Author Topic: New Shepard Discussion Thread  (Read 99599 times)

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6448
  • Liked: 4551
  • Likes Given: 5056
New Shepard Discussion Thread
« on: 12/10/2019 07:14 pm »
Blue Origin's FCC application for Flight 13 was dismissed without prejudice
Quote
You are advised that the Commission is unable to grant your application for the facilities requested. The application is dismissed because NTIA objects to authorize the STA request on behalf of Blue Origin Texas, LLC for Van Horn, TX during the period 1 December 2019 thru 1 June 2020, for the following reason(s):
- Due to critical on-going law-enforcement operations

Blue Origin has filed a new request 2326-EX-ST-2019
Quote
EXHIBIT #1: Information about FCC license request for Flight 13
09 Dec 2019
Blue Origin Texas, LLC
Re: STA file # 2326-EX-ST-2019
This license request is a modification of the dismissed STA file # 2169-EX-ST-2019, correspondence reference number 52157. The dismissal does not specify which of the two frequencies from 2169-EX-ST2019 conflict with the on-going law-enforcement operations. Therefore, on this application 2326-EX-ST2019 Blue Origin Texas requests any two of the five frequencies listed in this application (we do not need all five). These combinations are

• 2202+/-2 and 2210+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2216+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2272+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2216+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz
• 2216+/-2.5 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2216+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz
• 2250+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz

We respectfully ask that if there are any issues with the above request, can someone please contact me to discuss this application? Blue Origin Texas has flexibility beyond what is listed above, and we are more than happy to coordinate and alter this application to accommodate other spectrum users. We are resubmitting this application with guesses as to what frequencies to ask for, because we don’t have specific feedback on what was conflicting with our initial application in correspondence reference number 52157.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey Bridge
New Shepard Operations

This seems quite concerning for any future commercial operations at Van Horn.

The Wikipedia entry for the NTIA doesn't mention law enforcement or border security.
The NTIA site says
Quote
NTIA is the Executive Branch agency that is principally responsible for advising the President on telecommunications and information policy issues. NTIA’s programs and policymaking focus largely on expanding broadband Internet access and adoption in America, expanding the use of spectrum by all users, and ensuring that the Internet remains an engine for continued innovation and economic growth.
It's Spectrum Management office also makes little mention of law enforcement.

Further comments may have to be taken to the Politics threads.
« Last Edit: 12/11/2019 03:52 pm by gongora »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline thirtyone

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 256
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 352
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #1 on: 12/11/2019 03:06 am »
Blue Origin's FCC application for Flight 13 was dismissed without prejudice
Quote
You are advised that the Commission is unable to grant your application for the facilities requested. The application is dismissed because NTIA objects to authorize the STA request on behalf of Blue Origin Texas, LLC for Van Horn, TX during the period 1 December 2019 thru 1 June 2020, for the following reason(s):
- Due to critical on-going law-enforcement operations

Blue Origin has filed a new request 2326-EX-ST-2019
Quote
EXHIBIT #1: Information about FCC license request for Flight 13
09 Dec 2019
Blue Origin Texas, LLC
Re: STA file # 2326-EX-ST-2019
This license request is a modification of the dismissed STA file # 2169-EX-ST-2019, correspondence reference number 52157. The dismissal does not specify which of the two frequencies from 2169-EX-ST2019 conflict with the on-going law-enforcement operations. Therefore, on this application 2326-EX-ST2019 Blue Origin Texas requests any two of the five frequencies listed in this application (we do not need all five). These combinations are

• 2202+/-2 and 2210+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2216+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2272+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2216+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz
• 2216+/-2.5 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2216+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz
• 2250+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz

We respectfully ask that if there are any issues with the above request, can someone please contact me to discuss this application? Blue Origin Texas has flexibility beyond what is listed above, and we are more than happy to coordinate and alter this application to accommodate other spectrum users. We are resubmitting this application with guesses as to what frequencies to ask for, because we don’t have specific feedback on what was conflicting with our initial application in correspondence reference number 52157.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey Bridge
New Shepard Operations

This seems quite concerning for any future commercial operations at Van Horn.

The Wikipedia entry for the NTIA doesn't mention law enforcement or border security.
The NTIA site says
Quote
NTIA is the Executive Branch agency that is principally responsible for advising the President on telecommunications and information policy issues. NTIA’s programs and policymaking focus largely on expanding broadband Internet access and adoption in America, expanding the use of spectrum by all users, and ensuring that the Internet remains an engine for continued innovation and economic growth.
It's Spectrum Management office also makes little mention of law enforcement.

Further comments may have to be taken to the Politics threads.

Don't think my reply is really related to politics, but IIRC legally the NTIA is the entity responsible for approving spectrum requests for the federal government (and not the FCC). This is typically the case for NASA satellites and payloads, but I'm not sure if it also applies towards the launch vehicle itself.
« Last Edit: 12/11/2019 03:09 am by thirtyone »

Offline darkmelmet

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #2 on: 12/11/2019 06:05 am »
Not sure if it was addressed already.

But will New Sheppard really have only six passengers without any crew/supervision.

It seems to me unlikely, since Virgin Galactic SS2 will have six passengers and crew of 2 pilots. SS2 flight will take much longer, but pilots are there mainly just for supervision, so FAA could want from BO to have at least 1 person crew to help passengers get back to their seats, if there will be some problem with it.

Not sure if FAA made some final decision about this.   
« Last Edit: 12/11/2019 06:08 am by darkmelmet »

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47416
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80275
  • Likes Given: 36322
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #3 on: 12/11/2019 09:44 am »
NS is completely autonomous whereas SS2 has no autonomy and needs the pilots to fly.

I would expect SS2 pilots to be largely separated from passengers (as shown in VG video animations) to avoid the risk of passengers bumping into controls and causing a flight risk.

So I’m not sure there’s such a big difference.

Offline daedalus1

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
  • uk
  • Liked: 476
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #4 on: 12/11/2019 10:16 am »
NS is completely autonomous whereas SS2 has no autonomy and needs the pilots to fly.

I would expect SS2 pilots to be largely separated from passengers (as shown in VG video animations) to avoid the risk of passengers bumping into controls and causing a flight risk.

So I’m not sure there’s such a big difference.

You may need someone to ensure passengers return to their seats before zero G ends.

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6448
  • Liked: 4551
  • Likes Given: 5056
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #5 on: 12/11/2019 05:29 pm »
From the NS-12 thread

Quote
"... fully operational reuseable launch vehicle..."
"... no further development of this vehicle..."
"... verification to fully understand the system...."
"... recycling system from NASA..."    (note: Makes carbon monoxide among other products.  Likely an issue on the ISS)
… two pieces of high-school artwork and kids' postcards to space...

A strict avoidance of discussing the start of commercial operations
No discussion of a fourth booster or second capsule
"Real soon" again, on next flight, although you see the permit issue above.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #6 on: 12/11/2019 05:55 pm »
NS is completely autonomous whereas SS2 has no autonomy and needs the pilots to fly.

I would expect SS2 pilots to be largely separated from passengers (as shown in VG video animations) to avoid the risk of passengers bumping into controls and causing a flight risk.

So I’m not sure there’s such a big difference.

You may need someone to ensure passengers return to their seats before zero G ends.
Gravity will reminding them to return to their seats.

Offline Chandonn

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1240
  • "Pudding!!! UNLIMITED Rice Pudding!!!"
  • Lexington, Ky
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #7 on: 12/11/2019 06:30 pm »

You may need someone to ensure passengers return to their seats before zero G ends.

But does that person have to be on board?

Offline Bubbinski

Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #8 on: 12/11/2019 06:35 pm »
Re: the new permit request for flight 13: I noticed that the revised request is from Feb 1st to March 15th, instead of Dec 1 to June 1....maybe will have a better chance to avoid conflicts and be approved? If this new permit is approved then that’s our clue as to when the next flight will be. Big question is will “Tail 4” be ready then, and will it be the last test flight before taking up people?
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Offline dondar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 298
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #9 on: 12/11/2019 09:20 pm »
Blue Origin's FCC application for Flight 13 was dismissed without prejudice
Quote
You are advised that the Commission is unable to grant your application for the facilities requested. The application is dismissed because NTIA objects to authorize the STA request on behalf of Blue Origin Texas, LLC for Van Horn, TX during the period 1 December 2019 thru 1 June 2020, for the following reason(s):
- Due to critical on-going law-enforcement operations

Blue Origin has filed a new request 2326-EX-ST-2019
Quote
EXHIBIT #1: Information about FCC license request for Flight 13
09 Dec 2019
Blue Origin Texas, LLC
Re: STA file # 2326-EX-ST-2019
This license request is a modification of the dismissed STA file # 2169-EX-ST-2019, correspondence reference number 52157. The dismissal does not specify which of the two frequencies from 2169-EX-ST2019 conflict with the on-going law-enforcement operations. Therefore, on this application 2326-EX-ST2019 Blue Origin Texas requests any two of the five frequencies listed in this application (we do not need all five). These combinations are

• 2202+/-2 and 2210+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2216+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2202+/-2 and 2272+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2216+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2210+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz
• 2216+/-2.5 and 2250+/-2.5 MHz
• 2216+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz
• 2250+/-2.5 and 2272.5+/-2.5 MHz

We respectfully ask that if there are any issues with the above request, can someone please contact me to discuss this application? Blue Origin Texas has flexibility beyond what is listed above, and we are more than happy to coordinate and alter this application to accommodate other spectrum users. We are resubmitting this application with guesses as to what frequencies to ask for, because we don’t have specific feedback on what was conflicting with our initial application in correspondence reference number 52157.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey Bridge
New Shepard Operations

This seems quite concerning for any future commercial operations at Van Horn.

The Wikipedia entry for the NTIA doesn't mention law enforcement or border security.
The NTIA site says
Quote
NTIA is the Executive Branch agency that is principally responsible for advising the President on telecommunications and information policy issues. NTIA’s programs and policymaking focus largely on expanding broadband Internet access and adoption in America, expanding the use of spectrum by all users, and ensuring that the Internet remains an engine for continued innovation and economic growth.
It's Spectrum Management office also makes little mention of law enforcement.

Further comments may have to be taken to the Politics threads.
NTIA is a governmental analogue of FCC. Because it is "executive" branch they also have actually enforcing capability.
The most important part of NTIA is OSM.
Quote
NTIA’s Office of Spectrum Management (OSM) is dedicated to protecting the vital federal government operations that use spectrum while also supporting the growth of commercial wireless broadband and technologies in America. Many federal agencies rely on the use of spectrum, a limited resource, to execute their core missions. There is also increasing demand for spectrum to meet the wireless broadband needs of consumers and businesses, paving the way for continued innovation and economic growth.
You can sue and fight FCC actions. It is useless and is actually "dangerous" to fight NTIA decisions.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47416
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80275
  • Likes Given: 36322
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #10 on: 12/11/2019 09:41 pm »
Several promotional style NS videos just released by Blue (see updates thread).

Hopefully a sign that passenger, as opposed to just payload, operations are not far away.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #11 on: 12/11/2019 11:11 pm »
Wonder if its possible for NS to land with capsule attached, would need a few significant design changes. Big plus is no need to repack parachutes or refurbish  retropulsion landing thrusters.

Still have option to do a launch abort. Crew would leave capsule via mobile boarding ladder once booster is safe ie H has all been vented and tanks purged.

In away it would be safer as they would have redundant landing systems, with parachutes as backups not primary.


Offline gaballard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 620
  • Los Angeles
  • Liked: 1496
  • Likes Given: 1174
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #12 on: 12/12/2019 06:00 pm »
Wonder if its possible for NS to land with capsule attached, would need a few significant design changes. Big plus is no need to repack parachutes or refurbish  retropulsion landing thrusters.

Still have option to do a launch abort. Crew would leave capsule via mobile boarding ladder once booster is safe ie H has all been vented and tanks purged.

In away it would be safer as they would have redundant landing systems, with parachutes as backups not primary.

Keeping the capsule on top will make the booster want to invert itself on descent; as the propellant tanks drain it'd become even more top-heavy (and unstable). They'd most likely have to rewrite the guidance software and/or modify the control surfaces. Not to mention if the booster crashes you've got a capsule full of people traveling downwards into the explosion, rather than away from it. It'd take twice the energy to cancel out the downward motion and get the capsule going up and away.

Besides, if you already have the abort motors and parachutes for in-flight abort, why not use them for landing as well? The booster can blow itself up ten ways to Sunday and the capsule would be fine.
"I venture the challenging statement that if American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land." — FDR

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1486
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 570
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #13 on: 12/12/2019 06:37 pm »
Wonder if its possible for NS to land with capsule attached, would need a few significant design changes. Big plus is no need to repack parachutes or refurbish  retropulsion landing thrusters.

Still have option to do a launch abort. Crew would leave capsule via mobile boarding ladder once booster is safe ie H has all been vented and tanks purged.

In away it would be safer as they would have redundant landing systems, with parachutes as backups not primary.

If memory serves, that was the first approach. They discovered that this approach meant less fuel, smaller booster.

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6448
  • Liked: 4551
  • Likes Given: 5056
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #14 on: 12/14/2019 04:46 am »
Several promotional style NS videos just released by Blue (see updates thread).

Hopefully a sign that passenger, as opposed to just payload, operations are not far away.

No it’s not
Promotional videos are not evidence of anything.

After a dozen ASDS landings, SpaceX came up with the Octograbber, a machine to deal with landed boosters.
For operations, Blue will need some machine to swiftly fetch the booster and put it back on the launch mount.
At least they have to anchor it. It’s a big, light sail with a narrow base, waiting for a stiff breeze to tip it over.
We can guess what they use but I don’t think we have seen any evidence of it.
When your customers end their quarter million dollar ride in the Texas scrub, Blue will not want to leave them hanging there with the Texas sun shining through the “largest windows ever in a spacecraft”. 
But they haven’t even practiced chasing the capsule, never mind showing a vehicle that would achieve the passenger experience they go on about. Pickup trucks won’t do.
In short, we haven’t seen any evidence of preparations for commercial operations.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline b0objunior

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 261
  • Liked: 162
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #15 on: 12/14/2019 05:52 am »
Several promotional style NS videos just released by Blue (see updates thread).

Hopefully a sign that passenger, as opposed to just payload, operations are not far away.

No it’s not
Promotional videos are not evidence of anything.

After a dozen ASDS landings, SpaceX came up with the Octograbber, a machine to deal with landed boosters.
For operations, Blue will need some machine to swiftly fetch the booster and put it back on the launch mount.
At least they have to anchor it. It’s a big, light sail with a narrow base, waiting for a stiff breeze to tip it over.
We can guess what they use but I don’t think we have seen any evidence of it.
When your customers end their quarter million dollar ride in the Texas scrub, Blue will not want to leave them hanging there with the Texas sun shining through the “largest windows ever in a spacecraft”. 
But they haven’t even practiced chasing the capsule, never mind showing a vehicle that would achieve the passenger experience they go on about. Pickup trucks won’t do.
In short, we haven’t seen any evidence of preparations for commercial operations.
Jeez, you're right I guess, the are twiddling their thumbs as we speak!

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Liked: 1305
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #16 on: 12/14/2019 06:57 am »
No it’s not
Promotional videos are not evidence of anything.

After a dozen ASDS landings, SpaceX came up with the Octograbber, a machine to deal with landed boosters.
For operations, Blue will need some machine to swiftly fetch the booster and put it back on the launch mount.
At least they have to anchor it. It’s a big, light sail with a narrow base, waiting for a stiff breeze to tip it over.
We can guess what they use but I don’t think we have seen any evidence of it.
When your customers end their quarter million dollar ride in the Texas scrub, Blue will not want to leave them hanging there with the Texas sun shining through the “largest windows ever in a spacecraft”. 
But they haven’t even practiced chasing the capsule, never mind showing a vehicle that would achieve the passenger experience they go on about. Pickup trucks won’t do.
In short, we haven’t seen any evidence of preparations for commercial operations.

Meh, just show up in a helicopter or some off-road vehicles.

Maybe the ground pick-up part is the least of their concerns. They can worry about developing that after they've flown their very first human test flights.

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1688
  • Europe
  • Liked: 837
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #17 on: 12/14/2019 07:22 am »
NS is completely autonomous whereas SS2 has no autonomy and needs the pilots to fly.

I would expect SS2 pilots to be largely separated from passengers (as shown in VG video animations) to avoid the risk of passengers bumping into controls and causing a flight risk.

So I’m not sure there’s such a big difference.

You may need someone to ensure passengers return to their seats before zero G ends.
Gravity will reminding them to return to their seats.

Yes, up to 5G of gravity. Sooner or later someone is going to realize they should've stopped goofing around earlier. Although they'll probably have to sign a disclaimer before getting in the vehicle.

Offline ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 920
  • Liked: 1425
  • Likes Given: 3409
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #18 on: 12/14/2019 07:31 am »

You may need someone to ensure passengers return to their seats before zero G ends.

But does that person have to be on board?

I thought deceleration peaked at around 5g? You can easily kill people at that level. Even if your waivers are legally watertight it really isn’t good for product image. I’d want crew in the capsule.

Offline niwax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
  • Germany
    • SpaceX Booster List
  • Liked: 2033
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: New Shepard Discussion Thread
« Reply #19 on: 12/14/2019 11:09 am »

You may need someone to ensure passengers return to their seats before zero G ends.

But does that person have to be on board?

I thought deceleration peaked at around 5g? You can easily kill people at that level. Even if your waivers are legally watertight it really isn’t good for product image. I’d want crew in the capsule.

I've always wondered how they were going to manage seating. Strapping yourself into a flight seat properly quickly isn't easy even on the ground without a pressure suit. Their customers are inexperienced with some basic training on the ground and no time spent in microgravity before. The time above the atmosphere is very short as it is, with a three minute safety window to get back to your seat there'll be nothing left of it. If you wanted to do it properly, you'd even need crew to check everything as they do in airplanes.
Which booster has the most soot? SpaceX booster launch history! (discussion)

Tags:
 

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