Quote from: meekGee on 10/06/2017 01:51 pmBO is very likely to buy ULA at some point, even though there's a lot of baggage that goes with it.Don't forget that BO is operating under time dilation constants larger than SpaceX's, and while JB's funding means they'll never go bankrupt, it doesn't guarantee they'll ever get it done.They're also trying to go from zero to world's largest rocket in one step. No F1 or F9 to gain experience on.Buying ULA help with these issues, and ULA is certainly looking for a way to survive in the not too long term.I don't see it. Boeing/LM didn't sell ULA for $4B, I doubt Bezos would want to hand out $5B+ just to buy ULA, what's the point? If he needs experienced people, he'll just poach them.I do wonder why Blue and ULA didn't partner to build a common first stage using the original smaller BE-4, with 5 engines they can have something in the Falcon 9 thrust range, with potential to do first stage landing.
BO is very likely to buy ULA at some point, even though there's a lot of baggage that goes with it.Don't forget that BO is operating under time dilation constants larger than SpaceX's, and while JB's funding means they'll never go bankrupt, it doesn't guarantee they'll ever get it done.They're also trying to go from zero to world's largest rocket in one step. No F1 or F9 to gain experience on.Buying ULA help with these issues, and ULA is certainly looking for a way to survive in the not too long term.
I don't see it. Boeing/LM didn't sell ULA for $4B, I doubt Bezos would want to hand out $5B+ just to buy ULA, what's the point?
If he needs experienced people, he'll just poach them.
I do wonder why Blue and ULA didn't partner to build a common first stage using the original smaller BE-4, with 5 engines they can have something in the Falcon 9 thrust range, with potential to do first stage landing.
The folks at ULA might be too "old Space". Thinking that you put as few engines in a stage as possible to lower the probability of mishaps from more machinery.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/06/2017 11:48 amAnd realize there's not much different between NG and BFR. Both designed to be fully reusable (eventually for NG). They both use methane/oxygen.What do you mean "eventually"? Second stage reusability is not part of the initial New Glenn design at all.SpaceX actually claimed to be working on F9 S2 reuse at various points but eventually decided it will remain expendable. Did BO even mention S2 reuse publicly?
And realize there's not much different between NG and BFR. Both designed to be fully reusable (eventually for NG). They both use methane/oxygen.
Quote from: meekGee on 10/06/2017 01:51 pmBO is very likely to buy ULA at some point, even though there's a lot of baggage that goes with it.Don't forget that BO is operating under time dilation constants larger than SpaceX's, and while JB's funding means they'll never go bankrupt, it doesn't guarantee they'll ever get it done.They're also trying to go from zero to world's largest rocket in one step. No F1 or F9 to gain experience on.Buying ULA help with these issues, and ULA is certainly looking for a way to survive in the not too long term.Vulcan is in someways the sub scale test for NG as for being the worlds largest rocket not by a long shot the Saturn V,N1,and Enegia were much larger.Though I can see ULA and BO eventually having a merger or some sort of partnership.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 10/06/2017 02:22 pmThe folks at ULA might be too "old Space". Thinking that you put as few engines in a stage as possible to lower the probability of mishaps from more machinery.I agree you should not put too many engines on a stage to reduce the no. of parts that potentially can go wrong causing LOM. Hopefully BO does not attempt to follow SpX's obsession with large nos. of engines and designs it's future vehicles after NG with fewer engines than SpX BFR on the 1st stage. BO may end up having the better approach to 1st stage engine no. than SpX but we won't know until they announce NA which will likely be their BFR competitor.
How much Blue needs to be delayed, before RE-engined Atlas V with AR-1 becomes a thing? (Will the same upper management continue?) ...Or just more RD-180s.
I think one of the defining items between SpaceX and BO is the Manager of the engine R&D programs at the two companies. SpaceX won the lottery when they hired Mueller to design and manage SpaceX in-house engine development. BO has struggled (but not a lot just more than SpaceX) in their engine R&D taking them longer to accomplish engine development projects.
Quote from: HVM on 10/06/2017 08:10 pmHow much Blue needs to be delayed, before RE-engined Atlas V with AR-1 becomes a thing? (Will the same upper management continue?) ...Or just more RD-180s.Tory Bruno, CEO @ulalaunch: CDR for Vulcan rocket by end this yr; we'll determine engine choice - @AerojetRdyne v @blueorigin before then.Posted: 5:40 PM - 12 Sep 2017https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/907629989377576962Based on that tweet from 12 September, my guess is that if BE-4 conducts a successful full-scale test firing by the end of this year, BO will get the contract, but if not (and especially if they hit another major delay) AR will get the contract.
Quote from: Rebel44 on 10/07/2017 12:05 pmBased on that tweet from 12 September, my guess is that if BE-4 conducts a successful full-scale test firing by the end of this year, BO will get the contract, but if not (and especially if they hit another major delay) AR will get the contract.I read that similarly, but hgas AR demonstrated a successful full-scale test firing? Or do they just "get a pass" because they have more history?
Based on that tweet from 12 September, my guess is that if BE-4 conducts a successful full-scale test firing by the end of this year, BO will get the contract, but if not (and especially if they hit another major delay) AR will get the contract.
I agree that BO needs to outperform AR, I'm just surprised that it's a given that AR would get selected without evidence that they will deliver.
The biggest problem for ULA if they go with AR can be summed up with word - cost. AR practically hand-builds all their engines. Of course they use 3d printing and modern tools, but it is not a production line in the modern mass production sense. Bezos and BO has a greater vision for the future of BE-4, and would likely (only likely since they are still in development mode) build theirs in a more streamlined and affordable way. Pick AR-1, and costs will *never* go down.Of course neither AR or Blue can match SpaceX in mass engine production, and since we know that SpaceX plans BFR with lots of engines, a low production cost will continue to be a critical concern.
It's true SpaceX has yet to prove the viability of block5 as a low maintenance relaunch vehicle. I think shotwell said 10 launches between major refurbs. Then how u get from 10 on F9v5 to 1000 on BFR seems a bit of a stretch. But SpaceX does have a business and has produced working hardware and relaunched orbital class rockets, something BO has not got close to yet. BO seems a bit more secretive than SX so maybe that are making good progress inside that factory.