Author Topic: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5  (Read 33344 times)

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« on: 07/25/2023 04:32 pm »
https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1683859101023862784

Quote
Blue Alchemist has been awarded a @NASA Tipping Point partnership to produce scalable solar power systems from lunar dust. We’re developing this technology to access and utilize space resources that enable sustainable exploration for the benefit of Earth.

https://www.blueorigin.com/news/blue-origin-awarded-nasa-partnership-to-turn-lunar-regolith-into-solar-power-systems-on-the-moon

Quote
NEWS | JUL 25, 2023
Blue Origin Awarded NASA Partnership to Turn Lunar Regolith into Solar-Power Systems on the Moon

Breakthrough could lead to autonomous manufacture of unlimited amounts of solar power, power transmission cables, and oxygen anywhere on the surface of the Moon

NASA awarded Blue Origin a $35 million Tipping Point partnership today to continue advancing its innovative Blue Alchemist breakthrough revealed earlier this year.

Blue Alchemist is a proposed end-to-end, scalable, autonomous, and commercial solution that produces solar cells from lunar regolith, which is the dust and crushed rock abundant on the surface of the Moon. Based on a process called molten regolith electrolysis, the breakthrough would bootstrap unlimited electricity and power transmission cables anywhere on the surface of the Moon. This process also produces oxygen as a useful byproduct for propulsion and life support.

According to NASA, a technology like Blue Alchemist is considered at a Tipping Point if the agency’s investment can help grow the innovation into a viable commercial solution. Today’s investment will result in a demonstration of autonomous operation in a simulated lunar environment by 2026.

“Harnessing the vast resources in space to benefit Earth is part of our mission, and we’re inspired and humbled to receive this investment from NASA to advance our innovation,” said Pat Remias, vice president, Capabilities Directorate of Space Systems Development. “First we return humans to the Moon, then we start to ‘live off the land.’”

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #1 on: 07/25/2023 06:57 pm »
https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1683910276091895809

Quote
New KSC/Cape flyover!

Covering construction of SpaceX's new crew access tower for Crew Dragon at SLC-40, Blue Origin's developments at Exploration Park and Launch Complex 36, and Amazon's Kuiper satellite integration, and more.

youtube.com/watch?v=yjpT9e…

Hosted by Matt (@badnewsbaron), joined by Max (@_mgde_) and Ryan (@dpoddolphinpro).


Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #2 on: 08/02/2023 10:12 pm »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1686862326073356288

Quote
It sounds like Blue Origin is considering acquiring Ball Aerospace. Would bolster Blue’s spacecraft division.

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6431
  • Liked: 4512
  • Likes Given: 4996
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #3 on: 08/03/2023 05:17 pm »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1686862326073356288

Quote
It sounds like Blue Origin is considering acquiring Ball Aerospace. Would bolster Blue’s spacecraft division.

I have also heard this.
The good news for some is that Blue is likely to overpay, although given Ball Corp’s position it may not help their stock that much.
The bad news is that this will be a disaster, the ultimate culture clash.  So many contrasts….
And “bolstering Blue’s spacecraft division” is such a small part that it’s almost irrelevant. 
We shall see
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline jimvela

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1654
  • Liked: 883
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #4 on: 08/03/2023 06:09 pm »
As a former long time Ball Aerospace team member, definitely mixed feelings about this.

In many ways, Ball Aerospace was shackled and severely limited by Ball Corp in my opinion and I won't elaborate- but being able to break free of that would potentially be good for them.

On the other hand, the culture clash and a severe impedance mismatch between organizational capabilities and practices would potentially wreck many of the last remaining great parts about Ball Aerospace under Blue ownership.

The only way I can see it being good for the acquired Ball Aerospace team and programs would be if it got better access to capital for projects and in particular much needed facilities and capabilities improvements.

I don't think it would be great for many of my former colleagues- but they're already in a minority at this point as the amount of hiring, growth, and change have been significant in the last few years. 

I can't think of a way that the Ball capabilities would help Blue on the spacecraft front except for perhaps if there was a huge focus at Blue on Lunar program work.  Those lunar programs need very different talent and capabilities from what Kuiper needs.  (And, Frankly, I think Kuiper has exactly the wrong set of folks working at Blue Amazon for what that program needs,  except for perhaps some integration and test folks.) 

Edit- Straighten out Amazon vs Blue with respect to Kuiper.
« Last Edit: 08/03/2023 07:47 pm by jimvela »

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #5 on: 08/03/2023 07:06 pm »


As a former long time Ball Aerospace team member, definitely mixed feelings about this.

In many ways, Ball Aerospace was shackled and severely limited by Ball Corp in my opinion and I won't elaborate- but being able to break free of that would potentially be good for them.

On the other hand, the culture clash and a severe impedance mismatch between organizational capabilities and practices would potentially wreck many of the last remaining great parts about Ball Aerospace under Blue ownership.

The only way I can see it being good for the acquired Ball Aerospace team and programs would be if it got better access to capital for projects and in particular much needed facilities and capabilities improvements.

I don't think it would be great for many of my former colleagues- but they're already in a minority at this point as the amount of hiring, growth, and change have been significant in the last few years. 

I can't think of a way that the Ball capabilities would help Blue on the spacecraft front except for perhaps if there was a huge focus at Blue on Lunar program work.  Those lunar programs need very different talent and capabilities from what Kuiper needs.  (And, Frankly, I think Kuiper has exactly the wrong set of folks working at Blue for what that program needs,  except for perhaps some integration and test folks.)

Kuiper is Amazon project and company. Blue is only providing some of launches that are needed to deploy Kuiper satellites. Bezos is only a minor shareholder by percentage in Amazon and no longer runs company.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5400
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1778
  • Likes Given: 1282
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #6 on: 08/03/2023 07:19 pm »
<snip>
I can't think of a way that the Ball capabilities would help Blue on the spacecraft front except for perhaps if there was a huge focus at Blue on Lunar program work.  Those lunar programs need very different talent and capabilities from what Kuiper needs.  (And, Frankly, I think Kuiper has exactly the wrong set of folks working at Blue for what that program needs,  except for perhaps some integration and test folks.)
Blue Origin (really just Bezos) is buying Ball Aerospace before someone else can.

Offline jimvela

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1654
  • Liked: 883
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #7 on: 08/03/2023 07:48 pm »

Kuiper is Amazon project and company. Blue is only providing some of launches that are needed to deploy Kuiper satellites. Bezos is only a minor shareholder by percentage in Amazon and no longer runs company.

You are right, corrected that part of my post above.
« Last Edit: 08/03/2023 07:48 pm by jimvela »

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • Liked: 2489
  • Likes Given: 2173
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #8 on: 08/03/2023 08:14 pm »
<snip>
I can't think of a way that the Ball capabilities would help Blue on the spacecraft front except for perhaps if there was a huge focus at Blue on Lunar program work.  Those lunar programs need very different talent and capabilities from what Kuiper needs.  (And, Frankly, I think Kuiper has exactly the wrong set of folks working at Blue for what that program needs,  except for perhaps some integration and test folks.)
Blue Origin (really just Bezos) is buying Ball Aerospace before someone else can.

Who else might have wanted to purchase Ball?

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #9 on: 08/03/2023 10:53 pm »


As a former long time Ball Aerospace team member, definitely mixed feelings about this.

In many ways, Ball Aerospace was shackled and severely limited by Ball Corp in my opinion and I won't elaborate- but being able to break free of that would potentially be good for them.

On the other hand, the culture clash and a severe impedance mismatch between organizational capabilities and practices would potentially wreck many of the last remaining great parts about Ball Aerospace under Blue ownership.

The only way I can see it being good for the acquired Ball Aerospace team and programs would be if it got better access to capital for projects and in particular much needed facilities and capabilities improvements.

I don't think it would be great for many of my former colleagues- but they're already in a minority at this point as the amount of hiring, growth, and change have been significant in the last few years. 

I can't think of a way that the Ball capabilities would help Blue on the spacecraft front except for perhaps if there was a huge focus at Blue on Lunar program work.  Those lunar programs need very different talent and capabilities from what Kuiper needs.  (And, Frankly, I think Kuiper has exactly the wrong set of folks working at Blue for what that program needs,  except for perhaps some integration and test folks.)

Kuiper is Amazon project and company. Blue is only providing some of launches that are needed to deploy Kuiper satellites. Bezos is only a minor shareholder by percentage in Amazon and no longer runs company.

Fully explaining why Kuiper is buying launches from everyone except the obvious launch provider, even at a risk to their own schedule.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • Liked: 2489
  • Likes Given: 2173
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #10 on: 08/03/2023 11:23 pm »
B.O. fears/respects SpaceX more than the FCC/ITU?

Edit: Oops, I meant to say “Amazon/Kuiper fears…
« Last Edit: 08/04/2023 02:20 am by matthewkantar »

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #11 on: 08/04/2023 12:27 am »
B.O. fears/respects SpaceX more than the FCC/ITU?
At present Blue have nothing to fear from SpaceX as lack of missions is all due to lack of operational LV not competitors outbidding them.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5292
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4139
  • Likes Given: 1664
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #12 on: 08/04/2023 12:49 am »
B.O. fears/respects SpaceX more than the FCC/ITU?
At present Blue have nothing to fear from SpaceX as lack of missions is all due to lack of operational LV not competitors outbidding them.
I do not understand your comment. I guess you mean that BO has booked orders for about 25 New Glenn flights? But how many of these customers will stay on the long-delayed NG, especially in the face of lower-priced alternatives? Thus the "fear" is that Starship will launch before New Glenn does and will vacuum up all the customers.

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2791
  • Liked: 1054
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #13 on: 08/04/2023 04:12 am »
<snip>
I can't think of a way that the Ball capabilities would help Blue on the spacecraft front except for perhaps if there was a huge focus at Blue on Lunar program work.  Those lunar programs need very different talent and capabilities from what Kuiper needs.  (And, Frankly, I think Kuiper has exactly the wrong set of folks working at Blue for what that program needs,  except for perhaps some integration and test folks.)
Blue Origin (really just Bezos) is buying Ball Aerospace before someone else can.

Who else might have wanted to purchase Ball?

Someone with a need for innovative spacecraft, possibly manned? Or someone with commercial station ambitions.

SNC perhaps?

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #14 on: 08/04/2023 04:58 am »
I'm having a hard time with what the new company will be called.  You just can't make up this stuff.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2791
  • Liked: 1054
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #15 on: 08/04/2023 06:30 am »
I'm having a hard time with what the new company will be called.  You just can't make up this stuff.

Blue BallAerospace

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6431
  • Liked: 4512
  • Likes Given: 4996
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #16 on: 08/04/2023 09:29 pm »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1686862326073356288

Quote
It sounds like Blue Origin is considering acquiring Ball Aerospace. Would bolster Blue’s spacecraft division.

I have heard that this is NOT happening, at least not directly.

edit: Not SNC either
edit 2: If you don’t KNOW the short list, don’t guess.  It’s a waste of time.

(For discussions of possible names and nicknames, etc., we do have the Party Thread.)
« Last Edit: 08/04/2023 09:32 pm by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 920
  • Liked: 1424
  • Likes Given: 3399
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #17 on: 08/17/2023 02:16 pm »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1686862326073356288

Quote
It sounds like Blue Origin is considering acquiring Ball Aerospace. Would bolster Blue’s spacecraft division.

I have heard that this is NOT happening, at least not directly.

edit: Not SNC either
edit 2: If you don’t KNOW the short list, don’t guess.  It’s a waste of time.

(For discussions of possible names and nicknames, etc., we do have the Party Thread.)


Confirmed it’s not going to Blue. Ball to be acquired by BAe Systems.

https://spacenews.com/bae-systems-to-acquire-ball-aerospace-for-5-5-billion/

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1734
  • USA
  • Liked: 1448
  • Likes Given: 2456
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #18 on: 08/17/2023 03:16 pm »
Berger was soo certain.

Well, at least we'll be spared the endless jokes, though it might've been fun  ;D

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • Liked: 2489
  • Likes Given: 2173
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #19 on: 08/17/2023 07:54 pm »
Berger was soo certain.

Well, at least we'll be spared the endless jokes, though it might've been fun  ;D

Reread the tweet; everything Berger said could be one hundred percent true.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #20 on: 08/17/2023 10:09 pm »
Berger was soo certain.

Well, at least we'll be spared the endless jokes, though it might've been fun  ;D

Reread the tweet; everything Berger said could be one hundred percent true.

Replay of SLC-6

(Explicitly: BO let it slip that they're interested in SLC-6 about 2 weeks before it was announced that SpaceX will be getting it. Can't remember if it was through Berger or not.)
« Last Edit: 08/18/2023 03:42 am by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #21 on: 08/19/2023 03:57 am »
Since Blue Origin plans to use the Blue Moon lunar landing system as the lunar landing component for the Artemis V mission, I'm curious as to why Blue Origin chose not to team up with Northrop Grumman to revive the canceled Altair lunar lander design given that Northrop Grumman had been contracted to help the Constellation Lunar Lander Project Office develop the Altair system concept and a revived Altair would have allowed Blue Origin to provide an alternative to the Starship HLS variant in terms of developing the lunar landing component for manned Artemis missions.

Offline cohberg

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 243
  • Liked: 769
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #22 on: 08/19/2023 04:30 pm »
/s

I'm curious as to why Blue Origin chose not to team up with Northrop Grumman to revive the canceled Altair lunar lander
Altair would have allowed Blue Origin to provide an alternative to the Starship HLS variant

I too am curious. Here is a quote that I think is relevant

Blue Origin plans to use the Blue Moon lunar landing system



Alternately:

NG is suddenly looking for a way to lose millions of dollars. It gets into bed with BO on Blue Altair Moon
A bunch of bureaucrats figure out early on that NG doesn't actually own Altair IP, NASA does
Dang
NG asks NASA wave all licensing and royalties for commercial use of the Altair design
NASA says no WTF
NG then FOIAs the designs
NASA takes 4 years to return responsive records which only includes 3 public relations emails and 1 heavily redacted PDF
NG then spends billions to complete the conceptual designs based on the incomplete FOIA

Come launch day, BO realizes that New Glenn can't lift Altair
NG / BO determine that to launch Altair you'd need a Ares V.
Through a series of merges Ares V actually now NG contract. Is Vahe231991 a NG shill!???
After years of development and building, NG concedes that its not cheaper and faster to not develop and build Ares V from scratch.
NG asks BO what the NET date for New Armstrong is.
"NET 2060s. Gradatim Ferociter"
Let's instead launch Altair on SLS.
NG asks its good friend Boeing to do it a solid. Haha get it, solid.
Boeing then asks its good friend NASA to wave all licensing and royalties for commercial use of SLS
NASA is so done with SLS that it says yes.
Boeing then happily builds an SLS for Blue Origin. Never thought I would type that sentence.
Billing terms are $4 billion dollars, NET 30. Per launch.

Appendix P rolls around. "WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT HAD TO BE REUSABLE!?"




Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8810
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10155
  • Likes Given: 11885
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #23 on: 09/11/2023 06:22 pm »
Sounds like Blue Origin had a minor reorg, with some people becoming "excess". Not sure this rises to the level of "Layoffs at Blue Origin!", but thought it was something to document.

Employees report a rare round of layoffs at Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin space venture - Yahoo News
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 FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #24 on: 11/03/2023 06:08 am »
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-03/amazon-founder-jeff-bezos-announces-move-to-miami-from-seattle

Quote
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos Announces Move to Miami From Seattle

By Spencer Soper
3 November 2023 at 00:23 GMT
Updated on 3 November 2023 at 00:52 GMT

Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos said he was moving to Miami from the Seattle region, relocating to be closer to his parents and the Cape Canaveral operations of Blue Origin LLC, his space exploration company.

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/robtfrank/status/1720242240138743880

Quote
Jeff Bezos says he’s moving to Florida to be closer to his parents. Another reason — taxes. Washington State has a new 7% tax on capital gains so he will owe $70 million in state taxes for every $1 billion of Amazon stock he sells. And he sells a lot.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2023 06:19 am by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2791
  • Liked: 1054
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #25 on: 11/03/2023 07:16 am »
Well, Bezos becoming an official Florida Man is sure to feed the social media meme machine...


But it does make the question of Bezos interfering with the CEO of BO more due to close proximity, rather than himself becoming CEO, a potential issue if there are some strategic vision alignment problems. Bezos faces strong headwinds if Musk's Starlink turns into a money printer, and may be feeling the gradual approach may put him at a distinct disadvantage should SpaceX suddenly accelerate their operations from the profit windfall.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #26 on: 11/03/2023 02:56 pm »
Well, Bezos becoming an official Florida Man is sure to feed the social media meme machine...


But it does make the question of Bezos interfering with the CEO of BO more due to close proximity, rather than himself becoming CEO, a potential issue if there are some strategic vision alignment problems. Bezos faces strong headwinds if Musk's Starlink turns into a money printer, and may be feeling the gradual approach may put him at a distinct disadvantage should SpaceX suddenly accelerate their operations from the profit windfall.
Limp IMO is a "corporate doctor", there to do the weeding work before they can start rebuilding management.

Remember practically everyone there joined on John Smith's watch.

I hope he is, since he's not a rocket boy.  I was going to say that he's a good a fit as Scully was at Apple, but then looked it up and in fact he WAS one of Scully's execs at Apple...

So at best he's there to clean up shop. JB, if he understands the problem he's facing, is there to try to rebuild.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2023 02:57 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5400
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1778
  • Likes Given: 1282
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #27 on: 11/03/2023 06:04 pm »
<snip>
Remember practically everyone there joined on John Smith's watch.
<snip>
Who is John Smith? ::)
Think you meant Bob Smith.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #28 on: 11/03/2023 06:36 pm »
<snip>
Remember practically everyone there joined on John Smith's watch.
<snip>
Who is John Smith? ::)
Think you meant Bob Smith.
There's got to be a joke in here somewhere. 

Other than the obvious one, which I shouldn't commit to ASCII.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • Liked: 197
  • Likes Given: 161
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #29 on: 11/03/2023 08:52 pm »
<snip>
Remember practically everyone there joined on John Smith's watch.
<snip>
Who is John Smith? ::)
Think you meant Bob Smith.

"John Smith" is also the alias for The Doctor (doctor Who).  SUrley some humor possibilities in that...

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1734
  • USA
  • Liked: 1448
  • Likes Given: 2456
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #30 on: 11/06/2023 03:17 pm »
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-03/amazon-founder-jeff-bezos-announces-move-to-miami-from-seattle

Quote
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos Announces Move to Miami From Seattle

By Spencer Soper
3 November 2023 at 00:23 GMT
Updated on 3 November 2023 at 00:52 GMT

Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos said he was moving to Miami from the Seattle region, relocating to be closer to his parents and the Cape Canaveral operations of Blue Origin LLC, his space exploration company.

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/robtfrank/status/1720242240138743880

Quote
Jeff Bezos says he’s moving to Florida to be closer to his parents. Another reason — taxes. Washington State has a new 7% tax on capital gains so he will owe $70 million in state taxes for every $1 billion of Amazon stock he sells. And he sells a lot.
Ding ding ding. We have a winner - not paying any taxes is the real reason.
Can't have the billionaires paying for the infrastructure and educated workforce they used to get rich. That would be responsible of them.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2023 03:18 pm by deadman1204 »

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #31 on: 11/06/2023 03:41 pm »
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-03/amazon-founder-jeff-bezos-announces-move-to-miami-from-seattle

Quote
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos Announces Move to Miami From Seattle

By Spencer Soper
3 November 2023 at 00:23 GMT
Updated on 3 November 2023 at 00:52 GMT

Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos said he was moving to Miami from the Seattle region, relocating to be closer to his parents and the Cape Canaveral operations of Blue Origin LLC, his space exploration company.

