Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blue Moon

blueorigin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 236 posts

Re: Blue Moon

#61

Post by rory096 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #2

I was waiting for this announcement. It is unclear to me how "real" this is; Bezo's claims they can meet the timeline of people on the moon in 2024. Since they aren't flying a heavy booster like the Delta IV heavy or the Falcon Heavy yet, and those platforms took about 10 years to go from concept to first flight. Bezos is suggesting he can do that in 5 years. Perhaps he's considering using the Delta for FHeavy as the…

>Perhaps he's considering using the Delta for FHeavy as the first stage booster and building the upper stage{s} himself. Either way, its great to have someone pushing for more progress.

In the past they've talked about launching Blue Moon on SLS. Not that I expect that to launch real payloads by 2024...

Re: Blue Moon

#62

Post by Dig1t »

macmac wrote: post #49

Why does everything BO build have to be so fugly? Don't they care, are they not good enough that they can make it pretty and achieve their technical goals at the same time or are there hard constraints that dictate the ugliness?

Its kind of in line with the rest of Bezo's other companies' UI/UX.

Most Amazon apps are generally pretty fugly too (at least IMO).

Re: Blue Moon

#63

Post by maxxxxx »

rory096 wrote: post #61
ChuckMcM wrote: post #2

I was waiting for this announcement. It is unclear to me how "real" this is; Bezo's claims they can meet the timeline of people on the moon in 2024. Since they aren't flying a heavy booster like the Delta IV heavy or the Falcon Heavy yet, and those platforms took about 10 years to go from concept to first flight. Bezos is suggesting he can do that in 5 years. Perhaps he's considering using the Delta for FHeavy as the…

>Perhaps he's considering using the Delta for FHeavy as the first stage booster and building the upper stage{s} himself. Either way, its great to have someone pushing for more progress. In the past they've talked about launching Blue Moon on SLS. Not that I expect that to launch real payloads by 2024...

That would be crazy expensive.

Re: Blue Moon

#64

Post by T-A »

username223 wrote: post #46
mlindner wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it does not exist yet. This is a page devoted to pulling both private and public funding and something to wave in front of Congresscritters' eyes.

Pretty much. President Trump wants to put a man on the moon before he's out of office (assuming he gets re-elected and makes it to 2024). Mike Pence obsequiously tells NASA to make it so. Amazon wants more sweet federal contracting money, and prepares to bid for that contract. I wish Bezos, Allen, Musk, etc. weren't burning their piles of cash to see who could be first to shoot other people at the moon, but such is t…

> I wish Bezos, Allen, Musk, etc. weren't burning their piles of cash

Allen did many things with his pile of cash (though none that I know of directly involved moon trips), but no longer:

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/paul-allen-microsoft-spacesh...

Re: Blue Moon

#65

Post by wmf »

ceejayoz wrote: post #40
pier25 wrote: post #15

Astronauts train for years before going to space. Do these space tourism companies pretend that anyone with enough cash can do it?

> Do these space tourism companies pretend that anyone with enough cash can do it? No pretend required. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Tito https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shuttleworth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_British

Note that ISS tourists did months of training to go into space for a few days.

Re: Blue Moon

#66

Post by lutorm »

stcredzero wrote: post #10
Stratoscope wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do looks matter for a lunar lander? Of course it doesn't look as good as the awesome streamlined rocketship concept art I grew up with in the 1950s, I will grant you that.

Of course it doesn't look as good as the awesome streamlined rocketship concept art I grew up with in the 1950s, I will grant you that. While SpaceX's concept for Starship does look that awesome. (In the form of animations and concept art, not in the form of steel water tower construction blown over on its side.)

Starship looks like it does because it has to re-enter Earth's atmosphere. If you don't, aerodynamic shells are just dead weight.

Re: Blue Moon

#67

Post by Robotbeat »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #57
mr_toad wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bezos is suggesting he can do that in 5 years. It was “only” 12 years between Sputnik and Apollo 11. You’d think we’d be able to do things faster now.

Its a fair point, just a matter of money and a limited number of manufacturers for the bits that make rockets fly. NASA had the advantage that as a single target they weren't overseeing three different SaturnVs, three different launch vehicles, etc. The horses here are Bezos, Boeing, and SpaceX.

There was Red Stone, Atlas, titan, Saturn I, Ib, and V. Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo. multiple contractors at each phase.

Re: Blue Moon

#68

Post by agildehaus »

shanxS wrote: post #27
agildehaus wrote: post #25

I'm all for anything that gets us back to the Moon, but this clearly feels underwhelming versus Starship. It'd also be good if they got to orbit prior to marketing these grand plans. Gradatim Ferociter indeed.

Oh as opposed to Elon Musk who had vertical landing nailed before they went out courageously and told the word that they are doing it.

Retropropulsive landing was the next step for SpaceX. The Moon is two or three or four steps down the line for Blue Origin.

Re: Blue Moon

#69

Post by Aeolun »

drusepth wrote: post #60
TimTheTinker wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue Origin is somewhat like the Waymo of space tech. They'll continue plodding methodically, indefinitely. And you can bet their safety/reliability record will be nigh near perfect. Yes, Waymo is the market leader in self-driving technology (unlike Blue Origin). And there's currently no analogue to SpaceX in the self-driving car market. The incredible, complementary leadership duo that Musk and Shotwell present is u…

>And there's currently no analogue to SpaceX in the self-driving car market. Isn't... Tesla analogous to SpaceX in the self-driving car market?

Tesla is too unstable to compare it with SpaceX I think.

Re: Blue Moon

#70

Post by mitchtbaum »

macmac wrote: post #49

Why does everything BO build have to be so fugly? Don't they care, are they not good enough that they can make it pretty and achieve their technical goals at the same time or are there hard constraints that dictate the ugliness?

classic trilemma, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilemma

good, beautiful, real

Post reply on HN