Author Topic: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2  (Read 465746 times)

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #500 on: 11/28/2018 05:04 pm »
I have to wonder if the slow down in flight rate and time since the last flight are due to the major changes they've made in the BE-3.

Are they changing the BE-3, though?

The BE-3U is a rather different engine, but there is no evidence (AFAIK) that any of the BE-3U changes have been applied to the BE-3.

The BE-3U has to have a different combustion chamber anyway, so there's a hard limit on the amount of commonality both can have.

Offline Chasm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 495
  • Liked: 230
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #501 on: 11/28/2018 05:11 pm »
They are not supposed to change the engine on NS.
The BE-3PM (PM = propulsion module, previously known just as BE-3) is still tap off.

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8860
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11928
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #502 on: 11/28/2018 08:04 pm »
My "thought process" is that if they were unhappy with the progress that was being made, they are not asset limited...and the assets would 1) either be committed to fix the progress issue that they were concerned with...or if the thought was that the assets committed were being spent badly causing the lack of progress...people would be going out the door and new people coming into it

They just lost a VP of Advanced Development, who was also their former President. That could be innocuous, or it could be a sign.

What are the "assets" you are alluding to, and in what way are you thinking they are not "asset limited"?

Quote
They got their USAF contract which is one of the key goals I think thaat they had...no one is leaving (of any significance) and assets are constant...so...in my thought process since no change is happening...they are steady as she goes.

See above. Though not bringing on enough people could be a problem too. Do they have enough people to execute their current programs?
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #503 on: 11/29/2018 02:21 am »
My "thought process" is that if they were unhappy with the progress that was being made, they are not asset limited...and the assets would 1) either be committed to fix the progress issue that they were concerned with...or if the thought was that the assets committed were being spent badly causing the lack of progress...people would be going out the door and new people coming into it

They just lost a VP of Advanced Development, who was also their former President. That could be innocuous, or it could be a sign.

What are the "assets" you are alluding to, and in what way are you thinking they are not "asset limited"?

Quote
They got their USAF contract which is one of the key goals I think thaat they had...no one is leaving (of any significance) and assets are constant...so...in my thought process since no change is happening...they are steady as she goes.

See above. Though not bringing on enough people could be a problem too. Do they have enough people to execute their current programs?

I was very clear on the assets...I even clarified it for someone who seemed to put another meaning on what I was saying to make sure I was cleaer about what the assets were

BO and Jeff B are exactly where they want to be right now in my view. 

Offline Radical_Ignorant

  • Member
  • Posts: 82
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 349
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #504 on: 11/29/2018 08:50 am »
First - BO and JB are clearly not where they want to be. They have goals, they want to reach them. This is where they want to be, not here.

Second - BO and JB are two separate things. JB has Amazon stock. Value of this stock seems unlimited as for aerospace development founds. But we should be aware that Amazon stock is not asset of BO and JB wealth is not asset of BO. BO has clearly limited assets - as much as Bezos is willing to invest give them.
So we can argue that:
1 - JB isn't committed enough, he should support BO with bigger amount of money
2 - BO isn't spending money effectively and effects compared to "invested"[1] capital are not satisfying.
3 - BO is trying to pull of too many things at once, or we have not enough knowledge to judge things...

I would also mention that their suborbital rocket is human rated, if it was not, then it would probably be flying long time ago.

[1] - it's not real investment since there clearly is no wish to get money returned in profits

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #505 on: 11/29/2018 09:48 am »
First - BO and JB are clearly not where they want to be. They have goals, they want to reach them. This is where they want to be, not here.

Second - BO and JB are two separate things. JB has Amazon stock. Value of this stock seems unlimited as for aerospace development founds. But we should be aware that Amazon stock is not asset of BO and JB wealth is not asset of BO. BO has clearly limited assets - as much as Bezos is willing to invest give them.
So we can argue that:
1 - JB isn't committed enough, he should support BO with bigger amount of money
2 - BO isn't spending money effectively and effects compared to "invested"[1] capital are not satisfying.
3 - BO is trying to pull of too many things at once, or we have not enough knowledge to judge things...

