Author Topic: SLC-6 and Blue Origin  (Read 18043 times)

Offline Tywin

SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« on: 10/18/2022 05:30 pm »
Should Blue lease this pad?
« Last Edit: 10/18/2022 07:41 pm by zubenelgenubi »
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline Tommyboy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 373
  • Likes Given: 598
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #1 on: 10/18/2022 06:13 pm »
Should Blue lease this pad?
No, BO should show that they can build, launch, and land an orbital rocket first.
« Last Edit: 10/18/2022 07:56 pm by Tommyboy »

Online trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2123
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #2 on: 10/18/2022 07:27 pm »
Besides, SpaceX has demonstrated a dogleg polar corridor from the Cape, and it's widely believed that New Glenn's performance numbers are sandbagged, so it can likely put 17,000 kg into a 98.2 degree 830km circular orbit from there without needing another pad. Which is what's required for national security launches (the only ones putting extremely large payloads into polar orbits).

Offline Tywin

Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #3 on: 10/18/2022 11:12 pm »
Besides, SpaceX has demonstrated a dogleg polar corridor from the Cape, and it's widely believed that New Glenn's performance numbers are sandbagged, so it can likely put 17,000 kg into a 98.2 degree 830km circular orbit from there without needing another pad. Which is what's required for national security launches (the only ones putting extremely large payloads into polar orbits).

But is necessary in case of any damage in LC-36...
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline Hamish.Student

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 389
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 464
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #4 on: 10/19/2022 01:47 am »
Besides, SpaceX has demonstrated a dogleg polar corridor from the Cape, and it's widely believed that New Glenn's performance numbers are sandbagged, so it can likely put 17,000 kg into a 98.2 degree 830km circular orbit from there without needing another pad. Which is what's required for national security launches (the only ones putting extremely large payloads into polar orbits).

But is necessary in case of any damage in LC-36...
 
 
How do you propose they launch East like they would from LC-36, from SLC-6? They cannot. 

Pad's on opposite coasts are not interchangeable like SLC-40 and LC-39A are.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2022 01:48 am by Hamish.Student »

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8744
  • Liked: 4646
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #5 on: 10/19/2022 03:09 am »
Besides, SpaceX has demonstrated a dogleg polar corridor from the Cape, and it's widely believed that New Glenn's performance numbers are sandbagged, so it can likely put 17,000 kg into a 98.2 degree 830km circular orbit from there without needing another pad. Which is what's required for national security launches (the only ones putting extremely large payloads into polar orbits).

But is necessary in case of any damage in LC-36...
 
 
How do you propose they launch East like they would from LC-36, from SLC-6? They cannot. 

Pad's on opposite coasts are not interchangeable like SLC-40 and LC-39A are.
There was an available ISS contingency cargo delivery option following STS-107 to launch converted Titan-II's (Titan 23G / Titan II(23)G / Titan 2(23)G / Titan II SLV) from SLC-4W to the ISS via the same narrow land overflight passage zone that the CCSFS polar launches currently use.  They would have been ordered from the since cancelled second batch of TII missile conversions (42 available missiles were in storage until a START program reduction decision) starting with G-15.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2022 03:25 am by russianhalo117 »

Online jstrotha0975

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 562
  • United States
  • Liked: 330
  • Likes Given: 2592
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #6 on: 10/19/2022 04:02 pm »
Vandenberg is for launching Government payloads to polar orbit. Vandenberg is a highly secure location for Government payloads.

Online trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2123
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #7 on: 10/19/2022 04:05 pm »
Vandenberg is for launching Government payloads to polar orbit. Vandenberg is a highly secure location for Government payloads.
LC-36 is part of the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, not the Kennedy Space Center. It should have a similar level of security.
« Last Edit: 10/19/2022 04:10 pm by trimeta »

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5982
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9147
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #8 on: 10/19/2022 05:17 pm »
Vandenberg is for launching Government payloads to polar orbit. Vandenberg is a highly secure location for Government payloads.
Plenty of commercial payloads launch from Vandenberg, just as they do from CCSFS.

Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #9 on: 10/24/2022 03:52 pm »
Besides, SpaceX has demonstrated a dogleg polar corridor from the Cape, and it's widely believed that New Glenn's performance numbers are sandbagged, so it can likely put 17,000 kg into a 98.2 degree 830km circular orbit from there without needing another pad. Which is what's required for national security launches (the only ones putting extremely large payloads into polar orbits).

But is necessary in case of any damage in LC-36...
 
 
How do you propose they launch East like they would from LC-36, from SLC-6? They cannot. 

Pad's on opposite coasts are not interchangeable like SLC-40 and LC-39A are.
Since ULA already decided that it would operate only one launch facility at Vandenberg SFB, and no final decision has been made about whether the now-inactive SLC-6 facility will be demolished, Blue Origin might ask the US Space Force for permission to have most of the SLC-6 infrastructure modified to accommodate the New Glenn.

