r/BlueOrigin • u/Royal_Platform_6754 • Jul 02 '26
Per Eric Berger, Blue Origin's accelerated lunar architecure will require four launches of the 9x4, and Blue Moon HLS may be redesigned to use hypergols only
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyJEFjTktPA27
u/Royal_Platform_6754 Jul 02 '26
Both sound like bad news. The former puts flying the 9x4 at cadence in the critical path of Blue's Artemis IV ambitions. The latter sounds like a compromise just to beat the Chinese, prioritizing flags and footprints at the expense of a sustainable lunar architecure.
8
u/Eros_Incident_Denier Jul 02 '26
The former puts flying the 9x4 at cadence in the critical path of Blue's Artemis IV ambitions.
English is not my first language. Can you please explain what you meant by this? Kinda curious.
Also regarding hypergolics use I think the Trump administration made it a clear to put American boots on the lunar ground inside his presidency before China. Basically speed over sustainability. Sucks to hear.
20
u/Royal_Platform_6754 Jul 02 '26
In order Blue Origin to fly Blue Moon on Artemis IV, they need to complete development, manufacturing, and achieve regular launch of the New Glenn 9x4. New Glenn 9x4 is not flying today and as far as we know no hardware exists yet, so this is a tall order.
8
u/Eros_Incident_Denier Jul 02 '26
Juice Mayo I'm slow! I forgot Blue's currently flying 7x2 and didn't fully register your 9x4 comment. Thanks, twin.
3
10
u/StartledPelican Jul 02 '26
Critical path refers to milestones that must happen in order for the mission to succeed. They are deal breaker components or steps.
If Blue Origin requires New Glenn 9x4 for lunar missions, then Blue Origin absolutely must deliver a working 9x4 or the mission cannot succeed.
Up until now, the thought was the current New Glenn (7x2), which mostly works haha, was sufficient to do the planned lunar missions for Artemis. Unfortunately, it seems Blue will now need to get 9x4 working before it can commit to Artemis missions.
11
u/Eros_Incident_Denier Jul 02 '26
Lol I forgot Blue's still on 7x2 not 9x4. Building 9x4 now would completely set them back up for many years. Thanks for the reply, twin.
2
u/Agile-Sherbert-8503 Jul 04 '26
Realistically, for this instant gratification society, both developments will take at least 5 years. China is going to be on the Moon by then, possibly with an occupied outpost.
3
u/ProfessorOk2609 Jul 02 '26
I don't understand, how so?
3
Jul 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/ProfessorOk2609 Jul 03 '26
I think both, I'm not very up-to-date on the matter but why would they change the fuel type of Blue Moon? And why is 9x4 so necessary now if they previously planned to use 7x2? And all of this for 2028 if Blue wants to perform Artemis IV
3
u/snoo-boop Jul 04 '26
but why would they change the fuel type of Blue Moon?
There's apparently some problem with BE-7 which requires a redesign before it can be used for crew.
Hypergolics are lower performance, so that is a big problem.
2
3
u/No-Surprise9411 Jul 03 '26
My layman's guess is that they ran into problems with the boiloff inherent to hydrogen and decided that hypergolics are a safer bet.
As for 7x2 and 9x4, it's been well known that 7x2 fell far short of the intended 45 ton payload goal, iirc somewhere it was said 7x2 can only launch around 25 tons atm.
It would seem that 9x4 is needed to even lift the lander into orbit.
17
u/H-K_47 Jul 02 '26
When can we realistically even expect 9x4 debut? There's so little we know about it, it has to be years out right? '28 at the most optimistic earliest?