Talk:New Glenn

Details on the launch site and launch-site ground support equipment for New Glenn

This link, although not a reliable source in itself, provides information and pointers to various regulatory documents filed with the US Federal government that would be reliable sources, and could be used to improve the article.

• Details on Blue Origin Launch Site and Recovery, 13 Sep 2016. Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:02, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Bad data on BE4 thrust

The thrust data for the fist and second stage engines does not list whether it is sea level or vacuum thrust. This is inadequate. Has any extensive data been published? You cannot simply use the thrust level for the sea-level engines for the upper stage, especially when the engine is the "U" model optimized for vacuum thrust.--Winged Brick (talk) 19:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I know that the thrust is "wrong". But we don't even know if the stated thrust is SL or Vac, and it hasn't yet been to the test stand. I have certain models to get an estimate, but we can't do original research in Wikipedia. So let's leave it there as a place holder for a paper rocket, for now. - Baldusi (talk) 23:59, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

All these data are inaccurate right now, or preliminary if you will. Given the size of the rocket (specifically the 3stage version), it would probably weight 2000t+. An initial thrust of 17.1MN would not allow it to ever take off. So let's face it, this rocket is still in its design phase and the specs are not out yet. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.81.109.154 (talk) 18:11, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Payload to low Earth orbit

Is there any information anywhere on what the payload to low Earth orbit is projected to be for the 2-stage and the 3-stage versions of the New Glenn? N2e (talk) 19:10, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I believe I saw Robert Zubrin made some calc for LEO payload, and it was somewhere in the 70t range if I remember. I might be wrong :) --Михаило Јовановић (talk) 08:39, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Here is the link: http://twitter.com/robert_zubrin/status/775365975034114049 --Михаило Јовановић (talk) 08:43, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Михаило. Interesting to see. But we are probably going to need more a a reliable source/non-twitter post for using any of that in the article. Seems like Blue has been silnet on tghe topic. N2e (talk) 21:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

I know, but it's still interesting to see a rough number for LEO payload. It's gonna be a powerfull booster that's for sure. --Михаило Јовановић (talk) 06:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Bezos thinking on "near future" and "longer term"

This article (Why Bezos’ rocket is unprecedented—and worth taking seriously, in Ars Technica) has the following quote from Bezos:

"My view is you make plans for the near future, and you develop scenarios for the longer term, because so many things will change between now and then it doesn't make sense to make detailed plans for things like how you're going to do harvesting of resources from near-Earth objects. You want to think about those things, you want to develop scenarios, but you don't need to go all the way to a planning stage." (emphasis added)

Useful perspective for writing of wiki-prose describing the more longer term plansscenarios of Bezos (like the longer-term uses of New Glenn, or the existence and thinking around the New Armstrong, whatever that turns out to be). Cheers. N2e (talk) 20:58, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

New launch manifest contracts announced

Blue announced a number of new contracts on their twitter feed today, including this one: SKY Perfect JSAT. I would expect we'll see good secondary sources for these in a day or two. Cheers. N2e (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Engine configuration changes

Second stage will have two BE-3U instead of one BE-4U and become somewhat longer. Information on Blue Origin website is outdated. [1] --PM3 (talk) 02:24, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

March/April 2017 long interviews with Jeff Bezos: more New Glenn info

It does not appear that these have been noted here before. Bezos is continuing his pattern, begun in 2015, of actually talking relatively freely, and taking interview questions, about his space interests and entrepreneurial venture. After 15 years of being extremely limited in releasing information.

The second interview below, which included the introduction of Eutelsat as the first launch contract for New Glenn, has quite a bit of New Glenn info in it, including an overview animation video. N2e (talk) 03:00, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

• Jeff Bezos at Space Symposium on Blue Origin's New Shepard 2017-4-5] (published 26 August 2017)
• Jeff Bezos' Keynote at SATELLITE 2017, circa March 2017. (published 4 October 2017) "[New Glenn will land on a ship that is underway so that the ship might be fin stabilized, increasing reliability and robustness, even in heavy sea state], the rocket can fly in more wind and sea conditions, therefore more launch windows. Bezos/Blue Origin goals is "to dramatically lower launch costs" which will allow the industry to reach a "new equilibrium."

