Blue Origin New Glenn Thread 2: Updates and Discussion

[wannamoonbase]

0456-EX-ST-2025 [Mar 12]

Testing will be conducted on the New Glenn second stage, requiring RF transmissions to verify nominal system operation. RF transmission will be in the federal S-band and will be coordinated with CCSFS range scheduling prior to testing.

Operation Start Date: 04/07/2025
Operation End Date: 04/30/2025

Test location is LC-36 (28°28′18″N 80°32′17″W).

This cannot be for a second static firing as there is no reason to do another one, unless it is to test some sort of significant change or changes between this GS2 and the original that flew on NG-1.

They don't exactly have a lot of flight heritage.  I can see them doing second stage static fires for a number of flights yet. 

Old space didn't seem to be as concerned with doing static fires, but new space has the flexibility and as you mention, there maybe some subtle changes to check.

Maybe when the launch cadence picks up they drop static fires to stream line flow, but Blue is a long way away from a 'cadence'

[starskale]

SpaceX still does long duration static fires every Falcon 9 second stage:

https://x.com/_thomashayden/status/1907066762513842284

As well as static firing all their boosters.

[JEF_300]

Of course Blue Origin will keep doing second stage static fires. They'd have to be crazy to skip it, especially with an expendable stage of a relatively new design.
Static fires are pretty much THE number one thing you can do to increase a rocket's reliability.

The early space race (well, missile race) gave us a perfect, head to head example of this with the simultaneous development of the Jupiter and Thor ballistic missiles, two missiles with almost identical performance. Before May of 1958, the Thor missiles would at best have a 5-15 second static fire before being launched. In contrast, every single Jupiter missiles had a full duration static fire before it was launched. The numbers tell the story.

In May 1958
Jupiter: 62% success rate (8 flights overall, 5 successes, 3 failures (0 pad explosions))
Thor: 30% success rate (13 flights overall, 4 successes, 9 failures (4 pad explosions))

Don't skip static fires kids.

[StraumliBlight]

0656-EX-ST-2025 [Apr 3]

Demonstration satellite mission, DarkSky-1-2 (DS-1-2) demonstrating the integration of Blue Origins first logistics flight system, in-flight validation of the DS-1-2 Telemetry, Tracking, and Command (TT&C) hardware and ground-based radiometric tracking.

Operation Start Date: 08/01/2025
Operation End Date:   02/01/2026

The DS-1-2 mission is partially funded by the United States Government, Washington Headquarters Services, under Agreement No. HQ00342190001, a 10 U.S.C. § 4022 (formerly 2371b) prototype Other Transaction award for the "Multi-Orbital Logistics" Area of Interest. Through the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), the sponsoring Government entity, the Department of Defense (DoD) is seeking commercial space logistics services to enable low cost, responsive access to orbits beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). Blue Origin, DIU, and the U.S. Space Force's Space Systems Command's Launch Enterprise Mission Manifest Office have selected the DS-1-2 mission as a pathfinder logistics mission opportunity that will demonstrate the integration of Blue Origin's first logistics flight system, with the primary objective as performing in-flight validation of the DS-1-2 Telemetry, Tracking, and Command (TT&C) hardware and ground-based radiometric tracking. 

[...]

The DS-1-2 flight system, comprised of Blue Origin avionics equipment, is expected to be launched as a non-separable, secondary payload on the upper stage of a National Security Space Launch-class launch vehicle (LV) with an expected launch date between August 1st, 2025, and February 1st 2026. The mission will be an elliptical medium Earth orbit (MEO) of approximately 21000 km apogee, 2500 km perigee, at an inclination of 55 degrees. The DS-1-2 flight system will be independent from the LV upper stage, with separate power, communications, and avionics systems. While an unrelated primary payload will separate from the LV upper stage, DS-1-2 will remain attached to the LV upper stage through decommissioning. After separation of the primary payload, the LV upper stage will send an activation signal to the DS-1-2 flight system but will not have any control over the operation of DS-1-2. Likewise, DS-1-2 will not be able to control the LV upper stage.

[...]

The DS-1-2 mission duration will be no greater than 24 hours, concluding when the DS 1-2 flight system’s battery is depleted.

NOTE: It doesn't actually state New Glenn as the launcher but neither did DS-1 initially.

The DarkSky-1 mission is expected to be launched co-manifested on the upper stage of a future National Security Space Launch. The launch service provider and specific timeframe have not been disclosed.

