Updates Blue Origin announces the New Glenn Orbital Launch Vehicle

[K_Jameson]

Falcon Heavy has a theoretical payload capacity of over 60 tons in LEO. Very theoretical because the t/w ratio of the second stage would be very low and the fairing does not allow for a very large payload. New Glenn has a full capacity of over 40 tons with a 7 meter fairing. For high energy orbits, FH has better performance, but it is a three-stage rocket, so it is quite obvious.

I am not addicted to Starship at all

 

[sberinde]

I am not addicted to Starship at all

I cannot imagine a reason for that, other than to consider it an a priori failed project.

 

[K_Jameson]

I think the whole Mars thing as envisioned by Musk is frankly nonsense. And the concept of using the same machine for: point-to-point transportation on Earth, heavy duties in LEO, and Earth-Mars travel is wildly optimistic. Jack of all trades, master of none. Also, thinking about the Artemis program (assuming it won't be shut down) without an orbiting infrastructure previously loaded to act as a "gas station", the entire viability is at stake: 10-15 tanker launches just to achieve a single Moon landing is insane. Just my two cents.

 

[sberinde]

I'm not wildly optimistic about Starship. But near impossible engineering objectives they have, these make me excited about it. I don't judge it by numbers. Numbers will change.

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm not wildly optimistic about Starship. But near impossible engineering objectives they have, these make me excited about it. I don't judge it by numbers. Numbers will change.

I watch Starship mostly for entertainment, not really for seeing the near future of spaceflight. It might look like they have come far with Starship, but in reality, the whole project is still an early development. Their work might appear hardware-rich and agile, but in reality, its almost the opposite of agile in many aspects. Its just an iterative approach a la playing KSP. Launch, explode, improve, launch again. It might look like their rocket is almost ready now, but actually, its far away from doing something meaningful or even get closer to what they plan to achieve.

 

[GLS]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889693456659825017

 

[K_Jameson]

I watch Starship mostly for entertainment, not really for seeing the near future of spaceflight. It might look like they have come far with Starship, but in reality, the whole project is still an early development. Their work might appear hardware-rich and agile, but in reality, its almost the opposite of agile in many aspects. Its just an iterative approach a la playing KSP. Launch, explode, improve, launch again. It might look like their rocket is almost ready now, but actually, its far away from doing something meaningful or even get closer to what they plan to achieve.

Plus, their iterative approach is starting to not seem faster than a traditional one anymore

 

[Kyle]

Falcon Heavy has a theoretical payload capacity of over 60 tons in LEO. Very theoretical because the t/w ratio of the second stage would be very low and the fairing does not allow for a very large payload. New Glenn has a full capacity of over 40 tons with a 7 meter fairing. For high energy orbits, FH has better performance, but it is a three-stage rocket, so it is quite obvious.

I am not addicted to Starship at all

I really believe the 60 metric ton for FH is not actually true. There have been quite a few FH missions that were fully expendable that had no reason to be if that were the case.

 

[K_Jameson]

I tried to do the math and seems you're right. Not sure if I used the correct specs and must check the calculation, but seems that, even in a totally expendable mode, the FH cannot exceed 45 tons of LEO payload.

 

[GLS]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889830214735372368

"stay home", for what? So the workers can't hit the managers?

 

[GLS]

"stay home", for what? So the workers can't hit the managers?

Yep, things would probably get violent with 2000 people...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1890008528946971030

 

[Urwumpe]

2000 people? Peanuts!

At Volkswagen its 35000 people in the next 5 years..... already 4000 (about half of it) in the R&D.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

I watch Starship mostly for entertainment, not really for seeing the near future of spaceflight. It might look like they have come far with Starship, but in reality, the whole project is still an early development. Their work might appear hardware-rich and agile, but in reality, its almost the opposite of agile in many aspects. Its just an iterative approach a la playing KSP. Launch, explode, improve, launch again. It might look like their rocket is almost ready now, but actually, its far away from doing something meaningful or even get closer to what they plan to achieve.

Considering the part of the infrastructure meant to convey the meat bags keeps filling with leaking methane and oxygen and exploding, or has flight surface chunks ablated off during re-entry, I don't think anyone would argue that it was ready at all. The booster is surprisingly mature, even with the catch tower, but a non-lethal payload stage is still lacking.

 

[Urwumpe]

Considering the part of the infrastructure meant to convey the meat bags keeps filling with leaking methane and oxygen and exploding, or has flight surface chunks ablated off during re-entry, I don't think anyone would argue that it was ready at all. The booster is surprisingly mature, even with the catch tower, but a non-lethal payload stage is still lacking.

A booster is still an easier beast as an upper stage or a upper stage/spacecraft combination: If you have problems, you can always fix them with more mass. Its much more punishing for the later stages. Also the first stage can happily take lots of subsystems for supporting the later stages, like interfaces and valves for pre-launch operations or engine condititioning.

And I wouldn't call the booster mature by my German instincts.

First of all, because any flames after some short tolerance period, even if controlled, simply look unprofessional and are an unnecessary risk. They are the space-flight equivalent of a dirty, cluttered workspace. Maybe great art is created there and in rare cases, the quality is outstanding, but in most cases, its a warning sign that the work grows beyond their heads.

Next, the chances of a successful landing on the next flight are just 66% (counting only flights were it was actually planned) and thats actually better than the chances of the booster not exploding at some time during the mission (just 25%, because of the small sample size). Even if you can actually weight the last flights more than first ones, SpaceX would require a lot of successful booster missions to eventually exceed 80% reliability.

 

[GLS]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1890063903398498407

 

[GLS]

.... and back

https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/1ir0uxf/found_some_debris_from_blue_origins_new_glenn

 

[K_Jameson]

Hello lads,
Do we know for sure whether New Glenn's first stage performs a re-entry burn, Falcon 9 style, or not? In my understanding, the aerodynamic surfaces are intended to allow a smoother reentry profile, reducing thermal stress and avoiding that costly maneuver, unlocking the use of the lighter aluminum structure.
am I right?

 

[Urwumpe]

AFAIR It does a short one for controlling the trajectory and should perform a longer burn of course for a return to launch site.

 

[DaveS]

AFAIR It does a short one for controlling the trajectory and should perform a longer burn of course for a return to launch site.

New Glenn doesn't have an RTLS profile st this time, only a downrange barge landing, the entry burn is where they lost the stage on the first launch.

 

[Urwumpe]

New Glenn doesn't have an RTLS profile st this time, only a downrange barge landing, the entry burn is where they lost the stage on the first launch.

Its still very likely that they will attempt it for even simpler turn-around. Landing on a barge means that you have to check weather and sea state at the landing site, too, to decide if you can launch. Not really optimal.