NG is 3 stages.
Okay, I just want to point out that Blue Origin's orbital rocket is NOTIONAL. Got that? It doesn't exist. It's a paper rocket.
Quote from: sanman on 05/17/2017 12:58 pmIt seems to me that the arrival (operationalization) of New Glenn will be the landmark moment which alters the relative perceptions of the 2 companies. At that point, we'll be seeing this whole other new orbital rocket reusably launching and landing - something nobody else in the world can do, except SpaceX. At that point, the optics will undergo a sea-change, along with overall public perceptions. And given the size of New Glenn, it's going to make quite a splash, to make F9R seem small. New Glenn will then be seen as competing with Falcon Heavy, rather than with the smaller F9R.At that juncture, who's going to dominate the headlines more, and be seen as the 'space leader'?(Or will it just come down to who blows up less often?)SpaceX will be testing ITS at around that time. So SpaceX. (Not that I'm worried about Blue Origin. Doesn't really matter that SpaceX will have a bunch of advantages, as Bezos is stupendously wealthy and so will be able to keep up just fine.)The real crazy thing is what it implies when you have TWO very competitive reusable and then fully reusable launch companies with very similar capabilities:now F9 then FH then fully reusable FH then New Glenn the fully reusable New Glenn. Then at about the same time as New Glenn starts flying, ITS will also fly and then some time later, New Armstrong which will likely be about the same capability.Nobody else in the entire world is anywhere near just that first level of partially reusable Falcon 9. By the time Europe and others will have /started/ comparable partial RLV programs, we'll be watching ITS and probably the beginnings of New Armstrong. America will have like crazy scifi space capabilities compared to everyone else (and kind of already does with the regular F9 landings). Poor ULA, Ariane, Roscosmos, CNSA, etc...People are just barely starting to realize where this is headed. I can see why they'd have been skeptical before SpaceX had started sticking landings and before New Shepard (and the announcement of New Glenn, all backed by the insanely rich Bezos), but now it should be pretty obvious the direction things are going. Everything larger than a refrigerator and competitively bid (without being sold at a loss) will be launched on an (at least partial VTVL) RLV within 5-7 years, and almost certainly by either SpaceX or Blue Origin.
It seems to me that the arrival (operationalization) of New Glenn will be the landmark moment which alters the relative perceptions of the 2 companies. At that point, we'll be seeing this whole other new orbital rocket reusably launching and landing - something nobody else in the world can do, except SpaceX. At that point, the optics will undergo a sea-change, along with overall public perceptions. And given the size of New Glenn, it's going to make quite a splash, to make F9R seem small. New Glenn will then be seen as competing with Falcon Heavy, rather than with the smaller F9R.At that juncture, who's going to dominate the headlines more, and be seen as the 'space leader'?(Or will it just come down to who blows up less often?)
Quote from: Robotbeat on 05/19/2017 04:44 amNG is 3 stages.Not initially, the 2 stage version with a 5m fairing will fly first. But I have my doubts that the 3 stage version of NG will ever fly, I think they are working on a reusable 2nd stage instead.
It appears Musk is rethinking BTR,BFS and is looking at a smaller rocket on the way to the full blown ITS. This sounds like a NG killer, 8 -10 m core raptor powered rocket with in orbit refuelling and 2nd stage capable of landing on moon , earth, Mars. 2nd stage with cargo and human qualified versions. BO NG powered by BE4 DOA I would think.
8 -10 m core raptor powered rocket with in orbit refuelling and 2nd stage capable of landing on moon , earth, Mars. 2nd stage with cargo and human qualified versions.
Given the factory and launch infrastructure are actually being built for New Glenn and it has secured launch contracts, it is a little hyperbolic to claim it will be DOA because of mini-ITS. ITS doesn't even have a frozen design on paper yet. It's much more probable that ITS was descoped partially due to the threat of New Glenn making it DOA. New Glenn will almost certainly arrive sooner than mini-ITS for the above reasons.
Quote from: Darkseraph on 07/20/2017 03:57 pmGiven the factory and launch infrastructure are actually being built for New Glenn and it has secured launch contracts, it is a little hyperbolic to claim it will be DOA because of mini-ITS. ITS doesn't even have a frozen design on paper yet. It's much more probable that ITS was descoped partially due to the threat of New Glenn making it DOA. New Glenn will almost certainly arrive sooner than mini-ITS for the above reasons.SpaceX does have a factory and several launch sites and lots of launch contracts (which are not necessarily fixed to specific vehicles, see Falcon 1), so it's not like they are behind in any of those areas. I also doubt the NG design is wholly frozen either - there will certainly be changes coming during testing, particularly BE-4 testing.SpaceX is also including full reuse as baseline for the next-gen vehicle, while New Glenn does not (initially). That's a significant potential advantage, even if NG launches several years earlier.
Quote from: envy887 on 07/20/2017 05:31 pmQuote from: Darkseraph on 07/20/2017 03:57 pmGiven the factory and launch infrastructure are actually being built for New Glenn and it has secured launch contracts, it is a little hyperbolic to claim it will be DOA because of mini-ITS. ITS doesn't even have a frozen design on paper yet. It's much more probable that ITS was descoped partially due to the threat of New Glenn making it DOA. New Glenn will almost certainly arrive sooner than mini-ITS for the above reasons.SpaceX does have a factory and several launch sites and lots of launch contracts (which are not necessarily fixed to specific vehicles, see Falcon 1), so it's not like they are behind in any of those areas. I also doubt the NG design is wholly frozen either - there will certainly be changes coming during testing, particularly BE-4 testing.SpaceX is also including full reuse as baseline for the next-gen vehicle, while New Glenn does not (initially). That's a significant potential advantage, even if NG launches several years earlier.SpaceX have tested a subscale raptor, not the full up version that is roughly equivlant to BE4 in thrust. The full scale version will likely be qualified later than Blue's engine. As for any incarnation for the ITS, if will have to be assembled elsewhere than their current facilties in Hawthorne - either close to a water way or adjacent to the launch site itself. It is simply too big to be transported by road. If any SpaceX super rocket was going to be launching in the near future, there should be ground broken on a large assembly facility right now. That has not happened yet and to public knowledge there has been no competition to select a state to build such a facility in yet. A launch pad would also be selected by now or a plan to modify an existing pad to gigantic methalox rockets.None of these things have happened yet therefore it's very probably to conclude any SpaceX gigantic rocket is years away and certainly behind New Glenn.The Dead on Arrival comment applied to eiither company, is unsubstantiated hyperbole.
SpaceX have tested a subscale raptor, not the full up version that is roughly equivlant to BE4 in thrust. The full scale version will likely be qualified later than Blue's engine.
My impression is SpaceX's new vehicle (miniBRF/ITS) will compete with New Armstrong, not New Glenn. New Glenn will initially compete with F9 and FH for payloads.