|
Author
|
Topic: [Discuss] Blue Origin New Glenn orbital rocket
|
GACspaceguy
Member Posts: 3309
From: Guyton, GA
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 04-19-2026 02:41 PM
   
Had a chance to be 5 miles away from this morning's NG-3 launch, it was spectacular. I am amazed at how slowly it lifts off the pad and clears the tower. Once the sound hits you, you know it's a big rocket. It's amazing!  
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-20-2026 01:20 PM
The launch looked great, unfortunately it failed to put its payload — AST SpaceMobile's Blue Bird 7 satellite — into the proper orbit and the vehicle has been declared a loss.An update from Blue Origin CEO David Limp: Now that we have a more complete view, we wanted to provide an update on our NG-3 mission. While we are pleased with the nominal booster recovery, we clearly didn't deliver the mission our customer wanted, and our team expects. Early data suggest that on our second GS2 burn, one of the BE-3U engines didn’t produce sufficient thrust to reach our target orbit. Blue Origin is leading the anomaly investigation with FAA oversight to learn from the data and implement the improvements needed to quickly return to flight operations. We have been in steady communication with the team at AST SpaceMobile, we appreciate their partnership, and we’re looking forward to many flights together. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-28-2026 08:15 PM
Blue Origin tonight (May 28) was performing a static fire before the NG-4 (Amazon Leo) launch when New Glenn exploded on the pad. From Blue Origin: We experienced an anomaly during today's hotfire test. All personnel have been accounted for. We will provide updates as we learn more. The resulting fireball appeared to consume the entirety of LC-36 and reports are that it took down support towers. From Jeff Bezos: All personnel are accounted for and safe. It's too early to know the root cause but we're already working to find it. Very rough day, but we'll rebuild whatever needs rebuilding and get back to flying. It's worth it. From NASA Spaceflight Space Coast Live video feed: |
issman1
Member Posts: 1231
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 05-29-2026 04:15 AM
Very unfortunate and puts Artemis missions in limbo. |
perineau
Member Posts: 435
From: FRANCE
Registered: Jul 2007
|
posted 05-29-2026 04:23 AM
Between that and Starship being grounded, how is Artemis III going to fly in 2027? |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-29-2026 07:09 AM
Artemis III can proceed without Blue Origin if need be (NASA's requirement for the mission is just one HLS; flying two is on a as ready basis). And while I agree it looks dim for Blue Origin to be in any condition to fly in less than a year, if not longer, we don't know the extent of the damage to the pad or root cause yet, so it is probably best to wait for the company's (or NASA's) assessment before concluding anything. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-29-2026 07:53 AM
From Blue Origin: Debris from our recent hotfire anomaly may wash ashore in the coming days/weeks. If you encounter any debris, do not touch or approach it for your safety.Please report the location immediately:
Call: 1-321-222-4355
Email: [email protected] |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3962
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 05-29-2026 10:34 AM
This was very unfortunate, but underlines why NASA is very unwise to fly Artemis missions on the assumption that Pad 39B will always be available. If an SLS explodes on the pad, where are the back-up launch facilities for Artemis?In contrast SpaceX is developing multiple launch pads and will in due course (but not yet!) be able to continue launching even if a launch failure, dropped booster or dropped Starship takes out the launch-structure. I'm sure SpaceX will have this explosion in mind when they come under pressure to go for a "catch" on Flight 13. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-29-2026 10:46 AM
From NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman: NASA is aware of the anomaly that occurred [May 28] at Launch Complex 36 involving Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.
Spaceflight is unforgiving, and developing new heavy-lift launch capability is extraordinarily difficult. We will work with our partners to support a thorough investigation of this anomaly, assess near-term mission impacts, and get back to launching rockets.
We will provide information on any impacts to the Artemis and Moon Base programs as it becomes available. |
Headshot
Member Posts: 1483
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 05-29-2026 11:06 AM
Does anyone know the total amounts of fuel and oxidizer were aboard NG-4 when it exploded? |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-29-2026 11:44 AM
I wasn't able to find data for the second stage, but back in 2024, CEO Dave Limp described the first stage as follows: The first stage LOX tank is nearly 30,000 cu. ft., and the LNG tank is almost 25,000 cu. ft. — equivalent to about 24 and 20 tanker trucks, respectively. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-29-2026 01:30 PM
Aerial views shared by Launch Heaven showing the aftermath to the pad: 
|
Headshot
Member Posts: 1483
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 05-29-2026 02:26 PM
Based on a formula NASA developed in 1965 and assuming only the first stage of New Glenn was fueled to capacity, the fireball from the explosion was 1135 feet in diameter.There is no data for the weight of propellants in the second stage. Using a rough estimate, if the second stage was also fueled to capacity, the fireball would have been 1195 feet in diameter. |
Jim Behling
Member Posts: 2056
From: Cape Canaveral, FL
Registered: Mar 2010
|
posted 05-29-2026 07:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Blackarrow:
This was very unfortunate, but underlines why NASA is very unwise to fly Artemis missions on the assumption that Pad 39B will always be available.
Not really. SLS doesn't fly enough to warrant a second pad. And if n pad incident did happen, flying Orion on another vehicle would be a better option. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 05-30-2026 04:22 PM
From CEO David Limp: We have regained some access to Launch Complex 36 and are actively investigating the hotfire anomaly. We will start clearing the pad soon and have a good rebuild plan in place. The booster and GS2s in the integration facility appear healthy from quick looks. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 56630
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-02-2026 10:45 AM
From CEO David Limp: Some LC-36 updates. Now that we've had access to the pad and integration facility we can share a bit of good news. The propellant farm, oxygen, liquid hydrogen and LNG tanks are all in good shape. This is good luck because these are very long lead items. The water tower is also good. The big support tower is damaged, but it can be repaired in place rather than torn down and replaced. The booster "Never Tell Me The Odds" and the three GS-2s that were onsite in the integration facility also look good.I've seen some speculation that we might move directly to the 9x4 configuration, but we won't do that. Rate manufacturing of 7x2 is going well, and we're going to continue that at pace as planned and store the stages for use. In addition, we had already been working for some time on eliminating our transporter-erector in favor of an alternative vertical conop, and we'll now go directly to that; so we don't need a new transporter-erector. We will fly again before the end of this year. Gradatim Ferociter. |
advertisement