MaverickSawyer Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 o.O Okay, that's interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 I want to go to the Moon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 That seems a bit premature. BO don't even have a Moon rocket, but they are "offering the Moon"? PR stunt if i ever seen one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 Well, there is some precedent. I recall that they were at least talking with NASA about a BE-3 powered cargo lander for lunar missions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 54 minutes ago, Scotius said: That seems a bit premature. BO don't even have a Moon rocket, but they are "offering the Moon"? PR stunt if i ever seen one Yeah, nobody else would do something like promise a Mars landing based on a rocket that exists only on powerpoint slides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 1 minute ago, mikegarrison said: Yeah, nobody else would do something like promise a Mars landing based on a rocket that exists only on powerpoint slides. The opposite would also be funny. “We're building this huge rocket, but we won’t tell you what’s it for until it’s done!” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 4 minutes ago, sh1pman said: The opposite would also be funny. “We're building this huge rocket, but we won’t tell you what’s it for until it’s done!” Actually, that might be more scary than funny. It's the nature of aerospace that you have to start with the mission before you can even start on the design, so people are always promising new planes and rockets and such before they have started building them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 21 minutes ago, sh1pman said: The opposite would also be funny. “We're building this huge rocket, but we won’t tell you what’s it for until it’s done!” Arguably SLS, seeing as they change it's ultimate goal every few months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wjolcz Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 (edited) Bezos certainly has money to develop a Moon rocket though. So if there are contries/companies/space organisations/whatever interested in going there and they can pay for the ticket he will build it. Edited May 24, 2018 by Wjolcz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tullius Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Scotius said: That seems a bit premature. BO don't even have a Moon rocket, but they are "offering the Moon"? PR stunt if i ever seen one Someone needs to pay for New Armstrong and it is certainly useful if you already have a paying customer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 BO is making a cryogenic upper stage for NG, which is gonna happen—it’s more real then Vulcan at this point, for example. Small scale lunar landers are entirely within the payload capabilities of NG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racescort666 Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 19 hours ago, MaverickSawyer said: Well, there is some precedent. I recall that they were at least talking with NASA about a BE-3 powered cargo lander for lunar missions. The BE-3 seems like it would be kind of overpowered for a lunar lander. With a lunar TWR of 2 you could have a 165t spacecraft. Whether that's the mass you're deorbiting or trying to lift off the surface, it's still huge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, Racescort666 said: The BE-3 seems like it would be kind of overpowered for a lunar lander. With a lunar TWR of 2 you could have a 165t spacecraft. Whether that's the mass you're deorbiting or trying to lift off the surface, it's still huge. Local TWR is greater than 2 for most reference designs, simply because lunar gravity is so low, but yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 17 minutes ago, Racescort666 said: The BE-3 seems like it would be kind of overpowered for a lunar lander. With a lunar TWR of 2 you could have a 165t spacecraft. Whether that's the mass you're deorbiting or trying to lift off the surface, it's still huge. How much propellant would be needed? How much would the tankage for that weigh? How about landing gear? If you account for all of that, the available payload mass winds up in the same ballpark as the throw mass of New Glenn, especially if you start reusing upper stages as tugs to carry cargo to Lunar orbit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racescort666 Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 46 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said: How much propellant would be needed? How much would the tankage for that weigh? How about landing gear? If you account for all of that, the available payload mass winds up in the same ballpark as the throw mass of New Glenn, especially if you start reusing upper stages as tugs to carry cargo to Lunar orbit. Are you saying that they're going to use the NG upper stage as a lander? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 23 minutes ago, Racescort666 said: Are you saying that they're going to use the NG upper stage as a lander? NG upper stage will likely end up acting as a crasher stage for a multi-engined lander. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying, if it were up to me, I'd find a way to turn NG's upper stage into a reusable tug, then use that to pick up payloads delivered by another NG and take them to the Moon, where a dedicated BE-3 powered lander then takes the payload to the surface. It would leverage a lot of existing tech and experience that's already been proven, and could be a decent opportunity to partner with ULA to give them an opportunity to use the work they've already done towards ACES and orbital propellant depots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 55 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said: No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying, if it were up to me, I'd find a way to turn NG's upper stage into a reusable tug, then use that to pick up payloads delivered by another NG and take them to the Moon, where a dedicated BE-3 powered lander then takes the payload to the surface. It would leverage a lot of existing tech and experience that's already been proven, and could be a decent opportunity to partner with ULA to give them an opportunity to use the work they've already done towards ACES and orbital propellant depots. For normal missions NG looks like have enough performance to recover upper stage, assuming 40 ton to leo is with first stage reuse, else it would be low performance with the huge rocket. But yes for stuff like manned moon you discard upper stage, but this is a bit like the dual falcon heavy moon mission idea, New Amstrong is the real tool for this, from the scale it would be BFR sized, note that you would still have an fully reusable launcher for standard satellites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canopus Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) I highly doubt they plan for New Armstrong to be a seperate bigger launch vehicle anymore. With the talk about refueling tugs and New Glenn already being 7 meters in diameter, there doesn‘t seem to be a need for it anymore. Edited May 25, 2018 by Canopus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 27 minutes ago, Canopus said: I highly doubt they plan for New Armstrong to be a seperate bigger launch vehicle anymore. With the talk about refueling tugs and New Glenn already being 7 meters in diameter, there doesn‘t seem to be a need for it anymore. I'd say put it on the back burner until there eventually is a need for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 From my perspective, NA is still more of a concept than an actual plan. They still need to get NG to the pad first, let alone flying. Heck, as far as I'm aware, they haven't even gotten BE-4 to full power yet, let alone running a full mission duration burn. New Armstrong is a long ways off, if it's even happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted May 26, 2018 Share Posted May 26, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted May 26, 2018 Share Posted May 26, 2018 Something something On A Boat... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchz95 Posted May 26, 2018 Share Posted May 26, 2018 Technically not Blue Origin related, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted May 26, 2018 Share Posted May 26, 2018 BO or SpaceX needs to get a human on the moon before we run out of people who have been there. (Alan Bean died today, I made a thread in the lounge) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.