Blue Origin New Glenn Thread 2: Updates and Discussion

[edzieba]

Blue needs many more reps with NG. And other than HLS and prop transfer in LEO there is no market looking for even more mass to orbit. 

For mega-constellations, the metric is $/kg to LEO, and they can use the whole available LV launch mass. I think NA will beat NG for this.

I think the 'satellites per launch' ceiling is far lower than most assume. e.g. Starlinks started with 60 birds per launch then reduced to <30, and Starship will be flying ~60x Starlink V3s rather than 120x V2 Minis.
The upshot being that unless you have very large satellites in your megaconstellation, cost/kg scaling stops long before you get to Starship's throw-weight as you end up with too many satellites per launch to fill a plane. But if you have very large satellites, that locks you into a single launch provider - and who is not yet available on the commercial market, and is likely a few years away from commercial launch offerings - 'chomper' being in the queue behind HLS, tankers, depots, and the starlink deployer variants. Which ultimately means current and this-decade under-design megaconstellations will see little benefit from launch vehicles with higher throw-weights to LEO: regardless of theoretical cost/kg, you pay for cost/launch.

[woods170]

I think NG has a lot of maturing to do; those engineers are going to be plenty busy improving the design for the near future.

Correct. NG is only at the very start of its growth path. In the coming years it will be continuously improved and become a lot more capable (and a lot more reusable) than it is now.
What is called "New Armstrong" (really: the next generation BO orbital launcher) will eventually come along. But not in the next five years.

That would be a shame, because even if they started today at full speed, it might be 10 years before it flies.

Please note that in my prior post in this thread I did NOT say that Blue wasn't working on the next generation vehicle; they very much ARE doing preliminary work on the next-gen vehicle. It's just that NG has the priority, while work on the next-gen vehicle is much lower priority. And that's why the next-gen vehicle won't be launching five years from now.

[woods170]

My understanding is also that New Glenn is now closer to what New Armstrong was once envisioned to be, when the names were announced.  New Glenn was originally supposed to be a much smaller vehicle, powered by BE-3s like New Shephard. 

The name "New Armstrong" came directly from Jeff Bezos, around the same time in 2016 as when the New Glenn vehicle (in its current form) was officially announced. But New Glenn had been in development since 2012, starting with full development of the BE-4.

The smaller vehicle (carrying the biconic crewed vehicle) that was envisioned before New Glenn, was the one that would be powered by uprated BE-3s. But that plan was shelved in 2012 in favour of a new vehicle, powered by BE-4s. And as stated, full development of that new vehicle (New Glenn) began in 2012 and had the plan to use multiple BE-4s in the first stage from the get-go.

New Armstrong wasn't envisioned until several years after development of New Glenn in its current form, had begun. As such, the current New Glenn is NOT "closer to what New Armstrong was once envisioned to be".

[woods170]

In looking at the bottom of New Glenn, I don't see how they can get 9 engines under it unless the outer ring almost touches each other and not gimble, unless only the center engine can gimble.  They have 6 legs instead of 4 and they seem to be in between the 6 outer engines.  They could reduce parts, like Raptor, and save some space, then increase the pressure, but I don't think they could double it.  But who knows, they did with Merlin. 

If they did increase thrust and ISP, then they would have to stretch the booster for more fuel. 

Nine engine New Glenn would see a total redesign of the thrust structure and the landing system, as well as the need for a new TE due to a stretched first and second stages and wider "footprint" of the first stage thrust structure. Not unprecedented. SpaceX did almost exactly the same when they switched from Falcon 9 v1.0 to Falcon 9 v1.1 (completely different thrust structure, stretched first and second stages, new TE, introducing new landing system, etc.)

If SpaceX can do it, then so can Blue. It will likely just take Blue a little longer to actually do it.

[DanClemmensen]

Blue needs many more reps with NG. And other than HLS and prop transfer in LEO there is no market looking for even more mass to orbit. 

For mega-constellations, the metric is $/kg to LEO, and they can use the whole available LV launch mass. I think NA will beat NG for this.

I think the 'satellites per launch' ceiling is far lower than most assume. e.g. Starlinks started with 60 birds per launch then reduced to <30, and Starship will be flying ~60x Starlink V3s rather than 120x V2 Minis.
The upshot being that unless you have very large satellites in your megaconstellation, cost/kg scaling stops long before you get to Starship's throw-weight as you end up with too many satellites per launch to fill a plane. But if you have very large satellites, that locks you into a single launch provider - and who is not yet available on the commercial market, and is likely a few years away from commercial launch offerings - 'chomper' being in the queue behind HLS, tankers, depots, and the starlink deployer variants. Which ultimately means current and this-decade under-design megaconstellations will see little benefit from launch vehicles with higher throw-weights to LEO: regardless of theoretical cost/kg, you pay for cost/launch.

