Quote from: https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/968970651355709440 Jeff Foust @jeff_foustJim Centore, Blue Origin: making good progress on BE-4 engine testing. Getting to longer duration [but unspecified] burn times, and multiple runs on the same engine. Continuing testing for the next several months.
Jeff Foust @jeff_foustJim Centore, Blue Origin: making good progress on BE-4 engine testing. Getting to longer duration [but unspecified] burn times, and multiple runs on the same engine. Continuing testing for the next several months.
Significance of multiple runs on same engine is that they have a) many units under test (reproducability) and b) some idea of wear on engine - critical for an ORSC that is vulnerable to significant erosion down stream of the preburner.They are about where the earlier schedules would have put them in the September/October time frame. Good progress.add:It is unlikely you'd attempt a high thrust test burn, before you have long duration burns.Long duration burns allow you to gain insight on combustion stability and thermal dissipation, in addition to obviously greater engine wear it must endure to get the duration. You determine margins and can tell thermal runaway that might happen at high thrust levels, as well as determining the chamber pressures that the engine will be operating at to obtain them.
Ninja'd in updates thread:Quote from: Kryten on 03/06/2017 01:05 pm@JeffBezos 15m15 minutes ago 1st BE-4 engine fully assembled. 2nd and 3rd following close behind. #GradatimFerociter@JeffBezos 11m11 minutes ago Here’s one more shot of BE-4 in its transport cradle.
@JeffBezos 15m15 minutes ago 1st BE-4 engine fully assembled. 2nd and 3rd following close behind. #GradatimFerociter@JeffBezos 11m11 minutes ago Here’s one more shot of BE-4 in its transport cradle.
How about applying the same critical eye to SpaceX and not just anything not SpaceX
(Note - my post above was meant to synopsize success. Meant to "buffer" ignorant criticism with some insight, in an area one cannot "teach" in posts. Perhaps I shouldn't, if it's going to be used as a means to attack by rhetorically picking from it to concoct a negative.)Again, they have made good progress with BE-4, and I wish them well in hoping to hear more success in testing.
More than six years into developmentBE-4 is already more than six years into development, fully funded, and will be flight qualified in 2018 – at least two years ahead of the alternative engine option. BE-4 component testing has already been underway for more than four years and full engine testing will begin soon.Ready in 2019BE-4 is the only engine that can fly by 2019, meeting the congressionally mandated deadline to eliminate dependence on Russian-built engines. The alternative engine option is multiple years behind and could not be integrated into a launch vehicle until at least 2021, extending our dependence on Russian engines well beyond 2019.
Quote from: Jim on 03/01/2018 05:33 pmHow about applying the same critical eye to SpaceX and not just anything not SpaceXAbsolutely. AncientU's post isn't fair, or based of understanding, or inquiring why.(Note - my post above was meant to synopsize success. Meant to "buffer" ignorant criticism with some insight, in an area one cannot "teach" in posts. Perhaps I shouldn't, if it's going to be used as a means to attack by rhetorically picking from it to concoct a negative.)...
Quote More than six years into developmentBE-4 is already more than six years into development, fully funded, and will be flight qualified in 2018 – at least two years ahead of the alternative engine option. BE-4 component testing has already been underway for more than four years and full engine testing will begin soon.Ready in 2019BE-4 is the only engine that can fly by 2019, meeting the congressionally mandated deadline to eliminate dependence on Russian-built engines. The alternative engine option is multiple years behind and could not be integrated into a launch vehicle until at least 2021, extending our dependence on Russian engines well beyond 2019. from the horse's mouthI presume "in the next couple of months" refers to the expectation it will be flight qualified by the end of 2018. Which seems credible given the full scale version has already hot fired multiple times and the engines has been in development for over six years. There will be delays just like everything else, but probably on the order of months, not years.
The real question is when can this engine be flight qualified? 2018 was estimate as of over a year ago... is it still a viable target date?
Quote from: AncientU on 03/01/2018 09:39 pmThe real question is when can this engine be flight qualified? 2018 was estimate as of over a year ago... is it still a viable target date?Yes they can. It will be late. IMHO doubt 2020. Others will be late too, as before. So what.It's not a "design flaw" issue here. It's a gradual proving by "mm, degrees, milliseconds, ..." issue. Then some refinements.Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Just no "booms". Same is true for Raptor.
The only useless boom is the one you don't learn from.
...add:And to put the shoe on the other foot, we've heard twice now on BE-4 testing, but nothing more on Raptor. Aren't we overdue on a SX report on how Raptor is doing? Unless it's sliding into "Musk time dilation"? By now they should have finished 1/3 scale Raptor tests, and be fabricating a full scale along with an test stand that can handle such. Hello? Where is it?
Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 03/01/2018 06:04 pm...add:And to put the shoe on the other foot, we've heard twice now on BE-4 testing, but nothing more on Raptor. Aren't we overdue on a SX report on how Raptor is doing? Unless it's sliding into "Musk time dilation"? By now they should have finished 1/3 scale Raptor tests, and be fabricating a full scale along with an test stand that can handle such. Hello? Where is it?Not like you to low value post...But, since you asked, I was wondering the same.We saw first raptor burn at IAC2016.Next we heard was at IAC 2017... 42 tests, 1,200s cumulative over the first year of testing.We've also heard testing continues this year.We may have to wait until IAC 2018 to get next quantitative status.
Been told to post less frequent/depth, be more crisp and balanced with inconsistent rivals, limiting details. Hard.