Connect with us

News

Blue Origin rocket launch fails after engine catches fire

Blue Origin's 23rd New Shepard launch has ended in failure. (Blue Origin)

Published

on

Blue Origin’s suborbital New Shepard rocket suffered a catastrophic engine failure during its 23rd launch attempt, ending a seven-year streak of 21 successes.

Following a handful of mostly weather-related delays that pushed New Shepard’s 23rd launch about two weeks past its original August 31st target, the single-stage vehicle lifted off from Blue Origin’s Van Horn, Texas launch site around 10:25 am CDT (14:25 UTC) on September 12th. Measuring about 15 meters (49 ft) tall, 3.7 meters (12.1 ft) wide, and capable of producing about 50 tons (~110,000 lbf) of thrust with its lone BE-3 engine at full throttle, New Shepard only made it about halfway through its nominal powered ascent before catastrophe struck.

The first signs of trouble appeared about 62 seconds after liftoff in the form of flickers and flashes in New Shepard’s exhaust, which is normally almost transparent. Less than two seconds after the first seemingly harmless flash, flames unintentionally burst from New Shepard’s engine section and quickly surrounded its BE-3PM engine. Less than a second after that, the rocket’s aft and began shedding pieces and stopped producing thrust, triggering a solid rocket motor stored inside its deployable capsule.

About a second after the incident began, the capsule’s abort motor ignited and carried the suborbital spacecraft safely away from the failing New Shepard booster. The capsule ultimately coasted to an apogee of 11.4 kilometers (7.1 miles) – almost ten times lower than nominal – before descending back to Earth, deploying its parachute system, and safely touching down in the Texas desert scrub. Thankfully, NS-23 was only carrying experiments, and no humans were at risk. Had a crew of suborbital tourists been aboard, they would have likely been a little battered but otherwise completely unharmed.

While any failure of a rocket is unfortunate, the failure of a rocket nominally designed to launch humans can have even worse repercussions. However, thanks to the seemingly flawless unplanned performance of New Shepard’s abort system, it’s safe to say that the day could have gone much worse for Blue Origin.

Advertisement

The failure is still not going to do the reputation of Blue Origin or New Shepard any favors. It also invites less than favorable comparisons with SpaceX, a different spaceflight startup also funded and founded by a tech tycoon in the early 2000s.

Founded a year and a half after Blue Origin, SpaceX, in comparison, reached orbit with Falcon 1 in 2008. In June 2010, it successfully debuted Falcon 9, an orbital-class rocket roughly 20 times larger. In 2012, Falcon 9 successfully launched an orbital Dragon spacecraft which became the first private vehicle to dock to the International Space Station. In January 2015, it attempted to recover a Falcon 9 booster for the first time. In December 2015, one month after Blue Origin’s first successful New Shepard landing, SpaceX aced its first Falcon 9 booster landing.

Nine months later, Falcon 9 suffered a catastrophic failure during prelaunch testing in September 2016 and didn’t return to flight until January 2017. That is where, for the most part, the paths of Blue Origin and SpaceX almost entirely diverged – but not in any obvious way. Instead, after a successful suborbital launch in October 2016, New Shepard didn’t fly again until December 2017. In the roughly six years between October 2016 and September 2022, New Shepard completed 10 uncrewed suborbital launches, 6 suborbital tourist launches, and suffered one failure during another uncrewed mission – 18 total launches.

Despite suffering a catastrophic failure that destroyed a customer’s multimillion-dollar satellite in September 2016, SpaceX returned to flight four months later, completed 150 orbital Falcon launches without fail in the same period; debuted the world’s largest operational rocket, Falcon Heavy, and completed two additional launches with it; debuted Crew Dragon and Cargo Dragon 2 on Falcon 9; launched its first astronauts into orbit, launched its first operational astronaut transport mission for NASA, launched its first two Starlink internet satellite prototypes, launched another 60 refined Starlink prototypes, began operational Falcon 9 Starlink launches, built and launched more than 3000 Starlink satellites total; landed 130+ Falcon boosters, and reuse Falcon boosters 117 times.

(SpaceX)
Completed on September 11th, Falcon 9’s latest mission was its 173rd successful orbital launch. (Richard Angle)

The differences could not be more stark or strange, given that both companies have been operating more or less side by side and working towards similar goals for as long as they’ve existed. To Blue Origin’s credit, the company managed a record six New Shepard launches – three carrying tourists – in 2021. NS-23 was its fourth planned launch in 2022, suggesting that it could have achieved a similar cadence this year if the mission had had a different fate. Instead, the launch failure has triggered an anomaly investigation that will search for the root cause and try to uncover shortcomings that will then need to be rectified before New Shepard can return to flight. Given that Blue Origin once went 15 months between successful New Shepard launches, it’s impossible to say how long that process will take.

In the meantime, the apparent failure of New Shepard’s BE-3PM engine could trigger investigations into Blue Origin’s other engine programs. While substantially different, BE-3U, a variant optimized for the upper stage of New Glenn, Blue Origin’s first orbital rocket, likely shares the most in common with New Shepard’s BE-3PM. BE-7, a small engine meant to power a Moon lander, could also be impacted.

Advertisement

Most importantly, Blue Origin is also in the midst of finally preparing two much more powerful and far more complex BE-4 engines for customer United Launch Alliance (ULA). Years behind schedule, Blue Origin completed the first two theoretically flightworthy BE-4 engines and began putting them through qualification testing earlier this year. It wants to ship those engines to ULA as soon as possible to avoid delaying the debut of the customer’s new Vulcan Centaur rocket. BE-3PM and BE-4 probably don’t share a single part, but many Blue Origin employees have likely worked on both programs, and the same Blue Origin leadership has certainly overseen both. As long as there’s any form of commonality, no matter how abstract, there’s always a risk that the underlying cause of problems in one program could be present in others.

Ultimately, it’s unlikely that there will be any serious connection. The New Shepard booster that failed on NS-23 was almost five years old and was flying for a record-breaking ninth time. It’s possible that Blue Origin was privately worried about the possibility of failure while pushing the envelope, but it offered no qualifications while discussing the mission. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, in comparison, has almost always made it clear that failure is a possibility when the company attempts ‘firsts’ of any kind.

SpaceX recently launched and recovered the same Falcon 9 booster for the 14th time, setting its own internal record. As a result, that lone Falcon 9 booster, B1058, has flown as many times in the last 31 months as all New Shepard boosters combined have flown in the last 45 months.

Finally, while no company should be put in that position, Blue Origin deserves praise for its live coverage of the anomaly. Instead of immediately cutting the feeds, which would be what most providers would be expected to do during an operational launch, Blue Origin continued to broadcast views of the failure and provide live commentary until New Shepard’s capsule touched down well ahead of schedule.

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Comments

News

Tesla teases new market entrance with confusing and cryptic message

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla teased its entrance into a new market with a confusing and what appeared to be cryptic message on the social media platform X.

The company has been teasing its entrance into several markets, including Africa, which would be a first, and South America, where it only operates in Chile.

In September, Tesla started creating active job postings for the Colombian market, hinting it would expand its presence in South America and launch in a new country for the first time in two years.

Tesla job postings seem to show next surprise market entry

The jobs were related to various roles, including Associate Sales Manager, Advisors in Sales and Delivery, and Service Technicians. These are all roles that would indicate Tesla is planning to launch a wide-scale effort to sell, manage, and repair vehicles in the market.

Last night, Tesla posted its latest hint, a cryptic video that seems to show the outline of Colombia, teasing its closer than ever to market entry:

This would be the next expansion into a continent where it does not have much of a presence for Tesla. Currently, there are only two Supercharger locations on the entire continent, and they’re both in Chile.

Tesla will obviously need to expand upon this crucial part of the ownership experience to enable a more confident consumer base in South America as a whole. However, it is not impossible, as many other EV charging infrastructures are available, and home charging is always a suitable option for those who have access to it.

Surprisingly, Tesla seems to be more concerned about these middle-market countries as opposed to the larger markets in South America, but that could be by design.

If Tesla were to launch in Brazil initially, it may not be able to handle the uptick in demand, and infrastructure expansion could be more difficult. Brazil may be on its list in the upcoming years, but not as of right now.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla expands crucial Supercharging feature for easier access

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Published

on

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has expanded a crucial Supercharging feature that helps owners identify stall availability at nearby locations.

Tesla said on Tuesday night that its “Live Availability” feature, which shows EV owners how many stalls are available at a Supercharger station, to Google Maps, a third-party app:

Already offering it in its own vehicles, the Live Availability feature that Teslas have is a helpful feature that helps you choose an appropriate station with plugs that are immediately available.

A number on an icon where the Supercharger is located lets EV drivers know how many stalls are available.

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Essentially, when those drivers needed to charge at a Supercharger that enables non-Tesla EVs to plug in, there was a bit more of a gamble. There was no guarantee that a plug would be available, and with no way to see how many are open, it was a risk.

Tesla adding this feature allows people to have a more convenient and easier-to-use experience if they are in a non-Tesla EV. With the already expansive Supercharger Network being available to so many EV owners, there is more congestion than ever.

This new feature makes the entire experience better for all owners, especially as there is more transparency regarding the availability of plugs at Supercharger stalls.

It will be interesting to see if Tesla is able to expand on this new move, as Apple Maps compatibility is an obvious goal of the company’s in the future, we could imagine. In fact, this is one of the first times an Android Auto feature is available to those owners before it became an option for iOS users.

Apple owners tend to get priority with new features within the Tesla App itself.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Boring Co goes extra hard in Nashville with first rock-crushing TBM

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

Published

on

Credit: The Boring Company/X

The Boring Company is gearing up to tackle one of its toughest projects yet, a new tunnel system beneath Nashville’s notoriously tough limestone terrain. Unlike the soft-soil conditions of Las Vegas and Austin, the Music City Loop will require a “hard-rock” boring machine capable of drilling through dense, erosion-resistant bedrock. 

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

A boring hard-rock tunneling machine

The Boring Company revealed on X that its new hard-rock TBM can generate up to 4 million pounds of grip force and 1.5 million pounds of maximum thrust load. It also features a 15-filter dust removal system designed to keep operations clean and efficient during excavation even in places where hard rock is present.

Previous Boring Co. projects, including its Loop tunnels in Las Vegas, Austin, and Bastrop, were dug primarily through soft soils. Nashville’s geology, however, poses a different challenge. Boring Company CEO and President Steve Davis mentioned this challenge during the project’s announcement in late July.

“It’s a tough place to tunnel, Nashville. If we were optimizing for the easiest places to tunnel, it would not be here. You have extremely hard rock, like way harder than it should be. It’s an engineering problem that’s fairly easy and straightforward to solve,” Davis said.

Advertisement

Nashville’s limestone terrain

Experts have stated that the city’s subsurface conditions make it one of the more complex tunneling environments in the U.S. The Outer Nashville Basin is composed of cherty Mississippian-age limestone, a strong yet soluble rock that can dissolve over time, creating underground voids and caves, as noted in a report from The Tennessean.

Jakob Walter, the founder and principal engineer of Haushepherd, shared his thoughts on these challenges. “Limestone is generally a stable sedimentary bedrock material with strength parameters that are favorable for tunneling. Limestone is however fairly soluble when compared to other rack materials, and can dissolve over long periods of time when exposed to water. 

“Unexpected encounters with these features while tunneling can result in significant construction delays and potential instability of the excavation. In urban locations, structures at the ground surface should also be constantly monitored with robotic total stations or similar surveying equipment to identify any early signs of movement or distress,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending