sevenperforce Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 4 hours ago, RCgothic said: The point stands I think, that I can't think of any metric on which BE-4 is better than Raptor. BE-4 doesn't need subcooled propellants to reach its highest performance levels. BE-4 runs at lower turbopump pressures and thus may be more readily reusable than Raptor. BE-4 has a single turbopump rather than two turbopumps and therefore has fewer failure modes. Of course all these are trade-offs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 1 hour ago, sevenperforce said: BE-4 doesn't need subcooled propellants to reach its highest performance levels. BE-4 runs at lower turbopump pressures and thus may be more readily reusable than Raptor. BE-4 has a single turbopump rather than two turbopumps and therefore has fewer failure modes. Of course all these are trade-offs. Yes, but from what little has been said, it is the turbopump that has been holding things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightside Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 4 hours ago, sh1pman said: Commercial availability. SpaceX is not selling their Raptor to anyone else. Didn't the Air Force give them some dev $? Could they use it for another project? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 42 minutes ago, Nightside said: Didn't the Air Force give them some dev $? Could they use it for another project? I'm not sure what you are asking here, but companies are not allowed to spend DOD dollars freely. For instance, if the Air Force is paying you to develop a particular project, you are not allowed to spend that money on anything else, even another Air Force project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 Brings a new meaning to the phrase “That’s some serious B.O....” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 6 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said: Brings a new meaning to the phrase “That’s some serious B.O....” Eh. I guess I have a different standard for "massive factories" than he does. (Biggest building in the world, by volume.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entropian Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 (edited) Boeing, isn't it? EDIT: Yeah, I see the logo on the front. Edited September 23, 2020 by Entropian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 1 hour ago, Entropian said: Boeing, isn't it? EDIT: Yeah, I see the logo on the front. Yes, that's the Boeing Everett Washington factory. It's going to be interesting to see what happens to it, actually. They have announced that 747 production will end. And there is strong speculation that 787 production (currently split between this building and one in South Carolina) will move entirely to South Carolina. That's because the 787-10 has only ever been built in South Carolina. So all that would be left here is 767 and 777. 737 is built in a factory at Renton Washington, about 40 miles away from this one. That would have left this building and the workforce here available for the next new airplane, but the one that was in development last year was cancelled. I'm certain Boeing will eventually have a new airplane though, and it really wouldn't make any sense for them to not use this building to make it in. However, you never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 Maybe they can start cranking out Starliners there. Or lease it to BO to build some of their stuff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said: Maybe they can start cranking out Starliners there. Or lease it to BO to build some of their stuff Well, there is no spaceport nearby. But there is, of course, an airport. (For obvious reasons, you will pretty much always find an airport right next to an airplane factory.) Blue Origin's local facilities are actually near a former Boeing site, but not there in Everett. Instead they are in Kent, a little south of Renton, where Boeing used to have a big defense and space facility. That facility mostly got absorbed into places like St. Louis and LA when Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas. It also is where the local Amazon warehouse is, so Jeff Bezos is involved both ways. Edited September 23, 2020 by mikegarrison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said: It's possibly just a coincidence (or I'm just stating the blindingly obvious) but I thought that comment revealed an interesting point about both companies' CEOs. Bezos is more comfortable with logistics (Amazon) than rocketry (Blue Origin's gradatim ferociter approach) so starts with the factory and then figures out what to build in it. Musk is more comfortable with the rocketry (SpaceX) than the logistics (Tesla), so starts building rockets and then builds a factory around that. Or at least that's where the more visible progress is in each case. Edited September 23, 2020 by KSK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 5 hours ago, mikegarrison said: I'm certain Boeing will eventually have a new airplane though, and it really wouldn't make any sense for them to not use this building to make it in. However, you never know. Anything to fix the traffic there. Never seen a bunch of people in such a dang hurry to get to AND from work. It’s like Mariokart around that place during shift change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 43 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Anything to fix the traffic there. Never seen a bunch of people in such a dang hurry to get to AND from work. It’s like Mariokart around that place during shift change. Maybe it's because parking is hard to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entropian Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 10 hours ago, mikegarrison said: They have announced that 747 production will end. Wait, WHAT!?! But it's an awesome plane! Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOXBLOX Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 Just now, Entropian said: Wait, WHAT!?! But it's an awesome plane! Why? Tell me about it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wumpus Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 7 hours ago, KSK said: It's possibly just a coincidence (or I'm just stating the blindingly obvious) but I thought that comment revealed an interesting point about both companies' CEOs. Bezos is more comfortable with logistics (Amazon) than rocketry (Blue Origin's gradatim ferociter approach) so starts with the factory and then figures out what to build in it. Musk is more comfortable with the rocketry (SpaceX) than the logistics (Tesla), so starts building rockets and then builds a factory around that. Musk claims that the factory design is driving Starship design, not the other way around. That's why he has all those Starship prototypes: he's testing manufacturing. Blowing them up and lighting them off is just a bonus. Granted that might be more PR that truth, but the idea of having a huge reusable rocket designed to be manufactured *in volume* is rather shocking. Bezos is more warehouses than factories. I suspect he simply doesn't want a tent after spending billions of dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 (edited) (clipboard didn't take my copy, lol) Edited September 23, 2020 by tater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 4 hours ago, Entropian said: Wait, WHAT!?! But it's an awesome plane! Why? No one is buying them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entropian Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 Well, I guess that makes sense. I mean, they've been making them for ages now; the operators must have enough now. Add the pandemic to that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 (edited) It's more about the fact that air travel shifted from "hub and spoke" model, where regional planes and other transport brought passengers to and from international airports, between which they traveled in long range, high capacity airliners, to a "web" model, in which the small airports are pretty much all interconnected directly by short and medium range airliners. Both the B747 and A380 were in decline well before the pandemic. That said, the pandemic was pretty devastating to the jumbos, as well. It will most likely further accelerate the shift mentioned above, and there might be very few of those heavyweights left once air travel starts back up. Good thing we have MSFS2020... Edited September 23, 2020 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 It's also about how two larger engines are simply more efficient than three or four smaller ones. However, we should probably move back to Blue Origin in this thread now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 Actually, this didn't really factor in. The 747 has four big engines. Twins are more efficient overall, but it's hard to make a superjumbo-sized twin. In fact, per seat, superjumbos are more efficient than smaller jets (four engines and all), but there's only a few routes left that can hope to fill a plane of that size on a regular basis. BO is moving rather slowly, we'll get back OT when the next piece of news comes in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 7 minutes ago, Dragon01 said: Actually, this didn't really factor in. Trust me on this one. I almost certainly know more about the 747 than you do, unless you are one of about 1000 other people that wouldn't be true of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 Well, GEnx is used on Dreamliner in a twin configuration and on the 747-8 in a quad, so at least the part of the latter having four big engines is true. Admittedly, with that in mind, Dreamliner would be more efficient (as expected from a much newer plane), seeing as it carries more than half of 747's passengers. However, I'm comparing a 3-class 747-8 with a 2-class 787-10, since that's what I have numbers for. I originally heard it said about the A380, anyway, which carries more passengers than the 747. 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.