 |
|
|
|||||
SpaceX owns 98% of global rocket launches, a monopoly with virtually no competition. Only China is competing with Elon Musk at this point in number of launches and, while the country is getting closer to mass-producing reusable rockets, it appears far from making that happen. The world needs to scramble. We cant let a single company dominate the future of humanityand much less one that is owned by Musk. If you copy SpaceX, itll take you 10 years to get where they are today, Lin Kayser, cofounder of Dubai-based engineering AI firm Leap 71, tells me in a video interview. But in 10 years, SpaceX wont be where they are today. The game will be over. Startups and nations need to catch up to Musk, but that means solving a brutal equation: designing engines with comparable thrust (measured in kilonewtons, or kN) and efficiency, but without the decade-long development cycles. And to beat SpaceX, you also need to be able to mass-produce the rockets. [Photo: Leap 71] This is now more important than ever because the stakes are even higher than just five years ago. Satellite constellations like Starlink, which may soon enable direct-to-phone internet, threaten to sideline telecom operators and centralize control of earths critical communication infrastructure on top of controlling the space economy. Every region needs sovereign launch capability, Kayser contends. Otherwise, youll pay 10 times what SpaceX pays to access spaceif they let you. His company may have a solution to fix that conundrum. Leap 71 developed artificial intelligence called Noyron that, so far, has successfully designed two rocket engines. Kayser believes that his company, legacy rocket makers, and startups will be able to leverage this synthetic rocket engineer to create a cheaper match to the SpaceX Raptorand beat Musk at his own game. The 10-foot-high Raptorwhich powers the Starshipis arguably the most advanced Western rocket engine in production. Its latest iteration produces 280 tonnes of thrust at sea level, surpassing competing engines like Blue Origins BE-4. It uses methalox, an efficient fuel that can be manufactured in places like Mars, which makes it key for deep-space exploration. But the Raptors importance lies in the fact that it is the first operational full-flow staged combustion (FFSC) engine in history. This means that it optimizes efficiency and thrust while minimizing thermal stress, so you can reuse it many times, the key for cheap, sustainable space exploration. Only two other FFSC engines have been tested, but they’ve never flown. Leap 71 now wants to achieve the same spaces but better, with fewer 3D-printed pieces, which will make it less expensive than Musk’s engine. [Photo: Leap 71] Computational blueprint Leap 71 describes its Noyron computational model as an engineer brain in a box. Unlike generative AI tools that require human oversight because they are just guessing what could work, Noyron encodes physics, material science, and manufacturing rules to autonomously design rocket engines. It generates not just shapes but also functional hardware ready for 3D printing. Traditional parametric CAD is geometry-driven. Ours is physics-driven, Kayser explains. Calling it parametric CAD would be like saying ChatGPT is autocomplete. The systems first breakthrough came in 2024 with a 5 kN rocket engine. The compact, high-efficiency rocket was fully designed by AI and 3D printed in one go as a single-piece copper engine with intricate internal cooling channels. During trials in an old World War II bunker in the U.K., the engine fired flawlessly, validating Noyrons ability to predict thermal stresses and fluid dynamics. Then, in January 2025, Leap 71 really pushed the envelope by designing one of the most challenging and elusive rocket engines in the aerospace industry: a cryogenic aerospike thruster, an engine capable of working at every altitude to eliminate the need for multiple rocket stages, minimizing elements and costs in the process. View this post on Instagram A post shared by LEAP 71 (@leap.71) Now the company wants to scale up this approach to engines 400 times larger. The new road map includes two reference designs: the 200 kN XRA-2E5 aerospike and the 2,000 kN XRB-2E6 bell-nozzle engine, equivalent to SpaceXs Raptor. The first, he says, is slated for testing within 18 months of April 2025 (placing it around late 2026). The second is targeted for readiness by 2029. From left: A rocket injector head designed by Leap 71 in 2024; the new, much larger injector head designed for a 2 meganewton engine [Photo: Leap 71] For rocket engine developmentwith design and testing cycles measured in decadesthis is incredibly ambitious. But the timeline is achievable because of how Noyron works, Kayser says. Instead of manually iterating prototypes, Noyron treats all engines as variations of a unified DNA. And instead of having to be programmed, its edge lies in its ability to absorb decades of engineering knowledgeeven from obscure sources. For its new model, Leap 71 has not only incorporated learnings from its past tests (like data on cooling efficiency and material strain), but also vast amounts of new information, including digitized Soviet-era rocket manuals. We plug these into Noyron to refine our thermal models, Kayser says. The AI also learns from every test, creating a feedback loop that collapses design cycles