In the 23 minute SATELLITE 2017 interview JB shows (about halfway) an image and animation of NG2 with 4 large strakes also at the bottom of the booster stage - and says these give it a larger non-propulsive cross-range ability and help it cope with wind conditions (at landing? and maybe launch?). At 15:00 JB implies the strakes are what allows reentry without an in-space "deceleration burn". - Rod57 (talk) 10:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Strakes shown here - Rod57 (talk) 12:54, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Removing the phrase "privately funded"

Though it is indeed partially funded privately, around $500 Million(a significant cost of a rocket development program) will come from the US Air Force. This is a recent development. Source - https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1658765/air-force-awards-three-launch-service-agreements/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:714D:E167:2603:3D0B:2982:134 (talk) 07:17, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018 New Glenn design is different

The New Glenn photos released in various places on the web the past week or two are different. Longer rocket overall, MUCH longer second stage. Plus entirely new paint scheme is shown (e.g., much smaller "feather" image, only on the second stage, etc.)

The much larger second stage makes sense. Blue have switched from the methalox BE-4U engine powering the second sate to the hrydrolox BE-3U engine. Liquid hydrogen is much less dense than is liquid methane, so much larger stage volume is needed to carry the same amount of fuel-energy. N2e (talk) 15:27, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@N2e: Done!

– XYZt (talk  |  contribs) – 07:01, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

That's frustrating...I'll look into it in more detail later, but I can't immediately see what the display issue is. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:22, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll just put the png in the infobox for now. – XYZt (talk  |  contribs) – 07:42, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks XYZt.The new graphic brings the article graphics up to date.N2e (talk) 12:27, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Why is the name italicized?

This is fairly unusual compared to other rocket articles. – XYZt (talk  |  contribs) – 07:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I am thinking this thing too. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 15:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is unusual. Rocket names do not get Italics in Wikipedia, as compared with spacecraft names. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:12, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree. --mfb (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Can we reference the official payload user guides

The rev C payload user guide is dated Oct 2018 - Looks like a definite ref for much detail, eg on payload fairing options. Is there any policy not to reference it due to it being on-request from Blue Origin ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:00, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Update to 2020:

Certain paragraphs still refer to as of 2018 even though it is now March 2020. Please consider updating so that readers can know whether the activity in question had been completed or is still pending. Thanks. Abul Bakhtiar 103.60.175.28 (talk) 02:49, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Why does infobox describe 2nd stage as Centaur

Why does infobox describe 2nd stage as Centaur ? Is it just an erroneous carry over from Vulcan-Centaur ? - Rod57 (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

This article has a lot of potential for a Good Article status

There is a lot of content in the article, as well as sufficient reference. In my opinion, an active editor should nominate this article! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

There is still a lot of work need to be done, but it can be fixed relatively quickly by a dedicated editor. Anyways, to anyone see this message, I wish you best of luck CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Blue Origin Signs Long-Term Agreements With Four Kansas Companies to Support New Glenn

News that might be useful as a reference

https://www.iqstockmarket.com/n/blue-origin-signs-long-term-agreements-kansas-companies-support-glenn-heavy-lift-2866272/

• Sbmeirow • Talk • 06:47, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Development timeline slips of New Glenn: compared

Someone has put together a lovely and informative chart comparing the development time and slips in planned launch dates for a number of recent new launch vehicles. Very relevant comparative info, in my view. Shows New Glenn in context with Ariane 6 Starship, Vulcan, and others. launch vehicle announce/planned_launch/first_launch chart by Ken Kirtland

Perhaps Kirtland might be interested in releasing that chart under CC license, or someone might make up a new one (as long as it has good sources). — N2e (talk) 01:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Actual photograph of new Glenn

The vehicle was shown on a launch pad in February 2024. Is it possible to replace the main photo which is currently an illustration to one of the images shown of the actual rocket from the blue origin website? 73.210.30.217 (talk) 21:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)