I worked in the space industry for a few years and now back in aviation. Tech like this makes we want to get back into the space stuff. Very exciting time for that industry.
@@pikachulovesketchup666 yes, battery technology is the bottleneck in a lot of cases. But I would be hesitant to call it a fail, there are many brilliant minds working to solve these problems. We don't know what we haven't yet discovered.
Bruh! How did I only now realize how revolutionary rocket lab is?! Also Peter beck remind anyone else of so Pete Becker from friends? Yo I freaked when I heard Peter Beck! He's real!!!
“Will it be able to launch larger sats and astronauts into space” well rocketlab already said “we don’t fly meat” so thats astronauts out the picture and if i recall correctly, they also said small sats was their only target market which with their kickstage orbiter puts them as 100% market leaders for small sats. Maybe they will go with bigger sats but generally satellites are only getting smaller. Is the Rutherford capable tho, with enough of em you could launch anything theoretically.
The also said not doing reusable. Now he is looking for hat condiments after the "I will eat my hat" comment on not doing reusable. So I guess where you start and what you say are subject to change.
Wait, what? 8:36 - "Will it be able to launch heavy satellites and astronauts in the future?" _No! Not one bit._ As you yourself mentioned in _the first line of the video_ - 0:01, this whole company is expressly designed for dedicated small satellite launches. Electron and Rutherford will never be human rated, and they will never launch heavy loads. Rocket Lab may some day, sure. But that's certainly nowhere in their current business model or engineering plans.
At 2:22 you say that an inverter changes the battery’s DC to AC for the motors, yet at 2:48 you say that the Rutherford uses dual DC brushless electric motors. So which is it - AC or DC motors?
A brushless DC motor replaces the traditional commutator with solid-state electronics that control power to the motor’s phases, so in a sense it is a hybrid of DC and AC. There is a good Wikipedia article about this.
@@williamhanna4823 Smaller versions of these sorts of motors, electronic speed controllers and batteries have been used for years in model aircraft. Now full size aircraft, such as those produced by Pipistrel, use this sort of technology, but the range is still a tenth to a fifth of that attainable using conventional fossil fuels. Furthermore, the weight does not decrease during flight, as no propellant is expelled, which is why Rocket Lab have ingeniously resorted to dumping a used up battery pack during ascent of the second stage. I'm curious as to whether the first stage battery packs and ESC's will be re-usable after the first stages are recovered.
The power to the motor is variable-frequency three-phase AC. But the electronics that produce the AC are small and located close to the motor. The module is DC powered.
Even more fun fact, Lord Earnest Rutherford is on the NZ $100 bill because he was the first person in the world to split the atom, in like 1890 i think it was.. absoliute legend, it's now super awesome to see his name launched into space by a New Zeland company..
Well those 2 engines have 2 different objectives Raptor is meant to be powerfull and reusable Rutherford is meant to be expendable and quick/cheap to produce
"World's first battery powered rocket engine" - I don't think Rocket Lab used the world's first battery. It would be far too weak for their motor pumps.
@@Anvilshock you said they didnt use the world's first battery. But actually the sentence isn't worlds-first-battery powered It's worlds first battery-powered pump. It uses top notch lithium battery cells. That can hold upto I think 37kwh. Powerful enough to turn the pumps and pressurize the fuel into combustion chamber
@@observeoutofthebox7806 I know it uses batteries and for what it is using it. Good job missing the point. Yet ironically, you had to explain _your_ point with the very device whose omission I was mocking with my original comment. Isn't that telling? And in case it's still not clear: Yes, you had to use hyphens to switch the meaning of the sentence from one it has without to the one it has with.
Batteries are the Achilles heel of electric motors and therefore pumps. From what I can understand bigger rockets would run into the problem of battery density. But as Peter Beck has said time and time again they aren't interested in anything bigger then their current rockets. If batteries improve then we might very well see human rated launch rockets.
Copenhagen Suborbitals is considering an electric pump for their human rated SPICA rocket now under construction, but they have a heat-powered alternative option if the electrical pump isn't good enough.
Nice video. However, you mention at 2:21 that the electric pump fed rock motor the battery DC current goes through an inverter where it is converted to AC to power the motor. On 2:47 you mention that the motors are brushless DC electric motors. It should be noted that DC motors as their name implies use DC current and hence don't require inverters to provide DC to power the motors. They may use inverters for AC conversion to transform to a higher voltage and then rectified back to DC for motor usage.
@@Stefan-rg1ub Right you are. I forgot my "Brushless" DC motor theory. In a regular DC motor a commutator, commutates the electrical supply, which is effectively changing the DC to AC allowing it to rotate. A Brush-Less DC Motor uses an external electronic commutation, in other words, an Inverter. I apologize for my momentary ignorance.