and speeds up the development process. Noyron is not generative AI, but a computational model capable of producing deterministic results that are consistent every time. They are accurate according to the actual physical world and data. It understands. It doesnt just guess. Input the same specs, and it generates identical designs (try that with ChatGPT, Gemini, Midjourney, or Sora). This is critical for aerospace reliability. Human engineers can see the rationale behind evey decision, Kayser says. Its not a black box. The challenges While Noyron can design a rocket engine in minutes, proving it works in the physical world is the real test. The companys ambitions collide with a stark reality: Even the most advanced AI cannot shortcut the laws of physics and bureaucracy. Securing test facilities for large engines is another hurdle. While smaller subsystems (like the 28 kN turbopump it wants to test this year) fit on existing stands, the 2,000 kN engines sheer size demands specialized infrastructure. The critical path here is test-stand availability, says Kayser. Current options are scarce and scattered around the world. Shipping engines abroad triggers export controls and delaysa problem compounded by geopolitical tensions. Moving a small engine from Germany to the U.K. already takes two to three weeks, Kayser tells me. Thats why Leap 71 is in talks with governments in Dubai, Singapore, and New Zealand to co-locate manufacturing and testing. Omans planned spaceport and New Zealands remote Twhaki facility, with its vast sound-dampening landscapes, are leading candidates. You cant just put a loud rocket engine next to a city, Kayser says. [Photo: Leap 71] The other challengethe actual production of the enginehas only just become possible, with Chinas new 3D-printing behemoths capable of producing parts that are 6.56-by-6.56-by-3.60 feet. In fact, this is what led Kayser and his partner, Leap 71 cofounder Josefine Lissner, to believe that making a Raptor-class engine was even possible. Called the EP-M2050 (and manufactured by Eplus3D), this colossal 3D printer uses 36 lasers to turn metallic powders into all the parts needed for next-gen rocket engines, including the nozzles, which will be much taller than your average human. [Image: Eplus3D] The printers are so new that quality assurance is still a question mark. Surface roughness, inherent to layered metal printing, disrupts fluid dynamics in cooling channels. Rough walls increase friction, altering fuel flow and thermal stability. Post-printing, parts undergo rigorous cleaning to remove residual metal powder, a task that until now has been handled by German firm Solukon because any impurities could cause an explosion, Kayser says. Material uniformity is another gamble. While printers handle alloys like copper-chromium-zirconium, ensuring consistent strength in massive componentsespecially under the violent vibrations and thermal swings of a firing engineremains unproven at this scale. The turbopump, which forces fuel into the combustion chamber at extreme pressures, epitomizes this challenge. Leap 71s 28 kN test rig validates principles for larger designs, but scaling amplifies risks. Turbines spin at supersonic speeds, generating centrifugal forces that warp metal. Rapid temperature shiftslike the -297°F cryogenic oxygen flow meeting 5,430°F exhaustthreaten cracks. Sealing, material fatigue, and transient conditions during start-up and shutdown are critical, Kayser explains. These are not just design problemsthey demand practical testing. Thats why the most unnerving hurdle of rocket development with this method is blind testing. Leap 71s aerospike engine, printed as a single copper block with internal cooling channels, could not be inspected internally before firing. We had to test blind, Kayser says. During trials, imperfect oxygen flow led to higher-than-expected temperatures. Although it all worked, it forced an early shutdown. Instead of risking additional runs, we cut the engine in half to analyze it, Kayser adds. Each failure feeds back into Noyrons models, but iteration consumes time and capital. For now, Leap 71s strategy hinges on incremental validationtesting subsystems like injectors and turbopumps individuallywhile lobbying governments to fund dedicated test facilities. The road ahead While these are big challenges, they are not insurmountable. The space industry knows it and, according to Kayser, wants a piece of the action. Everyone is looking for a way to leapfrog several years and catch up toor surpassMusk. Right now, Leap 71 collaborates with about 15 rocket startups. Kayser cant disclose their names under confidentiality agreements except for the Exploration Co., which is developing a European Moon lander. These partners lack SpaceXs vertical integration but want tailored engines without decade-long R&D. The engine is the most expensive and complicated part, Kayser emphasizes. Everyone else just buys them. But theres no supply. L3Harriswhich now owns the legendary rocket engine maker Aerojet Rocketdyne, makers of the Apollo engineswants to sell them, but it doesnt have anything comparable to the Raptor. Blue Origin makes and sells engines for the United Launch Alliance (ULA), but nobody else. The Russian NPO Energomash once dominated the global rocket engine market, supplying the RD-180 that powered ULA’s Atlas V rocket for decades. But