Author Topic: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan  (Read 318403 times)

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 676
  • Likes Given: 153
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1280 on: 12/02/2018 07:29 pm »
No. When BFR comes online, F9 and FH will be retired. That is the plan.

The production lines will be retired probably before BFR comes online. The vehicles that have already been built will be flown until no-one wants them.

Likewise, I expect something similar for Blue, that they'll make a dozen or two NG first stages and move on.
artist, so take opinions expressed above with a well-rendered grain of salt...
https://www.instagram.com/artzf/

Offline yoram

  • Member
  • Posts: 46
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1281 on: 12/02/2018 07:47 pm »

My own personal guess as to the manufacturing cost for a NG rocket would be ~$100m for 1S, ~$25m for 2S, and ~$10m for the PLF (compared with about $30m/$10m/$5m for a Falcon 9). An NG will be throwing away ~$35m in equipment per launch, compared with $15m for a F9 or 3xRecovery FH, and $45m for an FH with 2xRecovery.


Can you please explain the rationale for the price differences more? Why would NG 2S be much more expensive than Falcon 2S? Is there something inherent in it that is more expensive? Or just economies of scale?


Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 761
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 1381
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1282 on: 12/02/2018 07:59 pm »

My own personal guess as to the manufacturing cost for a NG rocket would be ~$100m for 1S, ~$25m for 2S, and ~$10m for the PLF (compared with about $30m/$10m/$5m for a Falcon 9). An NG will be throwing away ~$35m in equipment per launch, compared with $15m for a F9 or 3xRecovery FH, and $45m for an FH with 2xRecovery.


Can you please explain the rationale for the price differences more? Why would NG 2S be much more expensive than Falcon 2S? Is there something inherent in it that is more expensive? Or just economies of scale?

they are going to be about the same price to produce...

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2484
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 433
  • Likes Given: 246
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1283 on: 12/02/2018 08:04 pm »
NG 2nd stage will have two engines vs one for F9.  It will also be 7m in diameter vs 3.7m for F9 S2.  More engines, more material, and more fuel.  NG second stage will also use hydrolox which is more expensive than kerolox for F9 or FH, thus the higher cost for New Glenn.  Now you really can't compare New Glenn to F9, but must compare it to FH because of the comparable capabilities. 

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 676
  • Likes Given: 153
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1284 on: 12/02/2018 08:04 pm »

My own personal guess as to the manufacturing cost for a NG rocket would be ~$100m for 1S, ~$25m for 2S, and ~$10m for the PLF (compared with about $30m/$10m/$5m for a Falcon 9). An NG will be throwing away ~$35m in equipment per launch, compared with $15m for a F9 or 3xRecovery FH, and $45m for an FH with 2xRecovery.


Can you please explain the rationale for the price differences more? Why would NG 2S be much more expensive than Falcon 2S? Is there something inherent in it that is more expensive? Or just economies of scale?

Because it's a lot larger and uses two engines. Empty mass of the Falcon 9 2S is about 4 tonnes, empty mass for the NG second stage will probably be on the order of 16 tonnes.

The size of the NG second stage is a lot closer to Falcon's first stage than it's second stage.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2018 08:13 pm by ZachF »
artist, so take opinions expressed above with a well-rendered grain of salt...
https://www.instagram.com/artzf/

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 676
  • Likes Given: 153
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1285 on: 12/02/2018 08:25 pm »
Better to visualize; here's a little size comparison of NG, FH and Vulcan. Tanks are shaded roughly to their contents' density.

NG truly is a gigantic rocket. NG and FH will both have gross takeoff weights between 1,450-1,500 tonnes, Vulcan Centaur Heavy looks to be in the 900+ tonnes range.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2018 08:28 pm by ZachF »
artist, so take opinions expressed above with a well-rendered grain of salt...
https://www.instagram.com/artzf/

Online GWH

Better to visualize; here's a little size comparison of NG, FH and Vulcan. Tanks are shaded roughly to their contents' density.