Online trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2123
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #10 on: 10/24/2022 04:40 pm »
Since ULA already decided that it would operate only one launch facility at Vandenberg SFB, and no final decision has been made about whether the now-inactive SLC-6 facility will be demolished, Blue Origin might ask the US Space Force for permission to have most of the SLC-6 infrastructure modified to accommodate the New Glenn.
Again, why? SLC-6 doesn't allow for any equatorial or mid-inclination launches, so it doesn't mitigate the risk of a launch failure taking out CCSFS LC-36, and Blue Origin can use a dogleg to access polar orbits from LC-36, too. If anything, they could try getting a second Cape Canaveral launch site to increase flexibility without needing to transport the rocket from the factory (which is at Cape Canaveral) all the way across the country.

Offline AmigaClone

Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #11 on: 10/24/2022 05:32 pm »
Since ULA already decided that it would operate only one launch facility at Vandenberg SFB, and no final decision has been made about whether the now-inactive SLC-6 facility will be demolished, Blue Origin might ask the US Space Force for permission to have most of the SLC-6 infrastructure modified to accommodate the New Glenn.
Again, why? SLC-6 doesn't allow for any equatorial or mid-inclination launches, so it doesn't mitigate the risk of a launch failure taking out CCSFS LC-36, and Blue Origin can use a dogleg to access polar orbits from LC-36, too. If anything, they could try getting a second Cape Canaveral launch site to increase flexibility without needing to transport the rocket from the factory (which is at Cape Canaveral) all the way across the country.

Has New Glenn been approved to use the dogleg south from the Cape?

I agree that there is not really a reasonable explanation why BO would want SLC-6. I can see a less logical reason - simply to prevent SpaceX from bidding on it to use with Starships.

Kuiper, which is Amazon's communications constellation, will have three shells - one of the three (51.3 at 630km altitude) MIGHT be reachable without flying over dry land from SLC-6.

Online trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2123
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #12 on: 10/24/2022 07:09 pm »
Has New Glenn been approved to use the dogleg south from the Cape?
I imagine that receiving that approval would be cheaper and faster than building a second complete launch site and then bringing the rocket over via barge through the Panama Canal every time they want to launch from it.

Offline Tywin

The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2296
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1945
  • Likes Given: 1127
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #14 on: 04/10/2023 09:13 pm »
Has New Glenn been approved to use the dogleg south from the Cape?
I imagine that receiving that approval would be cheaper and faster than building a second complete launch site and then bringing the rocket over via barge through the Panama Canal every time they want to launch from it.
If both stages are reusable, you just have to bring a few rockets via the Panama Canal to the west coast and keep reusing them there.

Online trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2123
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #15 on: 04/10/2023 10:02 pm »
Has New Glenn been approved to use the dogleg south from the Cape?
I imagine that receiving that approval would be cheaper and faster than building a second complete launch site and then bringing the rocket over via barge through the Panama Canal every time they want to launch from it.
If both stages are reusable, you just have to bring a few rockets via the Panama Canal to the west coast and keep reusing them there.
Sure, but then you need to build a refurbishment factory on the West Coast.

Although since Blue Origin is primarily in the warehouse-building business, they're certainly capable of doing that.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5340
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4182
  • Likes Given: 1683
Re: SLC-6 and Blue...
« Reply #16 on: 04/11/2023 12:59 am »
Has New Glenn been approved to use the dogleg south from the Cape?
I imagine that receiving that approval would be cheaper and faster than building a second complete launch site and then bringing the rocket over via barge through the Panama Canal every time they want to launch from it.
If both stages are reusable, you just have to bring a few rockets via the Panama Canal to the west coast and keep reusing them there.

If both stages are reusable, they only need to transport a very few boosters via ship. The second stages can be launched on missions from Florida and landed at the West Coast landing site after their payloads are delivered to orbit.

Online Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5424
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1789
  • Likes Given: 1289
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #17 on: 04/11/2023 01:43 am »
It seems that Blue Origin is attempting to get the SLC-6 site for launching New Glenn. Not surprising. Couldn't leave the Vandenberg site to be a possible future Starship launch and recovery facility later. Along with alerting the California Congressional delagation that a new donor is entering the field.

Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #18 on: 04/11/2023 01:51 am »
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1645502085297840143

Is true...
If Blue Origin takes over SLC-6 launch site, the question is whether New Glenn is compatible with the SLC-6 launch tower as currently constructed.

Offline GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1741
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1924
  • Likes Given: 1277
Re: SLC-6 and Blue Origin
« Reply #19 on: 04/11/2023 02:21 am »
Why?  Aside from a scant few Space Force missions that they currently don't have what's the advantage over a Florida launch and dog leg. They have the performance.

Would it really be worth the cost for their customers?

 

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