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/robtfrank/status/1720242240138743880

Quote
Jeff Bezos says he’s moving to Florida to be closer to his parents. Another reason — taxes. Washington State has a new 7% tax on capital gains so he will owe $70 million in state taxes for every $1 billion of Amazon stock he sells. And he sells a lot.
Ding ding ding. We have a winner - not paying any taxes is the real reason.
Can't have the billionaires paying for the infrastructure and educated workforce they used to get rich. That would be responsible of them.
Have some sympathy man.  You have ANY idea how expensive marine fuel has gotten lately?  Jeez.  Some people.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #32 on: 11/06/2023 09:20 pm »
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-03/amazon-founder-jeff-bezos-announces-move-to-miami-from-seattle

Quote
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos Announces Move to Miami From Seattle

By Spencer Soper
3 November 2023 at 00:23 GMT
Updated on 3 November 2023 at 00:52 GMT

Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos said he was moving to Miami from the Seattle region, relocating to be closer to his parents and the Cape Canaveral operations of Blue Origin LLC, his space exploration company.

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/robtfrank/status/1720242240138743880

Quote
Jeff Bezos says he’s moving to Florida to be closer to his parents. Another reason — taxes. Washington State has a new 7% tax on capital gains so he will owe $70 million in state taxes for every $1 billion of Amazon stock he sells. And he sells a lot.
Ding ding ding. We have a winner - not paying any taxes is the real reason.
Can't have the billionaires paying for the infrastructure and educated workforce they used to get rich. That would be responsible of them.
Amazon pays a massive amount of property taxes in the communities they have facilities in which does pay for schools and roads and fire and police protection, so it's not like they pay zero.  In some smaller communities they pay a sizeable portion of the local budgets.  Moving to Florida to avoid $70 million per billion dollars of stock sold just proves he's not an idiot.  New York has had a ton of wealthy move out in the past few years, often to Florida, because the taxes are so high.  Since a lot of these people can operate out of any state, it needs to be part of the calculus when states like Washington add a 7% capital gains tax.  It can backfire.

Hopefully, his presence in Florida will mean he will push to get Blue Origin moving faster maybe with some of that $70 million he saves on every billion.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39244
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25171
  • Likes Given: 12101
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #33 on: 11/16/2023 03:58 pm »
If Blue DOES buy ULA, what would be the near and mid-term effects?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline JayWee

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 983
  • Liked: 978
  • Likes Given: 1785
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #34 on: 11/16/2023 04:12 pm »
If Blue DOES buy ULA, what would be the near and mid-term effects?
After Limp throws out Smith's Honeywell management and streamlines BO, Tory comes in with his own team?
 

Offline trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1658
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2120
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #35 on: 11/16/2023 04:51 pm »
If Blue DOES buy ULA, what would be the near and mid-term effects?
After Limp throws out Smith's Honeywell management and streamlines BO, Tory comes in with his own team?
People have talked about how Limp is likely to basically be Jeff Bezos' hatchet man, so it makes perfect sense for Tory to step in after Limp has finished his job. Whether Tory would want to do that is a separate question.

Offline Steve G

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Ottawa, ON
    • Stephen H Garrity
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 56
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #36 on: 11/16/2023 04:56 pm »
If Blue really wanted Tory Bruno, I think they would be able to get him without having to buy an entire rocket company.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5400
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1778
  • Likes Given: 1282
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #37 on: 11/16/2023 06:55 pm »
If Blue really wanted Tory Bruno, I think they would be able to get him without having to buy an entire rocket company.
Don't think so. There are non-compete clauses and NDAs issues that is solved by Bruno staying at the new ULA, instead of going to another company.
« Last Edit: 11/16/2023 08:46 pm by Zed_Noir »

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #38 on: 11/16/2023 07:08 pm »
If Blue DOES buy ULA, what would be the near and mid-term effects?

Some layoffs, internal warfare, famine, maybe even locust.

Irrespective of a buy-out, NG gets delayed, Vulcan has a longer run than currently predicted.

But - eventually, a buyout means that Vulcan will bow out to NG in a cooperative manner, which is a good thing - once NG is ready, we don't want Vulcan's owner fighting it using procurement/legal/policitcal tools.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1658
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2120
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #39 on: 11/16/2023 07:21 pm »
But - eventually, a buyout means that Vulcan will bow out to NG in a cooperative manner, which is a good thing - once NG is ready, we don't want Vulcan's owner fighting it using procurement/legal/policitcal tools.
This would also reduce the likelihood of Vulcan's SMART reuse ever coming to fruition, if the plan is to phase out Vulcan and replace it with New Glenn anyway.

Offline JayWee

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 983
  • Liked: 978
  • Likes Given: 1785
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #40 on: 11/16/2023 07:50 pm »
Irrespective of a buy-out, NG gets delayed, Vulcan has a longer run than currently predicted.
Hmm.. BO effectively "subcontracting" Kuiper NG launches to Vulcan could make sense.

Offline StraumliBlight

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 179
  • UK
  • Liked: 370
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #41 on: 11/16/2023 08:54 pm »
This would also reduce the likelihood of Vulcan's SMART reuse ever coming to fruition, if the plan is to phase out Vulcan and replace it with New Glenn anyway.

Tory Bruno is currently doing a Reddit AMA and seems pretty upbeat on SMART.

Quote
Q: Also how would the engine bay recovery and refurbishment operations work for BE-4 and Vulcan? Do you think there will be problems with contamination from sea water?

A: Recovery will return to Florida. Initial engines will likely return to factory for full check out. Later on intend to inspect and reinstall at the Cape.
The key is to not get them wet. Fortunately, the exit plane of the bells sits over 20 feet above the water. Also developing options for spray shields
.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #42 on: 11/16/2023 09:19 pm »
This would also reduce the likelihood of Vulcan's SMART reuse ever coming to fruition, if the plan is to phase out Vulcan and replace it with New Glenn anyway.

Tory Bruno is currently doing a Reddit AMA and seems pretty upbeat on SMART.

Quote
Q: Also how would the engine bay recovery and refurbishment operations work for BE-4 and Vulcan? Do you think there will be problems with contamination from sea water?

A: Recovery will return to Florida. Initial engines will likely return to factory for full check out. Later on intend to inspect and reinstall at the Cape.
The key is to not get them wet. Fortunately, the exit plane of the bells sits over 20 feet above the water. Also developing options for spray shields
.

His job is to do exactly that.  Until the sale is final, you go full bore as if it isn't on the table even.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #43 on: 11/27/2023 11:49 am »
This may be nothing to do with Blue Origin - can move elsewhere once clear - but any ideas?

Quote
An unusual piece of cargo coming into Port Canaveral this morning from the shipyard of a contractor known to work with Blue Origin (and other Space companies...)

nsf.live/spacecoast

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1729117261724868815

Offline seb21051

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #44 on: 11/27/2023 03:44 pm »
Inverse Chopstick carriage.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #45 on: 11/27/2023 06:40 pm »
https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1729201462201454999

Quote
The Blue Origin-owned crane at Port Canaveral is moving in to lift the delivery that arrived this morning... (I think it's a jig of some kind)

nsf.live/spacecoast

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #46 on: 11/27/2023 07:22 pm »
https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1729232959616491908

Quote
Big day for Blue Origin fans!

The (suspected) jig has now been unloaded at Port Canaveral by the company crane - the first major lift for this crane too!

nsf.live/spacecoast

Offline jstrotha0975

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 560
  • United States
  • Liked: 329
  • Likes Given: 2577
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #47 on: 12/13/2023 02:15 pm »
Any updates on Blue Origins landing barge?

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #48 on: 12/14/2023 06:07 pm »
https://twitter.com/lexfridman/status/1735360877312778404

Quote
Here's my conversation with @jeffbezos, founder of Amazon and Blue Origin. This is his first time doing a long-form conversation of this kind, and it was an epic one.

It's here on X in full & is up on YouTube, Spotify, and everywhere else.

Timestamps:
0:00 - Introduction
0:24 - Texas ranch and childhood
4:02 - Space exploration and rocket engineering
16:36 - Physics
26:10 - New Glenn rocket
1:08:59 - Lunar program
1:18:55 - Amazon
1:36:16 - Principles
1:54:56 - Productivity
2:05:34 - Future of humanity


Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #49 on: 12/14/2023 06:08 pm »
From the above interview:

Quote
.@JeffBezos re: New Glenn in conversation with @lexfridman:

"Very optimistic" for a first launch in 2024, but unsure what payload it will carry. Possibly EscaPADE. "We also have other things that might go on that first mission."

"Extremely nervous" about first launch.

https://twitter.com/johnkrausphotos/status/1735365667937722502

Quote
"Blue Origin needs to be much faster and it's one of the reasons I left my role as the CEO of Amazon a couple of years ago. I wanted to come in, and Blue Origin needs me right now."

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47311
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80117
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #50 on: 12/15/2023 06:02 am »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1735406727917379601

Quote
I do love to see Jeff Bezos engaged at Blue Origin. "We're going to become the world's most decisive company across any industry," he said. "We're going to get really good at taking appropriate technology risks, making those decisions quickly." Article:

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/jeff-bezos-says-what-were-all-thinking-blue-origin-needs-to-be-much-faster/

Quote
Jeff Bezos says what we’re all thinking: “Blue Origin needs to be much faster”
"We're going to become the world's most decisive company across any industry."

by Eric Berger - Dec 14, 2023 8:37pm GMT

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #51 on: 12/15/2023 04:08 pm »
Discovered this Youtube presenter. Has some good videos worth a watch.



