As we develop the ambitious SPICA rocket at Copenhagen Suborbitals, our goal remains constant – launching a human into space. Recently, we’ve transitioned to the smaller, more manageable BPM 25 engine, marking a significant milestone in our journey. Previously, we grappled with challenges in manufacturing and sourcing parts for the colossal BPM 100 engine. These difficulties, combined with cost concerns, led us to rethink our strategy. As a result, we turned to the BPM 25 engine, which we could construct in-house, granting us more control and flexibility.
Rocket engine design hinges on combustion stability, a trait tested in action. An in-depth comparison of the BPM 25 and BPM 100 engines revealed trade-offs in roll control, software reusability, and flow control. Importantly, clustering BPM 25 engines improved roll control and allowed us to fine-tune flight parameters, contributing to safer and more efficient missions.Practical aspects of testing and qualifying the engines also swayed us towards the BPM 25.
Its smaller size allowed quicker, cheaper, and simpler design iterations. Despite the need for testing more engines, the benefits outweighed the challenges. In reflection, the BPM 100 might suit larger rockets, but for our current capacity, budget, and machining capabilities, the BPM 25 is a smarter choice.
In this video we discuss the important details behind our decision.
Please sign up as as Copenhagen Suborbitals Supporter – click here
