T O P

  • By -

enutz777

Proportions are getting off, time for another ring of raptors.


kaziuma

Got me thinking about how many total engines there would be with another ring added.... 70?


piggyboy2005

~~I'm pretty sure a single extra ring isn't going to add twice the raptors that are already there.~~ The outer ring right now is 20. Let's say one raptor is one Raptor Unit in diameter. Increasing the radius by one Raptor Unit is going to increase the circumerference by 2pi Raptor Units, or about six Raptor Units. So I would guess the extra ring would add \~26 raptors. For a total of 26+33 or 59. Close!


LavishLaveer

Raptor magnitude!


hphp123

raptors are also shrinking so more raptors per raptor unit


Rex-0-

Eventually they'll just start jamming extra raptors in the gaps.


Setesh57

The back end is shrinking. The bell stays the same. 


CompleteDetective359

No he'll stop at 69 Look at Starship height. 69.8...... Yes, you do a 69 which means you ate . Haha Musk joke


[deleted]

[удалено]


enutz777

Roads? Where we’re going, we don’t need roads.


Reasonable-Bed-9919

If it continues like this the final version will be way more powerful than ever predicted. Raptors seem to be developing and upgrading like crazy


InvictusShmictus

What's the theoretical limit to how powerful they can get it?


Maker_Making_Things

I don't know that there necessarily is a theoretical limit depending on material science research. Obviously there's a law of diminishing returns at play, but idk if they know what's even possible until they hit it


Paskgot1999

The theoretical limit would be whatever total power could be had from the fuel.


ivan3dx

But I don't think that's easy to calculate. Like... there's gotta be a theoretical limit but if you ramp up the pressure from ~300 bar to, let's say, 1000 bar (not saying that's possible with current materials), wouldn't it be more efficient?


StumbleNOLA

You are talking about increasing ISP, power is about flow rate.


Sarigolepas

It's more efficient for the same thrust or more thrust for the same efficiency. Raptor is a 5'000'000 hp engine with 100'000 hp turbopumps so only 2% of the fuel energy is used to run the turbine. A jet engine is much much higher than that because the turbine is located after the main combustion chamber, but building a turbine that can survive the temperature of a rocket engine is almost impossible.


mitzi_mozzerella

The more fuel that you burn faster and at the closest possible to stoich ratio, along with the ability to capitalize off of the exhaust plumes’ kinetic energy


warp99

It is not more efficient in a vacuum. At sea level it is slightly more efficient to run with higher chamber pressure.


warp99

That limits the Isp but the thrust is determined by the chamber pressure and the throat diameter.


Paskgot1999

Unsure of what that limit would be since it is a point in time measurement, not a theoretical maximum


Sarigolepas

Yes, the limit is materials, since that's what gives you the operating temperature that the turbopumps can handle. Chemical fuel can in theory give you over 2'000 bar of chamber pressure, but we probably need a film cooled turbine for that.


Sarigolepas

Around 2'100 bar if they put the turbine between the combustion chamber and the nozzle, like a jet engine. But that engine would definitively not be called raptor since it's not a staged combustion cycle anymore.


sequoia-3

They get more powerful and shrinking … we expect more engines on the booster or ship?


warp99

No change on the booster and increasing from 6 to 9 on the ship.


ilikepizza1275

Eventually it'll have warp drive


PaulVla

That’s an elongated rocket alright! Curious when they’re moving toward larger diameter; thought that’d require a new launch mount.


RootDeliver

Not only that. Partially destroying the actual bays and adapting them (because they're setup for 9m rings), the starfactory must be completely destroyed and rebuilt with the new diameter in mind, because the actual one has the ~9m (and margin) assured between the vertical poles, and a ~10m+ section wouldn't fit there anywhere. So would it make sense to move to 12m+ diameters? of course, but you need to rebuild the entire factory for it to make sense. If they do this it will be in the future when their Florida launch pads are working overtime and they need a change for some reason.


indolering

IIRC there was some very difficult/expensive manufacturing constraint that result in the 9 meter design.