In regards to this thread forget RL bit, what is interesting is his take on Blue.

My worry with Blue is succession especially as its a very expensive hobby company. Will Bezos estate keep funding it to tune of $1B a year if he dies.  Just look at Stratolauncher history.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5400
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1778
  • Likes Given: 1282
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #52 on: 12/15/2023 06:29 pm »
<snip>
In regards to this thread forget RL bit, what is interesting is his take on Blue.

My worry with Blue is succession especially as its a very expensive hobby company. Will Bezos estate keep funding it to tune of $1B a year if he dies.  Just look at Stratolauncher history.
It is up to Jeff to set up and funded a trust to keep Blue Origin as ongoing business after he isn't around.

But I don't think Blue Origin's current woes is money. The company has no focus and no long term goals. Their previous CEO and top management is too much bean counting and empire building without too much long term strategy for the company.

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #53 on: 12/15/2023 09:24 pm »
<snip>
In regards to this thread forget RL bit, what is interesting is his take on Blue.

My worry with Blue is succession especially as its a very expensive hobby company. Will Bezos estate keep funding it to tune of $1B a year if he dies.  Just look at Stratolauncher history.
It is up to Jeff to set up and funded a trust to keep Blue Origin as ongoing business after he isn't around.

But I don't think Blue Origin's current woes is money. The company has no focus and no long term goals. Their previous CEO and top management is too much bean counting and empire building without too much long term strategy for the company.
It's up to Jeff to turn it into a profitable business as soon as possible so it can keep going after he's gone.  If it makes money doing what he envisions, it will continue.  Then his heirs can keep it or sell it.  If it needs a trust to keep funding it in the long haul, it's a waste of time and money.

Offline Oersted

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2858
  • Liked: 3988
  • Likes Given: 2722
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #54 on: 12/31/2023 07:05 am »
It's up to Jeff to turn it into a profitable business as soon as possible so it can keep going after he's gone.  If it makes money doing what he envisions, it will continue.  Then his heirs can keep it or sell it.  If it needs a trust to keep funding it in the long haul, it's a waste of time and money.

Disagree.

I don't think asteroid mining will become profitable over a short lifespan. If an economic construct is set up that will funnel warehouse money (i.e. Amazon) into a space exploration program then that is perfectly fine.

NASA has not been running a profitable operation over its lifetime either, yet has still been a success in many ways, especially in the early years.

If Bezos, whose income exceeds that of many nation states, wants to earn money on Amazon and spend it on Blue Origin, by all means he should do it. As long as the overall earnings are sufficient it will be a viable operation. Much better than spending all his money on trivial rich guy pursuits...

Blue has gotten off to a slow and rocky start but it can be turned around if new management implements a culture change.

Maybe they should hire some ex-SpaceX managers.

Having SpaceX and Blue Origin compete with each other is the dream scenario. In a time where there is a huge popular culture backlash against space exploration and the development of new space technology we need both companies to thrive. 

Offline seb21051

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #55 on: 12/31/2023 05:52 pm »
Seems its difficult for the company to go Celeriter (speedy) when its Owner, Leader and Funder is stuck at Graditem (gradual). JB talks a good game in the Lex Fridman Interview. He really does. About becoming quick and decisive. Is he spending every waking moment setting them on the right path? Is he selling all his toys and then pumping that money in BO? Is that the kind of commitment it would take?

In all seriousness, where is the real, driving, win-at-all-costs, do-or-die motivation evident in their actions?

What are the consequences if they do not change their culture? Will JB go bankrupt? Unlikely. He might close BO without consequence except to his pride. It all seems to be a personal pride play.

For spacex and EM, in the mid to late 2000s, it was literally succeed or go down the tubes. Is that true today for JB, as the driving force behind BO?

It has been suggested in this thread that they should get some spacexers to help them out, motivate them, drive them to exceed. They have hired quite a few ex spacexers. I guess you'd have to be specific about which SXers you need.

Big picture, I just don't see the hunger that drives them out of their funk yet. There were the court cases that they initiated, which to me indicated hurt pride, but the outcome of those were not sufficiently positive to fuel real change. They did get their HLS contract, but thats about it. Again, MHO.

I would be very glad to see them break out of their malaise. I think they can, but do they REALLY have the drive?
« Last Edit: 12/31/2023 06:09 pm by seb21051 »

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #56 on: 12/31/2023 06:57 pm »
Seems its difficult for the company to go Celeriter (speedy) when its Owner, Leader and Funder is stuck at Graditem (gradual). JB talks a good game in the Lex Fridman Interview. He really does. About becoming quick and decisive. Is he spending every waking moment setting them on the right path? Is he selling all his toys and then pumping that money in BO? Is that the kind of commitment it would take?

In all seriousness, where is the real, driving, win-at-all-costs, do-or-die motivation evident in their actions?

What are the consequences if they do not change their culture? Will JB go bankrupt? Unlikely. He might close BO without consequence except to his pride. It all seems to be a personal pride play.

For spacex and EM, in the mid to late 2000s, it was literally succeed or go down the tubes. Is that true today for JB, as the driving force behind BO?

It has been suggested in this thread that they should get some spacexers to help them out, motivate them, drive them to exceed. They have hired quite a few ex spacexers. I guess you'd have to be specific about which SXers you need.

Big picture, I just don't see the hunger that drives them out of their funk yet. There were the court cases that they initiated, which to me indicated hurt pride, but the outcome of those were not sufficiently positive to fuel real change. They did get their HLS contract, but thats about it. Again, MHO.

I would be very glad to see them break out of their malaise. I think they can, but do they REALLY have the drive?
They also need a goal and a viable plan. A goal that's more than just lip service to "futurists".

SpaceX has a goal: Colonize Mars.  Precisely defined, and can start within the decade.

Not all goals are created equal.

"Millions of people working and living in space" (presumably O'Neill cylinders) is centuries away even if SpaceX were aiming at it.  If it will ever be done at all.

There's no "Colonize the moon" since it doesn't make sense (too close to earth and too hostile), and "Lunar base" is not much different than ISS, but beached.

This may seem anecdotal to some, but I'd propose a simple test:  How many people working on Starship (or at SpaceX in general) are truly motivated by their goal, compared to how many people working at BO are truly motivated by BO's goal.

Musk imagines moving to Mars at his old age. Mr. Limp is probably thinking about Hawaii or the Caribbean islands.
« Last Edit: 01/01/2024 01:04 am by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #57 on: 01/01/2024 07:12 am »
NASA has not been running a profitable operation over its lifetime either, yet has still been a success in many ways, especially in the early years.
Since when has NASA ever had the mission to run a profitable operation?  They are a government agency, not a private business.  If Bezos doesn't want to turn a profit soon, he should just sell off Blue or shut it down.  Without a profit goal, or any urgency to improve cash flow,  there is no urgency to be efficient or goal oriented.

NASA has no urgency or incentive to be all that efficient and that is why SLS is ridiculously expensive and taking way too long to get flying.   It is why NASA should never be developing any manned spacecraft or launch vehicles ever again.  Research on enabling technology, yes.  Developing manned spacecraft on the whims of Congress, absolutely not.

SpaceX is constantly generating significant amounts of revenue.  Musk says StarLink is now cash flow positive.  He gets it and that is why he is moving a lot faster than Blue.

Profit and other rewards along with the threat of losing your business or job if you don't succeed is what motivates success.  It is basic to human nature.  Jeff Bezos needs to remind himself of this.

Offline seb21051

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #58 on: 01/01/2024 05:22 pm »
Anyone keeping score as regards the Limp pruning expected at BO?

Obviously Smith, and one or two other SVPs are already gone. But how about the overweight middle management crowd? Or is the middle management crowd really overweight? Could the VP ranks be the problem? How long will this take to shake out? Assuming one has to replace some of the pruned crop, since they would comprise the incompetent and competent-but-unliked-by-current senior-management.

Also, where do you get the real stars that you need to turn this boat around? Pretty sure they are generally in very high demand in their respective niches. Good thing Uncle Jeff has deep pockets.

Makes me think of the 30 year effort to make a winning team of the Lions. The number of Head Coaches they had to go through to find Campbell. Once he was in place things started to come together quite quickly, it seems. Is Limp the head coach that will make this happen?
« Last Edit: 01/01/2024 05:25 pm by seb21051 »

Offline gin455res

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • bristol, uk
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 72
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #59 on: 01/01/2024 05:33 pm »
Would it be feasible to run a BE-4 initially on dimethyl ether and switch to methane mid flight to optimise isp but benefit from better density impulse at lift-off?

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #60 on: 01/01/2024 05:35 pm »
Anyone keeping score as regards the Limp pruning expected at BO?

Obviously Smith, and one or two other SVPs are already gone. But how about the overweight middle management crowd? Or is the middle management crowd really overweight? Could the VP ranks be the problem? How long will this take to shake out? Assuming one has to replace some of the pruned crop, since they would comprise the incompetent and competent-but-unliked-by-current senior-management.

Also, where do you get the real stars that you need to turn this boat around? Pretty sure they are generally in very high demand in their respective niches. Good thing Uncle Jeff has deep pockets.

Makes me think of the 30 year effort to make a winning team of the Lions. The number of Head Coaches they had to go through to find Campbell. Once he was in place things started to come together quite quickly, it seems. Is Limp the head coach that will make this happen?
In my experience, once you have a rotten SVP or VP, practically all management under them is shite.

