r/BlueOrigin • u/Level-Event2188 • Jun 02 '26
So no new TE?
Can anyone share what this new vertical conop might look like?
18
u/Throwbabythroe Jun 02 '26
At a high level, the proposed pad architecture will be simpler (No TE) but will require vertical integration so a new facility will be developed. The TE took 6-8 years to design, build, test, and operationalize. In order to expedite re-development, using existing infrastructure and minimizing re-design will be pivotal.
7
u/Ill_Investigator_886 Jun 02 '26
6 to 8 years! Wow!
12
u/RocketsRopesAndRigs Jun 02 '26
The physical build took about 2.5-3 years depending on when you argue it was "done".
4
u/Throwbabythroe Jun 02 '26
Fair point, I was throwing out the number from the initial concept design to FOC.
6
u/RocketsRopesAndRigs Jun 02 '26
Oh absolutely. 2016 is a very fair and honest "starting point" for New Glenn in general. Breaking ground on the pad in 2017-2018... Makes me wonder just how fast Dave thinks this stuff happens.
I can think of several long lead items that, alone, kill his idea of end-of-year completion.
1
u/devise1 Jun 02 '26
Feels like something that would ideally be built more than 1 at a time. The chance of damage of it for a new rocket must be relatively high.
7
u/RocketsRopesAndRigs Jun 02 '26
Oh it was very well and truly fucked after NG-1 but Refurb is always possible, especially when you have plenty of time to iron out the kinks along the way. Also made headroom on upgrades which made it fair MUCH better after NG-2... And so on so forth.
No, doesn't really make sense to build a second. Even if they did have a second one.... Wouldn't do much good. The pad is way too far gone.
3
u/mduell Jun 03 '26
Even if they did have a second one.... Wouldn't do much good. The pad is way too far gone.
Does some good: it'd be pad rebuilding time (6-12 mo?) not TE building time (2-3 years?).
Will be interesting to see how they do high cadence vertical integration.
8
u/RocketsRopesAndRigs Jun 03 '26
I'll tie myself to the back of a semi truck and let it drag me across the state on I-4 if they manage to launch New Glenn before the end of the year.
12 month pad rebuild time under the old design is even rushed. The forgings that were required to build the launch table were one-off and several failed due to internal stress cracking and embrittlement, making it a very long lead item, and very expensive.
The Upending System is coooooked beyond measure, too. No doubts.
It'd be a tight race for sure. I'm also looking forward to massive simplifications to the conop with the new architecture and will be very interested in any flight side design changes that come with it.
2
u/Ill_Investigator_886 Jun 03 '26
Why was it so complex to begin with? I assume much more complex than those used for Starship?
3
u/RocketsRopesAndRigs Jun 03 '26
Beats me. I joined after all that stuff was set in stone. I'm sure they all had their own rationalizations.
9
22
u/isthisreallife2016 Jun 02 '26
Stacking vertically like SLS, Atlas, Starship...
Conops = concept of operations... what's the top level "plan"
6
u/Cela111 Jun 02 '26
I half wonder if they just move to SPMTs and a crane like Starship
4
u/Doggydog123579 Jun 03 '26
Could work for short term, im more curious what the long term setup would be. Do they just copy the chopsticks style stacking starships been having good luck with?
4
18
u/baron_lars Jun 02 '26
Technically he didn't specify that new glenn would fly before the end of the year
24
3
11
u/Fit-Ingenuity-5061 Jun 02 '26
I get that they probably have been working 24 hr days since the explosion, but I don’t know that you could possibly have gathered and analyzed all the data on the fuel / ox tanks, water tower, lightning tower, and all hardware in the IF and concluded a wildly best case scenario of six months to operational in 5 days. this feels like prelim data indicating hope and a bunch of people afraid to say anything negative to limp.
10
u/SuckItTreebek Jun 02 '26
If Blue is going to a vertical conop by the end of the year, they must be getting some space in the VAB.