I think you have cause and effect reversed. You use smaller satellites when you are desperately trying to launch enough of them to achieve initial full coverage. This was true for OneWeb and for Starlink. Larger satellites deliver more bandwidth per kilogram, so you move to the larger satellites when you can. Starlink wanted to go to the initial "V2" Starship satellites in 2020, but Starship was very late, so they cobbled together the "V2 mini" with a mass that matched the F9 capability instead. The history is right there in the satellite name. That kludge was a spectacularly successful brilliant recovery, not a plan. If your constellation architecture is sufficiently flexible you will move to bigger satellites as quickly as the LVs can support them, because you get more bandwidth per mass.

[woods170]

In looking at the bottom of New Glenn, I don't see how they can get 9 engines under it unless the outer ring almost touches each other and not gimble, unless only the center engine can gimble.  They have 6 legs instead of 4 and they seem to be in between the 6 outer engines.  They could reduce parts, like Raptor, and save some space, then increase the pressure, but I don't think they could double it.  But who knows, they did with Merlin. 

If they did increase thrust and ISP, then they would have to stretch the booster for more fuel. 

Nine engine New Glenn would see a total redesign of the thrust structure and the landing system, as well as the need for a new TE due to a stretched first and second stages and wider "footprint" of the first stage thrust structure. Not unprecedented. SpaceX did almost exactly the same when they switched from Falcon 9 v1.0 to Falcon 9 v1.1 (completely different thrust structure, stretched first and second stages, new TE, introducing new landing system, etc.)

If SpaceX can do it, then so can Blue. It will likely just take Blue a little longer to actually do it.

What if the Nine Engine New Glenn is stacked vertically on a new pad?

Correct if you're referring to the required TE modifications and the landing system. Those won't be needed if they go for Starship-style GS-1 catch and on-pad vertical stacking. But that is only one of several options that have been suggested for 9-engines-on-GS1 -version of NG.
Just a word of caution for everyone here: preliminary work is being done on a GS1 9-engine version. But that's no guarantee it will ever be actually built. There's more than one path to turn current NG into something (much) more capable. The most effective way would be to increase the performance of BE-4. For such an advanced engine the current performance is mediocre, due to the low chamber pressure used. There's a lot of room for improvement. It would not only serve NG well, but Vulcan as well.

[meekGee]

I think NG has a lot of maturing to do; those engineers are going to be plenty busy improving the design for the near future.

Correct. NG is only at the very start of its growth path. In the coming years it will be continuously improved and become a lot more capable (and a lot more reusable) than it is now.
What is called "New Armstrong" (really: the next generation BO orbital launcher) will eventually come along. But not in the next five years.

That would be a shame, because even if they started today at full speed, it might be 10 years before it flies.

Please note that in my prior post in this thread I did NOT say that Blue wasn't working on the next generation vehicle; they very much ARE doing preliminary work on the next-gen vehicle. It's just that NG has the priority, while work on the next-gen vehicle is much lower priority. And that's why the next-gen vehicle won't be launching five years from now.

Yup I know they have.  I meant "seriously started", as in "lean into" or "divert the majority of resources towards".

Remember when Musk said he'd afford Starship by basically almost stopping manufacturing Falcon boosters (a crazy idea at the time) - how many years ago was that?

First work on Starship (says the Internet) started in 2012..

[Comga]

Yeah, if BE-4 increases in thrust by 50%, improved Isp and mass fraction, and they go from 7 to 9 engines, I could see the performance more than doubling.

“If”


Each of these changes would ramp up NG’s payload, but please tell us of any evidence for any of them. 
We have heard rumors of a nine engine version but seen no images. 
(Keeping the same spacing would require increasing the diameter of the base from 8.5 to 11 meters.)
We have heard about small gains in thrust but 50%?
Have we heard anything anout improving Isp or mass fraction?
(Note that if they did increase thrust by 50% or made substantial reductions in dry mass NG might not be able to hover.)

[meekGee]

Yeah, if BE-4 increases in thrust by 50%, improved Isp and mass fraction, and they go from 7 to 9 engines, I could see the performance more than doubling.

“If”


Each of these changes would ramp up NG’s payload, but please tell us of any evidence for any of them. 
We have heard rumors of a nine engine version but seen no images. 
(Keeping the same spacing would require increasing the diameter of the base from 8.5 to 11 meters.)
We have heard about small gains in thrust but 50%?
Have we heard anything anout improving Isp or mass fraction?
(Note that if they did increase thrust by 50% or made substantial reductions in dry mass NG might not be able to hover.)

Currently BE-4 thrusts at about 2.9 of Merlin.
So 7 of them is equivalent to 20 Merlins at lift-off, compared to FH's 27.

The ISP of course helps offset some of that, so I believe at the end they'll match FH. But I don't think it'll go far beyond that, not without making BE-4 a LOT more compact.

[DrTadd]

Didn’t BO take over some sort of intermediate cis space transport module from Lockmart?

I remember thar is getting close to flight ready in 26.

So that would be another NG launch testing that capability.

[seb21051]

BE-4 Chief Engineer in NG 9 engine meeting: "Show me that Raptor 3 schematic again?"

Limp: "Think McKenzie would jump ship for a $5m p.a. offer?"

[woods170]

BE-4 Chief Engineer in NG 9 engine meeting: "Show me that Raptor 3 schematic again?"

Limp: "Think McKenzie would jump ship for a $5m p.a. offer?"

Violating an NDA will cost a lot more than $5M. Just sayin'

[StraumliBlight]

Space Systems Command Continues New Glenn’s Certification Process for National Security Space Launches [Nov 13]

Space Systems Command (SSC) continues its process of certifying New Glenn for National Security Space Launches after the successful NG-2 launch today at 3:55 p.m. EST from Space Launch Complex (SLC)-36 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The U.S. Space Force’s (USSF) Assured Access to Space (AATS) Certification Team from System Delta 80 (SYD 80) was on site to observe the second flight of Blue Origin’s New Glenn.

New Glenn’s certification continues with the NG-2 mission as part of Blue Origin’s agreement with the NSSL program. The SYD 80 team manages the NSSL program in partnership with the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), who share responsibilities for delivering launch services for the War Department and other government agencies.

“The Space Force congratulates Blue Origin on its launch of NG-2, a monumental step towards New Glenn delivering our most critical warfighting capabilities to orbit,” said Lt. Col. Brian Scheller, SSC’s system program manager and chief engineer for SYD 80.

Commercial launch partners like Blue Origin must be certified prior to carrying national security payloads into space. The formal certification process with Blue Origin began with approval of their New Entrant Certification plan in 2022. The New Entrant Certification Guide allows Launch Service Providers to select between four options as paths for certification. Each option has a different number of flight requirements (2, 3, 6, or 14 flights) and corresponding government engineering insight. The fewer the number of flights flown, the more government insight into the rocket design and qualification testing the government will require.

[catdlr]

Blue Origin revealed some massively cool plans for its New Glenn rocket

“The iterative design from our current 7×2 vehicle means we can build this rocket quickly.”

Eric Berger – Nov 20, 2025 10:06 AM

[catdlr]

New Glenn Update
Upgraded Engines and Subcooled Components Drive Enhanced Performance

Starting with NG-3, we will phase in a series of upgrades to the New Glenn launch system designed to increase payload performance, launch cadence, and enhance reliability.

https://twitter.com/davill/status/1991544049095045367

Dave Limp
@davill
Because you asked…

[catdlr]

NSF Article

Blue Origin announce upgrades to New Glenn ahead of Flight 3
written by Chris Bergin November 20, 2025

[catdlr]

🏳️‍🌈Alejandro Alcantarilla Romera (Alex)
@Alexphysics13
Over the last several months, Blue Origin has been working at Launch Complex 36 to expand the existing tank farm and add subcooling capabilities. Clearing began somewhere around July and we can see this on satellite pictures like this one from Harry

https://x.com/Alexphysics13/status/1991538616376652174

[ZaphodBeeblebrox]

Looks like some of the "If's" on this thread just became "when's" - good to see.   

It goes to show BO has plans, they're just selective about when they disclose them to the public.  Although the job postings were a bit of a giveaway. 

I'm looking forward to a timeline on the 9x4.

[Coastal Ron]

Yep, it looks like Blue Origin is now making the kind of progress that we've been waiting for them to make - successful orbital rocket launches (and 1st stage recoveries) and moving forward with plans to iterate their services.

With the announced 8.7m wide payload fairing for New Glenn 9x4, I'll be interested to see what that works out to for payload size, specifically payload diameter and length. The current generation of Starship offers a max of 8m in length and 8m in diameter for payloads, so will New Glenn 9×4 equal that?

Pricing is also an unknown, for both New Glenn 9x4 and for Starship. Yes, Elon Musk has made public statements about what the price would be for Starship, but Starship is not operational yet, so that could change (dramatically even). But New Glenn 9x4 could be a backup for Starship for certain payloads, and that would be good for the launch market overall - assuming large payload markets come into existence (they haven't yet despite the significant cost reduction with Falcon 9/H).

[catdlr]

New Glenn Is Growing To Starship-Size? | Blue Origin Reveals Huge Update! - November 20, 2025



 

Nov 20, 2025
Blue Origin just dropped a massive upgrade with the new 9x4 variant — 9 BE-4 engines on the first stage, 4 engines on the second stage, stretched tanks, higher thrust, subcooled propellants, reusable fairings, and a staggering 70 tons to LEO (20 tons to TLI). This video breaks down everything announced, compares both New Glenn 7x2 and 9x4 configurations, covers the upcoming performance boosts coming to the current rocket (19.9 MN at liftoff, uprated BE-3U second stage, propellant densification), and explores what the stunning new renders really tell us — including the mysterious disappearance of the transporter-erector.

🤵 Hosted by Ryan Caton (@DPodDolphinPro).
🖊️ Written by Ryan Caton (@DPodDolphinPro).
🎥 Video from Jack Beyer, Max Evans, Tyler Gray, Jerry Pike, D Wise, Space Coast Live, Starbase Live, Blue Origin, NASA, SpaceX.
✂️ Edited by Sawyer Rosenstein (@thenasaman)
💼 Produced by Kevin Michael Reed (@kmreed).