Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 01/26/2021 03:55 amQuote from: spacenut on 01/25/2021 01:06 amI know it took a while for SpaceX to develop the Falcon Heavy, maybe 2-3 years,...Falcon Heavy was announced in 2011 and flew seven years later.Yes, but did they actually get started on it then or after they got the Full Thrust version of F9 so they could deliver more payload? Since the version they have now had to wait until they got the full thrust and the landings down.
Quote from: spacenut on 01/25/2021 01:06 amI know it took a while for SpaceX to develop the Falcon Heavy, maybe 2-3 years,...Falcon Heavy was announced in 2011 and flew seven years later.
I know it took a while for SpaceX to develop the Falcon Heavy, maybe 2-3 years,...
Blue is not likely to make many improvements once New Glenn is operational. They really don't seem to want to push the envelope. So, I would think leaving it as is for current satellites and launches to be competitive, then working on a 3 core heavy version with reusable upper stage could get them in the 100 ton category without development of an entirely new rocket. The rocket is already 7m wide which is large. Making the upper stage stretch wouldn't be hard. They could even develop cross feed to get the core further down range before the upper stage kicks in. This may add about 10 tons to the payload. Falcon 9 can get about 23 tons to LEO expendable, probably about 18 tons with down range drone ship landing. FH can get 63 tons to LEO expendable, and around 40-45 tons reusable. So New Glenn can get 40-45 tons with first stage reusability with down range landing. A 3 core version with down range landing should get 100-110 tons to LEO. I may be wrong, but just making comparisons. This would be without developing an entirely new rocket like a New Armstrong. One thing holding back Blue is their engine (BE-4) is fairly large in comparison to the Raptor. They can only get so many under a given diameter. They are putting 7 engines under the New Glenn with it's 7m core. I don't think they can fit 9 of them under there.
I think it's reasonable to assume that 'New Armstrong' will be in the 10-to-12 meter diameter range, with a matching wider upper stage. The engines will be just X-more of the existing BE-4 and BE-7 family.
Quote from: MATTBLAK on 01/29/2021 05:07 amI think it's reasonable to assume that 'New Armstrong' will be in the 10-to-12 meter diameter range, with a matching wider upper stage. The engines will be just X-more of the existing BE-4 and BE-7 family.Since Blue sell their engines, there's nothing to stop another company make a 10m+ BE4 vehicle either. Other than having a reason to do so of course.
Quote from: Cheapchips on 01/29/2021 06:37 amQuote from: MATTBLAK on 01/29/2021 05:07 amI think it's reasonable to assume that 'New Armstrong' will be in the 10-to-12 meter diameter range, with a matching wider upper stage. The engines will be just X-more of the existing BE-4 and BE-7 family.Since Blue sell their engines, there's nothing to stop another company make a 10m+ BE4 vehicle either. Other than having a reason to do so of course. Think that the New Glenn might be too small to be fully reusable....
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 01/29/2021 07:15 amQuote from: Cheapchips on 01/29/2021 06:37 amQuote from: MATTBLAK on 01/29/2021 05:07 amI think it's reasonable to assume that 'New Armstrong' will be in the 10-to-12 meter diameter range, with a matching wider upper stage. The engines will be just X-more of the existing BE-4 and BE-7 family.Since Blue sell their engines, there's nothing to stop another company make a 10m+ BE4 vehicle either. Other than having a reason to do so of course. Think that the New Glenn might be too small to be fully reusable. So anyone using BE-4 engines from Blue will likely be making 9 to 12 meter diameter cores for their launcher in the future.No. Where the heck did this magical thinking come from that You somehow need a 100ton SHLV to get to full reuse??Heck... You could make RocketLab's Electron fully reusable if you wanted. Helicopter/drone recovery of both stages (upper stage would use a small HIAD-like device).
Quote from: Cheapchips on 01/29/2021 06:37 amQuote from: MATTBLAK on 01/29/2021 05:07 amI think it's reasonable to assume that 'New Armstrong' will be in the 10-to-12 meter diameter range, with a matching wider upper stage. The engines will be just X-more of the existing BE-4 and BE-7 family.Since Blue sell their engines, there's nothing to stop another company make a 10m+ BE4 vehicle either. Other than having a reason to do so of course. Think that the New Glenn might be too small to be fully reusable. So anyone using BE-4 engines from Blue will likely be making 9 to 12 meter diameter cores for their launcher in the future.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 01/29/2021 07:15 amQuote from: Cheapchips on 01/29/2021 06:37 amQuote from: MATTBLAK on 01/29/2021 05:07 amI think it's reasonable to assume that 'New Armstrong' will be in the 10-to-12 meter diameter range, with a matching wider upper stage. The engines will be just X-more of the existing BE-4 and BE-7 family.Since Blue sell their engines, there's nothing to stop another company make a 10m+ BE4 vehicle either. Other than having a reason to do so of course. Think that the New Glenn might be too small to be fully reusable....No. Where the heck did this magical thinking come from that You somehow need a 100ton SHLV to get to full reuse??Heck... You could make RocketLab's Electron fully reusable if you wanted. Helicopter/drone recovery of both stages (upper stage would use a small HIAD-like device).
They talking about something bigger than the New Glenn, in the New Shepard direct...
Mention of a larger rocket is just after the 27:55 minute mark. Very brief remark. "New Glenn will be the smallest orbital class launch vehicle that we build"
My take on this...To make space a profitable business, there will be need for a re-launcher and usable re-entry vehicle larger than any current launcher currently in development.This may be what "New Armstrong"will be.. this will be to space, what bulk ore carriers are to shipping... moving high margin rare earths and other minerals from mining on the moon back to Earth. This thing would need to be BIG, VERY, VERY BIG, FAAARKING HUGE!It would be launched from the ocean, and re-enter back to the ocean.....Right now, New Glenn is what Blue Origin needs, but from this, there is a whole architecture that they know that they are not fully sharing, but dropping bread crumbs for....
Quote from: DrHeywoodFloyd on 08/04/2022 07:11 pmMy take on this...To make space a profitable business, there will be need for a re-launcher and usable re-entry vehicle larger than any current launcher currently in development.This may be what "New Armstrong"will be.. this will be to space, what bulk ore carriers are to shipping... moving high margin rare earths and other minerals from mining on the moon back to Earth. This thing would need to be BIG, VERY, VERY BIG, FAAARKING HUGE!It would be launched from the ocean, and re-enter back to the ocean.....Right now, New Glenn is what Blue Origin needs, but from this, there is a whole architecture that they know that they are not fully sharing, but dropping bread crumbs for....Don't need large LV to return large quantities of raw materials from space. Only a heatshield and fuel both of which come from ISRU, also propulsion but this can be small high performance engines eg BE7. The BE7 power spacetug can stay space and reused multiple times.