Blue Origin thread.

[FleshJeb]

1 hour ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Let's not change horses until we get a fuel depot up there.  After that major milestone is a reality - then you can put forth the better ideas 

I can put forth better ideas any time I like:

https://usnc.com/ultra-safe-nuclear-technologies-delivers-advanced-nuclear-thermal-propulsion-design-to-nasa/

referenced here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_depot#History_and_plans

It's not like I called Starship a garbage scow, it's just got some glaringly obvious issues as a moon lander.
(I also happen to think methalox is a bit of a dead-end technology beyond LEO.)

[sevenperforce]

2 hours ago, FleshJeb said:

It's not like I called Starship a garbage scow, it's just got some glaringly obvious issues as a moon lander.
(I also happen to think methalox is a bit of a dead-end technology beyond LEO.)

So believe it or not, hydrolox shines the best when it comes to putting really honking huge payloads into LEO. If you get a big beefy hydrogen upper stage like S-II or EUS, it weighs very little for the amount of energy it carries and so it is very well suited for providing the enormous surge of dV required to reach orbit in the first place.

Once you’re in orbit, you’re halfway to anywhere, and the specific impulse of your propellant becomes much less important than mass fraction. Simply put, being able to carry a lot of fuel is a good thing. 

[tater]

They flew NS this morning, it's coming back down right now. Coverage is painful as usual.

[magnemoe]

On 11/24/2021 at 1:53 AM, sevenperforce said:

So believe it or not, hydrolox shines the best when it comes to putting really honking huge payloads into LEO. If you get a big beefy hydrogen upper stage like S-II or EUS, it weighs very little for the amount of energy it carries and so it is very well suited for providing the enormous surge of dV required to reach orbit in the first place.

Once you’re in orbit, you’re halfway to anywhere, and the specific impulse of your propellant becomes much less important than mass fraction. Simply put, being able to carry a lot of fuel is a good thing. 

Interesting, and yes mass ratio. I suspect neutron will work very well for small payloads require high dV as the second stage will have an very low dry mass. 

[SunlitZelkova]

I just watched Shatner in Space on Amazon Prime.

Non-spoiler takeaways-

1. The people who do their Twitter PR are clearly different from whoever came up with the idea to do this documentary. It was pretty neat, and made Blue Origin look like a healthy company.

2. Obviously a couple posts above me, but also during the first crewed launch with Bezos, I recall people mentioning the coverage was painful, limited to a ground based tracking camera shot of the rocket (I may be misremembering that part). This featured a camera on the side of the rocket looking downwards, and camera apparently mounted somewhere on the side of the capsule, with a view of the booster separating. Odd that that isn't regular.

Full review (spoilers)-

Spoiler

I don't really do writing reviews of stuff in general, so I am just going to sum it up in a general way and then list some observations.

General summary-

It is no worse than say, any NatGeo or Netflix series that SpaceX has been a part of. Pretty standard as far as PR goes, nothing particularly "cult of personality-ish" about the way Bezos was treated, at least, no more than Musk gets treated. The main focus is Shatner's experience, and the experience of spaceflight, rather than BO operations. So it is definitely on the personnel side of spaceflight in terms of genre, as opposed to the technical.

Observations-

1. No overt deceptive statements appeared to have been made by Bezos. He actually inadvertently explains why BO is so slow (although of course he doesn't actually say it is slow, or mention schedules or timelines at all)- his philosophy apparently is "ultra-steady on the vision, flexible with the plan".

2. On the other hand, Bezos describes the current era of spaceflight as the "barnstorming era". He claims that popular attractions like barnstorming and tourist flights, common in the 1920s, were a critical step in the advancement of aerospace technology. I have to disagree. Real innovation occurred in either research organizations like NACA, the air technical institutes of the armies of the great powers, and at aircraft companies themselves. At best, barnstorming and such may have provided piloting experience in pushing aircraft to the max, but that is not directly related to aircraft development, it would be a military related development.

3. Shatner was very much there "to be in space to see the environment in space" rather than "to be in space to do space stuff". While other participants of the flight flipped upside down and so on, he basically floated up gently, observed that experience for a little bit, but then immediately head for the window, and stayed there for most of the weightless-ness portion. I personally respect this a lot, but if you are expecting more from his part of the flight, you will find yourself disappointed.

4. As far as "corporate ideology" goes, BO paints a pretty good picture for itself. Throughout the film they mention that they are going into space to help the Earth, some of Shatner's final words at the end are about protecting the planet, and the end credits (prior to the tribute to Glen de Vries) says something to the effect of "thanks to the employees of Blue Origin who are working to go to space to serve the Earth".

5. Despite its focus on Shatner's career, views on space and the environment, Bezos' and BO's history, and the Shatner's afterthoughts, it does provide an interesting view of the New Shepard experience. The film gives the impression that New Shepard is a pretty small operation. At Van Horn, you have the prep people who give you a simple simulation and presumably further health checks and so forth, the MCC, and some engineers, and it appears to be it. That said, it is possible that BO engineers were simply unwilling to participate in the film or were unable to. Unfortunately I suspect a more malign motive behind this, and especially given SpaceX isn't afraid to show off its engineers, this is a bad mark for BO itself (however, considering it is, after all, a PR item, I don't find it affects the film).

