3 ms·

I fail to see how this was "revolutionary" even back in 2020. The principle has been known since the Apollo-era when von Braun and his team discovered it by ac

by qayxc 4y ago

I fail to see how this was "revolutionary" even back in 2020. The principle has been known since the Apollo-era when von Braun and his team discovered it by accident (rotating detonations destroyed the F1-engine's combustion chamber) and several teams across the globe have been working on it ever since. There's prototypes of such engine running at the TU Berlin since at least 2017, for example, and the Łukasiewicz Research Network in Poland even launched a rocket using such engine last year. JAXA also did a successful engine test in space last year. So a prototype back in 2020 doesn't sound novel or even revolutionary to anyone even remotely interested in rocketry. But alas, press releases being press releases again...

rmah 4y ago
I think the revolutionary aspect of a rotation detonation engine is the "rotation" (i.e. continuous) part, not the "detonation" part. IMO, it is pretty novel.
xeonmc 4y ago
I fail to see how nuclear fusion is "revolutionary". The principles are simple and has been known for a century.
- qayxc 4y ago
  There's a difference between a natural process being harnessed using technology and claiming a breakthrough when there's extensive research and working devices that are are further ahead in terms of TRL already. But I guess you know that and just wanted be snarky ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- xani_ 4y ago
  Having working engine launched would be "revolutionary", but prototype of something that was already prototyped aint that. But JAXA got one launched in 2021...
actionfromafar 4y ago
In my book it's revolutionary when things start .. revolving. So to you it's not revolutionary because this is old news, and to me it's too early to be revolutionary. I'd say, this rocket tech can potentially spell a revolution.
JoeAltmaier 4y ago
They developed it - that's in the title. No one had sustained it before. It's all in the details, and they nailed it. Which makes it news?
UltraViolence 4y ago
Since there's no rocket in existence (as far as we know) that uses it for launching payloads it's revolutionary. Rockets are so large because they need enormous amounts of fuel to fulfill their mission. Making rocket engines more efficient cuts down on the fuel usage and reduces their size, or alternatively, increases mission flexibility.

by qayxc 4y ago

rmah 4y ago

I think the revolutionary aspect of a rotation detonation engine is the "rotation" (i.e. continuous) part, not the "detonation" part. IMO, it is pretty novel.

xeonmc 4y ago

I fail to see how nuclear fusion is "revolutionary". The principles are simple and has been known for a century.

qayxc 4y ago
There's a difference between a natural process being harnessed using technology and claiming a breakthrough when there's extensive research and working devices that are are further ahead in terms of TRL already. But I guess you know that and just wanted be snarky ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
xani_ 4y ago
Having working engine launched would be "revolutionary", but prototype of something that was already prototyped aint that. But JAXA got one launched in 2021...

actionfromafar 4y ago

In my book it's revolutionary when things start .. revolving. So to you it's not revolutionary because this is old news, and to me it's too early to be revolutionary. I'd say, this rocket tech can potentially spell a revolution.

JoeAltmaier 4y ago

They developed it - that's in the title. No one had sustained it before. It's all in the details, and they nailed it. Which makes it news?

UltraViolence 4y ago

Since there's no rocket in existence (as far as we know) that uses it for launching payloads it's revolutionary. Rockets are so large because they need enormous amounts of fuel to fulfill their mission. Making rocket engines more efficient cuts down on the fuel usage and reduces their size, or alternatively, increases mission flexibility.