DS-1-2 also has the same orbit as DS-1.

[GewoonLukas_]

0656-EX-ST-2025 [Apr 3]

Demonstration satellite mission, DarkSky-1-2 (DS-1-2) demonstrating the integration of Blue Origins first logistics flight system, in-flight validation of the DS-1-2 Telemetry, Tracking, and Command (TT&C) hardware and ground-based radiometric tracking.

Operation Start Date: 08/01/2025
Operation End Date:   02/01/2026

The DS-1-2 mission is partially funded by the United States Government, Washington Headquarters Services, under Agreement No. HQ00342190001, a 10 U.S.C. § 4022 (formerly 2371b) prototype Other Transaction award for the "Multi-Orbital Logistics" Area of Interest. Through the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), the sponsoring Government entity, the Department of Defense (DoD) is seeking commercial space logistics services to enable low cost, responsive access to orbits beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). Blue Origin, DIU, and the U.S. Space Force's Space Systems Command's Launch Enterprise Mission Manifest Office have selected the DS-1-2 mission as a pathfinder logistics mission opportunity that will demonstrate the integration of Blue Origin's first logistics flight system, with the primary objective as performing in-flight validation of the DS-1-2 Telemetry, Tracking, and Command (TT&C) hardware and ground-based radiometric tracking. 

[...]

The DS-1-2 flight system, comprised of Blue Origin avionics equipment, is expected to be launched as a non-separable, secondary payload on the upper stage of a National Security Space Launch-class launch vehicle (LV) with an expected launch date between August 1st, 2025, and February 1st 2026. The mission will be an elliptical medium Earth orbit (MEO) of approximately 21000 km apogee, 2500 km perigee, at an inclination of 55 degrees. The DS-1-2 flight system will be independent from the LV upper stage, with separate power, communications, and avionics systems. While an unrelated primary payload will separate from the LV upper stage, DS-1-2 will remain attached to the LV upper stage through decommissioning. After separation of the primary payload, the LV upper stage will send an activation signal to the DS-1-2 flight system but will not have any control over the operation of DS-1-2. Likewise, DS-1-2 will not be able to control the LV upper stage.

[...]

The DS-1-2 mission duration will be no greater than 24 hours, concluding when the DS 1-2 flight system’s battery is depleted.

NOTE: It doesn't actually state New Glenn as the launcher but neither did DS-1 initially.

The DarkSky-1 mission is expected to be launched co-manifested on the upper stage of a future National Security Space Launch. The launch service provider and specific timeframe have not been disclosed.

DS-1-2 also has the same orbit as DS-1.

Orbit matches a GPS launch, so I suspect this one will be going up on GPS III SV08 on ULA's Vulcan rocket.

DarkSky-1 originally was also planning this, but got moved to the inaugural flight of New Glenn. (They did change the orbit a bit when they did that)

[JCRM]

In May 1958
Jupiter: 62% success rate (8 flights overall, 5 successes, 3 failures (0 pad explosions))
Thor: 30% success rate (13 flights overall, 4 successes, 9 failures (4 pad explosions))

Don't skip static fires kids.

The difference in number of pad explosions suggests there's more to it than the duration of the static fire

[Steven Pietrobon]

The difference in number of pad explosions suggests there's more to it than the duration of the static fire

I think that would be experience. Von Braun and his team had that from the V-2 and Redstone, which helped in developing Jupiter. I do agree though that static fires help in development. The N-1 and Starship are also examples of insufficient ground testing.

[JEF_300]

In May 1958
Jupiter: 62% success rate (8 flights overall, 5 successes, 3 failures (0 pad explosions))
Thor: 30% success rate (13 flights overall, 4 successes, 9 failures (4 pad explosions))

Don't skip static fires kids.

The difference in number of pad explosions suggests there's more to it than the duration of the static fire

It turns out that in practice, a full duration static fire will pick up all sorts of stuff that you wouldn't intuitively expect it to. For example, a 15s static fire doesn't require fully filling the tanks, which is probably why the faulty LOX vent valve on Thor Missile 103 was not noticed until it exploded on the pad before the engine even started; pressure builds up a lot slower in a mostly empty tank. And that's just a single example. A full duration static fire gets the vehicle as close to flight conditions as it can be while on the ground, and that's what really matters.

