Why Blue Origin’s engine explosion matters

The Vulcan rocket for the Cert-1 mission stands at SLC-41 during testing in Cape Canaveral, Florida, May 12, 2023.

United Launch Alliance

CNBC’s Investing in Space newsletter offers a view into the business of space exploration and privatization, delivered straight to your inbox. CNBC’s Michael Sheetz reports and curates the latest news, investor updates and exclusive interviews on the most important companies reaching new heights. Sign up to receive future editions.

Overview: Gaining acceptance

There’s a reason the saying “that’s why we test” exists. I’ve seen it a lot in my mentions the past few days. Unfortunately, and crucially, it ignores that tests happen for different reasons.

Let’s get into that, especially in light of the recently unveiled explosion of a BE-4 rocket engine during Blue Origin’s testing in Texas. The engine was bound for the second launch of its customer United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan rocket.

It’s worth understanding the three main phases of rocket engine testing: Development, qualification and acceptance. An industry specialist with over a decade of experience in this type of testing posted a helpful rundown about how these phases differ. Here’s a tl;dr version: 

  1. Development: Prototypes and smaller scale versions of the engine. You’re pushing them hard, accepting failures as part of the process to find the limits and flaws.
  2. Qualification: An essentially finished design. You’re now verifying the margins of the engine’s ability. Destroying an engine may happen, but it shouldn’t be common.
  3. Acceptance: A production engine that’s being checked for a launch. You might push it slightly past what is necessary for a launch, but it’s not rough-and-tumble anymore, as you’re making sure it’s good to go.

I don’t report on every rocket engine that blows up. Most of the ones I hear about are in the first two phases. But more importantly, BE-4 is years behind schedule (the first flight engines were originally contracted for delivery in 2017), and this was the third production engine. Of course it’s better to lose an engine in testing than during a launch, especially on a rocket that can’t lose an engine to succeed, but that’s an overly dismissive way to view the loss of expensive production hardware – let alone another setback.

The downstream effects are especially why this matters. The first pair of BE-4 engines recently passed a critical test on Vulcan for the first launch. ULA CEO Tory Bruno is adamant that it’s “very unlikely” the incident will set back the timeline for Cert-1, currently scheduled for the fourth quarter. (Bruno will be sitting down with reporters Thursday for a roundtable, which was on the schedule before word got out about the BE-4 incident. I’ll be listening in – so stay tuned for any more potential details on Vulcan’s situation.)

But ULA doesn’t need just Cert-1 to fly: The company needs Vulcan to complete two launches successfully before the U.S. Space Force will sign off on it flying valuable national security missions. SpaceX is dominating the launch market and many in the industry, both competitors and customers, fear a monopoly. All six of ULA’s recently assigned Space Force missions are set to fly on Vulcan, since the company’s currently operational rockets are retiring.

So maybe this doesn’t affect Cert-1, but what about Cert-2? Bruno believes the BE-4’s failure in acceptance testing does not affect the previous qualification tests that Blue Origin has done. Even if they don’t need to re-qualify the engine, they still need to close the investigation – in which Blue Origin says it’s already found a likely cause of the explosion – check future production engines for the same flaw or flaws, and test the replacement.

As one propulsion engineer wrote on social media: “You learn a lot in development testing. You learn a little bit in qualification testing. Blessed be they who continue to learn in acceptance testing.”

Which brings us to another refrain I’ve seen in my mentions these past few days: “Space is hard.” It’s sounding a little too much like “thoughts and prayers” these days.

What’s up

Industry maneuvers

  • Dish and EchoStar reportedly analyzing a potential merger, a move that would see Charlie Ergen re-combine the companies after the latter was spun out 15 years ago. – Semafor
  • Private equity and defense firms in the mix to buy Ball Aerospace, which CNBC previously reported is up for sale from parent company Ball. According to a report, firms Blackstone and Veritas Capital are competing against defense companies BAE Systems, General Dynamics, and Textron to acquire Ball Aerospace. – Reuters
  • Satellite intelligence venture HawkEye 360 raises $58 million from BlackRock, as well as Manhattan Venture Partners, Insight Partners, NightDragon, Strategic Development Fund (SDF), Razor’s Edge, Alumni Ventures, and Adage Capital. The company plans to use the funds to develop new systems and its expand its analytics capabilities, especially to “support high-value defense missions.” The company currently has 21 satellites in orbit. – HawkEye 360
  • Satellite propulsion startup Benchmark Space Systems raises $33 million, in from unnamed investors. CEO Ryan McDevitt said the raise was “not directly related” to layoffs the Vermont-based company made recently. – SpaceNews
  • Axiom and Collins each given $5 million NASA spacesuit contracts that come under previously awarded deals from the agency. The new awards are intended to fund Axiom’s development of a spacesuit for use in low Earth orbit, and Collins’ development of a spacesuit for use on the surface of the moon. – NASA
  • HawkEye 360 awarded Australian contract to monitor fishing, for an undisclosed amount. The contract is part of Australia’s pilot program to improve maritime awareness around the country and surrounding islands. – HawkEye 360

Market movers

Boldly going

On the horizon

FOLLOW US ON GOOGLE NEWS

Read original article here

Denial of responsibility! Secular Times is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – seculartimes.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Leave a Comment