Discussion
They built a crew access capability into the launch tower for the New Glenn rocket, so you never know.
It'll be at least another 2 years until we see that rocket launch, but I expect they'll do some fit tests and static fires at the pad in a year or so.
They're also supposed to be working on a recoverable upper stage for New Glenn, so there's that.
It'll be at least another 2 years until we see that rocket launch, but I expect they'll do some fit tests and static fires at the pad in a year or so.
They're also supposed to be working on a recoverable upper stage for New Glenn, so there's that.
Edited by Beati Dogu on Wednesday 28th July 13:33
Blue Origin are still whining about not getting a NASA contract for the Human Landing System (HLS) program.
Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Beati Dogu said:
Blue Origin are still whining about not getting a NASA contract for the Human Landing System (HLS) program.
Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Is it really that complicated to get to the moon?Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Bit confused that Blue Origin would use "Launch vehicle that has never flown" as a risk though.
Because obviously Vulcan has hopped several times. And New Glenn has made multiple flights to altitude and landing. Those BE-4 engines have done loads of flights.
Oh, wait, no. I'm thinking of Starship and Raptor.
Because obviously Vulcan has hopped several times. And New Glenn has made multiple flights to altitude and landing. Those BE-4 engines have done loads of flights.
Oh, wait, no. I'm thinking of Starship and Raptor.
saaby93 said:
Beati Dogu said:
Blue Origin are still whining about not getting a NASA contract for the Human Landing System (HLS) program.
Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Is it really that complicated to get to the moon?Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Einion Yrth said:
saaby93 said:
Beati Dogu said:
Blue Origin are still whining about not getting a NASA contract for the Human Landing System (HLS) program.
Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Is it really that complicated to get to the moon?Elon has already said "16 flights is extremely unlikely. Starship payload to orbit is ~150 tons , so max of 8 to fill 1200 ton tanks of lunar Starship.
Without flaps & heat shield, Starship is much lighter. Lunar landing legs don’t add much (1/6 gravity). May only need 1/2 full, ie 4 tanker flights."
Beati Dogu said:
This is what I find utterly perplexing.These are "test" engines. But they don't fire the rocket on a test stand somewhere with these "test" engines, they have to wait months for the "real" pad to be available. Why do that? Presumably then you have to roll the rocket back to the factory, swap the engines, and do the test again.
The overall planning process at Blue Origin still seems highly wedded to a "how slow can we go" approach.
It reminds me a little of the short section in the "LiftOff" book where an "old space" CEO was hired and rapidly fired as his methods were the antithesis of getting things done.
It’ll be a wet dress rehearsal. Where they fill the rocket & go through the normal countdown procedure, stopping just short of engine ignition. It’s a test of the rocket, ground support equipment and their command and control comms really. It’s a perfectly valid test and quite a normal thing to do.
SpaceX usually do the same, but also light the engines for a second. The advantage of having engines that are built for rapid reuse. The Shuttles main engines were built for reuse of course, but needed to be taken off and given a full check over after each use. So no routine test fires for them. Even a pad abort after ignition meant all 3 engines had to be taken off and swapped out.
I think ULA are getting a simplified version of the BE4 engine, as they won’t be reusing them. The plan it to eventually recover the engine section, but they’ll need the reusable variant for that of course. That’s the one Blue Origin will used on the New Glenn.
SpaceX usually do the same, but also light the engines for a second. The advantage of having engines that are built for rapid reuse. The Shuttles main engines were built for reuse of course, but needed to be taken off and given a full check over after each use. So no routine test fires for them. Even a pad abort after ignition meant all 3 engines had to be taken off and swapped out.
I think ULA are getting a simplified version of the BE4 engine, as they won’t be reusing them. The plan it to eventually recover the engine section, but they’ll need the reusable variant for that of course. That’s the one Blue Origin will used on the New Glenn.
Edited by Beati Dogu on Sunday 15th August 12:21
Beati Dogu said:
It’ll be a wet dress rehearsal. Where they fill the rocket & go through the normal countdown procedure, stopping just short of engine ignition. It’s a test of the rocket, ground support equipment and their command and control comms really. It’s a perfectly valid test and quite a normal thing to do.
