[HN Gopher] New Glenn Update - Blue Origin
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       New Glenn Update - Blue Origin
        
       Author : rbanffy
       Score  : 55 points
       Date   : 2025-11-20 21:21 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.blueorigin.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.blueorigin.com)
        
       | toss1 wrote:
       | Interesting that "...additional vehicle upgrades include a
       | reusable fairing..."
       | 
       | I wonder how they'll be implementing that since SpaceX gave up on
       | recapturing fairings (seemingly too soon, but only from the POV
       | of someone with no internal info).
        
         | kanisae wrote:
         | They still recover the fairings. They gave up on trying to
         | catch them out of the air and now just let them land in the
         | water and pick them up.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_fairing_recovery_progra...
         | 
         | > SpaceX performs some amount of cleaning and refurbishing
         | before using the previously flown fairings on a subsequent
         | flight. SpaceX has reflown fairing halves more than 300 times,
         | with one being reflown for 34 times.
         | 
         | They gave up on catching them in nets, because it turns out
         | they're fine splashing directly into the water.
        
       | SilverElfin wrote:
       | For those who aren't aware, the next flight is to lunar orbit,
       | with a planned landing on the moon:
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Moon_Pathfinder_Mission_1
        
         | sanex wrote:
         | That seems like a big jump between flights. I'm used to the
         | spend and explode fast incremental iterations of SpaceX.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Seems BO is taking the NASA approach of not being so cavalier
           | with testing. You can tell people you _expect_ the thing to
           | fail, but repeatedly seeing them fail is still seen as a
           | negative.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | It worked pretty well for F9.
        
               | BoredPositron wrote:
               | Mostly because the whole landing thing was pretty novel.
        
             | WorkerBee28474 wrote:
             | NASA still had much smaller jumps in capability between
             | flights. Check out the Smarter Every Day NASA talk.
        
           | SilverElfin wrote:
           | I was thinking the same thing - big leap. But maybe there's
           | no real difference between ending up in Earth orbit versus
           | lunar orbit, in that the basic aspects (thrust, staging,
           | navigation, etc) are all there already? But everything
           | relating to the lander (releasing it, landing it) would be
           | new.
        
           | proee wrote:
           | I think SpaceX is taking the re-usability part of Starship as
           | foundation. Meaning they won't move forward until it's
           | solved. With Falcon they added it as a bit of a secondary
           | priority. They've spent so much resources trying to get the
           | second stage back to earth. I think they should have just
           | focused on getting the whole system flying to orbit, throwing
           | away second stage for now, and using that platform to replace
           | falcon. Eventually, they could refactor second stage to get
           | it back to earth. But perhaps it's all too coupled that it
           | has to be solved at one time (not later).
        
       | gangstead wrote:
       | The incremental improvements to the engine thrust is par for the
       | course. The exciting thing in this announcement is the new 9x4
       | configuration (9 and 4 engines in the first and second stages vs
       | the current 7x2). They don't mention whether the tanks will get
       | stretched to allow for more fuel, or if this just burns the fuel
       | faster. Starship generations keep getting both more engines and
       | longer.
        
         | zaphoyd wrote:
         | Based on the photo posted by the Blue Origin CEO the tanks are
         | definitely getting stretched (also looks like a slightly
         | different fin, landing leg, and fairing config)
        
         | DennisP wrote:
         | Yep, 70 tons to LEO is more than the Falcon Heavy.
        
         | bryanlarsen wrote:
         | Yup, the thrust improvements were expected. The BE-4 engines
         | have quite a low chamber pressure for their engine class, so
         | they can gain significant performance just by increasing
         | chamber pressure.
         | 
         | Additionally, the New Glenn fairings are very large for their
         | weight capacity. New Glenn has 3x the fairing volume compared
         | to the Falcon Heavy, but can throw less mass. So many expected
         | that BO designed it this way because they expected to increase
         | performance of their engines in the future, making the
         | weight/volume ratio of their fairing more balanced.
         | 
         | New Glenn has 45t of capacity now. Increasing thrust by 15%
         | should increase that to 51t, thus making New Glenn 7x2 also
         | just barely a Super Heavy booster. Perhaps they didn't call
         | that out because that would overshadow the 9x4 announcement.
        
           | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
           | > New Glenn has 3x the fairing volume compared to the Falcon
           | Heavy, but can throw less mass.
           | 
           | To be fair, the Falcon Heavy has way too little fairing
           | volume for it's lift capacity (and apparently it is in the
           | process of getting an extra 50% or so?)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-20 23:00 UTC)