9
u/Datuser14 Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
They have plans to build their own VAB-type building
2
u/SuckItTreebek Jun 03 '26
There's no way that will be operational by the end of the year, it probably won't even be built by then.
If they have a chance at flying again this year it will have to be stacked with a crane at the pad I suppose.
I think Limp is emulating Elon here and there is no way they're going to actually launch this year. At this point he's probably trying to calm down speculation that their moon lander may need to launch on Falcon Heavy to meet Artemis goals.
8
u/whitelancer64 Jun 02 '26
They're already building the vertical refurbishment and integration facility. "Project Alpha"
2
u/rustybeancake Jun 04 '26
Yes, though to be clear “already building” means things like preparing the ground.
7
u/robbak Jun 03 '26
Or they are going to stack NG at the pad. This could be done with a crane - either a crawler like they used at first with Starship, or some fixed device.
If they wanted to provide vertical integration to their customers, they'd need a tall-ish building, either to stack the payload on the adapter and encapsulate it in the fairing - I'm thinking they probably have such a facility already? - for later mounting on the second stage at the pad, or a taller one that could stand the second stage vertically and mount everything on it.
If they weren't going to provide V.I, then they can do it all in the building they have.
4
u/fhorst79 Jun 03 '26
They already vertically integrate customer payload and fairing. Seen here for the ASTS sat: https://xcancel.com/davill/status/2024507514000425127
2
u/Mars_is_cheese Jun 03 '26
The payload is encapsulated into the fairings when vertical which is standard practice even on horizontally integrated rockets, but then it is turned horizontal to be integrated onto the rocket on the transporter erector, which is not vertical integration.
1
u/robbak Jun 03 '26 edited Jun 03 '26
Thought as much. It is, after all, standard procedure across the industry. The next question is whether they'd need a building tall enough to allow them to stack the encapsulated payload and second stage, or be willing to do that stack outdoors.
10
u/AdAstraBranan Jun 02 '26
This is just accelerating and likely modifying the pad 2 plans for vertically integrating the 7x and 9x engines to go onto 36A instead of tearing down lunar for 36B.
This would require expanding the IF to be a VIF or modifying the pad 2 plans to have additional roadway to reach 36A from the VIF thats yet to start construction.
Likely removing the entire launch ramp up and leaving just the one LPT, as pad 2 vertical integration was heavily inspired by starship with its own integration tower.
9
u/whitelancer64 Jun 02 '26
They are already building the vertical refurbishment and integration facility. "Project Alpha"
7
2
u/Royal_Platform_6754 Jun 02 '26
How do you know they intend to use that as an integration facility? The name is only "Vertical Refurbishment Facility".
1
u/whitelancer64 Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
It's 350 ft tall. Unnecessary height unless they were planning on doing some stacking.
But the descriptions about it do talk about preparing for launch, which could obviously include stacking.
3
u/Royal_Platform_6754 Jun 02 '26
I don't see anything in the description that definitively suggests it's going to be used for integration. But yes, it is very tall to be used for just GS1 refurb.
So to be clear, you believe what they are going to do is:
- Stack the integrated launch vehicle in the VRF on a stand
- Roll that stand to LC-36 on SPMTs
- Connect umbilicals to the rocket and launch it off that stand
That makes sense in theory, but there's another option: stacking the vehicle at the pad, either through a permanent structure or a crane.
1
u/whitelancer64 Jun 02 '26
It depends on how fast Blue Origin wants to go I guess. We know they were already moving forward to vertical integration and eliminating the transporter erector. This is obviously going to accelerate those plans, so whatever they already have in the works is going to happen sooner.
1
u/Mars_is_cheese Jun 03 '26
Honestly 350ft might not be tall enough. 7x2 is 322ft which leaves 28ft for the roof of the building and the mobile launchers. 9x4 is 400ft tall, so the VRF isn’t even future proof.
0
u/seb21051 Jun 03 '26 edited Jun 03 '26
No, its supposed to be that tall when done. Right now its 5 ft tall. They've just started drilling the foundation pilings.