A brushless DC electric motor is powered by direct current electricity via an inverter or switching power supply which produces electricity in the form of alternating current to drive each phase of the motor via a closed loop controller. The controller provides pulses of current to the motor windings that control the speed and torque of the motor. This control system replaces the commutator used in many conventional electric motors. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_DC_electric_motor
In 2:15 you show a diagram of the electric feed rocket engine from wikipedia with the pumps mechanically attached with a shaft and one electric motor driving them. I think this is not correct for the Rutherford engine, but I cannot find the information online because everybody seems to be sharing this same information. I think that the turbopumps in the Rutherford engine are not mechanically connected and there are two electric motors. One electric motor for the oxidizer pump and one electric motor for the fuel pump. The reason to have independent pumps it is because the liquids are different and need different RPM and power to be pressurized. Also with the pumps being independent you are able to independently adjust the flow of fuel and oxidizer and therefore adjust the mixing ratio for the combustion. Can anyone tell me if I'm correct? Kind regards.
You can (but not must) have both pumps on the same power source. Both the raptor, most engines use one turbine to drive two pumps. You can adjust the ratio by simply put different pumps size. The fuel/oxidizer ratio is fixed anyway. But I’m not saying what you said is wrong, I don’t know that bit either.
Fantastic tech! This is so amazing, the company looks great. Yesterday I also found out it quoted on the stock market, if you believe in it it could be a legendary run!
When you compare a Nasa engine to rocket lab's sheez looks neat Nice 35kg 3:43 less crap less can go wrong 👍 i,m Sure Elon has spoken to rocketlab make bigger rocket eng's like this
@ andrew below comment . @ andrew > Robot Voice You Type a script in word > ( PDF works better ) just retested it yes works Ok open a pdf file and above ⚙ get it to - Read it Out aloud - #Tip to save a file in PDF Use Keys Control + P ( designation save as PDF Change from print) Now Look Above the file top border says read Aloud ( change the voice & speeds ) 🤔 the trump voice from Spitting image - Be fun puppets uk comedy :) Lots tips & tricks in you tube just type it in eeh no one reads these messages 5ms wasted i think anyway
A brushless DC electric motor is powered by direct current electricity via an inverter or switching power supply which produces electricity in the form of alternating current to drive each phase of the motor via a closed loop controller. The controller provides pulses of current to the motor windings that control the speed and torque of the motor. This control system replaces the commutator used in many conventional electric motors. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_DC_electric_motor
The motor is actually an AC motor. The inverter delivers AC at a very much higher voltage (and thus lower current) than provided by the battery alone. All current carrying components (including the motor) can thus be made smaller and lighter. There is a weight saving advantage in this scheme.
I think it's great. But wasteful. They need to learn from SpaceX. Land the boosters. Then those batteries would help pay for the cost, by recharging them, instead of letting it burn up.
They're already planning on recovering the boosters, even though they believed until recently that it was not economical to do so. Also, the batteries are such a tiny drop in the bucket of the costs of an Electron launch it's not even worth talking about. The cost of a launch of this (tiny) rocket is millions of dollars, keep that in perspective. Their factory infrastructure is (allegedly) geared to producing dozens of these rockets per year.
Mission 17 they are planning to recover the 1st Stage Booster by soft landing it and then hopefully Mission 18 they hope to sky catch the booster. Go check their youtube channel... They have a videos of the plan and even proved the sky catch
Text-to-voice immediately cheapens the quality of content. Don't be afraid to use your own voice to narrate your content, even if you feel insecure about your voice/accent, don't be. What your viewers need is a sense of connection with the author.
This company is playing a long game. Its engine is not useful for launching heavy payloads... on Earth. But it would work just fine on Mars or Moon. And the engines can be manufactured in-situ.
Maybe not something you would do in first stage. As others commented, the energy needed is not weight efficient in large scale. But i think it is an interesting concept for orbital maneuver. At that stage, the engine is smaller, can deploy solar panels to charge the battery back, the battery may be can share with the ship.
No, Rocket Lab is NOT the leader in delivering satellites. Space X is the most efficient at launching hundreds of satellites at a time, sometimes with the same exact booster twice a day.
Why? Why? Why do you take perfectly good content and then fuck it up by using a robo-voice? To be fair, it's not the worst I've heard, but it's still grating to listen to. No, I will NOT be subscribing to your channel.
