Author Topic: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?  (Read 8372 times)

Offline Tywin

We all know, that Blue, have a hole between, BE-4 and the BE-7 engines...they are very secret with her information, but we all know too, that they have after the NG, the New Armstrong...

Could be the BE-5 and BE-6 a bigger version of the methalox and hydrolox engines, that they already have?
« Last Edit: 12/14/2019 09:04 pm by Lar »
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2324
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1961
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, What are they likely to be?
« Reply #1 on: 12/14/2019 04:54 pm »
Blue Origin is so secretive anything would just be a guess at best.  My guess would be they are something destined for use on New Armstrong since the idea of a much bigger rocket was announced before the Blue Moon lander which will use the BE-7.  Then again one could be a small thruster for Blue Moon.  I suspect a long wait before we know for sure.
« Last Edit: 12/14/2019 09:05 pm by Lar »

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 808
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33890
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, What could be they are?
« Reply #2 on: 12/14/2019 08:31 pm »
I would say BE-5 and BE-6 are the engines for NA. One for the 1st stage and likely to be SC possibly FFSC methalox and more powerful than BE-4 and the other may be an SC hydrolox engine for the 2nd stage.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5184
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2589
  • Likes Given: 2898
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, What are they likely to be?
« Reply #3 on: 12/14/2019 08:38 pm »
I agree. The BE-5 may be as powerful as say the F-1 but metholox for reusability.  The BE-6 may be similar to the J2 or J2-X. 
« Last Edit: 12/14/2019 09:05 pm by Lar »

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 808
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33890
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #4 on: 12/15/2019 01:34 pm »
I agree. The BE-5 may be as powerful as say the F-1 but metholox for reusability.  The BE-6 may be similar to the J2 or J2-X. 
Not sure which will be BE-5 and BE-6 yet although the hydrolox engine may be similar to SSME.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2539
  • Likes Given: 8287
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #5 on: 03/20/2020 03:50 pm »
Why is everybody obsessed with F-1 sized engines? Combustion instability is really hard for big engines. Nobody did a SC, much less a FFSC engine over 2.5MN per nozzle. F-1 was 6.7MN, F-1A would have been 8MN. That's not trivial. And then you have issue of transport. If you go over 3.6m, you can't really use road, so manufacturing and testing has to be done at the design site. Or use waterways.

Offline HeartofGold2030

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 241
  • England
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #6 on: 03/20/2020 04:35 pm »
Why is everybody obsessed with F-1 sized engines? Combustion instability is really hard for big engines. Nobody did a SC, much less a FFSC engine over 2.5MN per nozzle. F-1 was 6.7MN, F-1A would have been 8MN. That's not trivial. And then you have issue of transport. If you go over 3.6m, you can't really use road, so manufacturing and testing has to be done at the design site. Or use waterways.

“Nobody did a SC, much less a FFSC engine over 2.5MN per nozzle.”

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39307
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32881
  • Likes Given: 8379
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #7 on: 03/21/2020 01:55 am »
The RD-270 had a thrust of 6.7 MN, but had combustion instability. The engine was cancelled before this problem was fully solved. It also used N2O4/UDMH propellants.

http://www.astronautix.com/r/rd-270.html
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2539
  • Likes Given: 8287
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #8 on: 03/21/2020 06:29 am »
Why is everybody obsessed with F-1 sized engines? Combustion instability is really hard for big engines. Nobody did a SC, much less a FFSC engine over 2.5MN per nozzle. F-1 was 6.7MN, F-1A would have been 8MN. That's not trivial. And then you have issue of transport. If you go over 3.6m, you can't really use road, so manufacturing and testing has to be done at the design site. Or use waterways.

“Nobody did a SC, much less a FFSC engine over 2.5MN per nozzle.”
Successfully. In fact, after failing to solve the combustion instabilities issues on the RD-170, Glushko went with four nozzles on the RD-170. Not even two, he went with four because doing 2MN+ is a lot harder.

Offline Lemurion

Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #9 on: 03/23/2020 05:27 am »
Like others, I think they are the engines for New Armstrong.

My guess is that at least one of them is going to be an FFSC methalox design with possibly only slightly higher thrust than BE-4 but better ISP. I don’t see it being F1-sized but it may be bigger than Raptor.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6155
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9417
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #10 on: 03/24/2020 12:18 pm »
Or BE-5 and BE-6 were designators for internal design concepts that were abandoned, and will not be used for production engines.