RD-180s are now considered relicsand are under sanctions because of the Ukraine war, anyway. [Current design processes] are actually a problem for many of the micro launcher companies right now, Kayser says. So they have relatively small engines. And if they now want to play in the higher leagues, they basically have to embark on a completely new project, create a completely new rocket. The main differentiation between sizes is the engine, because the rest of the rocket is scalable. It’s harder to scale up the engine because it has completely different specifications and requirements. By using Noyron, Kayser says customers will be able t fine-tune to their own needs and input thrust, fuel type, and size to receive bespoke engine designs for every need. A startup might tweak an aerospike for methane fuel, while another firm could optimize for cost. Some engines will be small and some could be Raptor-class. We will know if it all works in just a couple of years, so we wont have to wait long: Kayser tells me that he and Lissner expect the first hot firing of the 200 kN XRA-2E5 aerospike engine in October 2026. Full-scale testing of the large 2,000 kN Raptor-class engine is tentatively planned to begin in 2028, with qualification for flight readiness stretching into 2029. If Leap 71 can pull it off, it will be phenomenal for humanity. A new process for rocket development will challenge Elon Musk at his own game and democratize the means to reach orbit for every country on the planet. Plus, if it happens, the dream of having Tony Starks J.A.R.V.I.S.-like AI to aid humans to build the future will be real. Kayser certainly believes in it: Were building a world where anyone can engineer complex machines.
Category:
E-Commerce
Like other famous structures of similar dimensions, the 48-story Transamerica Pyramid, a revolutionary 70s modernist skyscraper and San Francisco icon, has a bit of history buried beneath its ground floor. [Photo: Nils Huenerfuerst/Unsplash] A recently unearthed time capsule, buried in 1974 and discovered during a recent round of renovations, offers a picture of San Francisco’s past. The site of the structurethen a parking lotwas initially part of the original shoreline of the city that reeked of historical significance, from the citys growth as a shipping and banking capital. The capsule even contains a recipe for Pisco Punch, a cocktail that was invented at the nearby Bank Exchange Saloon, site of the citys original stock exchange. [Photo: courtesy SHVO] Part of an exhibit in the building lobby opening May 18, the time capsules contents are timeless: pictures of the buildings steel frame beginning to stretch skyward, or vintage news clippings and images of the city after its last 60s flowering. But within the cylindrical steel capsule, which looks a bit like a large propane tank, theres also a narrative about building in America, and how thats radically changed in the last 50 years. [Photo: courtesy SHVO] The battle over the permitting and construction of the Transamerica Pyramid in San Francisco from 1969 to 1972 offers a flashback to a different time in development, real estate, and construction. The tower was proposed and built in just three years, a sprint compared to the time it takes today to build a signature part of a city skyline. Construction alone for the One World Trade in New York City took eight years; the Comcast Tech Center in Philadelphia, which had issues with cracks in some of the steel frame, took five years; and the St. Regis in Chicago took four years. An analysis of high-rise buildings by Construction Physics found building speeds decreased significantly over the past century, in many cases extending the time it takes to finish by roughly 50%. [Photo: courtesy SHVO] Buildings are more complex and require more permitting today, including complicated environmental review processes. This time-consuming process of development has led to backlash against what opponents call stifling building regulations. It has also led to more engagement from architects around code reform issues including elevator rules and exit stairs, and the formation of the abundance agenda, a center-left push by pundits like Ezra Klein to get the nation building fast again. The pace of the approval and the construction here is unbelievable, says developer Michael Shvo, who paid $650 million to acquire the Transamerica Pyramid in 2020, at the depths of the COVID office freeze.. The Mayor was very determined to get this thing approved, and Transamerica was very determined to get a building built, and with all the controversy, once they got the green light, they ran as fast as possible. They built it in two years, we couldnt do that today. [Photo: courtesy SHVO] A more humane debate Transaerica was then a massive business conglomerate with interests in banking, financial services, and insurance. According to former public relations staffer John Krizek, who worked for Transamerica during the pyramids construction and ultimately created the time capsule, the back-and-forth between protestors and developers at the time was more humane, more respectable, and more amusing. The conversation around the Transamerica Pyramid was, at the time, a larger debate about images, architecture, and aesthetics. The tower was not just a unique shape, but would tower above the skyline. It was to be the citys tallest