Author Topic: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)  (Read 10241 times)

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5377
  • Viewed launches since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 2018
  • Likes Given: 1346
Speaker Slide Presentation: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)

ISPCS .com
Published on Oct 17, 2017

Ariane Cornell, Head of Astronaut Strategy & Sales and Head of North American New Glenn Sales, Blue Origin

Reusability and more importantly, operational reusability, is designed into each of our systems and subsystems to ensure longevity, efficiencies, and robustness. Operational reusability is key to improving access to space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhoosHie4eQ?t=001



Tony De La Rosa

Online sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4151
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #1 on: 10/19/2017 11:10 AM »
Since SpaceX is now talking about Point-to-Point travel on Earth, what's the possibility of New Shepard being used for Point-to-Point delivery, like say by Amazon?

Suppose you had to get some item delivered to the other end of the Earth very quickly, in a couple of hours - could New Shepard do this as suborbital vehicle? Or would this require a much bigger rocket like New Glenn?

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28177
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7977
  • Likes Given: 5323
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #2 on: 10/19/2017 12:49 PM »
New Shepard doesn't have enough delta-V to be worth doing any of that.
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 Eerie

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 774
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #3 on: 10/19/2017 02:14 PM »
Since SpaceX is now talking about Point-to-Point travel on Earth,

There's a possibility of Blue Origin talking about it, as well.

Online brickmack

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
  • USA
  • Liked: 162
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #4 on: 10/19/2017 02:36 PM »
Much bigger. NS can barely deliver a useful payload 100 km straight up, nevermind 100 km up and halfway around the world. New Glenn would probably be a decent basis for such a vehicle

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4047
  • California
  • Liked: 3341
  • Likes Given: 2108
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #5 on: 10/19/2017 05:22 PM »
Much bigger. NS can barely deliver a useful payload 100 km straight up, nevermind 100 km up and halfway around the world. New Glenn would probably be a decent basis for such a vehicle

To be useful for point to point to point travel, such a vehicle would need close to SSTO levels of delta-v. (Either by itself, or as a staged vehicle)

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6351
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 5868
  • Likes Given: 1697
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #6 on: 11/04/2017 08:07 PM »
Here’s the video:


Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8582
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3475
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #7 on: 11/04/2017 09:28 PM »
Sigh. They've been carefully building a management structure and a procedures manual, and they'll be doing that for at least another three years before finally getting to orbit.



Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? Well... have you heard of Zeno's paradox?

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
  • Liked: 765
  • Likes Given: 112
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #8 on: 11/04/2017 11:56 PM »
Here’s the video:


Fighting words: "This is not a rocket where we decided to slap some legs on and see if we can land it."
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28177
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7977
  • Likes Given: 5323
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #9 on: 11/05/2017 12:24 AM »
Yeah, that's pretty much BS. Falcon 9 v1.1 was basically a full reboot of Falcon 9 to enable reuse. Grasshopper was "slapping some legs on" to see if it could land. Falcon 9 v1.1 was definitely not.
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 QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8582
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3475
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #10 on: 11/05/2017 12:26 AM »
The argument they're making is that New Shepard is a training program for their teams that will be doing the orbital reuse.
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? Well... have you heard of Zeno's paradox?

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1761
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 530
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #11 on: 11/05/2017 03:33 AM »
The argument they're making is that New Shepard is a training program for their teams that will be doing the orbital reuse.

A bit like saying that building a go-cart is good training for a Formula One team, none of the hard problems are covered by the training.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10173
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7033
  • Likes Given: 4812
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #12 on: 11/05/2017 03:46 AM »
The problem is that Bezos has too much money. No sense of urgency. No parlay it all and make it work.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 2700
  • Likes Given: 3455
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #13 on: 11/05/2017 04:24 AM »
The problem is that Bezos has too much money. No sense of urgency. No parlay it all and make it work.

An interesting point, and one that I think is very valid.

For Bezos, the motto he has for Blue Origin is "Gradatim Ferociter", Latin for "Step by Step, Ferociously". But so far at least the pace of their progress has not matched nor exceeded what SpaceX has been doing.

Musk announces goals that are obviously challenging, but even though they rarely meet the dates, the rapid iteration of their hardware and abilities is astonishing compared to what others have done.

In organizations it's good to have a sense of urgency. Blue Origin obviously has some, since they are building a new engine for ULA, but otherwise so far their funding level has not seemed to result in the commensurate progress you'd think we'd see.

Still, Blue Origin is dedicated to building reusable rockets, and that's not an easy thing to do, so I'm not criticizing, I'm more cheering them on from the sidelines in the hopes they go faster!
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 Cheapchips

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #14 on: 11/05/2017 05:43 AM »
The argument they're making is that New Shepard is a training program for their teams that will be doing the orbital reuse.

A bit like saying that building a go-cart is good training for a Formula One team, none of the hard problems are covered by the training.

Isn't that muddling the scaling vehicle technology and scaling operations?

I'll admit I know little about F1, but I'd have thought that an F1 pit crew and logistics are just higher performing versions of what you'd find in other motorsports?

In what ways isn't operating NS a good dress rehearsal for operating NG?

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6202
  • Liked: 3982
  • Likes Given: 5492
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #15 on: 11/05/2017 11:43 AM »
Here’s the video:


Fighting words: "This is not a rocket where we decided to slap some legs on and see if we can land it."

This is not a rocket -- enough said.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1761
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 530
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #16 on: 11/05/2017 12:20 PM »
The argument they're making is that New Shepard is a training program for their teams that will be doing the orbital reuse.

A bit like saying that building a go-cart is good training for a Formula One team, none of the hard problems are covered by the training.

Isn't that muddling the scaling vehicle technology and scaling operations?

I'll admit I know little about F1, but I'd have thought that an F1 pit crew and logistics are just higher performing versions of what you'd find in other motorsports?

In what ways isn't operating NS a good dress rehearsal for operating NG?

My whole point was about building, not operating. I've not much idea what goes into building a go-cart, but it will be very small in comparison with a Formula One car. The top teams spend about $500 M  per year, much of it on design and development, which mean their cars have cost more to develop than Falcon 9, Merlin and reuse combined (over the same period). The point is about margins, scale and complexity, going from NS to NG is a huge leap.

Online kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 572
  • Dublin/London
  • Liked: 345
  • Likes Given: 408
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #17 on: 11/05/2017 12:37 PM »
Its smarmy comments like these from Blue and Bezos that make me "dislike" them a little. They are unwarranted and unnecessary.
They have a lot to learn and a long way to go. Building an engine is one thing, launching and returning it is another leap.

If Blue want to score points then build and launch this thing and less talk.

Here’s the video:


Fighting words: "This is not a rocket where we decided to slap some legs on and see if we can land it."

Offline Cheapchips

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #18 on: 11/05/2017 01:14 PM »
The argument they're making is that New Shepard is a training program for their teams that will be doing the orbital reuse.

A bit like saying that building a go-cart is good training for a Formula One team, none of the hard problems are covered by the training.

Isn't that muddling the scaling vehicle technology and scaling operations?

I'll admit I know little about F1, but I'd have thought that an F1 pit crew and logistics are just higher performing versions of what you'd find in other motorsports?

In what ways isn't operating NS a good dress rehearsal for operating NG?

My whole point was about building, not operating. I've not much idea what goes into building a go-cart, but it will be very small in comparison with a Formula One car. The top teams spend about $500 M  per year, much of it on design and development, which mean their cars have cost more to develop than Falcon 9, Merlin and reuse combined (over the same period). The point is about margins, scale and complexity, going from NS to NG is a huge leap.

We've created a bit of cross talk there then as you'd quoted a point about operations, not building. 

Offline whatever11235

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Blue Origin and Operational Reusability (no audio)
« Reply #19 on: 11/05/2017 01:30 PM »
Its smarmy comments like these from Blue and Bezos that make me "dislike" them a little. They are unwarranted and unnecessary.
They have a lot to learn and a long way to go. Building an engine is one thing, launching and returning it is another leap.

If Blue want to score points then build and launch this thing and less talk.

Very cringey video with a lot of underhand comments. If any of the stories about Bezos and his management teams at Amazon are true, I would expect the same culture at BO and this video is not suprising at all.

Tags: