This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

Blue Origin's ISS Crew Vehicle

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
April 26, 2012
Filed under , , ,

Blue Origin Tests Design of Next-Generation Spacecraft
“Blue Origin successfully tested the design of its next-generation Space Vehicle, completing a series of wind tunnel tests to refine the aerodynamic characteristics of the spacecraft’s unique biconic shape. The tests were carried out as part of Blue Origin’s partnership with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under the agency’s Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) program. Blue Origin is designing the Space Vehicle to provide safe, affordable transport of up to seven astronauts to low-Earth orbit and the International Space Station.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

28 responses to “Blue Origin's ISS Crew Vehicle”

  1. Doug Mohney says:
    0
    0

    And Blue Origin speaks up now, as the House wants to effectively kick them to the curb in the next round of CCDev.

    Stealth PR isn’t wise if you want government R&D funding.  Unless, of course, you’re developing stealth aircraft…

    • no one of consequence says:
      0
      0

       You misunderstand the HR’s –   the only thing they appreciate is big money – just exactly which big money is the issue. Blue Origin worries them the most of all the “commercials”. Precisely because of the secrecy. Coupled with the Bezos big money.

      Here’s the hint – what if they let Boeing’s K street minions take them too far – which they have done before. And it doesn’t work out. And say Blue Origin does something 10x better.

      Then the firing squad gets loaded with ammo. Lock and load.

      There’s what they fear. The PR is right on the money.

  2. Monroe2020 says:
    0
    0

     And exactly how will it dock/berth/connect/attach/etc  with the ISS?

    • John Gardi says:
      0
      0

      Monroe:

      All crew vehicles to any space station will use a docking mechanism that can be operated from either side of the hatch. If a crew has to abandon ship or arrive at an empty station, then the ships crew must control the hooks, latches and such. The Russian docking ports on ISS, all four of them, have this ability.

      The Blue Origins vehicle will have its docking port at the rear as it re-enters the atmosphere nose first. They ‘steer’ their craft by rotating (rolling) clockwise and counter-clockwise, say with thrusters. The weight of their heavier ‘keel’ causes the ship to slew left or right. Even though the Apollo command module was shaped like a capsule, in used this same method during re-entry to maneuver some.

      It’s a compromise between capsule and Shuttle is all. Better cross-range than a capsule, not as much as the Shuttle.

      Hope that helps.

      tinker

      • Monroe2020 says:
        0
        0

        Most certainly does.  Thanks 🙂

      • Stuart J. Gray says:
        0
        0

        BTW – Curiosity will use a similar entry method at Mars.
        Even with the symmetric capsule shape, they plan on trying crossrange adjustment during entry at Mars.
        Without using (exclusively) thrusters……

  3. hikingmike says:
    0
    0

    Maybe they (Bezos) have always thought they can go it along if they have to.

    I still don’t get “biconic”. I see one cone, or maybe a cone and a cylinder. Where is the second cone? Does the heat shield count as a very flat cone? If so then why isn’t Orion biconic? Wikipedia says DC-X is biconic also but that just looked like one cone to me too.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wik

    • Michael Mahar says:
      0
      0

       I think it is called biconic because one side of the cone is a different radius than the other side which gives the shape a squashed look.  The irregular shape give the body that ability to maneuver that you wouldn’t get if the shape was a single cone like Apollo.

    • John Gardi says:
      0
      0

       Mike:

      Biconic means that the whole cone is made up of two different angled cones. The nose cone section has a higher angle than the rear part. Two cone sections = boconic. My guess would be that they are using this shape to help dissipate heat during re-entry by keeping the plasma off the rear cone section.

      Another guess is that they will parachute nose down into water. The rear seems a pretty safe place to put the ‘chute where the docking hatch is. Or they may just let a hatch into the side and do vertical powered landings like Spacex plans to do with Dragon.

      tinker

      • hikingmike says:
        0
        0

         Ah I see, it is just one overall shape but the cone has two different conic angles. Cool

  4. John Gardi says:
    0
    0

    Folks:

    With lawmakers fretting ’bout having ‘too many hands in the pie’ when it comes to ‘commercial’ crew, it’s no surprise that Blue Origins is looking for some PR right about now. Especially after lawmakers proposed cutting the commercial crew development budget in half. What’s wrong with this picture? Are the lawmakers saying; “We want competition… as long as it’s our competition!”?