Conclusion (no spoilers)-

If you don't mind PR-type things (with the associated gushing over the CEO, soft ball questions, and all around love fest for the product featured), it is worth a watch, not for BO or New Shepard, but to have a look at the experience of one man's short trip into space and how it affected him.

If you expect actually useful information, details, plans, and a proper educational experience, don't watch it, as that is not what this is.

Bonus feature (no spoiler)-

An interesting line appears where Bezos unintentionally explains why BO is so slow in development. Basically, his philosophy is something to the effect of "be ultra-steady on the vision, be flexible with the plan". This obviously contrasts to SpaceX's- and Musk's- statements that breaking stuff fast is necessary to move forward.

Bezos later makes a statement saying something to the effect of "it's going to take time [to get to space]".

I am unsure whether this actually has an impact on why BO is the way it is, or whether it doesn't matter at all. I can't think of any technical reason the BE-4 should have taken this long, nor New Glenn, and there is certainly little good reason why BO proposed the lander that it did for HLS.

I think criticisms like expecting Bezos to completely fund HLS, etc., are a little "armchair CEO"-like, but there are certainly major issues with the company itself that are preventing it from accomplishing its goals.

------

The observations are all within the context of "looking at a space corporation doing space things". As far as proper behavior as human beings (namely in the treatment of their employees) and whether what BO is doing is actually the "correct" manner in which people should be trying to get to space in an efficient manner goes, I have much more scathing opinions of BO.

And that's not to hate on BO. I have equal criticisms of SpaceX's behavior, although at the very least, their space operations and methods of getting to space are actually efficient and useful.

[Scotius]

"An interesting line appears where Bezos unintentionally explains why BO is so slow in development. Basically, his philosophy is something to the effect of "be ultra-steady on the vision, be flexible with the plan". This obviously contrasts to SpaceX's- and Musk's- statements that breaking stuff fast is necessary to move forward."

This approach could work better, if BO worked on something much more innovative and advanced than just another liquid fuel launch vehicle. Like nuclear, plasma or pulsed fusion propulsion - not one of several methalox engines being put in use by various companies.

As it is, what Bezos is saying means: "We are working on the same as everyone else. Just slower."

I guess he firmly believes in "Slow and steady wins the race." school of thought.

[wumpus]

3 hours ago, Scotius said:

I guess he firmly believes in "Slow and steady wins the race." school of thought.

More likely he believes that he can eventually scale bigger than anyone else and wants to make sure he can build to scale.  It worked for Amazon, it worked for AWS, but it isn't clear how it will work for BO.  I can't see New Glenn launching before Starship, at which point catching up becomes profoundly difficult (you can try to out-scale Rocket Labs, but I don't see the point).

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

8 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

An interesting line appears where Bezos unintentionally explains why BO is so slow in development. Basically, his philosophy is something to the effect of "be ultra-steady on the vision, be flexible with the plan". This obviously contrasts to SpaceX's- and Musk's- statements that breaking stuff fast is necessary to move forward.

From a Bread and Circuses standpoint, SX's philosophy makes for much better television. 

[tater]

Thanks for the review, I was gonna ignore it, now I think I’ll watch.

[Ultimate Steve]

Yeah I enjoyed it.

[SunlitZelkova]

9 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

From a Bread and Circuses standpoint, SX's philosophy makes for much better television. 

For me, each has their own pros and cons.

BO's response to the HLS decision was horrendous, and their speed is obviously slow with claims implying that they are "old space with a human face". On the other hand, their vision of "going to space to help Earth" feels a lot more positive in the face of claims that space exploration is playtime for the rich.

SpaceX's products and development strategy are very efficient and useful. They put the made the first crewed orbital launch from US soil after a 9 year gap, and Starship creates numerous opportunities for missions.

On the other hand, their vision does come off as apocalyptic and depressing at times. Musk has made statements saying "exploration is important too", but their main thing seems to be saving humanity and life in the event some catastrophe occurs on Earth. This belief comes up so often in their PR it gives the whole company a bit of a disturbing vibe.

This is purely about their PR and "image". As far as their actual actions and their general state as corporations go, as I stated earlier, I have a multitude of issues with both.

[mikegarrison]

37 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

On the other hand, their vision does come off as apocalyptic and depressing at times. Musk has made statements saying "exploration is important too", but their main thing seems to be saving humanity and life in the event some catastrophe occurs on Earth. This belief comes up so often in their PR it gives the whole company a bit of a disturbing vibe.

Even more disturbing is the idea that it's OK to justify environmental damage on Earth in order to "make humans a multi-planetary species". That is definitely the vibe I get from Musk.

 

[Jacke]

54 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

BO's response to the HLS decision was horrendous, and their speed is obviously slow with claims implying that they are "old space with a human face".

