You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: We are relying on ancient rocket engine designs to shoot us into space! Is the Aerospike engine an alternative?
Wow. I'm so used to the existing tech that the aerospike design seems counter-intuitive. Thanks for sharing.
I also liked your analysis of why Space-X didn't take this on. But I think once they get some good cashflow going with a few years of experience, they are going to want that efficiency for their bottom line. It's only a matter of time.
They will, but they have to deliver on their first promises or they will go bankrupt. It's how a private venture differs from a state agency. It will happen, but the risks are too great for them to research and test everything. As the fuel for the Falcon 9 is 200k and the rocket is tens of millions, they would not risk losing a rocket to bold innovation just for a tiny saving in fuel :)
I'm with you on that one. I'm really curious about the linear design, too. that just doesn't look like something that would work in flight. I can see on jet airplanes, though. They have that cone design, though it's not exactly like the aerospike.
Here you go! From scale tests in the 60's. Check the volume first! It's a rocket engine afterall :)
Great, thanks. I don't think anyone got to sleep that day.