14

In 2015-2016, the New Glenn design was expected to use a single BE-4 methane-LOX engine on the second stage (about 2400kN thrust), and a single BE-3 (the same as the suborbital New Shepard's single engine, and likely in the 500-600kN range for the upper stage version) on an optional third stage. There wasn't any need for an engine in between the power of the ...


12

It would be extremely unstable. There are 2 things that weight a lot on an empty rocket, the capsule and the engine. With the two of them on opposite sides, the rocket would become extremely unstable. Separating the two allows for the entire system to be more stable. This is particularly important when it is on the ground, where it could easily tip over if ...


11

The startup of the BE-3 is slower because it uses the Tap-Off cycle. Hot gas from the main combustion chamber is tapped off to run the twin turbines that power the fuel (LH2) and oxidizer (LOX) turbopumps. In the BE-3 engine diagram you can see that each of the turbopumps has its own turbine and exhaust. Startup sequence: Fuel and Oxidizer at tank ...


10

The capsule is equipped with a Launch Escape System capable of aborting from pad or in-flight. The pad abort was already tested in 2012: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/commercial/crew/blue-origin-padescapetest.html And the in flight escape was tested in October 2016:


9

Only one burn, just before landing, according to Blue Origin's broadcast of NS-12's flight. The only events during climb relating to engines are liftoff and MECO (main engine cut off). After apogee, 45:00 in the video, T+4:45, the only events at all are wedge fins deploy, drag brake deploy, booster restart, and booster touchdown. (Here are photos and ...


8

The Falcon 9 first stage is making three burns wile descending: Nope. It is making two burns while descending. boostback burn This burn happens while the rocket is still ascending. This burn only happens for return-to-launch-site landings. For ASDS landings, it doesn't need to "boost back", because it isn't going back, it is going forward. (They ...


7

I think we can all agree that the crux of this question is in the New Shepard specifications, feel free to offer improvements to these. Here are the ones I arrived at (note: there is no recovery of the booster in this analysis): Booster Masses: This reddit thread (that is now 5 yrs old) contains some estimates of tank volume and empty booster mass and I ...


7

I may have my own answer. It looks like this test vehicle uses a single BE-3 engine, which only has about 110,000 lbs of thrust. We have seen the SpaceX Grasshopper and F9R Dev1 vehicles take off from flat surfaces on a single engine as well, and the Merlin 1D engine produces 145,000 lbs of thrust (in 85% performance mode that apparently it has been ...


6

LOX and LH2 tanks that are boiling from equilibrium can be replenished via umbilicals. You can see one here: In some launch videos, it can be seen to detach right around engine start time. This lets any boil-off be replenished right up to launch. Note this is different from the Falcon 9, where the issue isn’t boil-off but rather warming of the deeply-...


6

There's 2 major reasons: safety and practicality Safety: If you look at the history of booster landings it is not a proven technology, the reliability is not good enough for safety. Don't get me wrong, it's amazing that they can land a booster for re-use, and it works a good portion of the time, however when it goes wrong it goes very, very wrong very fast. ...


5

Based on other promotional images of New Glenn that show it from different angles, they would appear to be fins: (Note how the edge appears to be sharp, suggesting a thin shape) Image source: https://www.blueorigin.com/assets/photos/new-glenn/blueorigin_newglenn_ascent_web.jpg


5

They are planning to take off and land vertically, so the vehicle has to be designed to tolerate engines firing close to the ground without a trench anyway. The amount of thrust that an engine provides doesn't determine the need for a trench by itself. You could, for example, raise the entire vehicle or provide protection on the engine itself instead of ...


4

According to the Blue Origin publicity web site https://www.blueorigin.com/new-shepard/ , the aft fin hydraulics are effective up to mach 4 (altitude isn't specified, but actual max is [remember it's sub-orbital] mach 3), and those fins are also used as steering canards during descent. If you are interested in re-entry control, then you should also check ...


4

Why do they say that New Shepard is the first one to do so? Because December (first successful landing of a Falcon 9 booster) is after November (first successful landing of New Shepard).


3

It's worth noting this is rather unique as its requried to be aerodynamically stable when going forwards and backwards. This is tricky as the centre-of-lift/pressure has to be 'behind' the centre of mass in both directions. The anular-fin being covered when the capsule is on, and open after release (which correlates to going 'up' and 'down'), helps with ...


3

The flight profile of a sounding rocket and the New Shepard are very different. For one, sounding rockets often fly higher than NS with some reaching altitudes of up to 1500 km. Additionally, sounding rockets undergo much more extreme accelerations. If you've ever seen a launch it's pretty clear to see that the sounding rocket is ridiculously fast. If you ...


2

Partial answer: According to a parts supplier, New Shepard uses a hydraulic system. JASC designed and manufactured the Flight Control System Actuators and the engine Thrust Vector Control Actuators used on New Shepard. Both of these actuators are servo-hydraulic units, with the former used to steer the vehicle and provide aerodynamic stability, and the ...


2

The National Team proposal comprised three separate vehicles, a Transfer Element provided by Northrop Grumman, a Descent Element provided by Blue Origin, and an Ascent Element provided by Lockheed Martin. Public statements from those companies indicate that vehicles could have been launched separately or combined. Several launch vehicles provide enough oomph ...


2

New Shepard is a suborbital launcher: it can get into space, but it can't stay there. As discussed in this oft-linked What If, the major challenge of orbit isn't reaching space, but going fast enough horizontally -- 7800 m/s or so -- that you don't fall back to Earth. New Shepard doesn't have to reach those very high speeds, so it doesn't need the huge ...


2

Yes, it will only be a few minutes. (Source: blueorigin.com)


1

Even though New Shepard did not achieve orbit nor put anything in orbit (because it was not designed to do so) it did land after achieving a 100.5 km apogee suborbital trajectory which it makes it in fact the first rocket booster to do so. The case for the first Falcon 9 landing is that it did manage to put something in orbit so if you want to make a ...


1

Using the OP's numbers: average acceleration (between T+ 00:10 and T+ 00:15): 13.4 ft/s^2 thrust: 110,000 lb force g: 32 ft/s^2 solve for the approximate average mass between T+ 00:10 and T+ 00:15. $$ ma = F_{thrust} - F_{grav} $$ $$ F_{grav} = mg $$ $$ ma = F_{thrust} - mg $$ $$ m(a+g) = F_{thrust} $$ $$ m = \frac{F_{thrust}}{a+g} $$ Wait! First ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible