Raptor production rate

[Slarty1080]

What is the likely rate of production for the Raptor now and moving forward and what impact will this have on the SpaceX testing schedule?

[intelati]

Assuming they have three Raptors testing/ready to test for the Hopper v1, they're probably working at a 1/week at a max at this point.

Production hasn't scaled up yet at all. I'm betting when we see the first vertical tests (Hopper), then we'll start seeing more movement on the engine front.

[DigitalMan]

I suspect SN3 and SN4 will be different from SN2.  Perhaps a slightly longer delay for those is reasonable, there could be a substantial amount of testing possible on Hopper with only one engine.

[Slarty1080]

I suspect SN3 and SN4 will be different from SN2.  Perhaps a slightly longer delay for those is reasonable, there could be a substantial amount of testing possible on Hopper with only one engine.

Yes a good point. Initially the production rate might be somewhat stop-start depending on what the production line rate actually is, what components they have to hand and perhaps even more importantly what new or modified components are required for the next engine.

It could well be that they will only make them "to order" initially until they have feedback from testing on the one before. So delay with SN2-3 as you said. Then delay while hopper is fully tested before making SN4-9 for the orbital prototype. Possibly with a few special orders if they blow stuff up.

After that, all being well SN10-28 for the first Superheavy prototype and then one per week ramping it up...ASAP, although I suppose they might simply start ramping it up after SN9 they should have a reasonable idea of what they are doing by then.

[Peter.Colin]

When all the parts are produced and available it would now probably take at least four to eight weeks to assemble the Raptor by hand.
Semi-Automated assembly maybe it could take a a few days.

The maximum run rate would depend on the how many parts can be cast in their SX500 foundry.
Let’s say enough parts for 1 engine a day or 200 engines per year.

Enough for:

2 SH per year = 62 engines
20 Starships/tankers per year = 140 engines

[Peter.Colin]

It’s about “the machine that builds the machine”, apparantly also for Raptor engines.

(And StarLink)


https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1100494266533433344

[Keldor]

In theory they can produce them at whatever rate they want - parallel production lines are a thing, after all.  In practice, they'll scale the factory to produce the number they need, plus some margin.  Beyond that and you're spending a lot of money on redundant tooling that will never be used at full capacity.

Man hour wise, I expect 1 Raptor to be equivalent to 2-3 Merlins, just as a guestimate judging by comparative complexity and part count.  Then again, they're going to need more of them than they need Merlins, so they might add more automation that would be cost ineffective at smaller volume due to the cost of developing and building the machines.

[RoboGoofers]

It’s about “the machine that builds the machine”, apparantly also for Raptor engines.

(And StarLink)


https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1100494266533433344

I'm pretty sure Merlin engines are all hand assembled. Parts are a different story: They're printed, machined, bent, turned, etc.

I would doubt Raptor changes much with how they assemble engines. after all, they have one launch site and a reusable rocket. And the Starship only needs 7, and early booster tests can proceed with less than a full 31, so it will be a couple years before then have to ramp up production.

[Coastal Ron]

I'm pretty sure Merlin engines are all hand assembled. Parts are a different story: They're printed, machined, bent, turned, etc.

Agreed

I would doubt Raptor changes much with how they assemble engines. after all, they have one launch site and a reusable rocket. And the Starship only needs 7, and early booster tests can proceed with less than a full 31, so it will be a couple years before then have to ramp up production.

I'm assuming you mean adding automation and robotics to the assembly line?

If so, I doubt the Raptor lends itself too much automation, since there are so many intricate connections that need to be made. Humans are infinitely adaptable, and I would expect they will stick with their current assembly process for quite a while, and only automate heavy lifting steps.

[RoboGoofers]

I'm pretty sure Merlin engines are all hand assembled. Parts are a different story: They're printed, machined, bent, turned, etc.

Agreed

I would doubt Raptor changes much with how they assemble engines. after all, they have one launch site and a reusable rocket. And the Starship only needs 7, and early booster tests can proceed with less than a full 31, so it will be a couple years before then have to ramp up production.

I'm assuming you mean adding automation and robotics to the assembly line?

If so, I doubt the Raptor lends itself too much automation, since there are so many intricate connections that need to be made. Humans are infinitely adaptable, and I would expect they will stick with their current assembly process for quite a while, and only automate heavy lifting steps.

Exactly. Just like how jet engines are assembled.
What will be more useful is specialty tools and jigs that make the assembly easier. I doubt that the CAD designers can truly understand how an engine will be assembled until they see people assembling it.

Here's an example for a J47 turbine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU3FXzzQB5U?t=516

[AU1.52]

I suspect SN3 and SN4 will be different from SN2.  Perhaps a slightly longer delay for those is reasonable, there could be a substantial amount of testing possible on Hopper with only one engine.

Yes a good point. Initially the production rate might be somewhat stop-start depending on what the production line rate actually is, what components they have to hand and perhaps even more importantly what new or modified components are required for the next engine.

It could well be that they will only make them "to order" initially until they have feedback from testing on the one before. So delay with SN2-3 as you said. Then delay while hopper is fully tested before making SN4-9 for the orbital prototype. Possibly with a few special orders if they blow stuff up.

After that, all being well SN10-28 for the first Superheavy prototype and then one per week ramping it up...ASAP, although I suppose they might simply start ramping it up after SN9 they should have a reasonable idea of what they are doing by then.

Wouldn't SN 2 and 3 be 2, 3 and 4? The hopper going to need 3 Raptors. Then a longer delay for SN 5 plus.

[Slarty1080]

I suspect SN3 and SN4 will be different from SN2.  Perhaps a slightly longer delay for those is reasonable, there could be a substantial amount of testing possible on Hopper with only one engine.

Yes a good point. Initially the production rate might be somewhat stop-start depending on what the production line rate actually is, what components they have to hand and perhaps even more importantly what new or modified components are required for the next engine.

It could well be that they will only make them "to order" initially until they have feedback from testing on the one before. So delay with SN2-3 as you said. Then delay while hopper is fully tested before making SN4-9 for the orbital prototype. Possibly with a few special orders if they blow stuff up.

After that, all being well SN10-28 for the first Superheavy prototype and then one per week ramping it up...ASAP, although I suppose they might simply start ramping it up after SN9 they should have a reasonable idea of what they are doing by then.

Wouldn't SN 2 and 3 be 2, 3 and 4? The hopper going to need 3 Raptors. Then a longer delay for SN 5 plus.

Yes you are correct shunt the numbers down one.