NG truly is a gigantic rocket. NG and FH will both have gross takeoff weights between 1,450-1,500 tonnes, Vulcan Centaur Heavy looks to be in the 900+ tonnes range.

Nice work on the hand drawing!! Manual scale drawing is rapidly becoming a lost art.

That does a really good job of providing a visual indication of just how large that 2nd stage is compared to other rockets.
Those big orthogrid tanks will take a lot of milling and welding of segments, about 3/4 as much as ULA will be doing for the Vulcan core. For reference:
Orthogrid trial panel:
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/855031915270635522
A photo of the orthogrid panels post machining and pre-forming:
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/987473611672858624

Regarding the doubt some people have on cost estimates of New Glenn being more expensive:

Falcon 9 doesn't use this type of construction (orthogrid). They use skin and stringer tanks with a small amount of machining on the skin.

Falcon 9 isn't insulated (to the best of my knowledge). New Glenn S2 will have to be so that air doesn't condense on the outside of the H2 tank as a liquid.

I'll hazard a guess that BE-3U will be about the same size as Merlin Vac despite being half the thrust due to the low density of Hydrogen, but someone can correct me on that since I haven't researched that point. How a kerolox gas generator engine stacks against an open-expander hydrolox engine for cost I have no idea. Curious if Blue is using the simpler pintle injector of a more traditional (and expensive) shower head type injector.

« Last Edit: 12/02/2018 10:21 pm by GWH »

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5799
  • Viewed launches since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 2293
  • Likes Given: 1656
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1287 on: 12/13/2018 03:33 am »
Will New Glenn be the KING of Heavy Lift Rockets?


Everyday Astronaut
Published on Dec 12, 2018

Blue Origin, perhaps the sleeping giant of the aerospace industry, will be going from a tiny suborbital rocket to one of the biggest rockets ever made…

Today, we’re finally going to do a quick rundown on Blue Origin, talk about their upcoming New Glenn rocket and then compare it to some of the other Heavy Lift Launchers it will be competing against.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3urRWGt2s6k?t=001



Tony De La Rosa

Offline groundbound

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1288 on: 12/17/2018 06:01 pm »

My own personal guess as to the manufacturing cost for a NG rocket would be ~$100m for 1S, ~$25m for 2S, and ~$10m for the PLF (compared with about $30m/$10m/$5m for a Falcon 9). An NG will be throwing away ~$35m in equipment per launch, compared with $15m for a F9 or 3xRecovery FH, and $45m for an FH with 2xRecovery.


Can you please explain the rationale for the price differences more? Why would NG 2S be much more expensive than Falcon 2S? Is there something inherent in it that is more expensive? Or just economies of scale?

Because it's a lot larger and uses two engines. Empty mass of the Falcon 9 2S is about 4 tonnes, empty mass for the NG second stage will probably be on the order of 16 tonnes.

The size of the NG second stage is a lot closer to Falcon's first stage than it's second stage.

No one seems to have mentioned the effect of economies of scale on cost either.

By the time 10 NG S2s have been produced, F9 S2 production will be well into being a 3 digit number. By the time NG production gets to 3 digits, the F9 production line will be long since shut down.

Online Navier–Stokes

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 232
  • Liked: 220
  • Likes Given: 1869
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1289 on: 12/19/2018 06:05 pm »

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
  • California
  • Liked: 4255
  • Likes Given: 2569
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1290 on: 12/19/2018 06:21 pm »
Nice video, the most interesting part may be that it shows a new leg design. Looks like a hybrid between New Shepherd and F9 legs.
« Last Edit: 12/19/2018 06:27 pm by Lars-J »

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
  • California
  • Liked: 4255
  • Likes Given: 2569
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1291 on: 12/19/2018 07:01 pm »
For comparison, here is the OLD leg design - which was a lot more like New Shepherd:

Offline Markstark

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1292 on: 12/19/2018 08:53 pm »
I like the older design but hey landing legs are landing legs!