    Good luck, Blue Origins. You’ll need it!

    tinker

  5. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/w

    Why isn’t this flying ? And should blue origins spacecraft have wings???

    • dogstar29 says:
      0
      0

      if it had wings, it would be the X-37, which NASA abandoned.

      • DTARS says:
        0
        0

        So commercial needs to do the smart thing and fix another NASA congress f up right????? Then build that 30 person space liner. Can’t wait on NASA. Just have to follow Elon.
        I sure can’t understand why the air force can’t provide a the plans info system software to NASA and they do a cots program to build a x-37 E or D with new space providers. I’m just a dreamer I guesss.

        • dogstar29 says:
          0
          0

          It is possible but X-37 is now classified and DOD does not like to share information on classified programs. DOD doesn’t (SFAIK) have any plans for human spaceflight so we aren’t likely to see a real shuttle successor anytime son.

          • no one of consequence says:
            0
            0

             DOD doesn’t (SFAIK) have any plans for human spaceflight…

            Better put as “any budget” for HSF. AF  always wanted “space planes”.

            Issues with X-37 “follow on” are about priorities.

            As for JSC/MSFC desires here agendas are crossed.

        • tom cotter says:
          0
          0

          Procurement & development is as much politics as engineering. You remember when back in the 1950s when ‘a civilian space agency’ was chartered…th USAF was taken out of the ‘spaceflight’ business. Air force flight & missile programs aren’t a ‘natural’ lead in for spaceflight… it defies common sense, but even developing ejection seats and catapult launcher was pulling ‘alligator teeth’ with Congress. One of these days… somebody is going to have ‘candor’ as an inter-agency positive management virtue? Don’t hold your breath.

      • hikingmike says:
        0
        0

         Don’t forget Dreamchaser. It’s based on NASA’s HL-20 lifting body. It looks kind of like the X-38 which was supposed to be an emergency crew return vehicle for 7 docked to the ISS (allowing for 7 ISS occupants regardless of Soyuz return capability).

  6. 3674562 says:
    0
    0

    This biconic design was also pushed by the Russian Energia folks.  Check out the design called Kliper.

  7. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    Had funny thought.

    What if there had not been Elon Musk, no Spacex.

    We most likely would still be trying to build two crazy giant moon rockets to no where I guess?
    No Spacex America human space flight would be completely in the tank by now I think!!!!

  8. dogstar29 says:
    0
    0

    The low L/D lifting body design with conic nose and cylindrical body has been used in reentry vehicle designs proposed by both Russia and ESA. In contrast to the traditional conic design, the heatshield is on the side during launch. Landing is by parachute as with a capsule. A similar fuselage profile was used in the DC-X, some of the engineers from that project are now with Blue Origin. The DC-X used powered lift for landing, but there does not appear to be sufficient space in the Blue Origin capsule for that type of system.

    • DTARS says:
      0
      0

      Thanks mr. D

      • dogstar29 says:
        0
        0

        Sorry I forgot the reason for the design. It provides somewhat better crossrange than a traditional capsule and more precise control of the entry path. Crossrange gives you more landing opportunities per day, because the ground path can be (for a biconic design) up to a couple hundred miles left or right of the landing site. However the best crossrange is with a delta wing design like the Shuttle or X-37. 

        • no one of consequence says:
          0
          0

           … the best crossrange is with a delta wing …
          More control authority / terminal guidance / landing “capabilities”.

  9. tom cotter says:
    0
    0

    Bold & innovative. Most people think this is rehashing established abilities. This ‘privatization’ of spaceflight development goes outside normal rocketry on many levels. With all the established companies and programs, there is no ‘incentive’ to develop anything less than a multi-billion dollar contract. Ironic that all the aerospace establishments ‘never’ attempted to spin a commercial wing for civil passenger spaceflight. It was attempted by Robert Truax and a few handful of developers… but private market funding wasn’t sustainable. Now we got billionaires with brains who want to go to the stars… sports cars & trophy wives are no longer thrilling. I respect that, not just collecting stuff but achieving something that changes how we see out into space. Getting back to the future that was deflected by short sighted national goals & a desperately defeated people who are told ‘if nobody could do it before it can’t be done…or it would have already happened.’
    Nobody ever takes you seriously until you risk your fortunes or your life… and with this many players… more than one will cross the finish line.