building, and wouldnt be surpassed until 2018s Salesforce Tower. [Photo: courtesy SHVO] Artists and community members protested the building for aesthetic reasons, and general distrust of large corporations. Posters passed around the city at the time proclaimed San Francisco Gets the Shaft or Artists Against the Icicle. The citys then planning director called the pyramid, designed by architect William Pereira, inhumane. [Photo: courtesy SHVO] During early street protests in front of the companys office, Transamerica execs sent secretaries to bring ice tea to the protestors lining up outside. During another protest, Krizek and his colleagues printed up fake fortune cookies at a nearby Chinatown bakery, frantically stuffing messages like TransamericaNot a square outfit or People who protest pyramid seek Che-ops publicity. Krizek recalled that the company was determined to break ground in December 1969. The building plan was announced in January of that year, and there was a tax break worth approximately $750,000 expiring at the end of December. Since Krizek and his coworkers knew that as soon as the company was given approval to build, there would be an appeal, they planned to move fast and break ground before paperwork was filed. To head off any challenges, they staged a tractor and truck near the site and sent someone to pick up the approval during the midday lunch break; they were able to get a time-stamped photo of someone digging at site while those opposing the project saw their appeal delayed as staffer enjoyed their lunch. The emotions around this building, Ive never seen this for any other building in the world, says Shvo. The debates today are more practical; this structure will block my view or cast a shadow. You cant say that about this building, it was a pyramid designed to let the light down to the street level. It didnt block views, the only thing people could complain about was this idea of the Manhattanization of San Francisco. Originally, Pereiras design was meant for a new building for ABC in New York City. The network passed on the project, deeming the design too futuristic, and went with another architects vision. Today, the Transamerica Pyramid stands as an icon in San Francisco, with 80% of the space leased in a challenging office market. The building ABC picked instead? Its since been demolished.
Category:
E-Commerce
Students are still setting fire to their Chromebooks for TikTokand now they’re facing the consequences. Fast Company first reported on the #ChromebookChallenge trend last week, following a series of school evacuations caused by students igniting laptop fires. The fires are started by inserting items such as pencils, paper clips, and pushpins into the charging ports of school-issued Chromebooks. This can cause the battery to overheat, potentially sparking a fire or explosion that releases toxic fumes. The #ChromebookChallenge reportedly began in Connecticut and has since spread rapidly. Newington High School was the first to evacuate students on May 1 after a laptop caught fire and the fire department was called. Since then, two students at Southington High School were arrested in connection with a separate laptop fire on May 7. The teens were charged with reckless burning, reckless endangerment, criminal mischief, and second-degree breach of peace. On May 8, a Plainville middle school student was hospitalized for smoke inhalation and is now facing criminal charges for deliberately causing the incident. That same day, Belleville High School in New Jersey was evacuated after a laptop fire started outside a classroom. Responding officers and firefighters found a charred Chromebook just outside the building. A 15-year-old student has since been charged with arson and criminal mischief. The trend has spread westward: As of late last week, Denver Public Schools had received 30 reports of students attempting to ignite their laptops, according to Axios. The Colorado Springs Fire Department has reported at least 16 similar incidents. With no sign of the trend slowing, schools across the countryincluding in California, Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Washingtonhave issued warnings about the reckless challenge. Parents and guardians are also being urged to talk to their children about fire safety and the dangers of blindly following social media trends. A TikTok spokesperson tells Fast Company that it takes down content that violates the platforms Dangerous Activities and Challenges policy. The company is currently working closely with the National PTA to fund programs in high schools about online safety and civility. In addition, searching for the term Chromebook challenge on TikTok brings up a safety warning: “Some online challenges can be dangerous, disturbing, or even fabricated,” it reads. “Learn how to recognize harmful challenges so you can protect your health and well-being.” However, the trend is still circulating under other hashtags, such as #ChromebookDurabilityTest and #FStudent. Many of these videos go viral, garnering thousands of views and comments from fellow students and baffled adults. The clips often feature a sound bite from fitness podcaster Ben Azoulay: The F students are inventors, Azoulay says. Theyre so creative that they couldnt sit in class. Now theyre sitting in jail cells.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||