Poll

Who willl successfully land (unmanned), first: Starship on Mars, or Blue's Lander on the Moon?

Starship (unmanned), on Mars.
35 (50%)
Blue's Lander (unmanned), on the Moon.
32 (45.7%)
Other result (explain in comments).
3 (4.3%)

Total Members Voted: 70

Voting closed: 06/18/2023 08:19 pm


Author Topic: Starship and Blue's Lander  (Read 7336 times)

Offline daedalus1

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
  • uk
  • Liked: 476
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #20 on: 05/21/2023 09:47 am »
After the first successful launch of Starship and the first successful launch of New Glenn, then we will get a clearer vision of the future ability.

Offline DeimosDream

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 124
  • Atlanta
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 46
Re: Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #21 on: 05/22/2023 02:24 pm »
I didn't think much of them the first time around, but National Team's new improved proposal seems remarkably well designed, planned, and motivated. I'm thinking only a 12-24 month schedule slip: 2028, or possibly early 2029. Thanks to the pathfinders I think the first landing will be a success.

Assuming SpaceX's first Mars landing attempt (likely a 2026 launch) is a "valuable learning experience" or similar then Starship's first successful landing is likely to be mid 2029.

It will be a close race. Maybe Starship will nail the Mars landing first try, or maybe Blue will discover storable LH2 is an epic headache with chronic delays, but on balance I think Blue is slightly more likely to land on the Moon before Starship lands on Mars.

Offline lightleviathan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 160
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #22 on: 05/22/2023 10:02 pm »
The more I think about it, the more I think that Blue will make it first.

Offline ppb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 183
  • San Francisco Bay Area
  • Liked: 196
  • Likes Given: 159
Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #23 on: 05/23/2023 04:01 am »
The more I think about it, the more I think that Blue will make it first.
Why? What of their accomplishments so far makes you think they can manage to pull off this complicated deep space system at all, let alone be first?
« Last Edit: 05/23/2023 04:02 am by ppb »

Offline lightleviathan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 160
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #24 on: 05/23/2023 02:22 pm »
The more I think about it, the more I think that Blue will make it first.
Why? What of their accomplishments so far makes you think they can manage to pull off this complicated deep space system at all, let alone be first?

New Shepard really ironed out a lot of doubts for me (hydrogen propulsion, propulsive landings, crew capsule, along with more recent pictures of their BE-7 engine components. While they still have a lot of things that need to be ironed out, like cryogenic fuel and oxidiser transfer, SpaceX shares a lot of those same issues. Blue is going for a less ambitious system with hardware that shares at least some commonality with their previously flown systems. And I didn't even mention the fact that they are partnered with the maker of Orion, which has flown a deep space mission, Boeing, who while I despise, has built cryogenic hydrogen tanks for over 40 years, and Astrobotic, which has the heritage of Masten which has completed more than 600 flights, all in the name of lunar lander development. SpaceX is doing everything themselves, and while they have the immense experience of Falcon 9, and the quick development of Raptor, I'm not sure if these and their quick execution alone will make them first.
« Last Edit: 05/23/2023 02:27 pm by lightleviathan »

Offline kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1594
  • Somewhere on the boat
  • Liked: 1869
  • Likes Given: 1262
Re: Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #25 on: 05/23/2023 02:35 pm »
Booster doesn’t use hydrogen, NS capsule is not the same as one that will go to orbit so has almost zero value and I am sceptical they can bring much of the learnings from landing NS to the NG stack. Add in they have no orbital experience, no ops experience and are working on maybe 6/7 different projects at the same time.

The more I think about it, the more I think that Blue will make it first.
Why? What of their accomplishments so far makes you think they can manage to pull off this complicated deep space system at all, let alone be first?

New Shepard really ironed out a lot of doubts for me (hydrogen propulsion, propulsive landings, crew capsule, along with more recent pictures of their BE-7 engine components. While they still have a lot of things that need to be ironed out, like cryogenic fuel and oxidiser transfer, SpaceX shares a lot of those same issues. Blue is going for a less ambitious system with hardware that shares at least some commonality with their previously flown systems. And I didn't even mention the fact that they are partnered with the maker of Orion, which has flown a deep space mission, Boeing, who while I despise, has built cryogenic hydrogen tanks for over 40 years, and Astrobotic, which has the heritage of Masten which has completed more than 600 flights, all in the name of lunar lander development. SpaceX is doing everything themselves, and while they have the immense experience of Falcon 9, and the quick development of Raptor, I'm not sure if these and their quick execution alone will make them first.

Offline lightleviathan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 160
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Starship and Blue's Lander
« Reply #26 on: 05/23/2023 02:42 pm »
Booster doesn’t use hydrogen, NS capsule is not the same as one that will go to orbit so has almost zero value and I am sceptical they can bring much of the learnings from landing NS to the NG stack. Add in they have no orbital experience, no ops experience and are working on maybe 6/7 different projects at the same time.

The more I think about it, the more I think that Blue will make it first.
Why? What of their accomplishments so far makes you think they can manage to pull off this complicated deep space system at all, let alone be first?

New Shepard really ironed out a lot of doubts for me (hydrogen propulsion, propulsive landings, crew capsule, along with more recent pictures of their BE-7 engine components. While they still have a lot of things that need to be ironed out, like cryogenic fuel and oxidiser transfer, SpaceX shares a lot of those same issues. Blue is going for a less ambitious system with hardware that shares at least some commonality with their previously flown systems. And I didn't even mention the fact that they are partnered with the maker of Orion, which has flown a deep space mission, Boeing, who while I despise, has built cryogenic hydrogen tanks for over 40 years, and Astrobotic, which has the heritage of Masten which has completed more than 600 flights, all in the name of lunar lander development. SpaceX is doing everything themselves, and while they have the immense experience of Falcon 9, and the quick development of Raptor, I'm not sure if these and their quick execution alone will make them first.

New Shepard is powered by the BE-3PM engine, which used cryogenic liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. And while they don't have orbital experience, their partners do and New Glenn is probably a year or less from flight. Blue has experience with things, and their partners have even more. Stop acting like they haven't done anything for 20 years.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0