Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,549
- Reaction score
- 1,716
Anybody seen any detail on nozzle construction? It looks like machined aluminum, which can't possibly be right.
Looks about the same size as the Saturn V F-1 engine.
BE-4 or AR-1, doubtful either is more cost effective than the Space X clustering of smaller, cheaper engines.
The day may be over for giant engines, except for special purpose monster rockets.
Space X can orbit payloads for half the cost.
Its probably high temp steel alloy, and it may be a type of deposited metal laser sintering 3d printing. I recently saw a video of a part being 3d printed in metal AND the very same machine was doing the milling as part of the process.
Its a WAG on my part.
No turbo-pumps, it is pressure fed, by thetanks inside the fuel and oxidizer tanks, which caused both explosions (GET THEM OUT OF THERE).
But I'm really tired of all the BO fans suggesting (not in this thread, but other places on the interweb) that BO was the first to successfully land a rocket after going into space. It wasn't them.
I'm fortunate enough to have visited that factory, and they do have milling machines that could have milled out that nozzle. I'm not an expert, but laser sintering sounds like a lot more effort than casting a beast and milling it to finish dimensions.
Anybody seen any detail on nozzle construction? It looks like machined aluminum, which can't possibly be right.
Because what BO did was just a test. SpaceX had successfully launched and landed several tests of their own Grasshopper well before BO did it but they didn't go above an imaginary line, mostly because their tests didn't require them to.I'm more of a SpaceX fanboi than Blue Origin, but I'm not sure where you get this. BO sent a capsule past the edge of space and recovered the booster. I'm not saying that SpaceX's job isn't harder, just that they didn't do that one thing first.
Oberon: I was under the impression that pintle valve engines were simpler and more reliable. Because, I saw a vid of an eng. from TRW who worked on the LM motor. He said they spent 10 years simplifying it down to 9 moving parts!
There is a mechanical eng. theorem that says reliability is inversely proportional to the # of moving parts.
I suspect Elon's crew has done that with the whole bird, it could actually be better engineered than the old Altas, Delta, etc. Time will tell.
Because what BO did was just a test. SpaceX had successfully launched and landed several tests of their own Grasshopper well before BO did it but they didn't go above an imaginary line, mostly because their tests didn't require them to.
SpaceX was flying actual missions when they landed the first booster that returned from "space", and it's apparently much harder to land on a tiny barge after lofting something towards orbit than it is going straight up and down. BO's success going up and down in a test doesn't mean they'll be successful when they add a LOT of sideways into the mix as well as a second stage (cargo) during a mission.
It's like the difference between hitting a ball over the fence in batting practice, and hitting a home run in an actual game. One is much less significant than the other. SpaceX hit a lot of balls into the outfield in their batting practice, BO hit a few over the fence in their practice. SpaceX hit several home runs during a game, BO is still at batting practice but claiming they hit the first home run.
Sorry to hear he drives people hard, but I doubt that key people are underpaid. He advertised looking for space eng. in the top 5%. That ain't cheap.
Wow, thanks for comments, Jmatt too. I could tell that you were probably involved in the industry. Yes, calif is expensive, I have heard of programmers living in their cars!
Engineers at many co. are exploited, if salary you are wide open to the overtime scam, but it gives you ammo during yearly review, if get one, to "suggest" increase. Many co make it up with bonuses and/or stock.
So, would you fly on a Soyuz? And, isn't it time to retire that Model-T Korolev concoction?
I like SpaceX and Blue Origin the same amount, as are a refreshing change from the big buck gov controlled launching biz.
I think the future is bright, not just in space, but with drones, self driving cars, and electric propulsion of everything.
If they can just stop those lithium batts from blowing up!
I agree with all of this. I give full marks to BO for being able to land their rockets and reuse them. That's an amazingly difficult thing to do and they are doing it well. Couldn't be happier about their existence or their inevitable competition to SpaceX. Free Enterprise works so much better when there's plenty of competition. I didn't mean to sound like I was trashing their accomplishments, only their claims that they were first.Now. It bugs me to no end how SpaceX fanboys will default to trashing what Blue Origin has done. While SpaceX does have to bleed off more energy to land Falcon than Blue does to land New Shepard does not make what Blue does any less impressive. The difficult part here is achieving a controlled landing. (Well, technically launch is difficult, too, but who's keeping score?)
This is where I disagree with you. What you call a mission I call a test. What was their mission? Did they deliver any satellites, cargo, carry passengers, perform any scientific tests in the low gravity (other than their booster), or do anything other than simply test to see if their booster could go up and come back down for a safe landing?SpaceX definitely got close several times, but Blue was the first to achieve vertical landing of a booster on a mission to space. Oh, and Blue has reflown the same booster and landed it four more times, which SpaceX has not done yet. I for one hope they succeed, but it's a milestone they still have to prove.
Did they deliver any satellites, cargo, carry passengers, perform any scientific tests in the low gravity (other than their booster), or do anything other than simply test to see if their booster could go up and come back down for a safe landing?
Enter your email address to join:
Register today and take advantage of membership benefits.
Enter your email address to join: