Quote from: ncb1397 on 09/20/2018 09:23 pmElon Musk is free to do what Bezos is doing in the money department. He could sell $1 billion a year in Tesla stock and fund SpaceX. Certainly, the rate of return of a dollar in SpaceX far exceeded the rate of return in Tesla over the last year or two.If Musk liquidates a billion from Tesla it would crater the stock price by panicking stockholders. Musk also needs to keep controlling interest.
Elon Musk is free to do what Bezos is doing in the money department. He could sell $1 billion a year in Tesla stock and fund SpaceX. Certainly, the rate of return of a dollar in SpaceX far exceeded the rate of return in Tesla over the last year or two.
So, if I am a trillionaire, but I spent $10,000,000 a year on my rocket development company, said company should be far ahead of SpaceX? It doesn't work that way.
Anyways, Blue Origin only had access to SpaceX-like levels of money starting ~24 months ago.
It isn't apparently clear if New Glenn leap frogs Falcon Heavy, Falcon 9 Block 1-5 and Falcon 1 - if the 45 t figure is with first stage re-use, it certainly does leap frog all of them. So, people are making judgements when no judgements can be made - yet.
It really all depends on New Glenn development and BFR/BFS development.
The judgement being made is that SpaceX has been operational for a decade, and despite not having the wealth of Jeff Bezos they were the first to make orbital-capable reusable rockets possible.
Elon Musk only got $22M from the sale of Zip2, and $180M (after taxes) from the sale of PayPal (after investing $12M of his own money). And we all know he almost went broke juggling both SpaceX and Tesla, so early on Musk could not personally support SpaceX to the degree Jeff Bezos could support Blue Origin.
Quote from: Eric Hedman on 09/20/2018 05:23 amIs there anyway to tell from the permits if they may actually fly people on the next flight?Not from the FCC permits, but yesterday Bezos said "we'll be putting people in space this coming year"
Is there anyway to tell from the permits if they may actually fly people on the next flight?
Personally I couldn't work at a company where you pour your efforts into projects that get a cursory review by a supervisor but otherwise go no-where, but some people are fine with it.
Quote from: envy887 on 09/20/2018 03:24 pmQuote from: ncb1397 on 09/20/2018 03:05 pmQuote from: kevinof on 09/20/2018 03:01 pmSpaceX's mission is to fly people and cargo to Orbit. It has done cargo and will early next year, do crew. Same with ULA and Starliner.Blue Origin's mission is to do sub orbital and cargo. It is 18 years in business and has done neither. There's slow and then there's Blue Origin.Quote from: TripleSeven on 09/20/2018 02:56 pmno one has flown anyone yet...They didn't get fat government money. Between 2000-2014, they had an average of $35 million per year. SpaceX gets $133 million every time they launch NASA cargo once.Money is not the reason for Blue's rate of progress.Are you saying they could be building New Glenn on $35 million a year? No, they couldn't, and if they started back in 2000, Bezos wouldn't own any Amazon stock. He was only worth a couple billion back then. Now, if they started back in 2000, do you think New Glenn would be flying by now? I'd give that pretty good odds. They could hire the best rocket scientists in the world. It was only a matter of money.
Quote from: ncb1397 on 09/20/2018 03:05 pmQuote from: kevinof on 09/20/2018 03:01 pmSpaceX's mission is to fly people and cargo to Orbit. It has done cargo and will early next year, do crew. Same with ULA and Starliner.Blue Origin's mission is to do sub orbital and cargo. It is 18 years in business and has done neither. There's slow and then there's Blue Origin.Quote from: TripleSeven on 09/20/2018 02:56 pmno one has flown anyone yet...They didn't get fat government money. Between 2000-2014, they had an average of $35 million per year. SpaceX gets $133 million every time they launch NASA cargo once.Money is not the reason for Blue's rate of progress.
Quote from: kevinof on 09/20/2018 03:01 pmSpaceX's mission is to fly people and cargo to Orbit. It has done cargo and will early next year, do crew. Same with ULA and Starliner.Blue Origin's mission is to do sub orbital and cargo. It is 18 years in business and has done neither. There's slow and then there's Blue Origin.Quote from: TripleSeven on 09/20/2018 02:56 pmno one has flown anyone yet...They didn't get fat government money. Between 2000-2014, they had an average of $35 million per year. SpaceX gets $133 million every time they launch NASA cargo once.
SpaceX's mission is to fly people and cargo to Orbit. It has done cargo and will early next year, do crew. Same with ULA and Starliner.Blue Origin's mission is to do sub orbital and cargo. It is 18 years in business and has done neither. There's slow and then there's Blue Origin.Quote from: TripleSeven on 09/20/2018 02:56 pmno one has flown anyone yet...
no one has flown anyone yet...
but to be clear RIGHT NOW there are only two real business cases concerning humans in space or near space that seem to be actually "maybe" valid.the first is what Blue and Branson are pursuing and that is people in sub orbital flights. I dont know if its valid...but both seem on the verge of giving it a try. the second is the pursuit of federal contracts for humans in space. both Boeing and SpaceX seem to be going at that with all the vigor that their companies can muster...
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 09/20/2018 11:39 pmThe judgement being made is that SpaceX has been operational for a decade, and despite not having the wealth of Jeff Bezos they were the first to make orbital-capable reusable rockets possible.Sorry, but this isn't true at all. The first partially-reusable orbital rocket was the space shuttle built by Rockwell International. I think you are searching for the word VTVL. That would be a true statement.
QuoteElon Musk only got $22M from the sale of Zip2, and $180M (after taxes) from the sale of PayPal (after investing $12M of his own money). And we all know he almost went broke juggling both SpaceX and Tesla, so early on Musk could not personally support SpaceX to the degree Jeff Bezos could support Blue Origin.Jeff Bezos kept his money in Amazon.
It is as absurd as saying because Alphabet had a profit $9.8 billion in the first 3 months of 2018 and they are an investor in SpaceX, SpaceX has access to way more money than Blue Origin. If they plow that $9.8 billion into SpaceX, they have access to it. If they don't, they don't.
I chose my wording carefully. The Shuttle Orbiter was not a rocket, it was the payload, and the SRM's were only refurbish-able, not reusable.
I dont see your point
I would add this, I believe that boeing is going to buy his engine
Jeff Bezos, at this point in his net worth, could easily invest $2-3B per year in Blue Origin without affecting his net worth much, or decreasing his ownership stake in Amazon significantly.Which is why the progress Blue Origin is making is, to a substantial degree, based on how fast Jeff Bezos wants them to go, and right now he is fine with the pace. That he is fine in following behind what SpaceX is doing, with no visible plan to try and catch up to, and overtake SpaceX.
Which is why the progress Blue Origin is making is, to a substantial degree, based on how fast Jeff Bezos wants them to go, and right now he is fine with the pace. That he is fine in following behind what SpaceX is doing, with no visible plan to try and catch up to, and overtake SpaceX.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 09/21/2018 03:06 pmI chose my wording carefully. The Shuttle Orbiter was not a rocket, it was the payload, and the SRM's were only refurbish-able, not reusable.4.)Under your definition of re-usability used for SpaceX, the Shuttle SRBs are re-usable. SpaceX hasn't achieved re-use with no maintanence.
5.)Only the complete system (the SRB, the ET, and the orbiter) have the features of an orbital rocket. Without the orbiter it is a one stage sub-orbital vehicle and has no payload fairing or equivalent feature for holding a satellite.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 09/21/2018 03:06 pmWhich is why the progress Blue Origin is making is, to a substantial degree, based on how fast Jeff Bezos wants them to go, and right now he is fine with the pace. That he is fine in following behind what SpaceX is doing, with no visible plan to try and catch up to, and overtake SpaceX.If New Glenn flys and lands before BFR/BFS, they have caught up and most likely overtook SpaceX as far as rockets go. How long does that last in that scenario? Who knows.
New Glenn is planned to be as reusable as Falcon Heavy (i.e. 1st stage reusable, but 2nd stage expendable) but carries less to space.
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 09/21/2018 09:57 pmNew Glenn is planned to be as reusable as Falcon Heavy (i.e. 1st stage reusable, but 2nd stage expendable) but carries less to space.Does it?