New Armstrong Speculation and Discussion - Thread 2

[meekGee]

But the skirt (engine circle) is about 9.  I'm calculating what the skirt of a 19 BE-4 hypothetical rocket would look like.

Pixel counting from image in link below, I get diameter for the base as 7*457/374 = 8.55 m.

https://www.blueorigin.com/new-glenn

The image from the link below gives a BE-4 nozzle exit diameter of 1.9 m.

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/amdyi4/raptor_engine_size_comparison_13m_nozzle_scaled/

Pixel counting this base image gives a space of 1.9*19/90 = 0.4 m between the engines.

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2024/10/blue-first-stage-testing/

Thus total estimated base diameter for a 19 engine New Armstrong is 8.55 + 2*(1.9+0.4) = 13.15 m. The core diameter could be 13.15*7/8.55 = 10.75 m.

Ok that's more detailed, I'll go with that.

The base area for a 13.5 disc is twice that of a 9 m diac, and the engine count is near half of 35, keeping the roughly 1:4 disparity in thrust density, so this all adds up.

[deltaV]

https://twitter.com/BellikOzan/status/1880416632822211067

I do believe we're heading rapidly towards a future with 2 American commercial LVs with 100+t payload capacity and ~8m diameter payload envelopes.

I expect it'll be a new standard to build to, displacing the 4.6m class.

And we probably won't stop there for very long.

A reply by BellikOzan states that their claim that there's a larger Blue vehicle under development is based on "Insider info".

I'm not 100% convinced by claims of insider info I cannot verify but I thought this was interesting enough to be worth sharing.

[Rakietwawka2021]

I've also heard that BO wolud announce something really big if first launch went successful

[meekGee]

If true, that's very very encouraging.  BO must treat NG as a necessary step on the way to a rocket that can address their goals.  If they don't, then the goals are just talk.

[sstli2]

I think it's fallacious to suggest that New Glenn is incapable of meeting their goals. Before you put millions of people in space, you put hundreds. You can't skip steps.

The smartest thing they could do right now is ignore the fervor of internet space fans and focus on scaling up and cost-optimizing New Glenn.

[StraumliBlight]

New Armstrong trademark received a Statement of Use Extension again on December 24th, 2024.

An Extension Request is a sworn statement that the applicant still has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, but needs additional time actually to use the mark. A filing fee of $125 per class of goods/services must be paid with the Extension Request.

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1879928253580021883

[panjabi]

New Armstrong trademark received a Statement of Use Extension again on December 24th, 2024.

An Extension Request is a sworn statement that the applicant still has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, but needs additional time actually to use the mark. A filing fee of $125 per class of goods/services must be paid with the Extension Request.

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1879928253580021883

Huge HUGE respect for Sally Ride, but come on.... FIRST person on another planetary body is something everyone will remember even centuries into the future, just like the first person to make it to space and come back to Earth alive.  If humanity survives to 3025, there will be a seventh grader somewhere who will have to memorize the names, "Gagarin" and "Armstrong"

[meekGee]

I think it's fallacious to suggest that New Glenn is incapable of meeting their goals. Before you put millions of people in space, you put hundreds. You can't skip steps.

The smartest thing they could do right now is ignore the fervor of internet space fans and focus on scaling up and cost-optimizing New Glenn.

Hundreds?  ISS hosts 3 right now.  Potentially it can host 10.  NG at full blast can build something comparable.  Let's call it Reef.

In the grand scheme of things that doesn't even constitutue a stepping stone.  NG is well sized for something like Reef, and neither of these is even a meaningful waypoint towards BO's Cis-Lunar ambitions.

BO needs to think a lot bigger than NG, and right now, not in some indeterminate future date.

[lightleviathan]

I think it's fallacious to suggest that New Glenn is incapable of meeting their goals. Before you put millions of people in space, you put hundreds. You can't skip steps.

The smartest thing they could do right now is ignore the fervor of internet space fans and focus on scaling up and cost-optimizing New Glenn.

You can skip steps clearly, the jump between NS and NG was unimaginable (effectively no commonality between the two rockets) and NA, if SS/SH sized, would be a much, much smaller leap

NG is capable of meeting Blue's goals, at least in the short term, but building a lunar base is clearly sized for a larger rocket

[DrTadd]

Engineering question.

How much of NG could be moved to NA?

The tank sections would need new domes. But the cylindrical walls could just be an additional section (with all at less curvature).

Strakes could be the same? Actuation systems? Fins?

The lower module is near 8m at fullest diameter anyways. A new housing just wouldn’t neck down.

Is BO actually closer to NA than suspected?
Maybe they planned it that way?

[AmigaClone]

Engineering question.

How much of NG could be moved to NA?

The tank sections would need new domes. But the cylindrical walls could just be an additional section (with all at less curvature).

Strakes could be the same? Actuation systems? Fins?

The lower module is near 8m at fullest diameter anyways. A new housing just wouldn’t neck down.

Is BO actually closer to NA than suspected?
Maybe they planned it that way?

BO will likely be able to incorporate lessons learned with NG in developing NA. Equipment on the other hand might have little in common with the current some currently used by NG or it's ground support - at least in many cases.

