Question about future Raptor methane engine?

[spacenut]

How much thrust would this engine deliver at sea level?  In pounds please.  I've read somewhere here that SpaceX was planning a 10m diameter future rocket with 9 of these engines.  I just wanted to compare it to Saturn V's 7.5 million out of the 5 F-1 engines.  Thanks.

[GalacticIntruder]

Not known completely, and is not set in stone.  But Musk and his team have said over 1 million pounds, most likely vacuum thrust, not sea level. You could choose 800,000 to 1.2 million pounds at sea level.

My guess is they want to be better than the RD180, which is 861,000 pounds sea level thrust.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/03/spacex-advances-drive-mars-rocket-raptor-power/

[docmordrid]

And in one statement Musk mentioned a total of 15 mlbf, which for 9 engines would indicate a 1.67 mlbf engine. He didn't specify vac or sea level.

AskMen article....

Link....

The rockets will get even bigger. “We’re looking at our Mars transporter being around 15 million pounds of thrust,” says Musk. “And that one will switch to methane [fuel] for a high specific impulse system.”

[InfraNut2]

Not known completely, and is not set in stone.  But Musk and his team have said over 1 million pounds, most likely vacuum thrust, not sea level. You could choose 800,000 to 1.2 million pounds at sea level.

My guess is they want to be better than the RD180, which is 861,000 pounds sea level thrust.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/03/spacex-advances-drive-mars-rocket-raptor-power/

See the June 9 print issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology. The latest Raptor thrust estimate exceeds your guesses ...according to their quote from none other than Tom Mueller himself. (edit: the quote was from the May 19-22 Space Propulsion 2014 conference, so its really fresh data). I have seen a facsimile of the relevant page. I do not think that issue has hit the stands here in Norway yet, (edit: and local news agents does not seem to carry AW&ST anyway).

(And of course L2 has had more that 1 Raptor performance update in recent months that were serious, but has not been publicly released because of insufficient confirmation. Join L2 if you want to stay ahead with the latest pre-release source info on this and many other things, but even more to help cover the direct costs of this excellent site).

edit: Sorry I cannot quote even the smallest number. The rabid copyright watchdogs of print publications will threaten to sue for quoting even the smallest fact or snippet, (although that would probably not be illegal AFAIK). So: Don't anyone try quoting any print publication stuff, because the moderators here will delete it to avoid any legal hassle. We'll have to wait until NSF or other online media publishes some equally fresh data.

[spacenut]

Thanks, so this big rocket could get almost twice the thrust as a Saturn V.  Saturn being able to deliver 112 tons to LEO I think.  This should deliver 150-175 tons?  Do you know when it should be ready?  Sounds like SLS is a big waste of money in comparison. 

[baldusi]

Thanks, so this big rocket could get almost twice the thrust as a Saturn V.  Saturn being able to deliver 112 tons to LEO I think.  This should deliver 150-175 tons?  Do you know when it should be ready?  Sounds like SLS is a big waste of money in comparison.

I wouldn't like to make an opinion on the SLS which is an actual rocket (at least they are bending metal) and Raptor that's a long term project which still needs many definitions and for which even the basic parameters are still being traded.
I can't make many comments, without tripping on L2 information. But you might want to go over the Raptor article here, which stated isp and thrust of the first stage engine. The second stage might have a bit more isp due to bigger nozzle (and thus, worse T/W). Then you can assume a Falcon 9 distribution (9+1 Raptors). Look for F9 mass ratio estimation. Look for a normal T/W (between 1.2 and 1.35). Then plug those numbers on Shillings. You can put your parameters here an then please post your findings. I can't do it because I don't want to spill anything from L2. But you can look at a previous thread about a methane engine.

[spacenut]

Since LNG or liquid methane can use the same valves, turbopumps etc, as liquid oxygen, it makes more sense cost wise.  Mass production of the same equipment.  Same with the upper stage if it is the same engine optimized for vacuum.  I am not a rocket scientist, but have worked with a natural gas utility and LNG.  I think it is a great idea, and we can also make methane from Martian soil and atmosphere for return home with the equipment sent up first.  I am retired now, but was hoping we would get to Mars before I passed.