Author Topic: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine  (Read 102264 times)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
  • US
  • Liked: 871
  • Likes Given: 715
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #360 on: 06/30/2017 03:59 PM »
Could SpaceX's Rapter Power Pack be used or lessons learned to mature Blue's BE-4 development?

1.  They are not the same type of engine design (ORSC for BE-4, FFSC for Raptor).
2.  Why would SpaceX turn their proprietary designs and test results over to a competitor?

Offline abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1368
  • Liked: 834
  • Likes Given: 663
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #361 on: 06/30/2017 04:27 PM »
First of all, no.

Second, even if yes, why would SpaceX be interested in helping a competitor?

Third, Blue is fully capable of figuring this out on their own, and are in fact the most expert of experts dealing with their own engine design.

It's gonna be fine without outside help.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7870
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 4687
  • Likes Given: 3169
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #362 on: 06/30/2017 04:49 PM »
This isn't space policy, thanks. It's also not about SpaceX...
« Last Edit: 06/30/2017 04:50 PM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline 99miles

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Denver
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #363 on: 07/13/2017 05:42 PM »
Does anyone have any guesses about the burn time of the BE-4 (at 100% rated thrust)?  Will it be similar to 270 second burn time of the RD-180?

Offline brickmack

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • USA
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #364 on: 07/13/2017 09:05 PM »
For Vulcan you mean? Its propellant mass is estimated at like 380 tons for the core stage. 2x BE-4s put out (at sea level), ~4800000 newtons thrust at ~311 seconds ISP.

4800000 = 9.8 * 311 * flowRate

FlowRate = 1.57 tons/second

About 242 seconds, or just over 4 minutes (probably closer to 5 or 5.5 with throttling)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 696
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #365 on: 07/13/2017 09:47 PM »
Quote
Madison County Commission votes to do their part in Blue Origin agreement

POSTED 5:24 PM, JULY 12, 2017, BY CAITLAN DALLAS, UPDATED AT 09:28PM, JULY 12, 2017

Quote
"This commission voted to authorize that we do site preparation, and that we also contributed a half a million dollars towards this incentive package,"

http://whnt.com/2017/07/12/madison-county-commission-votes-to-do-their-part-in-blue-origin-agreement/

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 696
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #366 on: 07/15/2017 05:43 PM »
Quote
Huntsville Oks deal 'confident' Blue Origin plant is coming

Updated on July 15, 2017 at 11:43 AM
Posted on July 14, 2017 at 5:17 AM

The Huntsville City Council unanimously approved a deal Thursday night to bring a $200 million Blue Origin rocket engine factory and up to 400 high-paying jobs to Cummings Research Park.

That so-called Project Development Agreement depends on Blue Origin Alabama getting an engine production contract from United Launch Alliance. [...]

http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2017/07/huntsville_oks_deal_confident.html

The agreement with Blue Origin is attached.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12418
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3196
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #367 on: 07/16/2017 01:10 AM »
On May 14, after the BE-4 powerpack failure on Blue's Texas test stand, the company tweeted that it would be "back into testing soon".  Two months have now passed.  Is there any evidence that testing of any kind has resumed?

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 07/16/2017 01:11 AM by edkyle99 »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26262
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6222
  • Likes Given: 4569
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #368 on: 07/16/2017 04:12 PM »
On May 14, after the BE-4 powerpack failure on Blue's Texas test stand, the company tweeted that it would be "back into testing soon".  Two months have now passed.  Is there any evidence that testing of any kind has resumed?

 - Ed Kyle
Gradatim, Ed, Gradatim.
« Last Edit: 07/16/2017 04:12 PM by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 356
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #369 on: 07/16/2017 04:48 PM »
On May 14, after the BE-4 powerpack failure on Blue's Texas test stand, the company tweeted that it would be "back into testing soon".  Two months have now passed.  Is there any evidence that testing of any kind has resumed?

 - Ed Kyle
Well, if it's a design problem, then the hardware rich approach will mean that there is a lot of hardware that's been made that can't be used and new hardware would have to be built to fix the issue and that will take time. If it's a sequencing or controller issue, then I would expect them to be testing again shortly.

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 1894
  • Likes Given: 1382
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #370 on: 07/18/2017 03:51 AM »
Correct on the "hardware rich", which I didn't think was all that helpful in the first place, for said reason.

If they had shared test cells off a common core test stand, if it was only a cell that got blown, a new iteration of hardware would have been done by now. Could they have blown the core too, making the other cells useless?

Then you'd have to rebuild the test stand, run tanks, and all the plumbing, which you'd think you could overlap with the new hardware iteration.

Next on the list would be revision of test procedures, possibly requalification of changed components separately.

But as said before, its the race to the full scale engine on test stand, then the endurance of surviving initial engine start-up/shutdown, then the evaluation of performance and wear.

Tags: