Thank you for the info. I don’t follow things that closely anymore so I am glad there is more info available about this problem.

You mentioned that this “flight” article had been stressed beyond mission criteria and had been through 15 tests already.

So this is their mission leader and they are going to launch essentially a test article and the AF is letting them get away with it in spite of all the other delays?

They built just one?

I’m admittedly out of the loop now a days but I remember the big effort to minimize “excessive” testing on flight hardware.

I would very much appreciate it if you would further enlighten me on this issue if you can because I am somewhat confounded by this situation.

Just posting a link to the resources that you have been using would be cool.

No, you are correct! My bad.

50 engines/year by 2025? Eeeek.

Richard M.
Going from 8 engines a year to 25 vehicles implies at least 50 engines per year (Vulcan) or 175 per year (New Glenn). Unless I misunderstand of course.

[Tory Bruno] added that the production rate of the BE-4 is high enough that the test failure will not delay upcoming Vulcan launches. Blue Origin and other suppliers, along with ULA itself, are working to increase production to meet a rate of 25 vehicles a year by mid-2025, an initiative he called “25 in ’25.”

“I’m flattered by the attention we have now that a routine acceptance test was colorfully discussed on social media, but it really isn’t news,” he concluded.

https://spacenews.com/centaur-modifications-push-first-vulcan-launch-to-fourth-quarter/

For Tory’s sake, I hope his aspiration is fulfilled. But color me skeptical that Blue Origin can ramp up from 8 to 25 in just a year.

Using MITs Launcher Calculator on line calculator it looks to me like the impact is around 3,000 pounds of payload. I had to make big assumptions, so I’ll accept that I’m wrong but I know the hit is more than just pound for pound.

If you first design for something that works, then every change for better manufacturability feels like a step backward, and your bosses and your customers probably won’t let you do it! Finally, you will give up and settle for what you have.

Of course, as many have observed concerning Elon, there are distinct advantages to not having a boss anywhere in the known universe, but having Gwynne Shotwell as CEO!

See “Falcon Heavy”

David M. Cook: Many here and elsewhere throughout the space world have been talking now for years of the need for Blue Origin to shift from the design to the mass production stage. At no point was there any indication from Blue Origin that it made the shift.

This tweet from Tory Bruno strongly suggests the company never did. Another bad sign about that company’s management.

It has been pointed out that the failure was on the 15th test of this particular tank which had therefore been stressed far beyond normal mission criteria, and it’s entirely possible that the problem didn’t actually have to be fixed. But either that public info is a bit optimistic, or they are being cautious in the face of the blowback they would face if they didn’t fix this and it did in fact fail on a mission.