A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to towerover SpaceX



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 12th 16, 06:14 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 650
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to towerover SpaceX

"The largest of the two new rockets, called the "New Glenn 3-stage," is an
enormous 23 feet in diameter (about half the length of a school bus), 313 feet
tall (close to the height of the Apollo moon rockets), and will spew out 3.85
million pounds of thrust — about half as powerful as NASA's Saturn V launcher.

Unlike the Saturn V, however, Blue Origin plans to build on its rocket-recycling
experience and reuse the giant first-stage booster of each launcher — saving
untold cash over multiple launches, since rocket boosters are normally trashed in
the ocean."


"Named in honor of John Glenn, the first American to orbit Earth, New Glenn is 23
feet in diameter and lifts off with 3.85 million pounds of thrust from seven BE-4
engines. Burning liquefied natural gas and liquid oxygen, these are the same BE-4
engines that will power United Launch Alliance's new Vulcan rocket."

See:

http://www.techinsider.io/blue-origi...rockets-2016-9

Ads
  #3  
Old September 12th 16, 09:11 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Rick Jones[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to tower over SpaceX

Rob wrote:
Size in feet and weight in pounds? Is it designed in the 19th
century?


http://www.space.com/34034-blue-orig...es-people.html

Includes both sets of units. I'm guessing the actual measurements are
SI and the feet and pounds are just for the US readers.

rick jones
--
No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision. - Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HPE might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hpe.com but NOT BOTH...
  #5  
Old September 12th 16, 11:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to tower over SpaceX

Rob wrote:

wrote:

"The largest of the two new rockets, called the "New Glenn 3-stage," is an
enormous 23 feet in diameter (about half the length of a school bus), 313 feet
tall (close to the height of the Apollo moon rockets), and will spew out 3.85
million pounds of thrust about half as powerful as NASA's Saturn V launcher.


Size in feet and weight in pounds? Is it designed in the 19th century?


It's designed someplace that's actually capable of doing it. Real
aeronautical engineers work in feet, pounds, and Rankine.


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
  #6  
Old September 13th 16, 01:10 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans totower over SpaceX

On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 5:14:22 AM UTC+12, wrote:
"The largest of the two new rockets, called the "New Glenn 3-stage," is an
enormous 23 feet in diameter (about half the length of a school bus), 313 feet
tall (close to the height of the Apollo moon rockets), and will spew out 3.85
million pounds of thrust — about half as powerful as NASA's Saturn V launcher.

Unlike the Saturn V, however, Blue Origin plans to build on its rocket-recycling
experience and reuse the giant first-stage booster of each launcher — saving
untold cash over multiple launches, since rocket boosters are normally trashed in
the ocean."


"Named in honor of John Glenn, the first American to orbit Earth, New Glenn is 23
feet in diameter and lifts off with 3.85 million pounds of thrust from seven BE-4
engines. Burning liquefied natural gas and liquid oxygen, these are the same BE-4
engines that will power United Launch Alliance's new Vulcan rocket."

See:

http://www.techinsider.io/blue-origi...rockets-2016-9


haha - the timing is right! Let the games begin!

The inline staging has much to recommend it, providing you have common engines, avionics and propellants throughout;

Amazing how much can be inferred from this. LOX/LNG - has a O/F ratio of 3..85 to 1.00 - and an exhaust speed of 3.4 km/sec at sea level and 3.7 km/sec in vacuo. 23 ft (7 meter) diameter stage is a little smaller in diameter than the External Tank. Instead of having seven or eight similar air-frames cross-feeding, Bezos has chosen to use tanks in line in three stages. Using common engines, and keeping a common cross section achieves many of the same goals as having common flight elements. Though you do have to light engines in flight, which means they're dead weight until you light them and you have the probability they may not light properly. Still a workable design!

LNG and LOX are about $150 per ton - so that's good to know. They're both easily handled compared to LOX LH2. Less costly too.

3.85 kg LOX 1.14 kg/litre 3.38 litres
1.00 kg LNG 0.47 kg/litre 2.12 litres

4.85 kg TOT 0.88 kg/litre 5.50 litres

Now, 3.85 million pounds of thrust translates to 1.75 million kg of thrust (17.16 megaNewtons). With the same acceleration as the Saturn V at lift off (1.28 gees) we have a take off weight of 1,400,000 kg.

Now, with a 3.4 km/sec in the first stage and a 3.7 km/sec in the upper stages which can afford higher expansion, we have a propellant fraction of 0.57334 for each stage to achieve orbit in three stages. With the first stage attaining 2.90 km/sec, the second and third stages adding 3.15 km/sec each - for a total ideal delta vee of 9.20 km/sec. After gravity losses and air drag - the payload achieves 7.91 km/sec - orbital velocity.

Structure fraction for the Bezos is low compared to legacy systems. Around 7.5% with all the recovery gear added. This leaves 1-0.574 - 0.076 = 0.35 payload fraction per stage.

So, starting with a 1.4 million kg take off weight (3,080,000 lbs) we can see that the three stage vehicle puts 60 metric tons (132,000 lbs) into LEO - slightly more than the Falcon Heavy! The length of tanks of constant diameter and cross section is 252 ft to carry 2,958.3 cubic meters of propellant in three stages. Add three interstage lengths of 16 ft each for the engines, and you have 300 ft length precisely before adding the payload!

http://read.bi/2cn8eiQ


Item................. Wgt (pounds) Weight (kg) Vol(m3) Len(m) Len( f)t

Thrust............. 3,850,000.0 1,750,000.0
Take Off Weight 3,080,000.0 1,400,000.0

Propellant......... 1,767,920.0 803,600.0 2,009.0 52.2 171.2
LNG................... 364,519.6 165,690.7
LOX................... 1,403,400.4 637,909.3
Structure.......... 234,080.0 106,400.0

Balance............ 1,078,000.0 490,000.0

Propellant......... 618,772.0 281,260.0 703.2 18.3 59.9
LNG................... 127,581.9 57,991.8
LOX................... 491,190.1 223,268.2
Structure.......... 81,928.0 37,240.0

Balance............. 377,300.0 171,500.0

Propellant.......... 216,570.2 98,441.0 246.1 6.4 21.0
LNG................... 44,653.6 20,297.1
LOX................... 171,916.6 78,143.9
Structure........... 28,674.8 13,034.0

Payload.............. 132,055.0 60,025.0

So, how did we do? How close is this to the Glenn 3 - three stage rocket?

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016...nn-orbital-lv/

While the first stage is slated for recovery to gain the biggest bang for the buck, there's no reason not to look at the second and third stages as well. The second stage doesn't need to be recovered down range. Its flying fast enough to skip around the world and land at its launch point, similar to the way a Sanger bomber was designed to do back in the 1930s. The orbital stage ditto - it can be deorbited and land directly at the launch point when its released its payload. Throwing away the aeroshell is the last thing to be reused.

The BE-4 can be throttled back to 20,000 lbs thrust from 550,000 lbs thrust.. This means that a single BE-4 in the second and third stages simplify operations logistics and support - with the seven engines in the first stage.

The BE-3 is an interesting engine as well. Its a 110,000 lbf LOX/LH2 engine and is well suited, with ZBO composite cryogenic tanks, and MEMS based solar powered cryo-coolers on board, for deep space operations. Deeply throttable as well to 3,500 lbf, its ideally suited to take 132,000 lb payload from LEO to LLO or to Mars or the Asteroids. Capable of 4.6 km/sec exhaust speeds in vacuo, it projects the most mass most conveniently at lowest technical risk.

A delta vee from LEO to LLO and back again is 4.4 km/sec. 0.6158 propellant fraction and with a 0.0742 propellant fraction leaves 0.3100 payload fraction. So, 132,000 lbs in LEO -equipped with a BE-3 powered kick stage, can carry 40,920 lbs (18,600 kg) to Low Lunar Orbit (LLO) and back to Earth - to be recovered and reused!

https://www.wired.com/2013/07/lunar-flying-units-1969/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCkHnvDGWOY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoS4Lzr4dhE

The astronaut tourists on this trip will wear mechcanical counter pressure biosuits with MEMS based life support and MEMS based bipropellant engine arrays that will operate as a rocket belt with the biosuit creating a space wingsuit - that allows an astronaut to jump down from LLO to the Lunar Surface and back to orbit again - spending up to 16 hours on the lunar surface and up to 24 hours in the suit. Over the course of an 8 day stay in LLO each astronaut tourist will visit the moon three times and return - from three different locations.

Each astronaut and crew person will have 400 lbs of consumables on board and 2,500 lbs of payload and structure allocated to them. This allows 1,500 lbs of this is LOX/LH2 propellant - used for the three lunar landings and take offs via rocket belt.

16 passengers and 4 crew members may be transported with this system.

1,183.3 metric tons (2.6 million lbs) of propellant at $150 per metric ton costs $177,495.20 per launch! The lunar stage contains 12,510.7 lbs of LH2 at $0.45 per lb and 68,808.8 lbs of LOX at $0.07 per lb. That's another $10,446.50 per trip.

