> Likely the shortest time from spec to manufacturing for a new rocket engine (2 weeks, usually this process takes many months in manual engineering using CAD)
Does anyone in the field of rocketry specifically know if this alleviates some previously annoying constraint?
My uninformed gut suspects that these rocket spend an overwhelming amount of time in the post-design stage (I mean rocket engines seem to stick around for a long, long time, right?). But I’m a programmer I don’t know anything about this stuff.
Exactly, right, I don’t trust my intuition here because that’s seen as an absurdly long time in software, whereas in rockets it seems like months and weeks just kinda zoom by.
"We've built a great new way to design physical structures."
"So what? The existing ways work just fine."
"We designed and built a rocket engine in two days."
However, even in the rocket field, there's a "design, simulate, build, test" cycle. They can do two of those steps in effectively 0 time and with significantly lower cost.
Moreover, it looks like the design has incremental feedback from something akin to simulate.
Does anyone in the field of rocketry specifically know if this alleviates some previously annoying constraint?
My uninformed gut suspects that these rocket spend an overwhelming amount of time in the post-design stage (I mean rocket engines seem to stick around for a long, long time, right?). But I’m a programmer I don’t know anything about this stuff.