Author Topic: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2  (Read 33641 times)

Online Chris Bergin

Thread 2.

Thread 1:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41160.0

Please post useful comments and be civil to each other - and be on topic.

Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13244
  • N. California
  • Liked: 12802
  • Likes Given: 1363
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1 on: 07/01/2020 03:12 am »
I'm going to use the opportunity to speculate: NA will be very similar to SS but a bit larger.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline jstrotha0975

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • United States
  • Liked: 285
  • Likes Given: 2292
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #2 on: 07/01/2020 01:45 pm »
I'm going to use the opportunity to speculate: NA will be very similar to SS but a bit larger.

And made of different materials.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8079
  • Liked: 6707
  • Likes Given: 2943
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #3 on: 07/01/2020 01:57 pm »
I'm going to use the opportunity to speculate: NA will be very similar to SS but a bit larger.

IMO it will share some features of Starship:
2-stage to LEO
support refueling in orbit
methalox booster
booster primarily RTLS
both stages VTVL

But will differ from Starship with:
fewer larger engines on each stage
different fuels and engines between stages (LH2 upper)
use of horizontal integration of the stages

Online GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1700
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1859
  • Likes Given: 1204
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #4 on: 07/01/2020 02:01 pm »
I will speculate that whatever New Armstrong was planned to be has already changed.

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4943
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2470
  • Likes Given: 2642
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #5 on: 07/01/2020 02:07 pm »
If/when they get experience with New Glenn, I think it will be a larger version of New Glenn, except return to launch site because of it's size. 

It will probably be larger than SH/SS in a 12-14m range.  They could use multiple BE-4 engines without having to develop a larger engine. 

They may develop a BE-4U for an upper stage for a LEO super heavy lifter. 

For deep space probes they have BE-3U.  Now they may try to use multiple BE-3U's with some BE-3's on a second stage with the standard BE-3's used to land the upper stage.  Take the BE-3's off and strip off the heat shielding and you have a large deep space upper stage. 

All speculation.  If SS/SH gets going as Musk hopes.  I think they may develop New Armstrong quicker to compete.  However they are taking their sweet time to get New Glenn operational, as F9 has been around for 10 years already. 

Offline rakaydos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2806
  • Liked: 1859
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #6 on: 07/02/2020 08:59 pm »
Bezos and Musk have different visions for the future, different directions they want to take their respective companies.

Starship is designed for mars. There are certain efficiencies made possible by having an atmosphere on both ends of the trip, that starship is designed to take advantage of.

New Armstrong will be designed for the Moon and for asteroid resources. Bezos sees the goal as "people living and working in space", and the moon and asteroids are the easiest sources of bulk materials for the kinds of habitats popularized by the L5 society, of which Bezos is a member.

If New Glen can handle a reasonably priced reusable upper stage tanker, New Armstrong might not even be designed to land back on earth at all, instead focusing on landing  heavy equipment and lifting bulk resources from the moon

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8338
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 9676
  • Likes Given: 11403
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #7 on: 07/02/2020 09:47 pm »
Bezos and Musk have different visions for the future, different directions they want to take their respective companies.

I think this is an important point, meaning we shouldn't being thinking that Blue Origin will exactly follow in the footsteps of SpaceX. In fact New Shepard and New Glenn are not copies of what SpaceX has been doing, they have their own path they are taking.

Quote
Starship is designed for mars. There are certain efficiencies made possible by having an atmosphere on both ends of the trip, that starship is designed to take advantage of.

Again, another important point! SpaceX has a specific use case that the Starship addresses, and that starts with Mars. Jeff Bezos has other plans.

Quote
New Armstrong will be designed for the Moon and for asteroid resources. Bezos sees the goal as "people living and working in space", and the moon and asteroids are the easiest sources of bulk materials for the kinds of habitats popularized by the L5 society, of which Bezos is a member.

If New Glen can handle a reasonably priced reusable upper stage tanker, New Armstrong might not even be designed to land back on earth at all, instead focusing on landing  heavy equipment and lifting bulk resources from the moon

At this point we can only guess, and my guess is that Blue Origin has its hands full with New Glenn, and they are keeping a close eye on Starship to see how easy or hard that will be to make operational. Then, based on what the use case is once both of those launch systems are operational, that is when I think Jeff Bezos will start defining what New Armstrong should be.

And if Bezos wants to support living and working in space, then he should focus on a bulk transporter, since lowering the cost to move "stuff" to space is the limitation to expanding humanity out into space. Musk is shooting for $10/kg for a fully loaded Starship, so if Bezos can meet or beat that number, and offer a large payload capacity, that to me would be a worthy system to build.
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 Steve G

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 537
  • Ottawa, ON
    • Stephen H Garrity
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 50
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #8 on: 07/03/2020 05:20 pm »
What was the last update Blue Origin gave for New Armstrong? Is it possible they have quietly given up on it?

Offline Pipcard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
  • Liked: 264
  • Likes Given: 126
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #9 on: 07/03/2020 05:49 pm »
What was the last update Blue Origin gave for New Armstrong? Is it possible they have quietly given up on it?
When they first announced New Glenn in 2016, and only as a brief mention. They probably still have to launch that first before making an announcement on its successor.
« Last Edit: 07/03/2020 05:50 pm by Pipcard »

Offline Steve G

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 537
  • Ottawa, ON
    • Stephen H Garrity
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 50
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #10 on: 07/03/2020 10:27 pm »
I grew up during the space race, and I don't think the Soviets were as secretive as Blue Origin is. We'll see about New Armstrong, but there's a lot of speculation based on a single mention.
« Last Edit: 07/03/2020 10:28 pm by Steve G »

Offline rakaydos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2806
  • Liked: 1859
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #11 on: 07/03/2020 10:39 pm »
I grew up during the space race, and I don't think the Soviets were as secretive as Blue Origin is. We'll see about New Armstrong, but there's a lot of speculation based on a single mention.
The soviets were getting things DONE during the space race. Blue is in an awkward place where their first rocket is ready but not flying due to the pandemic, so there's nothing to announce there, and their next rocket is under development behind closed doors, with nothing ready to be announced.

As for the scarcity of information on New Armstrong, compare it to "18m Starship" which is also the only thing we know about that vehical, but I've seen speculative renders comparing a fatter starship with starship, the shuttle, Orion, and even the ISS.

Offline Seamurda

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
  • UK
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #12 on: 07/06/2020 07:23 pm »
I grew up during the space race, and I don't think the Soviets were as secretive as Blue Origin is. We'll see about New Armstrong, but there's a lot of speculation based on a single mention.

The N1 wasn't known about for decades!


Online John Santos

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 232
  • Liked: 211
  • Likes Given: 127
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #13 on: 07/06/2020 07:31 pm »
I grew up during the space race, and I don't think the Soviets were as secretive as Blue Origin is. We'll see about New Armstrong, but there's a lot of speculation based on a single mention.

The N1 wasn't known about for decades!

Technical details weren't known (by the public) for a long time after, but the US definitely knew about the rocket, its capabilities, and most of its difficulties at the time (in early 1969.)

Offline Steve G

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 537
  • Ottawa, ON
    • Stephen H Garrity
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 50
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #14 on: 07/07/2020 05:51 am »
I distinctly recall the N1 was well known. It was called the G-1-E back in the day, and there were also crude drawings of it back in 1969. The pad explosion in July 1969 was also reported at the time. I distinctly recall reading an article back then that the Soyuz 6, 7, & 8 troika mission, that they speculated that there was a missing element that was to have been launched on the ill-fated N1. I believe it may have been a Flight International magazine article written about 1974 that detailed the four N1 launch failures, and stated that they were waiting for the next test flight. All based on ancient memory, but the N1 was not an unknown commodity.

As for the New Armstrong? Not a known commodity. We'll have to be patient.
 

Offline Lemurion

Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #15 on: 07/16/2020 08:13 pm »
We know precisely two things about New Armstrong and one is a logical inference. All thatís been officially said is the name and that New Glenn is the smallest orbital launcher Blue ever intends to build. The latter implies New Armstrong will be larger, but thatís as far as it goes.

I think itís likely that Blue will continue with a single-stick methalox booster with hydrolox upper stage design but beyond that basic architecture I donít even think they know. Truth is, it doesnít really make sense to make decisions until they are sure what they want to do.

Starship has a huge advantage in that everyone knows what itís supposed to do and thatís driven a lot of design decisions. Once Blue settles on a mission and business case for New Armstrong, then they can work on closing the design.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13244
  • N. California
  • Liked: 12802
  • Likes Given: 1363
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #16 on: 07/16/2020 09:45 pm »
We know precisely two things about New Armstrong and one is a logical inference. All thatís been officially said is the name and that New Glenn is the smallest orbital launcher Blue ever intends to build. The latter implies New Armstrong will be larger, but thatís as far as it goes.

I think itís likely that Blue will continue with a single-stick methalox booster with hydrolox upper stage design but beyond that basic architecture I donít even think they know. Truth is, it doesnít really make sense to make decisions until they are sure what they want to do.

Starship has a huge advantage in that everyone knows what itís supposed to do and thatís driven a lot of design decisions. Once Blue settles on a mission and business case for New Armstrong, then they can work on closing the design.
Well StarShip does a lot of things, right?  You take a basic architecture that's brilliant, and turns out that with variants it's good for anything from p2p to colonizing Mars.

With variants, it's also good for cis-lunar industry.

IMO BO should move ASAP to a rapidly and fully reusable launcher, and that should be the definition of NA. The business case may change later, but once in-orbit fueling is matter-of-course, you gain flexibility to do anything you want.

They're trying to be a fast follower and they have infinite funding.  They should always aim ahead of the company they're following.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1813
  • Likes Given: 1016
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #17 on: 07/16/2020 10:56 pm »
We know precisely two things about New Armstrong and one is a logical inference. All thatís been officially said is the name and that New Glenn is the smallest orbital launcher Blue ever intends to build. The latter implies New Armstrong will be larger, but thatís as far as it goes.

I think itís likely that Blue will continue with a single-stick methalox booster with hydrolox upper stage design but beyond that basic architecture I donít even think they know. Truth is, it doesnít really make sense to make decisions until they are sure what they want to do.

Starship has a huge advantage in that everyone knows what itís supposed to do and thatís driven a lot of design decisions. Once Blue settles on a mission and business case for New Armstrong, then they can work on closing the design.
Well StarShip does a lot of things, right?  You take a basic architecture that's brilliant, and turns out that with variants it's good for anything from p2p to colonizing Mars.

With variants, it's also good for cis-lunar industry.

IMO BO should move ASAP to a rapidly and fully reusable launcher, and that should be the definition of NA. The business case may change later, but once in-orbit fueling is matter-of-course, you gain flexibility to do anything you want.

They're trying to be a fast follower and they have infinite funding.  They should always aim ahead of the company they're following.
Do you really think SpaceX could have jumped from Falcon 1 to Starship with out building and launching Falcon 9 and Falcon 9 Heavy first?

Blue might have a lot of money.  But they haven't built up the team with design and operational experience that SpaceX has.  Even with an unlimited supply of money, they need to go through the learning curve New Glenn is going to give them.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13244
  • N. California
  • Liked: 12802
  • Likes Given: 1363
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #18 on: 07/16/2020 11:08 pm »
We know precisely two things about New Armstrong and one is a logical inference. All thatís been officially said is the name and that New Glenn is the smallest orbital launcher Blue ever intends to build. The latter implies New Armstrong will be larger, but thatís as far as it goes.

I think itís likely that Blue will continue with a single-stick methalox booster with hydrolox upper stage design but beyond that basic architecture I donít even think they know. Truth is, it doesnít really make sense to make decisions until they are sure what they want to do.

Starship has a huge advantage in that everyone knows what itís supposed to do and thatís driven a lot of design decisions. Once Blue settles on a mission and business case for New Armstrong, then they can work on closing the design.
Well StarShip does a lot of things, right?  You take a basic architecture that's brilliant, and turns out that with variants it's good for anything from p2p to colonizing Mars.

With variants, it's also good for cis-lunar industry.

IMO BO should move ASAP to a rapidly and fully reusable launcher, and that should be the definition of NA. The business case may change later, but once in-orbit fueling is matter-of-course, you gain flexibility to do anything you want.

They're trying to be a fast follower and they have infinite funding.  They should always aim ahead of the company they're following.
Do you really think SpaceX could have jumped from Falcon 1 to Starship with out building and launching Falcon 9 and Falcon 9 Heavy first?

Blue might have a lot of money.  But they haven't built up the team with design and operational experience that SpaceX has.  Even with an unlimited supply of money, they need to go through the learning curve New Glenn is going to give them.
They should finish NG, but only as a stepping stone, and then immediately move on..  IMO..
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1700
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1859
  • Likes Given: 1204
Re: New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #19 on: 11/29/2020 02:48 pm »
According to this ex-employee on reddit New Armstrong wasn't ever a real thing.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueOrigin/comments/k23bih/comment/gdt5v6t

Quote
New Armstrong is not actually a thing

Quote
I used to work for Blue Origin. It's not a thing. The name was floated internally by employees but it is completely not a thing. 

Quote
No.

Here was the idea: Alan Shepard flew suborbital. Therefore the suborbital rocket was New Shepard. John Glen flew orbital. Therefore the orbital rocket is New Glenn. So logically the lunar vehicle would be New Armstrong, right?

Except with 2 and 3 stages, New Glenn can power a moon landing. Also there will be other iterations of New Shepard. Developing an entirely new vehicle to do the same thing as New Glenn would be a waste of resources.

Furthermore, Blue Origin teamed up with Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Draper Labs for the Project Artemis Human Landing System to return to the moon, and there is no New Armstrong that is part of that.

I repeat, New Armstrong is not a thing, but if that delusion makes you happy, have at it.


 

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