Author Topic: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion  (Read 190388 times)

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33568
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #260 on: 06/03/2018 07:04 pm »
Blue Origin New Armstrong width.  30 m????  >100 ft???

This is remarkable news, from an excellent post by johnlandish in a Blue vs SpaceX discussion thread:

Quote
Re: SpaceX vs BlueOrigin - Whose Approach / Business Strategy is Better?
« Reply #746 on: Today at 03:00:58 »

--- snip ---

12. Bezos deeply involved with blue operations, from that evidence i have seen it seems he has deeper knowledge of rocketry than most people think. Bezos talked to Alan Boyle about New Armstrong being the next rocket they build. Bob Meyerson hinted at a 30m Diameter rocket, also confirmed work on Blue moon & in space tugs. Aim to increase flight rate way beyond 12 flights a year.   Source:  MIT talk 2018-03-10

Let's discuss this.
NA may have larger dia. than Saturn V possibly around 12m at a guess. Any 30m dia. rocket would be in the far future and would be at least one generation after NA.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #261 on: 06/03/2018 07:09 pm »
12m diameter is about the largest you can go with existing barges on the intercoastal waterways and river systems.  Anything larger would have to be an offshore launch facility and be built near or at a shipyard. 

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3863
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 943
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #262 on: 06/03/2018 07:24 pm »
12m diameter is about the largest you can go with existing barges on the intercoastal waterways and river systems.  Anything larger would have to be an offshore launch facility and be built near or at a shipyard.
Nit - it’s INTRAcoastal. Sorry - pet peeve of mine.
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33568
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #263 on: 06/03/2018 07:36 pm »
12m diameter is about the largest you can go with existing barges on the intercoastal waterways and river systems.  Anything larger would have to be an offshore launch facility and be built near or at a shipyard. 
BO will likely build a new factory for NA close to the NA launch pad so would not need any barges to get it to the launch pad. Still I think NA won't be larger than 12m dia. which will be around the max. dia. you will be able to launch from KSC due to launch acoustics. Anything larger than 12m dia. will likely have to be launched offshore.

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 561
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #264 on: 06/03/2018 08:04 pm »
Does anyone have any thoughts about what a NA vehicle would be used for? If people are going to live and work in space they have to have something to do up there. No one outside of NASA builds a rocket without some purpose or market it is serving, so if we figure out what they intend to accomplish with this rocket then it will give us insight into how big it can be or needs to be.

Offline IanThePineapple

Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #265 on: 06/03/2018 08:19 pm »
Does anyone have any thoughts about what a NA vehicle would be used for? If people are going to live and work in space they have to have something to do up there. No one outside of NASA builds a rocket without some purpose or market it is serving, so if we figure out what they intend to accomplish with this rocket then it will give us insight into how big it can be or needs to be.

My guess is that it's a BFR- or ITS-style competitor for, well, BFR, sending tons of people and/or cargo to the Moon, Mars or Earth orbit in a large ship.

How wide could it be? I think 10-15m is pretty likely. Maybe a bit less and let it be taller.

That's all a pure guess though.

Remember, they're looking to build a NA pad north of LC-39B, where 39C would have been, so clearly they at least expect it will be able to launch from land and not kill everyone in the area. I think that gives us a slight hint at the largest it could be.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2018 08:26 pm by IanThePineapple »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #266 on: 06/04/2018 11:22 am »
12m diameter is about the largest you can go with existing barges on the intercoastal waterways and river systems.  Anything larger would have to be an offshore launch facility and be built near or at a shipyard. 
BO will likely build a new factory for NA close to the NA launch pad so would not need any barges to get it to the launch pad. Still I think NA won't be larger than 12m dia. which will be around the max. dia. you will be able to launch from KSC due to launch acoustics. Anything larger than 12m dia. will likely have to be launched offshore.
The factory they just built is probably big enough for a 12 meter rocket.