The solution is often to promote from within, find those people in the tech ranks that have the gene to also manage.  Those make the only managers worth anything, in comparison with people who "learned how to manage" in school.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline seb21051

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 87
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #61 on: 01/01/2024 05:38 pm »
A footnote from my favourite Ai, google chat: (This is obviously not news, just a summary)

"There has been a significant talent exodus from Blue Origin in recent months. Here are some of the key departures that have been reported:

New Shepard SVP Steve Bennett
Chief of Mission Assurance Jeff Ashby
Senior Director of Recruiting Crystal Freund
National Security Sales Director Scott Jacobs
New Glenn Senior Directors Jim Centore, Bob Ess, and Tod Byquist
New Glenn Senior Finance Manager Bill Scammell

These departures have been attributed to various factors, including dissatisfaction with the leadership of CEO Bob Smith and a push for all employees to return to the office.

It’s also worth noting that the attrition rate at Blue Origin has reportedly exceeded 20% for 2021.

Please note that this information is based on the latest available data and the actual situation may have changed."
« Last Edit: 01/01/2024 05:40 pm by seb21051 »

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #62 on: 01/01/2024 07:23 pm »
Anyone keeping score as regards the Limp pruning expected at BO?

Obviously Smith, and one or two other SVPs are already gone. But how about the overweight middle management crowd? Or is the middle management crowd really overweight? Could the VP ranks be the problem? How long will this take to shake out? Assuming one has to replace some of the pruned crop, since they would comprise the incompetent and competent-but-unliked-by-current senior-management.

Also, where do you get the real stars that you need to turn this boat around? Pretty sure they are generally in very high demand in their respective niches. Good thing Uncle Jeff has deep pockets.

Makes me think of the 30 year effort to make a winning team of the Lions. The number of Head Coaches they had to go through to find Campbell. Once he was in place things started to come together quite quickly, it seems. Is Limp the head coach that will make this happen?
In my experience, once you have a rotten SVP or VP, practically all management under them is shite.

The solution is often to promote from within, find those people in the tech ranks that have the gene to also manage.  Those make the only managers worth anything, in comparison with people who "learned how to manage" in school.
In my experience, people don't learn how to manage in school.  They only learn theory there.  You learn to manage by observing others (competent ones) manage and by managing first yourself effectively and moving up the ladder steadily gaining responsibility and experience.  It also involves listening to the people you are managing.  You need to know both the good and the bad.  You never kill the messenger when the news is bad,  You also need to understand what you are managing and the types of challenges you are facing.  A good manager is also a good communicator making it clear what needs to be done and realistically by when.  Really good managers are really hard to find.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3358
  • Liked: 6044
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #63 on: 01/01/2024 09:56 pm »
In my experience, people don't learn how to manage in school.  They only learn theory there.  You learn to manage by observing others (competent ones) manage and by managing first yourself effectively and moving up the ladder steadily gaining responsibility and experience.  It also involves listening to the people you are managing.  You need to know both the good and the bad.  You never kill the messenger when the news is bad,  You also need to understand what you are managing and the types of challenges you are facing.  A good manager is also a good communicator making it clear what needs to be done and realistically by when.  Really good managers are really hard to find.
Bold mine.  When trying to build technically challenging gadgets on a tight schedule, it *really* helps if the chief bureaucrat is intimately familiar with the technology.  Looking at historical examples of large complex projects done quickly, names such as Von Braun, Oppenhiemer, Korolev, and Brunel stand out.  All were designers first and managers later, and kept their taste for the technical details as their organization grew.  I'd guess that in the current examples, the amount of concern with the technical details would be Musk first, then Bruno, then Bezos.  In my mind, anyway, it's not a coincidence that that's the order of technical progress.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39244
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25171
  • Likes Given: 12101
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #64 on: 01/01/2024 11:10 pm »
[Two embedded quotes deleted.]

Note that BE-4 was supposed to be "flight ready" in 2017 (it wasn't until 2023, 6 years late). Vulcan was supposed to fly in 2019, so it'll be 5 years late... New Glenn was supposed to launch in 2020, and MAYBE will launch by end of 2024, so at best 4 years late. SLS was mandated to fly in 2016 (didn't fly until 2022 and won't fly with crew probably until 2025, so between 6 and 9 years late). And these were supposed to be much more realistic, easy vehicles. "Tortoise and the hare, we seem slower but we do what we say we'll do, on time" sort of thing.

The 2016 ITS announcement said 2020 for first orbital (i.e. two stage) tests for ITS. Starship met this in 2023 (~40 months later than the graph indicated). Starship is *smaller* than ITS, but not by much once foreseeable upgrades are in place. The Moon has really replaced Mars as the initial goal, and that initial landing on the Moon will probably be in 2025 (compared to 2022 for the uncrewed Mars landing) although 2024 isn't impossible, in line with 40 month delay. Crewed Artemis in 2026-2027 is feasible. (and Mars 2027/2027 uncrewed and crewed by 2029/2031 is not out of the question at all, if Artemis works.)

I'd say Musk (flawed as he is) has no worse grasp on reality, full time coherency, etc, than his clearest competitors. He had to descope *slightly* from ITS to Starship and use Starship initially for lunar missions instead of first Mars, but overall SpaceX is not any worse schedule-wise than all their biggest competitors. Starlink is absolutely insane.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2024 10:44 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #65 on: 01/02/2024 12:33 am »
[Two embedded quotes deleted.]
Note that BE-4 was supposed to be "flight ready" in 2017 (it wasn't until 2023, 6 years late). Vulcan was supposed to fly in 2019, so it'll be 5 years late... New Glenn was supposed to launch in 2020, and MAYBE will launch by end of 2024, so at best 4 years late. SLS was mandated to fly in 2016 (didn't fly until 2022 and won't fly with crew probably until 2025, so between 6 and 9 years late). And these were supposed to be much more realistic, easy vehicles. "Tortoise and the hare, we seem slower but we do what we say we'll do, on time" sort of thing.

The 2016 ITS announcement said 2020 for first orbital (i.e. two stage) tests for ITS. Starship met this in 2023 (~40 months later than the graph indicated). Starship is *smaller* than ITS, but not by much once foreseeable upgrades are in place. The Moon has really replaced Mars as the initial goal, and that initial landing on the Moon will probably be in 2025 (compared to 2022 for the uncrewed Mars landing) although 2024 isn't impossible, in line with 40 month delay. Crewed Artemis in 2026-2027 is feasible. (and Mars 2027/2027 uncrewed and crewed by 2029/2031 is not out of the question at all, if Artemis works.)

I'd say Musk (flawed as he is) has no worse grasp on reality, full time coherency, etc, than his clearest competitors. He had to descope *slightly* from ITS to Starship and use Starship initially for lunar missions instead of first Mars, but overall SpaceX is not any worse schedule-wise than all their biggest competitors. Starlink is absolutely insane.
I think the coherence barbs are aimed at extra-curricular comments on various topics, but reality has shown that some crazy how they do not contradict brilliant leadership of his companies.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2024 10:46 pm by zubenelgenubi »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5400
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1778
  • Likes Given: 1282
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #66 on: 01/02/2024 01:26 am »
<snip>
In my experience, people don't learn how to manage in school.  They only learn theory there.  You learn to manage by observing others (competent ones) manage and by managing first yourself effectively and moving up the ladder steadily gaining responsibility and experience.  It also involves listening to the people you are managing.  You need to know both the good and the bad.  You never kill the messenger when the news is bad,  You also need to understand what you are managing and the types of challenges you are facing.  A good manager is also a good communicator making it clear what needs to be done and realistically by when.  Really good managers are really hard to find.
There is a large pool of people that fits your criteria. They are the middle ranking staff officers in the military that have technical qualifications. The really good one become flag officers. ;)


Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10120
  • US
  • Liked: 13683
  • Likes Given: 5865
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #67 on: 01/04/2024 07:39 pm »
I think some people are getting confused, this thread isn't about Elon Musk.

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11002
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7292
  • Likes Given: 70076
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #68 on: 01/05/2024 07:50 pm »
I think some people are getting confused, this thread isn't about Elon Musk.
Moderator:
Thread trimmed, again.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2024 08:47 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #69 on: 01/07/2024 12:57 am »
I wonder how many of these folk who have left Blue actually jumped? I think most were pushed.

I say this because you rarely dis a former employer if you're the one choosing to leave - it is just stupid to burn bridges that way and professional executives just do not behave that way. That some of these people are doing so, suggests they didn't actually leave willingly, and they have an axe to grind.

Bezos originally setup Blue as a direct rival to Boeing and Lockheed. In 2000, SpaceX was still 2 years in the future, so they were not part of the equation, and the only "style" of operation was the standard government contractor model, and this is the same model around which Blue was arranged.

At that time, Blue's goal was to make a new operation that would try to replace either the Atlas-V or the Delta-IV EELV's, both of which were approaching their first launches at the time. The goal was to offer similar capabilities at a lower cost, and put one or other operation out of business, taking their market share.

So the management team was setup that way - and that was the "culture" that Blue has had ever since.

Over the last 23 years since that decision, SpaceX have come along and shown the industry that the "old.space" approach is a very outdated model and that there are far, far better approaches that work.

Bezos recently retired from Amazon to spend more time at Blue. It is clear to me that he has decided to do this in order to take a much firmer hand at the company so he can force Blue to change the entire culture. He is doing so because Blue is already at least one decade behind SpaceX and everyone knows it, and if they don't change immediately, they will quickly find themselves TWO decades behind SpaceX and more importantly, they will be left with zero market share.

The current management team is not inclined to do things the way SpaceX does, and most of the ones who would like to change simply don't seem to know HOW. So I think Bezos is simply clearing the decks of all management personnel who can't adapt to newer, faster ways of doing things, starting with senior management and moving into middle management and other positions as necessary. He is trying to change the entire culture - and it is a massive task.

