4 ms·

Your question reminds me of the image showing how SpaceX raptor motors evolved https://imgur.com/a/4w3q3lS https://imgur.com/a/4w3q3lS

pengaru 1y ago
Is that an actual honest photo? The first two seem fully equipped including what seems to be shielded wiring harnesses. #3 looks totally devoid of any electronics. disclaimer: I don't follow this stuff at all. It just looks like a b.s. photo deliberately exaggerating how simplified #3 is vs. the others to this grease monkey.
- jcims 1y ago
  Ready to rock(et) https://x.com/gwynne_shotwell/status/1821674726885924923?s=46 https://x.com/gwynne_shotwell/status/1821674726885924923?s=4...
- mjamesaustin 1y ago
  IIRC not only did they remove many parts completely, but others have been integrated into the interior, which makes repair harder but will improve reliability since they are no longer exposed.
GMoromisato 1y ago
To be fair, the reason the right-most Raptor looks so clean is because they moved all the piping (all the complexity) to inside the casing. And the reason they made the effort is because the casing protects the tubing from the heat of re-entry. Otherwise they'd have to waste mass on heat shielding. [Take a look at videos of Superheavy Booster returning back to the launch tower--the bottom engine sections starts to glow from the heat.] I don't think that applies to Stellarators, so there may not be an incentive to simplify it. [But what do I know; I'm just a simple programmer.]
- lux44 1y ago
  > the bottom engine sections starts to glow from the heat It's fuel burning, not glow. Speed is too low for glowing; glow would start at the edge, not from deep inside the skirt etc.
ortusdux 1y ago
I'm not keen on the idea of applying a 'keep subtracting things until it blows up' mentality to fusion reactors.
- bhaak 1y ago
  The nice thing about fusion reactors is that they don’t blow up but just don’t work anymore.
  - soperj 1y ago
    they have fission reactors that have done that since the 60s (CANDU Reactor). They just don't help you produce nuclear bombs...
    - greesil 1y ago
      I dunno dude, if you fuse tritium and deuterium it does make neutrons.
    - philipkglass 1y ago
      CANDU has low intrinsic nuclear proliferation resistance. It can run on natural uranium, so it's easier to fuel than light water reactors which need enriched uranium, and its online fuel-swapping design means that it's easy to switch to low-burnup operation for generating weapons grade plutonium. Current CANDU power reactors have extensive monitoring to confirm that they are used peacefully, but if e.g. South Korea had a security crisis and decided to pursue a crash nuclear weapons program, world opinion be damned, its CANDU based reactors at Wolseong could be quickly reconfigured for weapons purposes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolseong_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolseong_Nuclear_Power_Plant
      - perihelions 1y ago
        It's topical that India's nuclear weapons program was started up with a Canadian-supplied heavy water reactor (though not CANDU; a not-power-generating type). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIRUS_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIRUS_reactor > "Canada stipulated, and the U.S. supply contract for the heavy water explicitly specified, that it only be used for peaceful purposes. Nonetheless, CIRUS produced some of India's initial weapons-grade plutonium stockpile,[6] as well as the plutonium for India's 1974 Pokhran-I (Codename Smiling Buddha) nuclear test, the country's first nuclear test.[7]"
idiotsecant 1y ago
Raptor 3 really is quite an achievement. Good on them.
sheepscreek 1y ago
Wow - beautiful. So there is hope! As someone unfamiliar with the challenges of mechanical engineering, I’ve often wondered at the complexity of fusion reactors. This picture puts a lot into perspective. Thanks for sharing!
- api 1y ago
  Current fusion reactors are also studded with a ton of sensors and adjustments and injection ports and such that might not be present in a production reactor. They are experimental platforms, more like scientific instruments for studying the problem domain than production systems.

pengaru 1y ago

Is that an actual honest photo? The first two seem fully equipped including what seems to be shielded wiring harnesses. #3 looks totally devoid of any electronics. disclaimer: I don't follow this stuff at all. It just looks like a b.s. photo deliberately exaggerating how simplified #3 is vs. the others to this grease monkey.

jcims 1y ago
Ready to rock(et) https://x.com/gwynne_shotwell/status/1821674726885924923?s=46 https://x.com/gwynne_shotwell/status/1821674726885924923?s=4...
mjamesaustin 1y ago
IIRC not only did they remove many parts completely, but others have been integrated into the interior, which makes repair harder but will improve reliability since they are no longer exposed.

GMoromisato 1y ago

To be fair, the reason the right-most Raptor looks so clean is because they moved all the piping (all the complexity) to inside the casing. And the reason they made the effort is because the casing protects the tubing from the heat of re-entry. Otherwise they'd have to waste mass on heat shielding. [Take a look at videos of Superheavy Booster returning back to the launch tower--the bottom engine sections starts to glow from the heat.] I don't think that applies to Stellarators, so there may not be an incentive to simplify it. [But what do I know; I'm just a simple programmer.]

lux44 1y ago
> the bottom engine sections starts to glow from the heat It's fuel burning, not glow. Speed is too low for glowing; glow would start at the edge, not from deep inside the skirt etc.

ortusdux 1y ago

I'm not keen on the idea of applying a 'keep subtracting things until it blows up' mentality to fusion reactors.

bhaak 1y ago
The nice thing about fusion reactors is that they don’t blow up but just don’t work anymore.
- soperj 1y ago
  they have fission reactors that have done that since the 60s (CANDU Reactor). They just don't help you produce nuclear bombs...
  - greesil 1y ago
    I dunno dude, if you fuse tritium and deuterium it does make neutrons.
  - philipkglass 1y ago
    CANDU has low intrinsic nuclear proliferation resistance. It can run on natural uranium, so it's easier to fuel than light water reactors which need enriched uranium, and its online fuel-swapping design means that it's easy to switch to low-burnup operation for generating weapons grade plutonium. Current CANDU power reactors have extensive monitoring to confirm that they are used peacefully, but if e.g. South Korea had a security crisis and decided to pursue a crash nuclear weapons program, world opinion be damned, its CANDU based reactors at Wolseong could be quickly reconfigured for weapons purposes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolseong_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolseong_Nuclear_Power_Plant
    - perihelions 1y ago
      It's topical that India's nuclear weapons program was started up with a Canadian-supplied heavy water reactor (though not CANDU; a not-power-generating type). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIRUS_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIRUS_reactor > "Canada stipulated, and the U.S. supply contract for the heavy water explicitly specified, that it only be used for peaceful purposes. Nonetheless, CIRUS produced some of India's initial weapons-grade plutonium stockpile,[6] as well as the plutonium for India's 1974 Pokhran-I (Codename Smiling Buddha) nuclear test, the country's first nuclear test.[7]"

idiotsecant 1y ago

Raptor 3 really is quite an achievement. Good on them.

sheepscreek 1y ago

Wow - beautiful. So there is hope! As someone unfamiliar with the challenges of mechanical engineering, I’ve often wondered at the complexity of fusion reactors. This picture puts a lot into perspective. Thanks for sharing!

api 1y ago
Current fusion reactors are also studded with a ton of sensors and adjustments and injection ports and such that might not be present in a production reactor. They are experimental platforms, more like scientific instruments for studying the problem domain than production systems.