Live data from Hacker News

After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

arstechnica.com

31–40 of 148 posts

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#31
post #8

How much data do you guys reckon they gather during this 24-second window? Gigabytes? Terabytes? I imagine they have redundant sensors for every measurement, if possible. The LHC generates 1 PB/s, though it filters it down to roughly 200MB/s[0]. I wonder how this compares. 0: https://www.lhc-closer.es/taking_a_closer_look_at_lhc/0.lhc_...

Formula 1 car has over 300 sensors and generates 1.5Gb a lap.

So I would imagine this is generating hundreds of megabytes.

You are going to be limited by what you can transfer over radio.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#32
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starship will serve a different mission profile. People seem convinced Starship will just "solve" space, but if it works, there's still going to be demand for other mission profiles that it won't make sense to send on Starship. But if your point wasn't to say that it will be obsoleted by Starship, and just to say instead it's slower development than Starship, yeah, that's true. I suspect the head start in infrastruct…

Is Starship really not following the exact step of N-1 && VentureStar?

Computers and materials came a long way since the N1, as Starship’s successful tests can attest to.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#33
post #14
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which mission profiles does Starship not make sense for?

10t to LEO in an unusual orbit. Being smaller than Starship while still huge isn’t necessarily a disadvantage.

Starship should be able to put 10t into LEO significantly cheaper than New Glenn can. Why would anybody pay more?

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does if it's still cheaper than any other rocket.

Your launch price may somehow be cheaper; although, that's incredibly unlikely. Anyways as your insurance underwriter I'm going to jack up the rate on you so high for that launch it will no longer be cheaper.

Starship’s launch price is highly likely to be cheaper if New Glenn’s second stage isn’t reusable.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#35
Blue Origin is a funny company. I worked for TerraBella/SkySat/Google Satellite, Planet Labs and Kubos, each as a consultant/contractor/whatever. I struck up a conversation w/ Rob Meyerson @ a conference and told him what I was working on (mostly comms / ground station work, but with a tiny bit of GNC test infrastructure.) I mean, I'm not God's gift to rocket scientists, but... I was pretty heavily recruited by them but was working at Amazon and didn't want to leave, then spent some time nursing a family member through cancer treatments. Finally I'm ready to talk to them and I start with back-channel chats to make sure they still have open reqs. They do so I informally talk about specific things I've done and what I might do at BO. Finally I put my resume together and submit it to the hiring manager I had been talking about, emphasizing the bits he said he was interested in. 15 minutes later I'm rejected for the position they had been recruiting me for.

I mean... I'm not a SUPER rocket engineer, but I'm pretty solid for the things I did work on. I've slogged through design meetings where I had to analyze protocol specs and make sure we agree'd on details, wrote code, wrote A LOT of tests. I mean, I'm solid. The only thing I can think is I don't have a Ph.D., but that DEFINITELY wasn't a requirement when Bob was running the shop.

Folk have told me it's evolved into something much more like Amazon where each team optimizes it's tiny bit and teams communicate only via APIs and the only opportunity you get to optimize complete functional or value chains is when something breaks.

Just seems a bit weird they went from "we're 10 guys in a hangar" to "we've re-implemented Amazon's small-team/local optimization religion" in less than 10 years and with less than 1/30-th of the number of engineers.

I wish them the best. I think SpaceX really needs some decent competition to focus their collective minds. But... they've gone weird.

I'm probably too senior and too "weird" to them to get hired there, but I absolutely encourage young engineers interested in an intense experience to check out their jobs page.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does if it's still cheaper than any other rocket.

This. If, and it’s a big if, starship can be 100% reusable and less than 24 hours turn around, then it will be the space truck NASA envisioned with the shuttle

Even if it's not 100% reusable it's still likely to be cheaper than New Glenn. New Glenn uses extremely expensive methods of construction. Starship is assembled like a glorified water tank.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#37
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starship will serve a different mission profile. People seem convinced Starship will just "solve" space, but if it works, there's still going to be demand for other mission profiles that it won't make sense to send on Starship. But if your point wasn't to say that it will be obsoleted by Starship, and just to say instead it's slower development than Starship, yeah, that's true. I suspect the head start in infrastruct…

Which mission profiles does Starship not make sense for?

Starship is heavy lift / heavy expense. If you want to put 1 small-sat in orbit, you don't use Starship, you use a Rocket Lab Electron. It's MUCH cheaper. Or you wait until you find 600 other small sat users who want to launch into the same / similar orbit.

