-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Inspirational. I agree that BO is not in the same league as SpaceX. That said, I am happy to see any advancement in rocketry. BO seems to have a workable launch and landing system that could possibly upgraded to an orbital system. If SpaceX wasn't achieving what it has achieved then I'd be incredibly excited about what BO is doing. What SpaceX has done is revolutionary. What BO has done is a nice improvement that could lead to better things.
And congratulations Blue Origins, well done.
Even granting that a space hopper like Blue Origin is in a different class from SpaceX's craft, it is magnificent that BO has been able to perform a repeat. I hope that underneath the companies' leaders' tweet-wars, there is real sharing of hard-won knowledge.
What bugs me about the most recent press release is that they used weasel words about it being a production rocket, so that they couldn't be upstaged by SS1 which did the same thing years before.
Agreed. The SpaceX Grasshopper vehicle was doing lift offs and landings years ago. I know it wasn't going up to 100km altitude, but then the New Shepard wasn't anywhere near getting to orbit either.
chickensevil
Active Member
But... It's not production, is it? How can you call a one off rocket a production vehicle? And are they actually going to use this rocket (or other ones made like this) to do real launches? They even said they are working on development of their orbital rocket right now... So I'm not sure what is so "first" about this that couldn't be applied to SS1. Not to mention didn't one of the launches of SS1 include paying customers?
Or by flying hardware that only has 10% of the energy required to achieve orbit.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
I've watched the video a few times now. That's cool. Period. No qualifiers, no buts, no nothing.
Every time we see something like this - in this case, a rocket that's been launched, landed, and then launched and landed again, the art of the possible in people's minds expands. All of a sudden, rockets that get thrown away each time is starting to seem quaintly old fashioned, and we've only (by my count) had 3 rockets launched and landed thus far. And that's cool.
Our frontiers and the art of the possible is expanding before our eyes - that's amazing. It doesn't matter who does it, and it doesn't matter if it's quite as good as what somebody else has done. It's amazing, and it's turning upside down what we think and expect as reasonable when it comes to going to space.
Every time we see something like this - in this case, a rocket that's been launched, landed, and then launched and landed again, the art of the possible in people's minds expands. All of a sudden, rockets that get thrown away each time is starting to seem quaintly old fashioned, and we've only (by my count) had 3 rockets launched and landed thus far. And that's cool.
Our frontiers and the art of the possible is expanding before our eyes - that's amazing. It doesn't matter who does it, and it doesn't matter if it's quite as good as what somebody else has done. It's amazing, and it's turning upside down what we think and expect as reasonable when it comes to going to space.
swaltner
Active Member
At 1:07 in that video (wide shot of booster stage landing), I'm guessing that's not sped up at all. It amazes my how fast these booster stages are coming in, and they wait for the "last second" to do the retro burn. That's just what happens with such a high thrust-to-weight ratio for the boosted stage when it's low on fuel. Both Blue Origin and SpaceX seem to have the same kind of ballistic approach to a booster landing.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
That Launch. Land. Repeat. slogan they keep repeating -- I like that, and I think it sticks an easy mnemonic into people's heads that rebounds favorably on everybody that is doing Launch. Land. Repeat. The slogan makes it clear what is different in this next wave of spaceflight.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
There's no other approach than the ballistic one. It's a rocket, that's how they work both going up and down. I agree it's impressive. I think most people can't appreciate the precision required: burn a tad too little or a tad too late and the thing smashes in to ground. Burn just a little too much or too early, the rocket lifts up before touching down, does a small bounce in the air and after that comes crashing down. Basically everything has to be perfect so velocity is exactly 0 at height 0.
Both Falcon and New Shepard have fins and reaction control systems, so -not only ballistic.
Also throttleable engines, so different landing burns are possible:
"Jeff Bezos @JeffBezos Apr 1, Pushing the envelope. Restarting BE-3 fast @ high thrust, just 3600 ft from ground. Impact in 6 sec if engine doesn’t restart & ramp fast."
This is true only on Falcon. NS have enough thrust and fuel margin to do silly hovering before landing.
From about a year ago: "Launch and land and re-launch" I could watch this music video 100 times!
Made by some SpaceX fans, with some fun digs and friendly competition language.
What is the end goal of BO? Are they going to use that rocket to do anything w/satellites, resupply etc? Looks too tiny to do anything serious.
Watch Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin perform a risky rocket test during the company's first live webcast Sunday
Apparently a live broadcast test!
Apparently a live broadcast test!
hockeythug
Active Member
Krugerrand
Meow
Similar threads
- Article