Offline Nilof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 597
  • Likes Given: 707
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #11 on: 04/24/2020 08:53 pm »
Other advanced options include tripropellant engines like the RD-701, and engines specifically designed to take advantage of ISRU with an unusual propellant mixture.

Or, for "boring" options, they could refer to RCS engines like SpaceX's Draco series. There's a good chance that they're developing GH2/GOX RCS systems.
« Last Edit: 04/24/2020 08:57 pm by Nilof »
For a variable Isp spacecraft running at constant power and constant acceleration, the mass ratio is linear in delta-v.   Δv = ve0(MR-1). Or equivalently: Δv = vef PMF. Also, this is energy-optimal for a fixed delta-v and mass ratio.

Offline Aeneas

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Germany
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 110
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #12 on: 06/21/2020 09:06 pm »
Or BE-5 and BE-6 were designators for internal design concepts that were abandoned, and will not be used for production engines.

As sad it might be, I'd consider this likely. Because BE-1 and BE-2 aren't there either, or are they?

Though I'd hope that one of the engines might be a quad-propellant, 650 bar, 15 MN full flow staged expander cycle version...^^

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #13 on: 06/21/2020 09:13 pm »
Or BE-5 and BE-6 were designators for internal design concepts that were abandoned, and will not be used for production engines.

As sad it might be, I'd consider this likely. Because BE-1 and BE-2 aren't there either, or are they?

Though I'd hope that one of the engines might be a quad-propellant, 650 bar, 15 MN full flow staged expander cycle version...^^

BE-1 engines were produced (they weren't just concepts). At least 9 of them were produced and used on the "Goddard" vertical takeoff vertical landing demonstrator. 5 BE-2 engines were used on another VTVL test vehicle. All known BE designated engines either have flown(BE-1,BE-2,BE-3) or are scheduled to fly (BE-3U, BE-4,BE-7).
« Last Edit: 06/21/2020 09:20 pm by ncb1397 »

Offline Aeneas

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Germany
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 110
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #14 on: 06/21/2020 09:35 pm »
BE-1 engines were produced (they weren't just concepts). At least 9 of them were produced and used on the "Goddard" vertical takeoff vertical landing demonstrator. 5 BE-2 engines were used on another VTVL test vehicle. All known BE designated engines either have flown(BE-1,BE-2,BE-3) or are scheduled to fly (BE-3U, BE-4,BE-7).

In that case I want the 650 bar thing...^^

Offline DJPledger

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 808
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 33890
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #15 on: 06/22/2020 08:23 am »
BE-1 engines were produced (they weren't just concepts). At least 9 of them were produced and used on the "Goddard" vertical takeoff vertical landing demonstrator. 5 BE-2 engines were used on another VTVL test vehicle. All known BE designated engines either have flown(BE-1,BE-2,BE-3) or are scheduled to fly (BE-3U, BE-4,BE-7).

In that case I want the 650 bar thing...^^
Please be realistic. The main engine for NA 1st stage is likely to be either BE-5 or BE-6 and will likely to be larger than BE-4 and may be up to F-1 class. It may be FFSC methalox with a Pc possibly similar to Raptor. I don't think 65MPa Pc is possible. The other engine may be hydrolox SC of some kind for NA 2nd stage. I don't think BO will go with the 30+ engine route for NA.

Offline Aeneas

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Germany
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 110
Re: BE-5 & BE-6 Engines, what are they likely to be?
« Reply #16 on: 06/22/2020 11:03 am »
BE-1 engines were produced (they weren't just concepts). At least 9 of them were produced and used on the "Goddard" vertical takeoff vertical landing demonstrator. 5 BE-2 engines were used on another VTVL test vehicle. All known BE designated engines either have flown(BE-1,BE-2,BE-3) or are scheduled to fly (BE-3U, BE-4,BE-7).

In that case I want the 650 bar thing...^^
Please be realistic. The main engine for NA 1st stage is likely to be either BE-5 or BE-6 and will likely to be larger than BE-4 and may be up to F-1 class. It may be FFSC methalox with a Pc possibly similar to Raptor. I don't think 65MPa Pc is possible. The other engine may be hydrolox SC of some kind for NA 2nd stage. I don't think BO will go with the 30+ engine route for NA.

That was a joke! Nonetheless, I hope both engines will be the next steps for BE-3 and BE-4. Especially BE-4 offers a great deal of opportunity to improve in chamber pressure and deriving TWR and Isp... BE-3 might see that change to SC or is there an opportunity to enlarge the current cycle?

Tags:
 

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