The talk I heard was that New Glenn was supposed to be BO's answer to Starship (or more likely Falcon Heavy) that could launch a bunch of Project Kuiper satellites into LEO so Amazon could compete with Starlink and feed Amazon's Ground Station as a Service offering.

If we are to believe the published numbers, New Glenn can lift 50 imperial tons to LEO, Starship Block III will hoist 200 tons and Falcon Heavy will lift 50-60 depending on how re-usable you want your launch to be.

I'm not a heavy lift sales-person, but I've been in the room when they discussed what they thought they could sell to govt / mil / commercial customers. So take this with a little bit of salt... Seems to me BO was targeting a slightly smaller launch vehicle than SpaceX was going with so they could decouple schedule with Amazon's Kuiper Project. You don't want to have that cool new rocket you developed dependent on a satellite constellation that gets delayed. So you have a rocket that would be easier to fill with a number of small to medium sized satellites to LEO or (fewer) to GEO.

And like other people on the thread have commented, it seems BO is a decade behind SpaceX, so... yeah... a big rocket that competes with Starship is pretty risky for BO.

And yes, I understand that BO is independent from Amazon, but from what I've seen this is just so they can execute on a schedule that isn't determined by AMZN's board of directors. They seem pretty closely related, just from talking with Kuiper, GSaaS and BO engineers.

I don't work for any of the above mentioned companies and have no insider information. YMMV. Just my guesses from watching some of the personalities involved for the last 30 years.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. If, and it’s a big if, starship can be 100% reusable and less than 24 hours turn around, then it will be the space truck NASA envisioned with the shuttle

Even if it's not 100% reusable it's still likely to be cheaper than New Glenn. New Glenn uses extremely expensive methods of construction. Starship is assembled like a glorified water tank.

I'm not sure I see it that way, I wonder sometimes how much of the expensive construction can be systematized into something less expensive, and how much of Starship's "cheap" construction will remain as they work harder and harder to get to their reuse and turnaround goals. My intuition is that Starship will get more expensive to make over time and New Glenn less expensive but beyond that I can't say if they would meet in the middle or cross.

That said, platform construction costs only dominate when you can't re-use the platform. Anything you can re-use gets amortized over each re-use. That is what had made Falcon 9 so cost effective. Mostly because they get nearly 10 flights per booster.

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#39
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10t to LEO in an unusual orbit. Being smaller than Starship while still huge isn’t necessarily a disadvantage.

Starship should be able to put 10t into LEO significantly cheaper than New Glenn can. Why would anybody pay more?

I believe this is factually inaccurate. What's your source? Though admittedly, we have to depend on BO's predictions for per-kg launch costs, and those may be a lot higher for the first few missions and gradually ease off.

Google's AI tells me the current costs for a Starship launch is somewhere between $100m and $2b. Wikipedia says a Falcon 9 costs about $50m and can lift about 20t to LEO. I see a blurb that says Musk says Starship launches will get down to $10m each. But... that seems like an "asperational statement." He also said Full Self Driving Mode would be available in 2018, 2019, 2022 and 2025. Not trying to take away from the absolutely cool stuff his companies have done, but it seems like it will be a while before it costs $10m to launch a Starship.

This link from 2 years ago estimates a New Glenn launch costing $68m. I have no idea how accurate that number is. But if we're going to use Musk's "asperational" cost estimate for Starship launches in the distant future, we should let BO use an "asperational" figure as well.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/04/05/amazon-signs-rocket-deal...

Re: After a 24-second test of its engines, the New Glenn rocket is ready to fly

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does if it's still cheaper than any other rocket.

This. If, and it’s a big if, starship can be 100% reusable and less than 24 hours turn around, then it will be the space truck NASA envisioned with the shuttle

I agree w/ Chuck. It's a BIG IF. I'm hoping for them. I really hope BO turns out to be a good competitor for SpaceX so they're both highly motivated. I've seen the sausage being made at a couple of new space companies (and at least one old space company.) Even more than chip vendors and PC clone manufacturers, Heavy Lift providers are their own worst enemies. If SpaceX fails, it will be because of something they decided to do, not something that was foisted upon them. Ditto for Rocket Lab and Blue Origin. But the cool flip side of that is they're free to do extremely cool/innovative things. The guys who are privately held aren't beholden to a board that wants increasingly dependable revenue and profits (looking at you, ULA.) And this does not seem to be the industry that can tolerate that. I'm bullish on SpaceX, BO and Rocket Lab (assuming Rocket Lab doesn't run out of runway.)
Post reply on HN