Why is New Glenn so much bigger than Falcon Heavy but has less …
Aug 24, 2021 · Falcon Heavy's three stage design gives it a really unbalanced mass:volume ratio to LEO, so it's only really an optimal design for harder or higher-energy orbits. New Glenn sacrifices payload mass for a much larger volume, and it's two stage, which makes it very capable for LEO, but the energy and mass costs make it suboptimal beyond ~GEO.
Starship Vs New Glenn (Size Comparison) : r/SpaceXLounge - Reddit
Jan 26, 2019 · 100 metric tonnes on Starship mk-1 vs 45 metric tonnes on new glenn. While new glenn will surpass falcon heavy in terms of both payload capacity and payload volume. It still won't live up to Starship. Hell it's not even fully reusable, the hydrolox upper stage on NG is thrown out after every flight.
The Falcon Heavy VS New Glenn Debate: Media horse racing, or
May 23, 2017 · The Falcon Heavy is essentially three Falcon 9's strapped together. The Falcon cores are successfully flying orbital payloads and landing safely right now, which means the proof of concept is extremely solid. The New Glenn, on the …
New Glenn payload mass to LEO is 18% - 38% greater than Falcon …
Mar 9, 2017 · I've seen a lot of people putting New Glenn between Delta IV Heavy and Falcon Heavy in terms of payload mass capability. This was my initial thought, but it turns out that the Falcon Heavy 54,400 kg lift capacity is for expendable launches.
Blue Origin's New Glenn booster is larger than Falcon Heavy
Sep 12, 2016 · 3 stage New Glenn - 62 tons LEO, 26 tons GTO, 15.5 tons TMI Those numbers are most likely to differ from the actual capacities, but they should be in the general area of what New Glenn is capable to do. And for the better comparison with Falcon Heavy: Falcon Heavy (expendable) - 54.4 tons LEO, 22.2 tons GTO, 13.6 tons TMI
New Glenn vs Starship size comparison : r/BlueOrigin - Reddit
Feb 21, 2023 · As a result, I am happy that Space X have made Starship bigger than New Glenn, because that means Blue Origin when they come to build New Armstrong, and bigger rockets to come, will not have to waste all the money, and make all the mistakes that Space X have made [because development, especially the iterative development approach that Space X ...
New Glenn Heavy? : r/BlueOrigin - Reddit
So considering that New Glenn is much more capable relative to the commercial markets than Falcon 9 was at the time when Heavy was concepted, and New Glenn still has room to grow its performance if Blue cares enough (densified propellants but also just uprating BE-4, which has a rather conservative chamber pressure; once they get more ...
New Glenn vs Vulcan : r/BlueOrigin - Reddit
Oct 5, 2018 · Vulcan is also said to start at under $100 million per launch which is probably quite a bit cheaper than New Glenn. I am curious if this will be the case. Falcon Heavy is priced at $90M and New Glenn is, I believe competing against both it and Falcon 9. I'd be kinda surprised if NG was spendier than Vulcan, frankly. Will be interesting to see.
New Glenn vs Vulcan performance : r/BlueOrigin - Reddit
New Glenn would do well for refuelling but in terms of pure effectiveness, a direct high energy optimised expendable new Glenn launch is almost the holy grail of COLS block 1 imo, besides starship but spacex definitively isn’t acquiring bc their stupid opposite culture of hating high energy optimization and expendability
how will New glenn be able to compete against Falcon 9?
May 27, 2021 · The advantage to Falcon 9 isn't complete in two respects. First, New Glenn can launch heavier payloads that Falcon 9 cannot launch. For those payloads, Falcon Heavy is a better comparison, and Falcon Heavy has more cost …