Propellant is $200,000 per trip for 16 people - $12,500 per person. A vehicle that is reliably captured and reused 150 times and costs $60 million to build - costs another $400,000 per trip - for 16 people this adds $37,500 per person. A total out of pocket cost of $50,000!

The value is far more obviously! At $500,000 profit per passenger and 16 passengers per flight - each flight earns $8 million. At 104 flights per year this is $832 million per year. With four launchers and four moonships, this flight rate is easily sustained - and 1,664 people can visit the moon 4,992 times per year - transforming out understanding and relationship to the cosmos.

A 60 tonne payload carrying 0.9 tonne satellites puts up 66 satellites per launch and in 11 launches 722 satellite network is deployed capturing a large segment of the world's $1.6 trillion telecom market - by providing a discoverable legal signal that lets anyone with a laptop, tablet or handset communicate at 70 MB/sec to anyone anywhere in the world - while at the same time providing very secure cloud based services and live Google Earth images - that are searchable over time and space.

This provides a revenue 1000x greater, and sets the stage for whomever achieves this to have the capital needed to transform life on Earth and humanity's relationship to the cosmos.

Power satellites are next! At 60 metric tons and 22 megawatts of power per metric ton - 1.32 gigawatt power stations may be orbited. At $10 million per ton - for the satellite - the $600 million cost is less than that of a coal fired plant! Zero fuel costs once deployed. Selling power at $0.11 per kWh - which is highly competitive, and making it available anywhere its needed on Earth - which is highly sought after - all at no pollution - is a win/win for everyone! 1.32 million kilowatts - times 8766 hours per year 11.571 billion kWh per year - and at $0.11 per kWh earns $1.27 billion per year - over 30 years at sizeable discount rates this is worth $13.6 billion the day it starts paying. This is $12.0 billion net for the investors - and $0.6 billion for the build and another $1.0 billion incentive to Bezos per launch. He takes a $2.0 billion stake and donates the launch, liquidates half that stake the first year, and holds on to the balance. The investment group - organised by Bezos - reinvests most of their money to expand the programme.

Humanity requires on the order of 10,000 billion watts to sustain high living standards world wide- and at 1.36 billion watts per satellite requires 7300 satellites of this size. Launching one per day takes 20 years to meet this demand. Over 30 years the launcher infrastructure sustains a 50% growth from today's figures. Very large return, very small investment. $87.6 trillion assets earning 100x more money than the comsat network.
  #7  
Old September 13th 16, 01:59 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans totower over SpaceX

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqrVjSfMzMM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CR5y8qZf0Y


First stage empty is 234,000 lbs,
Second stage empty is 82,000 lbs
Third stage empty is 30,000 lbs.

So, a quad rotor type arrangement - but with throttling rocket engines - and gimbals - on each corner - with BE-4s with a range of thrust from 550,000 lbs to 20,000 lbs - we have 2.2 million lbs to 80,000 lbs.

With a propellant fraction of 0.6 and structure fraction of 0.2 - and payload up to 0.2 we have a vehicle that is capable of two gee acceleration - fully fuelled - 1,170,000 lbs not to exceed weight 234,000 lbs vehicle structure - 234,000 lbs payload weight - 702,000 lbs propellant. This has a five minute hover time. Now terminal velocity of a largely empty tank is about half sound speed. About 384 mph (620 kph, 172 m/sec) So, two minutes at this speed covers 20.6 km (12.8 miles).

A GPS transponder on the vehicle, tracks the vehicle until it is 12 miles above the landing threshold. A platform launches and meets the descending booster mid flight, clamps the hold down clamps at the base of the rocket, and lands the rocket and platform gently - all in a space of four minutes. The cost? Less than $48,000 in propellants!

This greatly simplifies recovery and minimises mass on board the rocket and maximises payload to orbit!

Though this is rather cool! I must admit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pillaOxGCo


A 110,000 lbf engine - throttable back to 4,000 lbf - is more scalable

From four of the large engines to twenty of the smaller engines - for the recovery of the big booster. Eight engines in a smaller platform to recover the second stage. Four engines to recover the third stage. Or merely reuse the smaller platform for the third stage as well.

Given the advanced development of the first stage recovery - its probably best not to change it at this point. However, a smaller platform using eight of the 110,000 lbf engines - two on each corner - to zoom up and recover the second and third stages - might be something to consider as a continuing development programme.

It could also recover capsules - and payloads from orbit - or returning from a failed launch.


  #8  
Old September 13th 16, 03:41 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brian T.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to tower over SpaceX

On 12 Sep 2016 17:16:53 GMT, Rob wrote:

wrote:
"The largest of the two new rockets, called the "New Glenn 3-stage," is an
enormous 23 feet in diameter (about half the length of a school bus), 313 feet
tall (close to the height of the Apollo moon rockets), and will spew out 3.85
million pounds of thrust about half as powerful as NASA's Saturn V launcher.


Size in feet and weight in pounds? Is it designed in the 19th century?


It is designed in the 21st, in a nation where SpaceX and Blue Origin
are about to make every other space launch provider in the world very,
very obsolete.

The paradigm shift accelerates.

Now with at least *two* Super Heavy (50+ tons to LEO) commercial
launch vehicles planned for entry into service after 2020, the comsat
industry is going to start working on much, much bigger satellites.
And Ariane 6/Angara/Vulcan/GSLV will be left behind.

Brian
  #9  
Old September 13th 16, 03:52 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brian T.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to tower over SpaceX

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 17:26:25 -0400, JF Mezei
wrote:

On 2016-09-12 13:14, wrote:

http://www.techinsider.io/blue-origi...rockets-2016-9



Is there commercial demand for such a heavy lifter?


There will be, now that there are two (maybe three, but I suspect
Falcon Heavy will eventually be replaced by variants of SpaceX's BFR.)
Comsats are about to get a lot bigger.

Or are its hopes
pinned on governmentds funding the assembly of a large mars expedition
ship, at which point a heavy lifter can be of use to bring the large
modules with fewer flights?


It looks like SpaceX (Mars) and Blue Origin (Orbital Tourism, strong
hints about Lunar Tourism with their talk of New Armstrong) will be
their own core customers. They'll pick up commercial contracts along
the way just due to their price points, and will likely establish new
markets. Space Solar Power just became much more realistic (although
it will still need oil to spike again.)

Secondly, what is the advantage of having a 3rd stage as oppposed to
making a bigger tank for 2nd stage for longer burn with same delta-V ?


You don't lug the extra drymass of the larger stage on missions that
don't need it. The third stage might also have other uses in the
future (lunar tug? orbital tanker?) He might plan on recovering Stage
2 in New Glenn Mk.II.

Since both second and 3rd stages are single engine, I don't see much of
an advantage of having 3 stages since you end up pushing one extra
engine and all extra weight to orbit.

If LOX/LH2 is so much more efficient than LOX/LNG, why not make second
stage LOX/LH2 ?


It would have to be bigger/heavier. Bezos might (probably does?) also
have Stage 2 reusability in mind for down the road, so he's saving
mass for that application.

Brian
  #10  
Old September 13th 16, 04:01 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brian T.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Jeff Bezos' secretive rocket company just revealed its plans to tower over SpaceX

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 15:37:57 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote:

wrote:

"The largest of the two new rockets, called the "New Glenn 3-stage," is an
enormous 23 feet in diameter (about half the length of a school bus), 313 feet
tall (close to the height of the Apollo moon rockets), and will spew out 3.85
million pounds of thrust about half as powerful as NASA's Saturn V launcher.


And about 70% as powerful as Falcon Heavy, which will be available
before it is.


Yes, but maybe by not all that much time. I think FH just took another
year's hit due to the Amos-6 disaster. And SpaceX has a lot on their
plate with Commercial Crew and a big backlog of Falcon 9FT payloads
still waiting their turn to fly. I can easily see FH being
backburnered to 2018-19.

Frankly, given Musk's hints about BFR in 2021 or so and Falcon 9FT
getting ever more powerful, I wouldn't be shocked if he reaches the
conclusion that FH is a dead end and abandons it.

We'll see how long it takes them to successfully land one after they
actually get them built.


Flight 1 almost certainly will be a short Stage 1-only hop over to
LZ-1 or wherever their landing site is, with progressively longer
flights out to the barge and eventually "out and back", then moving on
to flights with Stage 2. Really, how else can he test the thing? It is
being built at KSC and launched at CCAFS and is too big to overland to
Van Horn. So no Grasshopper equivalent operations seem possible.

Brian
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Secretive Blue Origin Reveals New Details of Spacecraft Plans [email protected] Policy 6 May 14th 12 01:47 PM
Jeff Bezos now just showing off Joseph Nebus History 6 March 31st 12 02:37 AM
Bezos' Blue Origin revealed! Pat Flannery History 282 February 13th 07 01:58 AM
Bezos brings space race to Kent as he plans a passenger rocket Michael Kent Policy 1 January 15th 06 01:01 AM
Bezos brings space race to Kent as he plans a passenger rocket [email protected] Policy 22 January 13th 06 06:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.