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33568
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #267 on: 06/04/2018 01:33 pm »
12m diameter is about the largest you can go with existing barges on the intercoastal waterways and river systems.  Anything larger would have to be an offshore launch facility and be built near or at a shipyard. 
BO will likely build a new factory for NA close to the NA launch pad so would not need any barges to get it to the launch pad. Still I think NA won't be larger than 12m dia. which will be around the max. dia. you will be able to launch from KSC due to launch acoustics. Anything larger than 12m dia. will likely have to be launched offshore.
The factory they just built is probably big enough for a 12 meter rocket.
The factory BO has just built is some distance from the site of the proposed LC-49 launch pad for NA. They will need a new factory near LC-49 to streamline ops. Only takes a couple hundred million $ to build a new factory which is nothing for JB.

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33568
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #268 on: 06/04/2018 01:35 pm »
Does anyone have any thoughts about what a NA vehicle would be used for? If people are going to live and work in space they have to have something to do up there. No one outside of NASA builds a rocket without some purpose or market it is serving, so if we figure out what they intend to accomplish with this rocket then it will give us insight into how big it can be or needs to be.

My guess is that it's a BFR- or ITS-style competitor for, well, BFR, sending tons of people and/or cargo to the Moon, Mars or Earth orbit in a large ship.

How wide could it be? I think 10-15m is pretty likely. Maybe a bit less and let it be taller.

That's all a pure guess though.

Remember, they're looking to build a NA pad north of LC-39B, where 39C would have been, so clearly they at least expect it will be able to launch from land and not kill everyone in the area. I think that gives us a slight hint at the largest it could be.
I think that around 70MN liftoff thrust is around the limit at KSC so I think NA will not be more than that.

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #269 on: 06/04/2018 03:43 pm »
12m diameter is about the largest you can go with existing barges on the intercoastal waterways and river systems.  Anything larger would have to be an offshore launch facility and be built near or at a shipyard. 
BO will likely build a new factory for NA close to the NA launch pad so would not need any barges to get it to the launch pad. Still I think NA won't be larger than 12m dia. which will be around the max. dia. you will be able to launch from KSC due to launch acoustics. Anything larger than 12m dia. will likely have to be launched offshore.
The factory they just built is probably big enough for a 12 meter rocket.
The factory BO has just built is some distance from the site of the proposed LC-49 launch pad for NA. They will need a new factory near LC-49 to streamline ops. Only takes a couple hundred million $ to build a new factory which is nothing for JB.

Blue doesn't need a new factory near LC-49 unless they want a second factory. They could move NA from the current factory to the LC-49 facility. The area is designed to move really big things between pads and buildings.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #270 on: 06/04/2018 04:04 pm »
I was referring to the protected waterway along the American coastline where a lot of barges carry large items and bulk items to ports for shipping.  The Saturn V traveled along this waterway from Louisiana.  It can be used as intercoastal also.  Both can be correct as in the interstate highway system.  The waterway goes between states along the coast.  When I was young and in the 1960's my teachers called it intercoastal.  Everyone I know calls it intercoastal.  Sorry if it is not correct. 


« Last Edit: 06/04/2018 04:09 pm by spacenut »

Online TrevorMonty

Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #271 on: 06/04/2018 04:21 pm »
I thought NG factory was also going to be used for NA.

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #272 on: 06/04/2018 05:18 pm »
I was referring to the protected waterway along the American coastline where a lot of barges carry large items and bulk items to ports for shipping.  The Saturn V traveled along this waterway from Louisiana.  It can be used as intercoastal also.  Both can be correct as in the interstate highway system.  The waterway goes between states along the coast.  When I was young and in the 1960's my teachers called it intercoastal.  Everyone I know calls it intercoastal.  Sorry if it is not correct.

You are correct. It runs from Boston to Brownsville. People outside this region may not be familiar with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intracoastal_Waterway

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #273 on: 06/05/2018 12:20 am »
This is what a lot of people in the interior of the US and foreign countries do not know.  The intracoastal waterway has limited width on barges, thus the Nova rocket of the 1960's was to be 12m in diameter, the largest diameter that could transverse this waterway as well as the Mississippi system.  Therein lies the problem of manufacturing a very large diameter rocket.  Yes it can be done, but only at a deep water port city which limits options in manufacturing.  SpaceX found this out with BFR/BFS.  They couldn't do it at Hawthorne, but had to near the port for shipment to the Cape. 