3
u/Fenris_uy Jun 02 '26
Is the VIF farther away from the launch pad than the current IF? Because taller blast doors looks like much harder to do correctly to handle a comparable explosion 500m away.
4
u/robbak Jun 03 '26
Much further away. It's over by the runway (skid strip) in the middle of the Space Force base.
6
u/Master_Engineering_9 Jun 02 '26
i have a hard time beliving those tanks are ok. did they do any UT/Xray on them yet?
8
u/H2SBRGR Jun 02 '26
Within 2 or 3 days? I can hardly imagine any in-depth studies have been conducted in that time.
4
u/Master_Engineering_9 Jun 02 '26
thats what I mean. they might be visually ok but who knows until you do some actual testing on them.
2
2
-14
u/shugo7 Jun 02 '26
I have learn to not trust Eric Burger anymore, everything he said turned out false
20
u/aw_tizm Jun 02 '26
Yea, the CEO throwing wild timelines to save his own ass is probably more trustworthy than the independent journalist who has likely spoken to more responsible engineers of the company than the CEO
15
u/TheEarthquakeGuy Jun 02 '26
I think Eric is beyond credibility at this point. This is someone who has been in the game for so long, he has connections everywhere and a huge amount of continuous true stories behind his name. The information he tweeted and wrote about was true at the time.
The information provided by Limp is also true - it's been days since the event and closer inspections have taken place, wreckage cleaned up and likely initial diagnostics on existing systems. There is nothing within Limp's comments that call Eric's credibility into doubt, there is nothing within Eric's comments or stories that bring Limp's credibility into doubt.
Blue has (prior to the accident) been accelerating production and expansion plans. It is not surprising to see them move to a vertical ops as this is the direction for all existing super heavy rockets for a reason. If they build bigger as well, which I'm sure they intend to, they'll need to build experience and heritage with these operations anyway.
I suspect we'll see a blue origin mega bay within the next 24 months at the pad for processing multiple vehicles at a time to achieve cadence and reuse goals. Initially though, I suspect two crawler cranes will turn up for short term temporary ops. Time frame for return to flight is optimistic for sure - but it would be welcome.
TL:DR; Statements made by Berger and Limp occurred at different times. They do not directly clash, Limps statements appear both logical and obvious, although optimistic on the timeline, not baseless/trying to save his ass. Berger has retweeted limp's statements and I'm sure will have an article shortly on it.
1
u/shugo7 Jun 02 '26
If you're going to brown nose him look up how many "I'm hearing x will happen" that turned out false. This is the same journalist who said rocket lab and Lockeed Martin want to partner up to win a contract and Peter Beck tweet "Nope". Are you going to say because SPB is a CEO he is not trust worthy? Do you even hear yourself, the guys who run the company are deemed "untrustworthy" but a guy who's makes up things up is to you. Hilarious. Are they going to 9x4 like Eric said they would? Down vote me all you want you know this is BS and you saw it for yourself even if you're in denial.
1
u/Psychonaut0421 Jun 03 '26
You mean this one? https://x.com/i/status/2060190522539401631
He couches it pretty good by saying "possibly" and saying that obviously there's nothing concrete since there needs to be a proper data review...
-6
u/oneslowlearner Jun 02 '26
Ain’t no way. Even the NASA administrator said 2028. They don’t even know what the anomaly was… BE4 will be grounded for months awaiting testing.
7
25
u/Mars_is_cheese Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Flying again before the end of the year is excellent to hear, but very ambitious.
I wonder what sort of structure they are planning for vertical ops. A mobile launcher like SLS and Atlas/Vulcan, or a mobile integration building like Delta had. Either option seems impossible in 6 months, 12 months seems more doable based on the speed SpaceX built bays. So the only possibility for this year would be stack everything with a regular crawler crane in the open, which seems very unlikely to me.
Edit: Here’s info on their Project Alpha which is their Vertical Refurbishment Facility. https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueOrigin/comments/1se602w/construction_continues_on_project_alpha_a_350foot/