IMHO there are plenty of former SpaceX personnel whom he can hire as replacements for the outgoing managers, and they should be able to guide Blue onto the correct rails. Bezos certainly has plenty deep enough pockets to hire all the key individuals he wants, or needs, to.

I don't expect to see miracles happen on New Glenn's development schedule, because that's too near-term to see the changes. But I would expect management changes that happen now, will affect New Armstrong's development approach, which I expect will more closely resemble Starship's - unless Bezos can come up with an even better approach than SpaceX's - something that I believe *is* actually feasible.

Only time will tell on how successful Bezos is in changing Blue's culture and saving the company.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 01/07/2024 01:16 am by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline deltaV

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2083
  • Change in velocity
  • Liked: 549
  • Likes Given: 1803
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #70 on: 01/07/2024 04:25 am »
But I would expect management changes that happen now, will affect New Armstrong's development approach

Is New Armstrong likely to actually be built any time soon? My guess is no. It seems better to focus on making New Glenn better and making payloads for it, activities which could certainly benefit from improved culture. New Glenn upgraded with a reusable second stage and in-space propellant transfer would be good for commercial, government, and moon exploration missions. You can do a lot with 45 tonnes with a 7 meter diameter fairing. Why build another multi-billion-dollar launcher they don't need?
« Last Edit: 01/07/2024 04:57 am by deltaV »

Offline trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1658
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2120
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #71 on: 01/07/2024 06:24 am »
Bezos originally setup Blue as a direct rival to Boeing and Lockheed. In 2000, SpaceX was still 2 years in the future, so they were not part of the equation, and the only "style" of operation was the standard government contractor model, and this is the same model around which Blue was arranged.

At that time, Blue's goal was to make a new operation that would try to replace either the Atlas-V or the Delta-IV EELV's, both of which were approaching their first launches at the time. The goal was to offer similar capabilities at a lower cost, and put one or other operation out of business, taking their market share.

So the management team was setup that way - and that was the "culture" that Blue has had ever since.

Is this actually true? One argument I see frequently for why Blue Origin is so far behind in terms of putting payloads into orbit is that for their first decade or so of existence, they were basically just a small think-tank. So not modeled after Boeing or Lockheed, not trying to build a new EELV-class vehicle, just "let's research some stuff and see what we find."

I don't know enough about the specifics of Blue's formative years to speak to their management structure during that era, but I don't think it's necessarily accurate to characterize them as attempting to copy Old Space from the beginning.

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #72 on: 01/07/2024 07:21 am »
But I would expect management changes that happen now, will affect New Armstrong's development approach

Is New Armstrong likely to actually be built any time soon? My guess is no. It seems better to focus on making New Glenn better and making payloads for it, activities which could certainly benefit from improved culture. New Glenn upgraded with a reusable second stage and in-space propellant transfer would be good for commercial, government, and moon exploration missions. You can do a lot with 45 tonnes with a 7 meter diameter fairing. Why build another multi-billion-dollar launcher they don't need?
I agree on this point.  New Glenn is big enough for LEO and cis-lunar with refueling.  I think the bulk of the demand will be within cis-lunar space for the next two decades.  Blue would be smart to focus on that while SpaceX figures out if Mars is a viable market.  New Glenn can probably get some upgrades if there is demand for somewhat heavier cargo.

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #73 on: 01/07/2024 07:24 am »
Bezos originally setup Blue as a direct rival to Boeing and Lockheed. In 2000, SpaceX was still 2 years in the future, so they were not part of the equation, and the only "style" of operation was the standard government contractor model, and this is the same model around which Blue was arranged.

At that time, Blue's goal was to make a new operation that would try to replace either the Atlas-V or the Delta-IV EELV's, both of which were approaching their first launches at the time. The goal was to offer similar capabilities at a lower cost, and put one or other operation out of business, taking their market share.

So the management team was setup that way - and that was the "culture" that Blue has had ever since.

Is this actually true? One argument I see frequently for why Blue Origin is so far behind in terms of putting payloads into orbit is that for their first decade or so of existence, they were basically just a small think-tank. So not modeled after Boeing or Lockheed, not trying to build a new EELV-class vehicle, just "let's research some stuff and see what we find."

I don't know enough about the specifics of Blue's formative years to speak to their management structure during that era, but I don't think it's necessarily accurate to characterize them as attempting to copy Old Space from the beginning.
Even if they weren't attempting to copy old space in the early years, they got there anyways and probably because of who they hired to run it.

Offline trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1658
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2120
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #74 on: 01/07/2024 02:59 pm »
Bezos originally setup Blue as a direct rival to Boeing and Lockheed. In 2000, SpaceX was still 2 years in the future, so they were not part of the equation, and the only "style" of operation was the standard government contractor model, and this is the same model around which Blue was arranged.

At that time, Blue's goal was to make a new operation that would try to replace either the Atlas-V or the Delta-IV EELV's, both of which were approaching their first launches at the time. The goal was to offer similar capabilities at a lower cost, and put one or other operation out of business, taking their market share.

So the management team was setup that way - and that was the "culture" that Blue has had ever since.
Is this actually true? One argument I see frequently for why Blue Origin is so far behind in terms of putting payloads into orbit is that for their first decade or so of existence, they were basically just a small think-tank. So not modeled after Boeing or Lockheed, not trying to build a new EELV-class vehicle, just "let's research some stuff and see what we find."

I don't know enough about the specifics of Blue's formative years to speak to their management structure during that era, but I don't think it's necessarily accurate to characterize them as attempting to copy Old Space from the beginning.
Even if they weren't attempting to copy old space in the early years, they got there anyways and probably because of who they hired to run it.
Honestly, I completely agree, but I wanted to make sure we're putting Blue Origin's management in the proper historical context.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 1909
  • Likes Given: 1891
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #75 on: 01/08/2024 04:45 am »
Blue Origin was founded in 2000 and flew the Goddard vehicle with BE-1 engines in 2006. That's reasonably quick progress for a small private venture. First flight of New Shepard in 2015 was also reasonably quick. The Blue Origin president at that time had been with Kistler Aerospace, (in)famous for the K-1, where he worked with George Mueller, former head of the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight. That leadership apparently left Blue Origin in 2017. What happened at Blue in the past 7 years is ... oft reported elsewhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Origin_Goddard
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline Tywin

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #76 on: 01/08/2024 07:00 am »
After 12 years developing the BE-4, having no experience with orbital rocket engines, after being a small company with only 500 employees, they now have the most powerful methalox rocket engine, in the world, complet operative!!!!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BE-4

The tortoise continues at its steady pace...
« Last Edit: 01/08/2024 07:01 am by Tywin »
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #77 on: 01/09/2024 05:46 pm »
@sdsds I'll grant you, Blue seemed to make fair progress early on in the organization, but the ultimate metric in the launch industry is how many customer payloads you deliver to LEO.

Aside from the BE-4 engines on Vulcan, the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

No wonder Bezos feels the current management must be changed.

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #78 on: 01/09/2024 08:10 pm »
@sdsds I'll grant you, Blue seemed to make fair progress early on in the organization, but the ultimate metric in the launch industry is how many customer payloads you deliver to LEO.

Aside from the BE-4 engines on Vulcan, the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

No wonder Bezos feels the current management must be changed.

Ross.

Reminder: Blue Origin's big pivot towards developing an orbital rocket happened in 2017.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Tywin

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #79 on: 01/09/2024 09:20 pm »
@sdsds I'll grant you, Blue seemed to make fair progress early on in the organization, but the ultimate metric in the launch industry is how many customer payloads you deliver to LEO.

Aside from the BE-4 engines on Vulcan, the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

No wonder Bezos feels the current management must be changed.

Ross.

Reminder: Blue Origin's big pivot towards developing an orbital rocket happened in 2017.

They never want to understand this...

Is like Masten was, change by the owner and put a 1 billion every year after 2016...but the company before, was NO a orbital rocket company, or even have money for nothing more than pure research...

The same with Armadillo...
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #80 on: 01/09/2024 10:15 pm »
@sdsds I'll grant you, Blue seemed to make fair progress early on in the organization, but the ultimate metric in the launch industry is how many customer payloads you deliver to LEO.

Aside from the BE-4 engines on Vulcan, the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

No wonder Bezos feels the current management must be changed.

Ross.

Reminder: Blue Origin's big pivot towards developing an orbital rocket happened in 2017.

They never want to understand this...

Is like Masten was, change by the owner and put a 1 billion every year after 2016...but the company before, was NO a orbital rocket company, or even have money for nothing more than pure research...

The same with Armadillo...
Says Wikipedia:

"Blue Origin publicly announced their orbital launch vehicle intentions in September 2015"

So definitely not 2017.

But wait. Wasn't New Sheppard supposed to be a real stepping stone on the way to an orbital rocket (unlike, say, Virgin's development plan?)

Yes it was.  SpaceX went "orbital unmanned first", BO went "Suborbital manned". At the time, that rational was not hidden and there was plenty discussion over which is better.

So this takes us back to 2012 or so, right?

But wait.

Why was Blue Origin founded? What was the goal?  (Hint: it's hidden in the name)

From day one, BO was about extending humanity from Earth outwards. Suborbital tourism was an add-on that was supposed to be just a step, with a bit of utility from tourism revenue.

From JB himself.  He wants to move industry to space. Always has. He's an "ONeillean" ever since he was in school. 

Well?
« Last Edit: 01/09/2024 10:39 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7039
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 1909
  • Likes Given: 1891
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #81 on: 01/09/2024 10:39 pm »
[...] the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

23 years, still going strong, and still without a failed orbital launch attempt!

He's an "ONeillean"

He's an "ONeillean" realist, recognizing it's a long game. Gradatim Ferociter.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #82 on: 01/09/2024 10:40 pm »
@sdsds I'll grant you, Blue seemed to make fair progress early on in the organization, but the ultimate metric in the launch industry is how many customer payloads you deliver to LEO.

Aside from the BE-4 engines on Vulcan, the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

No wonder Bezos feels the current management must be changed.

Ross.

Reminder: Blue Origin's big pivot towards developing an orbital rocket happened in 2017.

They never want to understand this...

Is like Masten was, change by the owner and put a 1 billion every year after 2016...but the company before, was NO a orbital rocket company, or even have money for nothing more than pure research...

The same with Armadillo...
Says Wikipedia:

Blue Origin publicly announced their orbital launch vehicle intentions in September 2015

So not 2017.

But wait. Wasn't New Sheppard supposed to be a real stepping stone otw to an orbital rocket (unlike, say, Virgin's development plan?)

Yes it was.  SpaceX went "orbital unmanned first", BO went "Suborbital manned". At the time, that rational was not hidden.

So this takes us back to 2012 or so, right?

But wait.

Why was Blue Origin founded? What was the goal?  (Hint: it's hidden in the name)

From day one, BO was about extending humanity from Earth outwards. Suborbital tourism was an add-on that was supposed to be just a step, with a bit of utility from tourism revenue.

From JB himself.  He wants to move industry to space. Always has. He's an "ONeillean" ever since he was in school. 

Well?

The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built. It's when the company started to expand from ~1,000 employees to ~10,000+ now.

Yes, New Shepard was originally going to be a lead-in to an orbital vehicle. However, we all know that's not what actually happened. That concept never got funded for development. Things would have gone very differently if NASA had selected Blue Origin for the commercial crew program.

Being founded as a company with the goal of getting humanity into space doesn't mean they were working on orbital LV development from Day 1. Lofty goals don't much when the first decade + of your existence is focused on doing low-budget VTVL research and development.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #83 on: 01/09/2024 10:43 pm »
[...] the company is now 23 years old and they still haven't reached orbit with their own rocket.

Any way you look at it, that's not very impressive.

23 years, still going strong, and still without a failed orbital launch attempt!

He's an "ONeillean"

He's an "ONeillean" realist, recognizing it's a long game. Gradatim Ferociter.

Sure.  Nobody was expecting O'Neil Cylinders by Friday.  But to say that this was just an innocent suborbital company that a few years ago decided to go orbital - that's a big stretch.

As for Latin motos, coats of arms, and other marketing shenanigans - I prefer "send it" and Starman riding a Roadster in Heliocentric orbit...   More real.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #84 on: 01/09/2024 10:52 pm »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built. It's when the company started to expand from ~1,000 employees to ~10,000+ now.

Yes, New Shepard was originally going to be a lead-in to an orbital vehicle. However, we all know that's not what actually happened. That concept never got funded for development. Things would have gone very differently if NASA had selected Blue Origin for the commercial crew program.

Being founded as a company with the goal of getting humanity into space doesn't mean they were working on orbital LV development from Day 1. Lofty goals don't much when the first decade + of your existence is focused on doing low-budget VTVL research and development.

Again, Wikipedia:

"Blue Origin began work on the BE-4 in 2011, although no public announcement was made until September 2014. "

BE-4 was a booster engine from day 1, even before the deal with  ULA.

You can't erase a decade and a half of misdirection and lack of progress and say "well this doesn't count", I'll start my watch in 2017, BO is effectively a 6 year effort.

I mean, you can, and are, but I'm calling you on it.

--

I rooted for BO 20 years ago, and it wasn't because I (or anyone) thought they were going to be a suborbital tourism company.

At some point soon BO will have existed for half of my life. I was still with my first wife when they got going.  Since then I divorced, married, raised a kid, sent him to school, divorced again, and am getting married again - and they're still here on the surface.  So yeah I've grown a little skeptical about them.

:)

Happy New Year!
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #85 on: 01/09/2024 11:01 pm »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built. It's when the company started to expand from ~1,000 employees to ~10,000+ now.

Yes, New Shepard was originally going to be a lead-in to an orbital vehicle. However, we all know that's not what actually happened. That concept never got funded for development. Things would have gone very differently if NASA had selected Blue Origin for the commercial crew program.

Being founded as a company with the goal of getting humanity into space doesn't mean they were working on orbital LV development from Day 1. Lofty goals don't much when the first decade + of your existence is focused on doing low-budget VTVL research and development.

Again, Wikipedia:

"Blue Origin began work on the BE-4 in 2011, although no public announcement was made until September 2014. "

BE-4 was a booster engine from day 1, even before the deal with  ULA.

You can't erase a decade and a half of misdirection and lack of progress and say "well this doesn't count", I'll start my watch in 2017, BO is effectively a 6 year effort.

I mean, you can, and are, but I'm calling you on it.

*snip*

Correct. But engine development does not orbital LV development make. Or does it?

What eventually became the Raptor engine started development in 2009. Would you say that Starship development started in 2009?
« Last Edit: 01/09/2024 11:02 pm by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline dglow

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2042
  • Liked: 2270
  • Likes Given: 4380
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #86 on: 01/09/2024 11:12 pm »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built. It's when the company started to expand from ~1,000 employees to ~10,000+ now.

Yes, New Shepard was originally going to be a lead-in to an orbital vehicle. However, we all know that's not what actually happened. That concept never got funded for development. Things would have gone very differently if NASA had selected Blue Origin for the commercial crew program.

Being founded as a company with the goal of getting humanity into space doesn't mean they were working on orbital LV development from Day 1. Lofty goals don't much when the first decade + of your existence is focused on doing low-budget VTVL research and development.

Again, Wikipedia:

"Blue Origin began work on the BE-4 in 2011, although no public announcement was made until September 2014. "

BE-4 was a booster engine from day 1, even before the deal with  ULA.

You can't erase a decade and a half of misdirection and lack of progress and say "well this doesn't count", I'll start my watch in 2017, BO is effectively a 6 year effort.

I mean, you can, and are, but I'm calling you on it.

*snip*

Correct. But engine development does not orbital LV development make. Or does it?

What eventually became the Raptor engine started development in 2009. Would you say that Starship development started in 2009?

<eye roll>

Offline AlexP

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Liked: 197
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #87 on: 01/09/2024 11:39 pm »
Even if you accept the 2017 date, you're just shifting the problem from being a technical one to a strategic one. As has been discussed many times, they now find themselves in a position of having to make a huge leap in capability and execution for something that may not be good enough to succeed for very long.

If they had been serious about going "step by step ferociously", they'd have had a smaller orbital launcher in operation for years at this point, not as the long term solution but something giving them vital experience on both the engineering and operational side, not to mention a track record and customer base.

Easier said than done, certainly, but you can't make a future of humans living and working in space without diving headfirst into the actual getting stuff up to orbit. New Shepard is very cool to watch and clearly had some great engineering go into it, but has the money and time invested in it in the almost nine years since its first launch been well spent in achieving their stated mission?

Hopefully they're on a better path now, but hard not to lament the missed opportunities when they now more or less need their very big debut launcher to work almost from the off, just to get into the conversation.
« Last Edit: 01/09/2024 11:40 pm by AlexP »

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #88 on: 01/09/2024 11:44 pm »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built. It's when the company started to expand from ~1,000 employees to ~10,000+ now.

Yes, New Shepard was originally going to be a lead-in to an orbital vehicle. However, we all know that's not what actually happened. That concept never got funded for development. Things would have gone very differently if NASA had selected Blue Origin for the commercial crew program.

Being founded as a company with the goal of getting humanity into space doesn't mean they were working on orbital LV development from Day 1. Lofty goals don't much when the first decade + of your existence is focused on doing low-budget VTVL research and development.

Again, Wikipedia:

"Blue Origin began work on the BE-4 in 2011, although no public announcement was made until September 2014. "

BE-4 was a booster engine from day 1, even before the deal with  ULA.

You can't erase a decade and a half of misdirection and lack of progress and say "well this doesn't count", I'll start my watch in 2017, BO is effectively a 6 year effort.

I mean, you can, and are, but I'm calling you on it.

*snip*

Correct. But engine development does not orbital LV development make. Or does it?

What eventually became the Raptor engine started development in 2009. Would you say that Starship development started in 2009?

<eye roll>

I just want to make sure we are all playing by the same rules.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #89 on: 01/09/2024 11:57 pm »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built. It's when the company started to expand from ~1,000 employees to ~10,000+ now.

Yes, New Shepard was originally going to be a lead-in to an orbital vehicle. However, we all know that's not what actually happened. That concept never got funded for development. Things would have gone very differently if NASA had selected Blue Origin for the commercial crew program.

Being founded as a company with the goal of getting humanity into space doesn't mean they were working on orbital LV development from Day 1. Lofty goals don't much when the first decade + of your existence is focused on doing low-budget VTVL research and development.

Again, Wikipedia:

"Blue Origin began work on the BE-4 in 2011, although no public announcement was made until September 2014. "

BE-4 was a booster engine from day 1, even before the deal with  ULA.

You can't erase a decade and a half of misdirection and lack of progress and say "well this doesn't count", I'll start my watch in 2017, BO is effectively a 6 year effort.

I mean, you can, and are, but I'm calling you on it.

*snip*

Correct. But engine development does not orbital LV development make. Or does it?

What eventually became the Raptor engine started development in 2009. Would you say that Starship development started in 2009?
So what was the BE-4 designed for? A larger new shepherd?

Of course Raptor was designed for Starship and it exactly marks the beginning of development of a successor to Falcon.

Which, news flash, is in a pretty advanced state of development. New Glenn meanwhile, was supposed to dethrone Falcon, and is still not flying.
« Last Edit: 01/10/2024 12:13 am by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline JayWee

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 983
  • Liked: 978
  • Likes Given: 1785
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #90 on: 01/10/2024 12:22 am »
BE-4 was a booster engine from day 1, even before the deal with  ULA.
True. Everyone expected them to go orbital.
That said - weren't people saying "awkward" when BO announced NG and that they are effectively going to compete against their own BE-4 customer (ULA) ?

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #91 on: 01/10/2024 12:31 am »
So what was the BE-4 designed for? A larger new shepherd?

*snip*

Ironically, your snark is more or less dead on lol

Image source: https://parabolicarc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/552848main_Commercial_Crew_Program_Overview_Collura.pdf
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #92 on: 01/10/2024 12:37 am »
So what was the BE-4 designed for? A larger new shepherd?

*snip*

Ironically, your snark is more or less dead on lol

Image source: https://parabolicarc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/552848main_Commercial_Crew_Program_Overview_Collura.pdf

The concept you pictured used BE-3s, according to every account of it I'm aware of.
Wait, ∆V? This site will accept the ∆ symbol? How many times have I written out the word "delta" for no reason?

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #93 on: 01/10/2024 12:46 am »
So what was the BE-4 designed for? A larger new shepherd?

*snip*

Ironically, your snark is more or less dead on lol

Image source: https://parabolicarc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/552848main_Commercial_Crew_Program_Overview_Collura.pdf

The concept you pictured used BE-3s, according to every account of it I'm aware of.

IIRC that's correct. This New Shepard "big brother" eventually turned into the New Glenn. The methalox design of New Glenn itself wasn't made public until about 2016, shortly before Blue Origin's big pivot towards its development.
« Last Edit: 01/10/2024 12:48 am by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline thespacecow

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 103
  • e/acc
  • Liked: 115
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #94 on: 01/10/2024 04:41 am »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built.

This is all incorrect.

2017 is when Jeff Bezos *said* he's pumping $1B per year into Blue Origin, he never claimed that's when he started doing it. A look at the history of his sales of Amazon stocks shows he also sold $1.4B of stocks in 2016, he also sold significant amount in 2013 ($711M) and 2015 ($534M)

Blue Origin announced orbital LV, the cape factory and LC-36 in September 2015: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/09/blue-origin-lc-36-cape-canaveral/

The cape factory broke ground in June 2016: https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/28/12051164/blue-origin-new-florida-rocket-factory


Offline JCRM

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
  • Great Britain
  • Liked: 308
  • Likes Given: 443
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #95 on: 01/10/2024 08:58 am »
@sdsds I'll grant you, Blue seemed to make fair progress early on in the organization, but the ultimate metric in the launch industry is how many customer payloads you deliver to LEO.



It's how many payloads one delivers to the desired trajectory

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #96 on: 01/10/2024 03:13 pm »
The hard pivot to orbital LV development was in 2017, prior to that point it was very much a back-burner project. 2017 is when Jeff Bezos started pumping ~ $1 billion per year into Blue Origin. That's when LC-36 and the huge manufacturing complex in Florida started getting built.

This is all incorrect.

2017 is when Jeff Bezos *said* he's pumping $1B per year into Blue Origin, he never claimed that's when he started doing it. A look at the history of his sales of Amazon stocks shows he also sold $1.4B of stocks in 2016, he also sold significant amount in 2013 ($711M) and 2015 ($534M)

Blue Origin announced orbital LV, the cape factory and LC-36 in September 2015: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/09/blue-origin-lc-36-cape-canaveral/

The cape factory broke ground in June 2016: https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/28/12051164/blue-origin-new-florida-rocket-factory

To be clear: I have never said that nothing was in the works before then. I have been saying that ~2017 is when Blue Origin began to spend big money on New Glenn development and associated infrastructure. If you want to push that to late 2016, when the first steel beams were erected at the Blue Origin complex at Cape Canaveral, I'm fine with that.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • Liked: 2489
  • Likes Given: 2173
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #97 on: 01/10/2024 03:36 pm »
The competitor got orbital flight going with a less than quarter billion dollar investment. They started after B.O.. The numbers are not public, but I'd bet Bezos's investment has out stripped the competitor from day one and continues to do so.

Talk of billions of dollars pouring in starting in 2017 ignores most of the company's history. Its a red herring, the billions of dollars are going down the drain until payloads fly.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #98 on: 01/10/2024 04:21 pm »
The competitor got orbital flight going with a less than quarter billion dollar investment. They started after B.O.. The numbers are not public, but I'd bet Bezos's investment has out stripped the competitor from day one and continues to do so.

Talk of billions of dollars pouring in starting in 2017 ignores most of the company's history. Its a red herring, the billions of dollars are going down the drain until payloads fly.

In 2015 Jeff Bezos said he had invested about $500 million total in Blue Origin up to that point. That's an average of about $33 million per year, and the majority of that total would have been in BE-3 and New Shepard development.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Purona

  • Member
  • Posts: 95
  • Liked: 81
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #99 on: 01/10/2024 04:57 pm »
OK NO

2000-2004 Literal think tank NO MONEY
They didn't even have a CEO until 2003
2004. 20 employees Gay Lai hired
2005 Charon
2006 Goddard
2007 Two Goddard Launches
2011 PM-2
2015 PM-3, 500 million in funding, New Glenn revealed.

By 2011 Space X spent 500 million and got Falcon 9,

in otherwards  by the time space x spent 500 million with the result of falcon 9. blue origin spent less than 500 million and got Goddard

idk how much charon and goddard cost, but I guarantee it was less than a hundred million.

Offline Robert_the_Doll

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 759
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1189
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #100 on: 01/10/2024 05:20 pm »
The competitor got orbital flight going with a less than quarter billion dollar investment. They started after B.O.. The numbers are not public, but I'd bet Bezos's investment has out stripped the competitor from day one and continues to do so.

Talk of billions of dollars pouring in starting in 2017 ignores most of the company's history. Its a red herring, the billions of dollars are going down the drain until payloads fly.

That is simply untrue. The COTS program alone netted SpaceX $278 million and nearly $400 million by 2011. This does not include the $1.6 billion contract in December 2008 for CRS.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14098
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13961
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #101 on: 01/10/2024 05:58 pm »
So what was the BE-4 designed for? A larger new shepherd?

*snip*

Ironically, your snark is more or less dead on lol

Image source: https://parabolicarc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/552848main_Commercial_Crew_Program_Overview_Collura.pdf

The concept you pictured used BE-3s, according to every account of it I'm aware of.

IIRC that's correct. This New Shepard "big brother" eventually turned into the New Glenn. The methalox design of New Glenn itself wasn't made public until about 2016, shortly before Blue Origin's big pivot towards its development.
So BE-4, just like Raptor, was the basis for the new rocket, predating it by several years, as is normal.

Too bad it ruins the narrative, but it is the best marker for "starting development of a new orbital rocket".
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #102 on: 01/12/2024 07:25 pm »
Talk about Blue please. It's in the title of the thread. Some of you should know better! ;)
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11002
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7292
  • Likes Given: 70076
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #103 on: 01/16/2024 05:39 pm »
Talk about Blue please. It's in the title of the thread. Some of you should know better! ;)
Moderator:
Off-topic posts posted after Chris' warning are deleted.  So were some pre-warning off-topic posts because members were responding to them, ignoring his warning. ⚠️
« Last Edit: 01/16/2024 05:48 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • The birthplace of the solid body electric guitar
  • Liked: 1937
  • Likes Given: 1126
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #104 on: 02/02/2024 10:30 pm »
It looks like Bezos might be getting some cash to put into Blue Origin to speed things up.  He disclosed plans to sell 50 million shares of Amazon within the next 12 months.  At today's share price, that is $8,590,500,000.00.  After he pays capital gains tax, that still leaves a lot to reinvest.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bezos-discloses-plan-sell-amazon-183048439.html

It could also be cash to buy ULA.
« Last Edit: 02/02/2024 10:31 pm by Eric Hedman »

Offline Tywin

Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #105 on: 02/03/2024 11:21 pm »
Almost 8 years of finance for Blue...
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12079
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18026
  • Likes Given: 12033
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #106 on: 02/04/2024 02:28 pm »
Almost 8 years of finance for Blue...

Actually no. Currently Bezos invests around $2B in Blue each year; the "$1B per year" figure has been outdated for a while. What remains after taxes would be enough to fund Blue for slightly less than three years.
« Last Edit: 02/04/2024 02:29 pm by woods170 »

Offline johnlandish

  • Member
  • Posts: 36
  • Europe
  • Liked: 95
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Blue Origin General Discussion - thread 5
« Reply #107 on: 02/21/2024 04:39 pm »
Blue Origin’s New CEO On Honing The Company’s Business Practices
https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/commercial-space/blue-origins-new-ceo-honing-companys-business-practices

Summary:
The new CEO was chosen for his expertise in manufacturing, signaling a focus on increasing Blue Origin's operational efficiency.

Emphasizing a cultural shift towards urgency, the CEO aims to move beyond the company's reputation for being slow-moving.

The CEO stresses the importance of customer needs over artificial deadlines to instill a sense of urgency.

Transforming Blue Origin into a robust business, the vision includes strategic efforts to lower costs and expand the market.

The CEO forecasts a rise in launch capacity demand, with plans to reduce launch costs from $60-$100 million to $6-$9 million, opening up a broader customer base.

Blue Origin's diverse customer base and broad operational scope highlight a plan for scalable production to meet this growing demand.

Leveraging 34 years of manufacturing experience, the CEO aims to dramatically increase production capabilities.

A key goal is the commitment to launching New Glenn within the year, reflecting an urgent push for progress.

Acknowledging the market's capacity for multiple launch companies, the CEO sees room for growth and competition.

Strategies include quick decision-making and accepting calculated risks to accelerate the company's pace.

The CEO sets aggressive goals, notably the significant reduction in launch costs and the timely launch of New Glenn, marking a new phase of dynamism at Blue Origin.


 

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