2
$\begingroup$

It may just be a handy "material" in the rendering software used to make the images, but it shows up in multiple places.

Could there be any possible engineering advantage of a fairing's outer finish being shiny and/or metallic rather than the more frequent matte white surface?

edit: Now opening up the question to include any possible engineering DISadvantage as well.

Images from Ars Technica's Blue Origin releases details of its monster orbital rocket.

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is it possible to bypass the canonical, negative comments about marketing and public relations? The question is about engineering advantages. It doesn't ask "Why did they..." - not even a little. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Apr 1, 2017 at 8:31
  • $\begingroup$ Might they be simpler to produce? If the vehicle had enough excess performance it might be not worth it to use big composite fairings? (Just my unfounded speculation) $\endgroup$
    – jkavalik
    Apr 1, 2017 at 8:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A polished metallic surface may have a slightly lower air drag than a matte surface. $\endgroup$
    – Uwe
    Apr 2, 2017 at 6:57
  • $\begingroup$ @Uwe I've edited the question just now to include possible disadvantages as well. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Apr 2, 2017 at 7:03

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

One advantage is mass savings if you don't need to coat the surface with something else (or if that "something else" is lighter than the matte white paint would be).

The most obvious example where we do have some numbers is the Space Shuttle External Tank:

The first two, used for STS-1 and STS-2, were painted white to protect the tanks from ultraviolet light during the extended time that the shuttle spends on the launch pad prior to launch. Because this did not turn out to be a problem, Lockheed Martin (at that time, Martin Marietta) reduced weight by ceasing to paint the external tanks beginning with STS-3, leaving the rust-colored spray-on insulation bare, saving approximately 272 kg (600 lb).

The surface area of the Blue Origin fairings is much smaller than the ET, but I guess it also saves up to a few dozen kilograms of mass.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I had to double check - you are right! The areas of the fairings of the two New Glen versions shown in the drawing are surprisingly large, the three stage's fairing seems to be about 1/4 the area of the Shuttle's external tank. This stops being surprising when one considers that the rocket is a whopping 7 meters in diameter. So it looks like we're talking about perhaps 50 pounds of paint. Could a much larger weight reduction be obtained by using composites instead of a metal structure? from here $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Apr 2, 2017 at 8:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.