Offline EnigmaSCADA

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Earth
  • Liked: 133
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #274 on: 06/05/2018 12:34 am »
I was referring to the protected waterway along the American coastline where a lot of barges carry large items and bulk items to ports for shipping.  The Saturn V traveled along this waterway from Louisiana.  It can be used as intercoastal also.  Both can be correct as in the interstate highway system.  The waterway goes between states along the coast.  When I was young and in the 1960's my teachers called it intercoastal.  Everyone I know calls it intercoastal.  Sorry if it is not correct.
As the name implies, it is intra to the coast, as in it doesn't traverse any oceans/seas/"blue water", it follows a continuous path hugging or within the coast. Not trying to be pedantic, but it's unrelated to state borders. In any case, anyone knows or should know exactly what someone is referring to even if they say intercoastal, at least in the context of the USA.

Offline hkultala

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1199
  • Liked: 748
  • Likes Given: 945
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #275 on: 06/25/2018 10:42 am »
I'd bet strongly against a triple core New Armstrong for two reasons:

1. Their goal is operational re-usability. Complex triple core systems don't help that.
    More complex recovery, more engines, more points of failure etc.

2. Lowering development costs is not as big a concern for Blue Origin.
    They're sufficiently funded by Bezos not to have to cut corners.
    From public comments their business philosophy seems to be
    'Do it right, rather than do it right now'.

Speculating,

New Armstrong will probably be like New Glenn, but scaled up to at least 10 meters with new 'BE-6' engines. The first two stages will be reusable, return to launch site. An optional third stage will be a 'BE-5' powered reusable lunar lander/spaceship that can be refueled from a lunar depot created in the Blue Moon program. The notional BE-5 would be a higher efficiency hydrolox engine to succeed the BE-3. Similarly, BE-6 would be an F1 class full-flow staged combustion methalox engine intended to replace BE-4. Rather than use dozens of engines like BFR, Blue Origin will simply invest adequate resources in developing larger engines.     

Speculating ...(or what I might do if I had a New Glenn and lots of billions)... reasons for a triple core:
- SpaceX has shown that a triple core is a good way of roughly tripling payload capability. Two stages at least are recoverable, and the third stage should also be recoverable.

Wrong. They have shown that triple-core is much more expensive and complex way of tripling capacity than most people think, and that development of it took many extra years.

And the "fully 1st stage reusable capacity" has not tripled, it hasn't even doubled.

Quote
- Tripling New Glenn gives 135 tons to LEO - which is compatible with the current BFR plans

Wrong. Rockets are not legoes. You cannot just "triple a rocket".

Without 3 times bigger second stage, the improvement would be MUCH LESS.


« Last Edit: 06/25/2018 10:43 am by hkultala »

Online Markstark

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
  • Liked: 457
  • Likes Given: 83
New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #276 on: 08/19/2018 08:34 pm »
Since we’re all just speculating, here are my two pennies. Blue Origin will go with vertical integration for New Armstrong stacking. They will lease one of the available VAB high bays. This will give them relatively easy access to a future NA launch pad located north west of pad 39B. The facility outside of KSC will still be used to make the major components but they will be integrated closer to the pad like New Glenn and other rockets.

Heck they may even lease one of the crawlers and MLPs.
« Last Edit: 08/19/2018 10:39 pm by Markstark »

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #277 on: 08/19/2018 10:07 pm »
BO rocks...just watch they might win it all :)

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #278 on: 08/19/2018 10:29 pm »
BO rocks...just watch they might win it all :)

Sudden outbursts of admiration are fine, but did you want to add any actual speculation or discussion?  ::)
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion
« Reply #279 on: 08/19/2018 10:38 pm »
BO rocks...just watch they might win it all :)
I just wish they were a little more ferociter and a little less gradatim... ;)
« Last Edit: 08/19/2018 10:38 pm by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1