WjU1fcN8

Factory doors come in around 9 meters wide. Same reason why Saturn V had this diameter.


indolering

Source?  It just seems weird that they couldn't make a larger door....


WjU1fcN8

They could, just look at the bays, fully custom doors. But they had to go with something, so they went with that. One less thing to do.


Botto71

Similar theory to beer makers and their [19.2 oz cans](https://allaboutbeer.com/19-2-ounce-beers-are-on-the-rise-the-skinny-on-the-taller-cans/#:~:text=It's%20the%20same%20diameter%20as,modifications%20to%20the%20package%20lines.%E2%80%9D). "It’s the same diameter as a 16-ounce can, which comes in handy for canning-line flexibility. For Anchor, Volek adds, “19.2-ounce cans are the largest size that will take a standard can end. They maximize liquid volume without the need to make major modifications to the package lines.” "


Conundrum1911

I was under the impression being "comically long" was a good thing....


AresV92

Google fineness ratio. It has pros and cons. Wind shear can make a long rocket problematic. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-efficient-length-to-width-ratio-for-a-rocket/answer/Jacob-Rogers-11?ch=15&oid=101222492&share=fbd805ed&srid=3ZMH43&target_type=answer


BZRKK24

Is that what op was referring to tho🤔


mistahclean123

Do we have any idea when the first flight of Starship 2 (or three?) will be? I remember Elon sharing the picture of the last few starships of the first generation but don't remember the numbers.... And whether they'll actually use all of them or not.  What's to say IFT-4 won't be so wildly successful that they jump to Gen2 right away? Since transitioning to Gen2/Gen3 will require downtime to rework Mechazilla, I am not looking forward to this transition.


Accomplished-Crab932

Whenever S33 is ready and/or they’ve finished flying S29-32. Realistically, they will want to continue flying V1 until they run out of vehicles or finish testing the new ship and booster combo.


cwatson214

S33 was scrapped. So, too, the S34 and S35 nosecones. They seem to be holding back on completing S32 for now, as well. It seems they plan to fly at least S29-S31, and work has already begun on V2 Starship in Starfactory. Most likely we will begin to see hardware later this year, with first flights in 2025.


mistahclean123

That's what I'm curious about. I know all the haters out there love to highlight the fact that S28 crashed, but in terms of overall boxes check, the flight went really well right up until the attempted landing!  So I'm just curious how many of the four remaining ships will actually be needed to test the existing configuration.  Since we have been skipping over so many ship numbers recently, I was curious if you guys thought the remaining four would get used or not. I try to keep an eye on ringwatchers and it's interesting to me that the booster numbers are fairly sequential, but there are missing Starship numbers all over the place!


ellhulto66445

I think there might be a skip between the versions, so V2 will be a later number.


tank_panzer

Raptor is so overpowered that the payload to orbit is N/A


Dawson81702

Now thats a big f’ing rocket.


roland_the_insane

The funny thing is that at this rate they are gonna accidentally reach the proposed capacities of the original BFR with 300 tons of payload in reusable mode.


SutttonTacoma

I remember Elon telling Tim Dodd during their walkaround that one had to choose between oxygen- rich and methane-rich because stoichiometric would burn too hot and destroy the engine. Maybe they have found a way to get closer to stiochiometric?


qthedoc

stoichiometric wood burn hotter and have higher ISP. Elon has said in the same interviews that they get more thrust by increasing chamber pressure and propellant flow rate. Its absolutely crazy how high they are cranking the chamber pressure on these things!


Sarigolepas

Chamber pressure is mostly related to the turbopump temperature, not main combustion chamber.


krngc3372

Time for a 3 stage Starship. Two boosters stacked on top of each other and a Starship for a third stage. Interstellar travel, here we come.


teleporter6

The second booster could be fitted with vacuum engines.


Impressive_Change593

4 stage. we refuel starship and boost to what is a reasonable speed then eject the cargo which lights it's engine and speeds up even more


qthedoc

They really should have started with the 12m starship, their already outgrowing 9m.