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Liked: 1538
  • Likes Given: 404
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1293 on: 12/19/2018 10:43 pm »
Nice video, the most interesting part may be that it shows a new leg design. Looks like a hybrid between New Shepherd and F9 legs.

Neat!  Looks a lot like the design we came up with for the Roton legs.  That's what I get for visiting Blue earlier this year.  ;)

(No, I'm not really suggesting they adopted the Roton leg design...)

Offline b0objunior

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 105
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1294 on: 12/19/2018 11:08 pm »
I can guess they changed the design to add stability. In my view it's a good decision.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
  • California
  • Liked: 4255
  • Likes Given: 2569
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1295 on: 12/20/2018 01:11 am »
The design may change, but I find it interesting that Blue certainly likes a lot of moving parts to cover up the leg base and feet. They seem a lot more reluctant to expose the leg parts to the air flow. I wonder if that will change - the extra panels that flip out seem like an unnecessary complication.

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Liked: 1538
  • Likes Given: 404
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1296 on: 12/20/2018 03:05 am »
The design may change, but I find it interesting that Blue certainly likes a lot of moving parts to cover up the leg base and feet. They seem a lot more reluctant to expose the leg parts to the air flow. I wonder if that will change - the extra panels that flip out seem like an unnecessary complication.

It's pretty common to have a number of fiddly bits as part of the landing gear door system.  But it'd be easier if they designed the doors for deploy only, rather than retracting the gear (i.e., cycling it on the pad).  Would simplify matters significantly since they could eliminate several actuators.

Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11072
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 8063
  • Likes Given: 6245
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1297 on: 12/20/2018 03:42 am »
It's pretty common to have a number of fiddly bits as part of the landing gear door system.  But it'd be easier if they designed the doors for deploy only, rather than retracting the gear (i.e., cycling it on the pad).  Would simplify matters significantly since they could eliminate several actuators.
That was (one of) the shuttle simplification(s) for their landing gear IIRC, retraction and restowage was a ground operation... Ditto F9 S1 or course. But the thinking is that BFS will have to be able to retract gear after take off.

Does this suggest that Blue is planning ahead? Not necessarily that this particular stage will take off from unimproved ground but that this gear design might live on to a vehicle that does?
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
  • California
  • Liked: 4255
  • Likes Given: 2569
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1298 on: 12/20/2018 05:04 am »
It's pretty common to have a number of fiddly bits as part of the landing gear door system.  But it'd be easier if they designed the doors for deploy only, rather than retracting the gear (i.e., cycling it on the pad).  Would simplify matters significantly since they could eliminate several actuators.
That was (one of) the shuttle simplification(s) for their landing gear IIRC, retraction and restowage was a ground operation... Ditto F9 S1 or course. But the thinking is that BFS will have to be able to retract gear after take off.

Does this suggest that Blue is planning ahead? Not necessarily that this particular stage will take off from unimproved ground but that this gear design might live on to a vehicle that does?

BFS/Starship (at least in the latest “Tintin” revision) might have no leg deploy or retract mechanism - at least not a clearly visible one. And the booster foregoes legs entirely. But that is going off topic.

Offline Bynaus

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Dreamer, Scientist, Teacher, Writer, Husband & Dad
  • Switzerland
    • Final-Frontier.ch
  • Liked: 372
  • Likes Given: 261
Re: New Glenn: Blue Origin Announcement of Orbital Rocket Plan
« Reply #1299 on: 12/20/2018 07:52 am »
The design may change, but I find it interesting that Blue certainly likes a lot of moving parts to cover up the leg base and feet. They seem a lot more reluctant to expose the leg parts to the air flow. I wonder if that will change - the extra panels that flip out seem like an unnecessary complication.

Remember that New Glenn will stage later and hotter than the Falcons, so thermal stress on the landing gear would be higher.

Also interesting to see that the base of the rocket seems to be covered by a heat shield now.
More of my thoughts: www.final-frontier.ch (in German)

Tags: