Chairboy t1_jdaw0bv wrote on March 23, 2023 at 1:54 AM

The tech behind this is way bigger than justbrockets. That they can make rockets with it is going to be both cool but also potentially a wickedly effective bit of marketing for the tech.

cjameshuff t1_jdb9jnj wrote on March 23, 2023 at 3:42 AM

Marketing is really all it is. Notice how, as much as they talk up the rocket being 85% 3D printed, they aren't using 3D printing for much else. The rocket's much flashier than, say, the strongback.

Pashto96 t1_jdce7kq wrote on March 23, 2023 at 12:06 PM

So what? They should print everything they use?

cjameshuff t1_jdckqok wrote on March 23, 2023 at 1:02 PM

Uh...yes? If it's such a superior way to manufacture things that it's automatically the right choice for the rocket to such an extent that they're trying for a 100% 3D-printed rocket, why wouldn't they?

Pashto96 t1_jdcsc4d wrote on March 23, 2023 at 1:59 PM

It doesn't have to be the superior way to create everything. Rockets require virtually all custom parts. Custom parts require custom machining and don't get the benefits of economies of scale. Having one machine that can create all of those custom parts cuts out the requirement for custom machining and they don't need to change the machine if they make adjustments to the parts. Strongbacks on the other hand are relatively simple truss structures. You can use mass produced parts to build up the strongbacks fairly easily and inexpensively. There's really no reason why they couldn't print the strongbacks, but it doesn't really make sense to.

pmMeAllofIt t1_jdeoioz wrote on March 23, 2023 at 9:15 PM

It's impossible to 100% 3D print one. Alot of that weight is in things like electrical cables, computer components, rubbers, and fasteners and fittings.

That 85-90% is all the main component mass. That's impressive.

cjameshuff t1_jdf28us wrote on March 23, 2023 at 10:47 PM

I'm not the one saying it's feasable, reasonable, or even desirable to 3D print 100% of a rocket, that's Relativity.

pmMeAllofIt t1_jdhlw78 wrote on March 24, 2023 at 1:36 PM

Uh, theyre not saying that. Their eventual goal is 95%. That means they only have to shed about a ton off, but none of that will really lower the part count much-which is there first goal(which suceeded). They made a rocket with 100x fewer parts than others and you're calling it a failure. Lol