I would also mention that their suborbital rocket is human rated, if it was not, then it would probably be flying long time ago.

[1] - it's not real investment since there clearly is no wish to get money returned in profits

Well...the three things you list that we can "argue"...are but a small subset of the possibilities.  Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that...because in my train of thought if he was not he would 1) make management changes and/or 2) invest more money

A friend had a four page op ed published in Space News recently and he shared with me the note he got from the head of BO (since the company was mentioned) "slow is smooth smooth is fast" seemed to be the theme of the note...so I am "happy" to go with that :)

To your first point.  What to say.  I am sure people who are trying to (lose weight, gain strength, increase miles run, get a PhD...whatever) would like to be "at the goal" rather than in the process of attaining it...but sadly things dont work like that even in our instant gratification society and you have to "take a trip" to get to the goal...and you are either "on the plan" or "ahead of it" or "behind it" and two out of three or good and the third devestating.  :) I suspect that Blue and Jeff are "at either of the first two.

We will see how it turns out.  People are different and the companies that they run reflect that.  I know the SpaceX way of doing things is very popular here.  Blue is different.  The next three or so years should tell a lot.

One more point. I suspect Jeff expects to make a lot of money from Blue eventually.

Ad Astra. 

« Last Edit: 11/29/2018 09:57 am by TripleSeven »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #506 on: 11/29/2018 04:28 pm »
Pouring more money won't necessary speed up existing projects like NG. As we've seen time and time again with all the other space companies going over time and budget is norm not exception.
Blue is exceptional in its investor is patient and willing to invest as much as needed to get job done.

Once NS and NG are flying commercially and making money, I expect to see JBs annual inject of money redirected to  missions for Blue eg building robotic moon base to extract water.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #507 on: 11/29/2018 04:34 pm »
Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that...

 I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.  ;D

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #508 on: 11/29/2018 08:05 pm »
Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that.
In 2010 Blue said they would be flying people on NS in 2012. If they're going as fast as they want go, then how fast they want to go has been steadily slipping.

Offline ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8406
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2344
  • Likes Given: 2060
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #509 on: 11/29/2018 08:25 pm »
Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that.
In 2010 Blue said they would be flying people on NS in 2012. If they're going as fast as they want go, then how fast they want to go has been steadily slipping.

That's the question I've been asking all these weeks.

Why has Blue Origin been putting off on their goals for so long (such as flying people aboard New Shepard or the inaugural New Glenn flight)?
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #510 on: 11/29/2018 08:38 pm »
Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that.
In 2010 Blue said they would be flying people on NS in 2012. If they're going as fast as they want go, then how fast they want to go has been steadily slipping.

That's the question I've been asking all these weeks.

Why has Blue Origin been putting off on their goals for so long (such as flying people aboard New Shepard or the inaugural New Glenn flight)?

Why has NASA been putting off their legally-mandated requirements to fly people on SLS/Orion by 2016? How about SpaceX and Boeing in Commercial Crew? How about Virgin Galactic and SS2?

Flying people to space is hard. It takes lots of money and lots of time, and you can't easily substitute one for the other. And even when you do get where you want to be, it doesn't always work right, as a couple astronauts found out a few weeks ago.

Offline Wudizzle

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 158
  • Liked: 328
  • Likes Given: 330
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #511 on: 11/30/2018 02:39 pm »
Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that.
In 2010 Blue said they would be flying people on NS in 2012. If they're going as fast as they want go, then how fast they want to go has been steadily slipping.

That's the question I've been asking all these weeks.

Why has Blue Origin been putting off on their goals for so long (such as flying people aboard New Shepard or the inaugural New Glenn flight)?

Why has NASA been putting off their legally-mandated requirements to fly people on SLS/Orion by 2016? How about SpaceX and Boeing in Commercial Crew? How about Virgin Galactic and SS2?

Flying people to space is hard. It takes lots of money and lots of time, and you can't easily substitute one for the other. And even when you do get where you want to be, it doesn't always work right, as a couple astronauts found out a few weeks ago.