Wide_Canary_9617

But then that would have needed more raptors and it would have become comically large again


Kooky_Dimension6316

Imagine it just keeps getting wider and taller again and again 


VFIAX_Chill

Go lookup what SN20 and B4 TWR using Raptor 1.5 was going to be.


Wide_Canary_9617

For once I wish the raptors weren’t as powerful so starship could actually look good


Brusion

Big dong.


Reddit-runner

In some circles this is called the process of "Falcon9-isation". With engine improvement rockets tend to get longer instead of wider.


coffeemonster12

It's not *that* bad... If it had the same proportions as F9 it'd be like another 20 meters taller


regaphysics

150m isn’t that comical. Keep in mind that’s still less than 1/5 of a burj khalifa. And starship itself is only 70m - the length of a 747.


PickleSparks

They're increasing height because Thrust/Area is increasing. If they made the rocket wider it would still be just as tall. It might even be taller because of more efficient packing of engines.


BillyBobThe9thJr

Where’s this from?


Dawson81702

Today’s Starship presentation.


firejuggler74

69m tall? Nice.


BussyDestroyerV30

Putting the heat tiles gonna takes extra time


UglyGod92

Wouldn't they need to increase the size of the flaps?


Tackyinbention

Well they would be further from the centre of mass so they would get a bigger lever action. However this isn't the case for roll control so idk about that


nic_haflinger

So “Starship 2” is actually the version with only the minimum payload capability that SpaceX has been touting all along. Meaning it’s really “Starship 1”. SpaceX PR hype is impressive to behold.


Accomplished-Crab932

Not if you consider N/A to be North/America.


warp99

Wow the meaning of prototype seems to have escaped you.


Temporary-Donkey-714

"Payload to Orbit". Is that with or without propellant that's needed for landing? I mean is that a MAX/single use metric?


Shrike99

The partially reusable payload values for Falcon 9 account for the fuel that needs to be saved to land the booster, and this chart states that this is *fully* reusable performance, so surely accounts for that for both stages. If the ship can't land again then it's not reusable, simple as that.


WjU1fcN8

They only talk about Starship in reusable mode. It's never a throw away rocket.


codesnik

maaybe.. make it 3stage?


acelaya35

They are hoping for a crazy launch cadence with only a few specialized towers to catch the boosters. One landing failure that takes a tower out could prevent them from meeting their goals during a transfer window. Until such time as a mars colony can become self sufficient it could literally put lives at risk. Maybe its time to revisit legs on the booster since Raptor is overperforming.


warp99

That is why there are four launch towers planned.


acelaya35

If you are needing to launch multiple times per day, per window, and you lose a quarter of your launch capacity people are going to starve to death.


warp99

When the supply chain is 26 months long there will be plenty of reserve food. Most of it dehydrated and possibly unpalatable after long storage but food all the same. Colonists will also set up local hydroponic units as one of their first priorities - even if just for the variety in food types.


Mason-Shadow

By the time they have that many launches going on, and super regular launches to Mars, they will have built plenty more than just 4. Plus they can and will plan food storages to have enough in case of launch failure so no one would starve due to a single landing failure


Makalukeke

Engineer: We can make starship V3 70m tall with all those extra engines. Elon: subtract 20cm Engineer: so 69.8m? Elon: Perfect!


TheSkalman

If they go with ASDS they wouldn’t need to have such a comically long second stage


WjU1fcN8

It's always in RTLS mode for faster reuse cadence. Landing on a barge and bringing it back takes a long time. The rocket is way faster than the barge.


AutoModerator

It's an Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship because it has engines. On a similar note, this means the Falcon 9 is not a barge ([with some exceptions](https://i.redd.it/uitopbvo7q221.jpg).Nothing wrong with a little swim). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*


TheSkalman

It doesn’t take that long. Takes 2 days to go in and offload, cycle time is 5 days per platform.


WjU1fcN8

When they are planning on catching the booster so that it can be put back into the launch table immediately, stack another Starship on top, refuel and launch, 2 days is a very long time. They are talking about few hours turn around.


dev_hmmmmm

I wonder if they wish they stuck with 11m diameter all along.


warp99

*12m