tater

Blue Origin Thread (merged)

315 posts in this topic

11 hours ago, Motokid600 said:

The moving barge is interesting as well. Could give needed extra stability given the NGs far lesser, uh.. leg stance? Deploy width? Whats the word for that? :P

I guess the barge won't move during the landing attempt.

In the case of SpaceX, the barges can't move themselves (except for keeping themselves exactly at the landing spot), which means that they need tugs to get the platform out into the ocean and back into the harbor. Blue Origin uses instead a ship, which allows them to not need tugs, making the whole procedure simpler (and also they probably need a bigger landing platform for New Glenn than Falcon 9, which would mean bigger tugs).

The only disadvantage is that a ship is probably more expensive, if you risk punching holes into it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 minutes ago, Tullius said:

I guess the barge won't move during the landing attempt.

As I understand, from dthe link I posted, it will be moving during the landing.

"One interesting caveat and difference to SpaceX’s ASDS will be that Blue Origin’s booster will land on a moving recovery vessel for added stability."

But I might be misinterpreting this.

Edited by VaPaL
Grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, VaPaL said:

As I understand, from de link I posted it will be moving during the landing.

"One interesting caveat and difference to SpaceX’s ASDS will be that Blue Origin’s booster will land on a moving recovery vessel for added stability."

But I might be misinterpreting this.

Ok, didn't thought that they might indeed want to land on a moving ship.

Increases the difficulty, since that gives no predefined landing spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tullius said:

Increases the difficulty, since that gives no predefined landing spot.

Thought the same, not only that but it can flip the booster if it suddenly gains lateral speed from a bottom impulse. But probably the speed will very small and it may only start moving few seconds before touchdown.

But I'm still a little intrigued about their decision, let's see how it will go and wait for more details in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A moving ship is more stable than a landing ship. It doesn't make much of a difference in terms of avionics as long as the rocket and the deck are both at the right place at the right time. Everything is relative anyway.

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, VaPaL said:

Thought the same, not only that but it can flip the booster if it suddenly gains lateral speed from a bottom impulse. But probably the speed will very small and it may only start moving few seconds before touchdown.

But I'm still a little intrigued about their decision, let's see how it will go and wait for more details in the future.

You also have that risk, if the ship is standing still. And New Glenn might be able to cope better with it, since it will be programmed that the landing spot will be constantly updated during flight, unlike Falcon 9, where the landing spot is probably somewhat hardcoded before liftoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I know, what I mean is, a stopped ship has the stabillity problem, a moving ship has the problem of having a different horizontal speed. There are solution for both, I just don't know if there's a good trade off. It might just be the same in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Whats this all about?     " There are also some significant differences between the vehicles, most notably the aerodynamic control surfaces used to help guide New Glenn's first-stage in for a landing. Reportedly, that negates the need for a re-entry deceleration burn. "      Hows that work?   https://www.engadget.com/2017/03/07/blue-origin-shows-how-new-glenn-rocket-will-fly-and-land/

Edited by Motokid600

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 5m fairing, it's not going to hold all that many sats. And they're hardly cubesats, they're 100kg+

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kryten said:

With a 5m fairing, it's not going to hold all that many sats. And they're hardly cubesats, they're 100kg+

Lol whoops, didn't see the 0:blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Motokid600 said:

Whats this all about?     " There are also some significant differences between the vehicles, most notably the aerodynamic control surfaces used to help guide New Glenn's first-stage in for a landing. Reportedly, that negates the need for a re-entry deceleration burn. "      Hows that work?   https://www.engadget.com/2017/03/07/blue-origin-shows-how-new-glenn-rocket-will-fly-and-land/

Lifting re-entry like pretty much all landing spacecraft to date have used, to varying degrees. This also explains the heavy looking engine cowling; there won't be exhaust to protect the machinery from the inrushing air stream.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

A moving ship is more stable than a landing ship. It doesn't make much of a difference in terms of avionics as long as the rocket and the deck are both at the right place at the right time. Everything is relative anyway.

 

Yes, an moving ship is more stable, you will know ship position at touchdown this will not change much. You will get the side wind from the moving ship but that will just be an added wind vector. 
This is with an suicide burn with TWR far higher than one, with hover an moving ship would be hard. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know but I think that it may be good to compensate wind velocity or part of it, if possible. Landing rocket do not interact with ground or sea, but it moves relative to ambient air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. Aircraft carriers typically sail into the wind during landing ops to reduce the speed of the aircraft relative to the deck. Would New Glenn's landing ship sail with the wind to reduce the wind speed across the deck while landing?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now