I think this is well understood and accepted by almost everyone. I think the point is that it doesn't square with "proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go."

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #512 on: 11/30/2018 02:55 pm »
Another possiblity, the one I believe is that 4) BO is proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go and Jeff B. Is ok with that.
In 2010 Blue said they would be flying people on NS in 2012. If they're going as fast as they want go, then how fast they want to go has been steadily slipping.

A quote by Carl Von Clausewitz comes to mind "you dont know what you dont know" (its one of four "you" statements from him)

a couple of examples.  When I set out to write my first Part 142 training program, I had a plan as to how long it would take due to having been associated with some efforts before...but never having managed the entirety of the effort...I didnt know what I didnt know ...and it was harder and longer (and cost more) than I thought it would take

when I was with Boeing and helped write (and fly) the B737 autoland program (which was their first) we had some metrics (and I was not in charge of the program) from the L1011...but every thing was new with digital avionics...and other than the shuttle (which did it in a non economical way ie using the MLS system) it had never been done.  It took two years longer than was first thought when the effort was cranked up

and nothing was going to change either of those time spans (or for instance 787 development) either more money or people BECAUSE it was a corporation (or person) learning process as to both "do" and "how to do it"

boeing had never built a completely new airplane with all new systems, body etc...and they vastly underestimated what it was going to take to do that. 

I doubt Musk had any idea how long it was going to take him to plant one on the deck :)

Corporations go through group learning experiences when they try something new...and the first thing a good manager figures out is that money is not going to fix that and if you have good people neither are more of those.

Having a little experience at that now...that is why I can look at a project that is "brand new" and see where the time estimates might be off...but not necessarily how far

Having said that.  in my considered opinion, both BO And VG are on the brink of flying people...and they have learned a far more important lesson...how to make their organizations work


Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #513 on: 11/30/2018 02:58 pm »


I think this is well understood and accepted by almost everyone. I think the point is that it doesn't square with "proceeding at or faster than the pace they want to go."

I used that as a marker of "Now" not as a statement of the entire project effort at BO. 

Offline Markstark

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
  • Liked: 457
  • Likes Given: 83
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #514 on: 12/17/2018 02:50 pm »
https://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_8_1847.html

Looks like we’re getting another New Shepard launch prior to the end of the year.

Offline Bubbinski

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #515 on: 12/17/2018 04:45 pm »
Apparently the window starts tomorrow for the next New Shepard launch. Is this one going to be crewed? Or at least with the same capsule they’ll put people in?
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #516 on: 12/17/2018 05:36 pm »
Apparently the window starts tomorrow for the next New Shepard launch. Is this one going to be crewed? Or at least with the same capsule they’ll put people in?

No crew.

https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1074734506953719808

Quote
Blue Origin @blueorigin
 We are targeting the next launch of #NewShepard tomorrow at 8:30 am CST / 14:30 UTC. Mission will take a cabin full of @NASA-sponsored payloads into space. Follow the launch live at http://www.BlueOrigin.com  and check out the payloads flying with us http://bit.ly/2QD1KSS  #NS10
« Last Edit: 12/17/2018 05:37 pm by Lars-J »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #517 on: 12/17/2018 05:43 pm »
Perfect timing, 10 minutes into the hour long coast phase of the GPS III flight.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48153
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81638
  • Likes Given: 36933
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #518 on: 12/17/2018 06:01 pm »
I’ve created a flight 10 specific thread:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46988.0

Offline mainmind

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 110
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #519 on: 12/17/2018 07:28 pm »
New tweet with video from Blue Origin. They now have "tail 3" and "tail 4" at the West Texas launch site and note that "tail 3" is only designed for cargo, but "tail 4" is designed for passenger flights next year (2019). This is the first time I've heard the "Tail" designation. I'm guessing that means capsule as opposed to booster, although in the video, there were two of each at the end. Is this a common terminology? Almost sounds more like aircraft language than rockets and capsules.

https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1074759932795281408

Tags: Jeff Bezos 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1