BO seems to be currently engaged in milking the deep-pocketed market for sub-orbital space tourism revenue.  I'll consider the BE-4 engines damn close to vapourware, with just 1 test article delivered to ULA.  I hope ULA is working on a replacement because I can see BE-4 not making the required deadlines for ULA.

As for Jeff Bezos's "human face", that's that of a slave-driver as he's the modern-day sweat-shop operator par excellent.  Both Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are actually horrible people.

[tater]

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

On the other hand, their vision does come off as apocalyptic and depressing at times. Musk has made statements saying "exploration is important too", but their main thing seems to be saving humanity and life in the event some catastrophe occurs on Earth. This belief comes up so often in their PR it gives the whole company a bit of a disturbing vibe.

His main argument is that humanity being multiplanetary would be cool.

Having a backup is a secondary argument.

The tertiary argument he doesn't make, that I will, is that the capability to even think about starting a legitimate colony on Mars—or since this is the BO thread to make O'Neill colonies—comes with existential threat mitigation as part of the bargain. If he was able to launch X starships per year (refilling figured out), or Bezos got heavy lift, lunar resources, etc to build space colonies—then humanity actually has the capability to intercept and divert threats we could not right now, regardless of money, international cooperation, etc. Musk doesn't make this argument probably because it largely obviates the idea of needing a backup. I think the backup thing is true, but I think it's really, really far off in the future.

 

26 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Even more disturbing is the idea that it's OK to justify environmental damage on Earth in order to "make humans a multi-planetary species". That is definitely the vibe I get from Musk.

Specifically what? Rocket launches from the manufacturing and launch facility in TX that in its entirety is about the size of pad 39A?

 

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

On the other hand, their vision of "going to space to help Earth" feels a lot more positive in the face of claims that space exploration is playtime for the rich.

Who makes those claims? Also Bezos? Tourism is the only way to need large numbers of humans in space, honestly. The BO far future is O'Neill colonies, the problem is that there's really no need for them, the concept was developed when the idea of any serious labor in space required, well, labor. Human labor. The ability for robotic systems to do all the work increases by the day, so there's not really much need for humans.

Edited December 22, 2021 by tater

[SunlitZelkova]

8 hours ago, Jacke said:

"human face"

This was metaphorical and in reference to the supposed vision of the company as a whole.

8 hours ago, tater said:

Specifically what? Rocket launches from the manufacturing and launch facility in TX that in its entirety is about the size of pad 39A?

There are a number of species under threat from the expansion of Boca Chica.

I am not saying Boca Chica shouldn't be expanded, but there is something that will be damaged.

8 hours ago, tater said:

Who makes those claims? Also Bezos?

Again-

9 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

This is purely about their PR and "image".

What they actually plan to do or how they plan to execute their "image" is another issue.

[mikegarrison]

9 hours ago, tater said:

Specifically what? Rocket launches from the manufacturing and launch facility in TX that in its entirety is about the size of pad 39A?

I don't have a laundry list of specifics. I said it was a "vibe".

I get the impression that he is focused on his tech-billionaire vision of the future, with people living on Mars and self-driving cars and "hyperloops" and suborbital ballistic travel -- so much so that he ignores things like accidentally setting fire to (and building parking lots inside) a wildlife sanctuary, or the concerns of his Tesla employees about their workplace exposure to COVID, or even things like whether his employees can have Thanksgiving weekend off.

(And on-topic, I think Bezos probably is too. His stated goals are to move all the "dirty" heavy industry into space and leave the Earth as a garden, but there are reports that the workers in his distribution centers have to urinate in bottles because they aren't allowed enough time to use the toilets during their shifts. I live near Amazon's HQ1, and the difference between the living standards of the engineers and tech management types versus the warehouse workers and delivery drivers is pretty stark.)

Edited December 22, 2021 by mikegarrison

[tater]

That Shatner in space show was indeed good.

[Beccab]

https://spacenews.com/space-and-national-security-what-to-expect-in-2022/

Posting here as well, BE-4 has been delayed once again, with the first engine set to be delivered to ULA in mid-2022. Even worse than what Berger reported last December, which was spring iirc

[tater]

 

Ok.

The press release I'd wanna see if I was ULA would be that their engine factory is working 3 shifts.

[insert_name]

On 1/23/2022 at 4:45 AM, Beccab said:

https://spacenews.com/space-and-national-security-what-to-expect-in-2022/

Posting here as well, BE-4 has been delayed once again, with the first engine set to be delivered to ULA in mid-2022. Even worse than what Berger reported last December, which was spring iirc

Elon's hat is pretty safe then

[Beccab]

4 hours ago, insert_name said:

Elon's hat is pretty safe then

What he said back then was about DoD launches even, which require Vulcan to be at least at its third successful launch, so yeah. No chances Vulcan flies three times this year even in ULA's official plans

Edited January 26, 2022 by Beccab

[tater]

 

 

[cubinator]

2 hours ago, tater said:

 

 

That barely showed the test...

[tater]

14 minutes ago, cubinator said:

That barely showed the test...

Well, it's BO, so.

 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

"This is a very exciting day"

 

 

 

 

(from the video)