4 ms·

Should have (2017) I noticed that when it said at the start: > five giant F-1 rocket engines—still the most powerful ever built This is no longer the case. T

Should have (2017) I noticed that when it said at the start: > five giant F-1 rocket engines—still the most powerful ever built This is no longer the case. The SpaceX Starship has the Saturn V beat nowdays. (Edit: I suppose the F-1 rocket engines still have the Raptor 2 engines beat, so the article is still correct. The Starship just has more engines than the Saturn V for more thrust)

nickmcc 2y ago
An individual F1 engine outperforms an individual Raptor 2/3.
- sudobash1 2y ago
  I just realized that after hitting post. Edited my comment.
- Polizeiposaune 2y ago
  Depends on the metric. F1 is still the winner in sea level thrust per engine (6770 kN vs 2660kN). Raptor is more efficient (with higher sea level and vacuum specific impulse); it also has a much higher thrust density -- those 2660kN come from a nozzle only 1.3m in diameter, vs the F1's 3.7m diameter. The higher thrust density and smaller size means that you can fit 33 raptors in a ~9m diameter circle and end up with a stage with double the thrust of the ~10m diameter Saturn V.
  - anothertroll123 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - pfdietz 2y ago
    Raptor also has twice the thrust/weight ratio of the F-1.
mulmen 2y ago
The line you quoted specifically says F-1 engine, not Saturn V rocket.
GuB-42 2y ago
SpaceX Starship is closer to the (failed) N1 Soviet Rocket which should have been the Saturn V competitor. The N1, with its 30 NK-15 engine would have made it more powerful than the Saturn V and its 5 F-1 engine, but less powerful than SpaceX "Super Heavy" with its 33 Raptor engines. Another similarity is that the NK-15 engine and the Raptor are both staged combustion engines, while the F-1 uses the simpler open cycle design. The F-1 is also much more powerful than both the Raptor and NK-15, that's why the Saturn V has only 5 of them. The similarities end there, fortunately.
- Aloha 2y ago
  The difference is, we have better QC procedures and modern flight control electronics.
avmich 2y ago
F-1 vs. Raptor question is only for American engines, not the world ones. If by "most powerful" you mean engine thrust.

nickmcc 2y ago

An individual F1 engine outperforms an individual Raptor 2/3.

sudobash1 2y ago
I just realized that after hitting post. Edited my comment.
Polizeiposaune 2y ago
Depends on the metric. F1 is still the winner in sea level thrust per engine (6770 kN vs 2660kN). Raptor is more efficient (with higher sea level and vacuum specific impulse); it also has a much higher thrust density -- those 2660kN come from a nozzle only 1.3m in diameter, vs the F1's 3.7m diameter. The higher thrust density and smaller size means that you can fit 33 raptors in a ~9m diameter circle and end up with a stage with double the thrust of the ~10m diameter Saturn V.
- anothertroll123 2y ago
  [flagged]
- pfdietz 2y ago
  Raptor also has twice the thrust/weight ratio of the F-1.

mulmen 2y ago

The line you quoted specifically says F-1 engine, not Saturn V rocket.

GuB-42 2y ago

SpaceX Starship is closer to the (failed) N1 Soviet Rocket which should have been the Saturn V competitor. The N1, with its 30 NK-15 engine would have made it more powerful than the Saturn V and its 5 F-1 engine, but less powerful than SpaceX "Super Heavy" with its 33 Raptor engines. Another similarity is that the NK-15 engine and the Raptor are both staged combustion engines, while the F-1 uses the simpler open cycle design. The F-1 is also much more powerful than both the Raptor and NK-15, that's why the Saturn V has only 5 of them. The similarities end there, fortunately.

Aloha 2y ago
The difference is, we have better QC procedures and modern flight control electronics.

avmich 2y ago

F-1 vs. Raptor question is only for American engines, not the world ones. If by "most powerful" you mean engine thrust.