[Vultur]

The difference in number of pad explosions suggests there's more to it than the duration of the static fire

I think that would be experience. Von Braun and his team had that from the V-2 and Redstone, which helped in developing Jupiter. I do agree though that static fires help in development. The N-1 and Starship are also examples of insufficient ground testing.

Starship is, I think, possibly slightly different in that the cost of failed flight tests may well be much less than something like N-1, so the risk/reward balance may be different. Certainly the rate of flight testing is higher than N-1's.

[meekGee]

The difference in number of pad explosions suggests there's more to it than the duration of the static fire

I think that would be experience. Von Braun and his team had that from the V-2 and Redstone, which helped in developing Jupiter. I do agree though that static fires help in development. The N-1 and Starship are also examples of insufficient ground testing.

Starship is, I think, possibly slightly different in that the cost of failed flight tests may well be much less than something like N-1, so the risk/reward balance may be different. Certainly the rate of flight testing is higher than N-1's.

Exactly that.

If you get to the point that flight test failures are entirely acceptable from both budget and schedule perspectives, or even preferable to static failures, you've got the best of both worlds.

[Robotbeat]

N-1 never even finished a first stage flight. Not comparable.

[matthewkantar]

Big difference between N-1 and Starship: N-1’s first stage was populated with untested engines. Every Raptor on every Starship has been test fired.

[clongton]

The difference in number of pad explosions suggests there's more to it than the duration of the static fire

I think that would be experience. Von Braun and his team had that from the V-2 and Redstone, which helped in developing Jupiter. I do agree though that static fires help in development. The N-1 and Starship are also examples of insufficient ground testing.

Hi Steven.
N-1 was launched before it was ready and as a system, was totally untested. The decision to launch was an order direct from the Kremlin, negating the objections of the design bureau.¹

Starship: I agree that a better regime of ground testing, i.e. the static fire, needs attention. Starship could profit from a full duration burn static fire to test the full range of the changing environment as the vehicle burns thru its full load of propellant. That means a full-thrust burn lasting approximately 6 minutes. But SpaceX does not have a static fire pad that could stand up to that kind of a beating. The OLM Pad A without a flame trench would suffer badly. And I don't know if Pad B, with a flame trench, would last that long. But that really is what is needed; a full duration, flight regime static fire test.

1. Reference: "Red Star in Orbit" by James E. Oberg

[ChrisC]

Some friends are at KSC today and spotted this rolling out of the BO facility. At a glance it looks to me like a New Glenn second stage so I'm filing it here. At last sight (second photo) it was parked on Space Commerce Way, facing westbound. I'm not caught up on NG vehicle status so I don't know where it would be headed but I figured this would be useful

[Robert_the_Doll]

https://x.com/davill/status/1910342302742216848

Great to see New Glenn’s 2nd stage on the move again in Florida and arriving at our Integration Facility. Next up will be a hotfire of our two BE-3Us on this second stage as we prepare for NG-2.

[DaveS]

Starship: I agree that a better regime of ground testing, i.e. the static fire, needs attention. Starship could profit from a full duration burn static fire to test the full range of the changing environment as the vehicle burns thru its full load of propellant. That means a full-thrust burn lasting approximately 6 minutes.

Maybe they could pay NASA Stennis to refurbish the B1 Test Stand? B2 is currently occupied by the SLS EUS test campaign but the adjacent B1 cell is currently unused, so they could contract NASA Stennis to outfit to support Starship testing. The B Test Stands were constructed to perform full mission length static test fires of the Saturn V S-1C stage, so with some upgrades it should be able to handle the increased thrust of Starship.

[StraumliBlight]

r/BlueOrigin post shows the GS2 inside the 2CAT building.

[litton4]

That picture reminds me of Starhopper, with the crane in the foreground doubling for a leg.

[Steven Pietrobon]

r/BlueOrigin post shows the GS2 inside the 2CAT building.

Your attachment is a WEBP file that has been incorrectly labelled as JPG. Here is the file converted to JPG.

[StraumliBlight]

0746-EX-ST-2025 [Apr 15]

Testing will be conducted on the New Glenn second stage, requiring RF transmissions to verify nominal system operation. RF transmission will be in the federal S-band and will be coordinated with CCSFS range scheduling prior to testing.

Operation Start Date: 04/07/2025
Operation End Date: 05/30/2025

This license is an extension to the approved license under 0456-EX-ST-2025, and the exhibit information was left unchanged between both submissions.

End date extended by 1 month.