Electric motors are not more efficient than gas turbines especially large scale overall. The added weight actually overall reduces capabilities but they do take away less energy from the combustion but this need to be stored in some form which the heavy batteries are for. This would only work small scale. Larger scale such as the raptor engine would require massive batteries and ridiculous size electric motors. If you would increase capacity and power density while decreasing the weight of batteries it would be more applicable for further use in small rockets. But never larger ones without major development in electric motors and battery technology.
I believe the unsung hero of rocket engines will be the aerospike model eventually replacing bell models as soon as material science solves certain current problems it suffers with . Material advancements will make this engine the one enabling single stage to orbit craft commonplace in the very near future. A company in Europe says it already has solve the aerospace engine development problems..I don't have that companies name.. Sorry.
I would like to see one day, an engine type Rutherford with a nozzle like the aerospikes and with liquid oxygen and methane fuel With a lithium-graphite hybrid battery and some Supercondensers as part of the rocket's own structure.
I think battery tech will keep getting better, exponentially, for a while longer, with so many companies pushing for a "holy grail" solution. This type of engine might be the future for rockets?
First you show a diagram of the engine with an inverter that inverts dc power from battery to ac power to power the motor but the you say that the engine uses brushless dc motor.
Useless rehash of known facts with a clickbait title. Nothing us rocket fans didn't learn years ago from channels that keep up with ongoing developments in the space industry.
So if battery technology keeps progressing at the current rate. Eventually does it get to a point where these engines are more efficient than a traditional turbo pump fed rocket engine?
As of now, IDK if they can launch heavy payloads in the future, but they can launch plenty of smaller & cube satellites. They just need to expand their launch webcast to include payload deployment.
So the batteries, a key element in the electric cars and main object of development from Tesla, drives the simplicity and reliability of the Rutherford engine. Who else thinks that Elon Musk and Peter Beck should become best buddies?
Screw that. Humans only weigh a few hounded pounds. So this can be a strictly commercial thing which could go a long way because I would definitely ride one.
why dont they use a traditional ic engine with a dynamo say a buggati engine that can produce a 0.8mw of energy ...the weight of that engine is just 500kg so add on extra fuel weight to power up which burns and reduces weight upon consumption ..say another 500ltrs of fuel ...so instead of the 1mw LCO battery which weighs probably 3-4 tonnes ....use a 500kg buggati engine and another 500kg or even 800kg of extra fueel if u want which is 1300kg compared to 4000kg of the battery..so u save 2 tonnes of weight thats a lot for the rocket !!
A Bugatti engine needs a huge amount of air to mix with the fuel at full power, meanwhile the rocket is climbing rapidly into a thinner and thinner atmosphere, at supersonic speed. Slowing incoming air enough for induction or heating and valving liquid oxygen for the ICE engine sounds as complex as existing turbo pump setups - in my humble opinion.
@@andrewsmactips ahh inwas exactly thinking along those ways ...once the atmosphere is too thin then the liquid O2 takes place in it ..anyways now u have to way the pros and cons on the intensity of complexity vs the reduction in weightage ....but I m sure it's less complex than the jet powered turning pumps ......so way less complex than turbine but a bit more complex than electric ...and since it's pure liquid O2 the amount required is pretty low compared to the intake of air ..and to fill up the void air u can use the burnt exhaust back in to get the perfect O2 ratio in the air where instead of N being most of the air ..u have the exhaust utilizes and replace N in vaccum and then pump into ice engine
@@andrewsmactips so yeah I think as we go higher up to replace air we use the exhaust and then add O2 to it to get the perfect ratio of O2 required to ignite inside the ice engine
Totaly productive figures if it uses a oxy fuel it has wast space ship parts production as vtool also perhapse a spin part with servo on other side as inntegraded part should be offer or L shape or half H the rest is in aplication off airplane transporters and rotational cocpits and for start position 3,4 front engine and 1,2 back pair transporter can be also like penta or hexa scfi design
Using electric motors instead of the turbo pumps is just a matter of fit for the job. They want the highest reliability at these crazy temperatures. Good to see the design competition taking place. the new Raptor has guarded secrets, and Elon talks about reducing battery weight. Elon likes a simple reliable design.
Its good for spare flight in space due electric motor not get impact on micro gravity☺️🐼🐼 its will impact bottom side motor from what i see... Need new designer put that motor like normally not like this... Its give impact on bottom side... And the front motor put turbin fan so after spinning not cost more energy from the battery and for cooling ... And if can add auto charging and solar system after on the space... Its can be used space transport☺️☺️☺️...
Nonsense. The motor in the front (second) stage isn't used until the rear (first) stage has thrown it into space with 5 spring loaded pins. This is completely traditional on all multi stage rockets.
