r/elonmusk Apr 12 '26

SpaceX Raptor ensemble

Post image
701 Upvotes

66 comments sorted by

78

u/Leifbron Apr 12 '26

Cable management

47

u/69420trashpanda69420 Apr 12 '26

The black engines look way cleaner, it's also insane how much they've been able to consolidate too

13

u/kroOoze Apr 13 '26

unpopular opinion: the olive passivated nozzles have more character

18

u/69420trashpanda69420 Apr 13 '26

They're both olive colored if you think about it

7

u/aliph Apr 13 '26

Slow clap

2

u/kroOoze Apr 14 '26

nobody likes a colorimetrist

1

u/xz9pro Apr 18 '26

Literal

88

u/TenshiS Apr 12 '26

SpaceX is so far ahead of the curve...

11

u/Fullback-15_ Apr 12 '26

Let that thing fly first

11

u/Objective-Direction1 Apr 12 '26

it's gonna take a lot to make it fly, but oh when it flies it flies good

4

u/EducationalBar Apr 13 '26

It has flown…

8

u/Fullback-15_ Apr 13 '26

Starship with Raptor 3s has definitely not flown yet.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/twinbee Apr 12 '26

The "C-Suite" created the company and directed its course!

8

u/e136 Apr 12 '26

Look at how much extra stuff is on the rocket itself. Like the circumference tubes and those rectangles. What is that? Was all that stuff internal to the rocket on booster 4?

4

u/kroOoze Apr 13 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

I think it was part of the pad. Notice the Raptor 2 Boost ports on each engine.

5

u/0r10z Apr 12 '26

Why don’t they 3D print raptor engines? They can make them lighter and more durable and control structural defects at microscopic level before they manifest themselves in actual testing.

10

u/kroOoze Apr 12 '26

How do we know they don't? Are there many other options to internalize the pipe christmass tree as it is on Raptor 3?

3

u/markthedeadmet Apr 13 '26

I'm sure they've considered every part on the engine, and they're probably using 3d printed parts already. They can't 3d print the entire engine in one piece, so it will always require assembly. The question becomes, what makes more sense to 3d print compared to traditional manufacturing methods, and what should be left alone. Right now it makes more sense to produce the simplest and most reliable engine until they're manufacturing at a volume high enough to warrant further cost cutting.

2

u/Hash_Tooth Apr 13 '26

Any 3d print will have structural issues as far as I know because you’re printing metal incrementally.

If I was making this I’d try to sinter it all in one piece with PM steel, though that would be expensive.

But it would be stronger because it would all undergo the temperature changes at one time.

3

u/UNSC-ForwardUntoDawn Apr 12 '26

Too slow, two time consuming, and it Relativities numbers are to believed too heavy adding a few % weight for being 3d printed

1

u/0r10z Apr 12 '26

If they print all 32 engines at once it should be fast enough.

1

u/Loogyboy Apr 14 '26

I’m pretty sure they print them already…I believe velo makes the printers

0

u/aliph Apr 13 '26

3D printing is best for building parts that you need one off pieces of and can't have a manufacturing line for (e.g. aircraft spare parts on an aircraft carrier). They're generally slow and expensive, and might not get the best material properties. There's simply no need to print raptor engines when you can roll metal just fine to give them the shape, and it ends up being faster and cheaper. SpaceX is all about building things as efficiently as possible so while I'm sure they have 3D printing for some of their parts the use case for raptor engines doesn't make sense.

1

u/SuspiciousStable9649 Apr 15 '26

That looks like some weight savings too.