Quote from: Lar on 03/09/2016 08:48 pmThe other difference of course is that this is not far from pocket change for Bezos, so they should not lack for funds. Bezos has a far larger and more liquid fortune than Musk, who in turn is richer than Branson, I believe, although perhaps not as liquid. Not new info but definitely supportive of Jon's thinking....however, we're starting to get into billions of dollars in investment to pull all these things off (New Shepard, multiple Cryogenic pump-fed rocket engines, launch pad, large new actors for full scale BE4 production, etc). New Shepard could be funded with Bezos' fun money, but the orbital stuff relies on real contracts with real customers or at least would require Bezos to sell off (or leverage) some Amazon stock. I think it's a good change because it forces Blue Origin to actually fly stuff.
The other difference of course is that this is not far from pocket change for Bezos, so they should not lack for funds. Bezos has a far larger and more liquid fortune than Musk, who in turn is richer than Branson, I believe, although perhaps not as liquid. Not new info but definitely supportive of Jon's thinking.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/09/2016 01:15 pmThe minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.The old rule that was working well for SpaceShipTwo seems to be:promised_launch_year = current_year + 2Current year is the key here. It's 2018 in 2016, but it will be 2019 in 2017.I'm looking forward to be proven wrong, though.
The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.
Today + 18 months is the standard for suborbital tourism. Today + 3 years is the standard for launching NASA astronauts to the ISS. Both are claims made consistently and it always "feels like for reals this time".If you want a hint as to why Blue Origin won't be launching tourists in 2018, just read the rest of the article. They're already distracted by other things.
Quote from: QuantumG on 03/09/2016 09:06 pmIf you want a hint as to why Blue Origin won't be launching tourists in 2018, just read the rest of the article. They're already distracted by other things.Jeff Bezos' focus is clearly on the near term (BE-4, New Shepard) and not a million people living and working in space, you're reading way too much into articles that simply mentioned the bigger picture.
If you want a hint as to why Blue Origin won't be launching tourists in 2018, just read the rest of the article. They're already distracted by other things.
For years, what went on here was mysterious and unknown, like Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory in Roald Dahl’s children’s book.
Today + 18 months is the standard for suborbital tourism. Today + 3 years is the standard for launching NASA astronauts to the ISS. Both are claims made consistently and it always "feels like for reals this time".
Blue Origin doesn't seem to have problems with its engines the way that Virgin Galactic has had over the years. Virgin seems to have resolved those problems now, but the engine held things up for a long time. They also had issues with manufacturing the nitrous oxide tank.
Quote from: parabolicarc on 03/10/2016 02:45 pmBlue Origin doesn't seem to have problems with its engines the way that Virgin Galactic has had over the years. Virgin seems to have resolved those problems now, but the engine held things up for a long time. They also had issues with manufacturing the nitrous oxide tank. Blue Origin is using a 490kn hydrolox engine though, which is somewhat excessive for suborbital tourism. Unless that makes it super reusable.
Where to start ... certainly doesn't need "hydrolox", even if to avoid coking on reuse. Even more on vehicle trades following propulsion. New Shepard is meant to set a direction beyond suborbital space tourism.Clearly its the top part of an orbital stack, and they are incrementally introducing parts of an orbital architecture well ahead of the need for them in a suborbital system. Add a little to a pile every time ... and you end up with a big pile.And the thrust/iSP/weight of the BE-3 seems to be consistent with what you might like for an in-space stage that can carry a meaningful payload to some C3 destinations.
Uhm... Well you're correct that any reusable vehicle doesn't need a hydrolox engine to be reusable, though there are quite a number of people and organizations that seem to think it IS a requirement.
Considering the background of a majority of the BO engineers I was actually surprised when they started with keroxide and jet engines You really want a better combination than hydrolox for a booster. Which is why (I assume) they chose methalox (LNG/LOx technically but ) for the BE-4.
As for New Shepard being part of an orbital stack and more specifically an upper stage I'm not seeing that as a logical conclusion. It is designed for suborbital use and most of it's recovery features are not suited for orbital entry at all.
I think you have that backwards. It is a good subscale demonstrator for a possible booster stage, it has all the needed "bits" to reenter and land from a suborbital trajectory which can be significantly upgraded with size and adding BE-4 engines.
I was at the Johnson Space Center in Houston last week, took the tour of the astronaut training facility. There, I noticed the interesting screen (pictured below, sorry for the low quality) showing four "commercial crew" rockets: from right to left, Falcon 9 / Dragon 2, Atlas 5 / Dream Chaser, Atlas 5 / Starliner and... well yes, what is that? A depiction of the Blue Origin "Very Big Brother", providing us with a scale for that rocket? Or am I missing something?
Quote from: Bynaus on 03/29/2016 07:34 amI was at the Johnson Space Center in Houston last week, took the tour of the astronaut training facility. There, I noticed the interesting screen (pictured below, sorry for the low quality) showing four "commercial crew" rockets: from right to left, Falcon 9 / Dragon 2, Atlas 5 / Dream Chaser, Atlas 5 / Starliner and... well yes, what is that? A depiction of the Blue Origin "Very Big Brother", providing us with a scale for that rocket? Or am I missing something?The illustration is consistent with Blue's circa 2011 Be-3 powered 'reusable booster system' concept; it's probably just not been updated since the early days of CCDEV.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/09/2016 01:15 pmQuote from: Borklund on 03/09/2016 06:59 am- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.I have more confidence in Bezos hitting this target than others in this area. Plus maybe not as default cynical as some posters.
Quote from: Borklund on 03/09/2016 06:59 am- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.
- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.
Quote from: Star One on 03/09/2016 02:11 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/09/2016 01:15 pmQuote from: Borklund on 03/09/2016 06:59 am- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.I have more confidence in Bezos hitting this target than others in this area. Plus maybe not as default cynical as some posters.Why? Whilst Blue's achievements are impressive, they have not actualised anything unprecedented yet. The two-years statement is another example of an event that has precedence in aerospace and space tourism. What are you going off? Bezos's past business patterns? His companies are prone to delays like everybody else in every tech field ever to have existed, ever.Expecting elastic timescales isn't cynical. We need to care about time less regarding spaceflight - it's often irrelevant unless you're talking decades or your competitors are extremely close at your heels. Neither is the case here. They don't compete for orbital payload delivery yet and won't for years, whilst they've got a reasonably safe shot at making a first with space tourism (whatever that "first" is when orbital tourism to that grand old space hotel the ISS has already been a phenomenon for years).
Quote from: The Amazing Catstronaut on 03/29/2016 09:15 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/09/2016 02:11 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/09/2016 01:15 pmQuote from: Borklund on 03/09/2016 06:59 am- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.I have more confidence in Bezos hitting this target than others in this area. Plus maybe not as default cynical as some posters.Why? Whilst Blue's achievements are impressive, they have not actualised anything unprecedented yet. The two-years statement is another example of an event that has precedence in aerospace and space tourism. What are you going off? Bezos's past business patterns? His companies are prone to delays like everybody else in every tech field ever to have existed, ever.Expecting elastic timescales isn't cynical. We need to care about time less regarding spaceflight - it's often irrelevant unless you're talking decades or your competitors are extremely close at your heels. Neither is the case here. They don't compete for orbital payload delivery yet and won't for years, whilst they've got a reasonably safe shot at making a first with space tourism (whatever that "first" is when orbital tourism to that grand old space hotel the ISS has already been a phenomenon for years).I prefer a company that speaks in actions and progresses steadily and doesn't make grandiose claims of Martian colonies.
I prefer a company that speaks in actions and progresses steadily and doesn't make grandiose claims of Martian colonies.
Quote from: Star One on 03/29/2016 09:24 pmQuote from: The Amazing Catstronaut on 03/29/2016 09:15 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/09/2016 02:11 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/09/2016 01:15 pmQuote from: Borklund on 03/09/2016 06:59 am- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.I have more confidence in Bezos hitting this target than others in this area. Plus maybe not as default cynical as some posters.Why? Whilst Blue's achievements are impressive, they have not actualised anything unprecedented yet. The two-years statement is another example of an event that has precedence in aerospace and space tourism. What are you going off? Bezos's past business patterns? His companies are prone to delays like everybody else in every tech field ever to have existed, ever.Expecting elastic timescales isn't cynical. We need to care about time less regarding spaceflight - it's often irrelevant unless you're talking decades or your competitors are extremely close at your heels. Neither is the case here. They don't compete for orbital payload delivery yet and won't for years, whilst they've got a reasonably safe shot at making a first with space tourism (whatever that "first" is when orbital tourism to that grand old space hotel the ISS has already been a phenomenon for years).I prefer a company that speaks in actions and progresses steadily and doesn't make grandiose claims of Martian colonies.I can prefer warp drive over space folding for space propulsion, but that's irrelevant to the choice of a propulsion system to mount a current mission off of.Bezos also makes grandiose claims. One of the reasons I still regard them as pure "BO".Musk has been in the space business for a number of years with actual missions. BO, while having some impressive accomplishments, has not yet done a single mission nor is one even proposed.Accomplishing missions are a relevant measure. Not our preferences.Speaking of which, I prefer to drink a sip of water right now ...
Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 03/29/2016 09:35 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/29/2016 09:24 pmQuote from: The Amazing Catstronaut on 03/29/2016 09:15 pmQuote from: Star One on 03/09/2016 02:11 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/09/2016 01:15 pmQuote from: Borklund on 03/09/2016 06:59 am- First tourist flights "as soon as" 2018.That is very interesting.The minute self-made billionaires start making statements such as the one above: add (at least) two years.I have more confidence in Bezos hitting this target than others in this area. Plus maybe not as default cynical as some posters.Why? Whilst Blue's achievements are impressive, they have not actualised anything unprecedented yet. The two-years statement is another example of an event that has precedence in aerospace and space tourism. What are you going off? Bezos's past business patterns? His companies are prone to delays like everybody else in every tech field ever to have existed, ever.Expecting elastic timescales isn't cynical. We need to care about time less regarding spaceflight - it's often irrelevant unless you're talking decades or your competitors are extremely close at your heels. Neither is the case here. They don't compete for orbital payload delivery yet and won't for years, whilst they've got a reasonably safe shot at making a first with space tourism (whatever that "first" is when orbital tourism to that grand old space hotel the ISS has already been a phenomenon for years).I prefer a company that speaks in actions and progresses steadily and doesn't make grandiose claims of Martian colonies.I can prefer warp drive over space folding for space propulsion, but that's irrelevant to the choice of a propulsion system to mount a current mission off of.Bezos also makes grandiose claims. One of the reasons I still regard them as pure "BO".Musk has been in the space business for a number of years with actual missions. BO, while having some impressive accomplishments, has not yet done a single mission nor is one even proposed.Accomplishing missions are a relevant measure. Not our preferences.Speaking of which, I prefer to drink a sip of water right now ...Yes Bezos makes claims but at least his seem based in the realm of the possible for what a company such as his may achieve & don't seek to overreach themselves.
Another one who has been drinking the Space X kool aid I see.