[meekGee]

Engineering question.

How much of NG could be moved to NA?

The tank sections would need new domes. But the cylindrical walls could just be an additional section (with all at less curvature).

Strakes could be the same? Actuation systems? Fins?

The lower module is near 8m at fullest diameter anyways. A new housing just wouldn’t neck down.

Is BO actually closer to NA than suspected?
Maybe they planned it that way?

You'll need another two rings of engines, because BE-4 and Raptor are comparable in thrust.

So BE-4 would need to be made more compact. I'm hoping they're already working on that.

[Tywin]

Engineering question.

How much of NG could be moved to NA?

The tank sections would need new domes. But the cylindrical walls could just be an additional section (with all at less curvature).

Strakes could be the same? Actuation systems? Fins?

The lower module is near 8m at fullest diameter anyways. A new housing just wouldn’t neck down.

Is BO actually closer to NA than suspected?
Maybe they planned it that way?

You'll need another two rings of engines, because BE-4 and Raptor are comparable in thrust.

So BE-4 would need to be made more compact. I'm hoping they're already working on that.

They are working in a BE-4 GEN2.

[Tywin]

How BIG the New Armstrong has to be, to make it worth not evolving the New Glenn (85 tonnes NG Evolution possible, with enlarged fairing, etc.) and not continuing to improve the New Glenn...?

[Navier–Stokes]

How BIG the New Armstrong has to be, to make it worth not evolving the New Glenn (85 tonnes NG Evolution possible, with enlarged fairing, etc.) and not continuing to improve the New Glenn...?

I suspect New Glenn will be around for a while (especially if they succeed in developing a reusable second stage for it). Since LC-36 was designed to accommodate future rockets, it implies that BO sees New Armstrong as a replacement for New Glenn rather than a complement to it.

[Tywin]

How BIG the New Armstrong has to be, to make it worth not evolving the New Glenn (85 tonnes NG Evolution possible, with enlarged fairing, etc.) and not continuing to improve the New Glenn...?

I suspect New Glenn will be around for a while (especially if they succeed in developing a reusable second stage for it). Since LC-36 was designed to accommodate future rockets, it implies that BO sees New Armstrong as a replacement for New Glenn rather than a complement to it.

Maybe ready for 2030-2035 time frame with the Artemis Base in the creation moment?

[Exastro]

How BIG the New Armstrong has to be, to make it worth not evolving the New Glenn (85 tonnes NG Evolution possible, with enlarged fairing, etc.) and not continuing to improve the New Glenn...?

There's an awful lot I don't know about New Glenn, but my gut says it has a lot of potential growth in it (maybe to the 85-tonne level you mentioned... can you say where that number comes from?)

Working by analogy with F9 and remembering some features NG lost in the rush to get something to orbit:

* BE4 upgrades: The existing engine is a deliberately conservative design aimed at reliable reuse.  But Raptor has demonstrated that it's possible to go a lot higher in chamber pressure and thrust per unit volume and per unit mass.  I'd guess BE4 won't reach Raptor-level performance for a long time if ever, but it's easy to imagine doubling (at least) the chamber pressure.  BE4 could also shrink enough to fit more of them in the existing diameter.

* By analogy with F9, it's probably a lot easier to stretch the tanks than to increase their diameter, up to the point where bending modes become an issue.  So I'd guess New Glenn will get taller as its engines get stronger.  Falcon roughly doubled its performance with engine upgrades and tank stretches, and I suspect New Glenn can do something similar.

* The once-planned 3rd stage is still possible, too.  IIUC the existing 2nd stage has pretty good exhaust velocity but is also pretty massive (especially compared to a Centaur).  It's easy to imagine that adding a lightweight 3rd stage with (perhaps) a single BE3U or a cluster of BE7s would considerably increase the performance for missions to cislunar space and beyond.  That should make reusing the 2nd stage more attractive, too, since its burnout velocity would be reduced and there'd be more performance available to trade for reuse.

* BE4-U powered 2nd stage: this presumably trades ISP for thrust, making the rocket better optimized for LEO missions

The New Glenn we saw fly a couple nights ago is just a baby version.  It looks like it can grow quite a bit before it hits a limit that makes it worth developing a whole new rocket.

[deltaV]

One potential New Glenn upgrade that could also be useful for New Armstrong is a staged combustion variant of BE 3. This would improve specific impulse compared to the open expander BE 3U. It would also probably make the mixture ratio less fuel-rich since it wouldn't dump the turbine hydrogen, reducing propellant tank dry mass.

[aporigine]

Or perhaps use RL-10 as Centaur has done for decades. It is still used because it works well.
If there is a compelling case for a larger engine, staged combustion will be needed. It will take time and money to develop however.

[Navier–Stokes]

Or perhaps use RL-10 as Centaur has done for decades. It is still used because it works well.
If there is a compelling case for a larger engine, staged combustion will be needed. It will take time and money to develop however.

Even if BO was okay with the significantly higher cost of purchasing RL-10s, that ~30 s ISP improvement over the BE-3U comes at the cost of much lower thrust which would necessitate staging later.