Blue Origin solicits research users

The Blue Origin website has added a page titled Opportunities for Research.

Blue Origin is developing New Shepard, a rocket-propelled vehicle designed to routinely fly multiple astronauts into suborbital space at competitive prices. In addition to providing the public with opportunities to experience spaceflight, New Shepard will also provide frequent opportunities for researchers to fly experiments into space and a microgravity environment.

The page goes on to describe the vehicle's flight characteristics and includes some graphs and specification tables. Alan Stern, former NASA associate administrator for the Science Mission Directorate, is given as "Blue Origins independent representative for research and education missions".

There is also this Timeline:

Flight testing of prototype New Shepard vehicles began in 2006. Blue Origin expects the first opportunities for experiments requiring an accompanying researcher astronaut to be available in 2012. Flight opportunities in 2011 may be available for autonomous or remotely-controlled experiments on an uncrewed flight test.

This is a slip from their 2006 Environmental Impact Statement (pdf) for the Blue Origin West Texas launch site, which gave 2010 as the goal for commercial manned operations.

I've been a bit surprised there were no test flights this year of the Goddard or of their second prototype, which I assume is assembled from the parts visible in this image on their homepage. Free flights must be FAA licensed and NOTAM bulletins posted so flights could not be secret. Perhaps they have been doing tethered tests somewhere.

Posted 12/06/08 | 10:58:21 by TopSpacer | Filed under: Suborbital Spaceflight

Comments

most likely BO is having engine issues.
eclipse was screwed by engine trouble,
SpaceX had a lot of trouble with the Merlin

i imagine BO is having some issues.
Hot spots, combustion instability, underperformance,
ignition glitches, it's all quite routine, but
usually underestimated.

Posted by anonymous at 12/06/08 13:37:26

Blue Origin is currently integrating their third vehicle (after the Jet test platform and Goddard):
"Blue, home based in Kent, WA. and resides on 25 acres with approximately 250,000 square foot of facilities and a multi-million dollar propulsion test facilities on site. Blue also owns and maintains a 200,000+ acre private launch site in West Texas. Blue has designed and built 2 flight articles with 4 successful flights flown to date and presently integrating our 3rd flight article. We are a privately held, well funded company with a head count in excess of 100 engineers.

Blue Origin is committed in the development of vehicles and technologies that, over time, will help enable an enduring human presence in space. Our efforts are focused on reusable propulsion systems, fully autonomous, low cost of operations, life support, abort systems and human factors."

http://www.linkedin.com/job...

I think the parts visible in the image are parts from Goddard.

Posted by linkedinbo at 12/06/08 17:02:46

"Blue Origin is currently integrating ..."

Super! Thanks for the info.

- Clark

[Update: In re-reading your comment, I should clarify some issues
/-- I believe the jet powered platform was a test system that was preliminary to the vehicles mentioned in the EIS. When I say "second prototype", I'm referring to the rocket powered prototypes described in the EIS.
/-- The EIS development schedule (sec. 2.1.3) says there would be up to 10 flights of a "first prototype low-altitude test vehicle" in 2006. This should correspond to the Goddard, which flew a couple of times in 2006 and a couple of times in 2007.
/-- For 2007-2009 there was supposed to be a series of prototype vehicles "conducting 25 or fewer launches per year" going to gradually higher altitudes. That clearly hasn't happened.
/-- I would expect at least one new prototype before the New Shepard.
/-- The black cylindrical object in the center of the image of the assembly bay does not resemble Goddard unless it had a separate aeroshell place around it. OTOH, with a bit of imagination, once could see it coupled with the domed item to its right to create the PM-CC design described in the EIS and on the Research Opportunities page mentioned above.
]

Posted by TopSpacer at 12/06/08 17:27:20

I dont quite understand what they are gaining by separating the two parts of the vehicle in space. It seems a little awkward to me and somewhat unnecessary too (I do understand the savety aspect of being able to do it in an emergency though). If I was a customer, I would put more trust into a vehicle that lands in one piece and not in pieces...

Posted by E_Moelzer at 12/06/08 18:15:13

"I dont quite understand what they are gaining by separating the two parts of the vehicle in space...."

The EIS description of the New Shepard discusses three scenarios: two nominal ones and one emergency. In the first nominal scenario there is no separation of the PM and CC and it lands as one unit.

In the second nominal scenario, the PM and CC separate shortly after main engine cutoff via springs and perhaps RCS burn but not with the emergency solid rockets. Each would continue on a ballistic trajectory to 100km. The PM would do a powered landing and the CC a parachute landing.

The emergency scenario has the CC separating via the emergency solid rockets due to some anomaly that happens anytime from prior to liftoff to main engine cutoff.

From the description on the Research Opportunities page, it sounds like they have decided to forgo the first nominal scenario. Perhaps they have had trouble insuring survivability of a powered landing if engine problems occur at lower altitudes.

- Clark

Posted by TopSpacer at 12/06/08 22:51:54

Thanks for the reply Clark!
I am sure you are right.
Maybe they will switch to the first nominal scenario, once they have had enough experience with landing the propulsion module separated from the CC. Sure sounds logical to first go the saver way, when you think about it from that perspective.

Posted by E_Moelzer at 12/07/08 10:58:26

it could be a strategy for managing
stability.

think about it, the Payload compartment on
top is heavy, when the propellant is mostly
expended, the vehicle may be heavy on top
so that on re-entry it keeps wanting to turn
around.

it's a hard problem to solve.

now if you kicked out the passengers at the top
it wouldn't be so hard.

Posted by anonymous at 12/07/08 17:23:22

Add Comment

Note: HTML code will not work except for bare URLs (i.e. http://www...). Also, for postings older than 1 week, comments are filtered manually to prevent spam and so may not appear for a few days.
Note: Trash talking and name calling, especially in anonymous comments, won't be tolerated.