SpaceX usually do the same, but also light the engines for a second. The advantage of having engines that are built for rapid reuse. The Shuttles main engines were built for reuse of course, but needed to be taken off and given a full check over after each use. So no routine test fires for them. Even a pad abort after ignition meant all 3 engines had to be taken off and swapped out.
I think ULA are getting a simplified version of the BE4 engine, as they won’t be reusing them. The plan it to eventually recover the engine section, but they’ll need the reusable variant for that of course. That’s the one Blue Origin will used on the New Glenn.
Oh it's a WDR? My mistake, I envisaged it was just a test firing (the sort of thing other companies do at the factory or test site instead of tying up a launch paid, hence my comment).SpaceX usually do the same, but also light the engines for a second. The advantage of having engines that are built for rapid reuse. The Shuttles main engines were built for reuse of course, but needed to be taken off and given a full check over after each use. So no routine test fires for them. Even a pad abort after ignition meant all 3 engines had to be taken off and swapped out.
I think ULA are getting a simplified version of the BE4 engine, as they won’t be reusing them. The plan it to eventually recover the engine section, but they’ll need the reusable variant for that of course. That’s the one Blue Origin will used on the New Glenn.
Edited by Beati Dogu on Sunday 15th August 12:21
If these are expendable engines, does that mean the reference to "test" engine doesn't mean they are "not yet ready for production" units but rather units specifically allocated for this test, which could be used for a real launch if they were not being sacrificed for the WDR?
Blue Origin are now taking NASA to court about losing the Moon lander contract.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
Beati Dogu said:
Blue Origin are now taking NASA to court about losing the Moon lander contract.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
What a jokehttps://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
Dummies everywhere…
Beati Dogu said:
Blue Origin are now taking NASA to court about losing the Moon lander contract.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
How to phttps://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
s off the potential customer......as well as causing them to piss away some of their precious budget on legal fees - more lawyers means less spent on spaceflight
Beati Dogu said:
Blue Origin are now taking NASA to court about losing the Moon lander contract.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
It is The American Way.https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/16/jeff-bezos-blue-or...
Exactly. US companies are always using lawfare to get their own way and to slow down the competition. Who do you think persuaded Congress to introduce a 2022 deadline that would stop ULA from using the Russian made RD-180 engines on their Atlas V rocket?
I don’t think SpaceX have taken NASA to court yet, but they've sued the Air Force via the same U.S. Court of Federal Claims a couple of times. Most recently in May 2019.
In 2018 the Air Force left SpaceX out of substantial rocket development funds, while giving them to three of their rivals. These awards were $500 million to Blue Origin for its New Glenn rocket, $792 million to Northrop Grumman for its OmegA rocket (which the company cancelled in 2020) and $967 million to ULA for the Vulcan Centaur rocket. SpaceX would have put the money towards Starship development, but it seems the Air Force weren’t that taken with it at the time. The case was passed down to a district court in California and the judge rejected SpaceX’s case last October.
No hard feelings from the Air Force. They’ve given SpaceX launch contracts for the likes of GPS satellites and the X-37B space plane. They also awarded SpaceX & ULA a big 5-year launch contract to start in 2022.
I don’t think SpaceX have taken NASA to court yet, but they've sued the Air Force via the same U.S. Court of Federal Claims a couple of times. Most recently in May 2019.
In 2018 the Air Force left SpaceX out of substantial rocket development funds, while giving them to three of their rivals. These awards were $500 million to Blue Origin for its New Glenn rocket, $792 million to Northrop Grumman for its OmegA rocket (which the company cancelled in 2020) and $967 million to ULA for the Vulcan Centaur rocket. SpaceX would have put the money towards Starship development, but it seems the Air Force weren’t that taken with it at the time. The case was passed down to a district court in California and the judge rejected SpaceX’s case last October.
No hard feelings from the Air Force. They’ve given SpaceX launch contracts for the likes of GPS satellites and the X-37B space plane. They also awarded SpaceX & ULA a big 5-year launch contract to start in 2022.
Edited by Beati Dogu on Monday 16th August 19:38
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff