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

Blue Origin first human flight

blueorigin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 504 posts

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#461

Post by rvz »

dang wrote: post #421
rvz wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It really shouldn't count as space travel unless they go into orbit around Earth. Translation: 'Other private companies building their own rockets and going into space is 'not good enough' unless it is by SpaceX' and doesn't count. To SpaceX fanatics and downvoters: I'm sure you are deep fanatics of SpaceX but surely you have the funds and deep pockets to join Musk and friends on a space mission together right now?…

Please don't take HN threads into tedious flamewar. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I think its more like that the parent comment ultimately 'invited' (and started) this so-called flamewar you are accusing me of.

Dismissing the achievements of a certain project to only bring up somebody else's one and promote this clear bias is how flamewars start.

I'm only just putting out the fires and celebrating the achievements of every other company competing and launching their rockets into 'space'.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#462

Post by samstave »

lttlrck wrote: post #459
samstave wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I wish Branson and Bezos would have just put their dicks back in their pants and just fully got behind spaceX I absolutely dont care about Bezos or Branson being able to do these stunts - SpaceX already docked with the IIS ffs. It's like McClaren winning the Gran Prix, and then Toyota and Ford showing that their CEOs can finish a few laps in Monaco.

Doesn't blindly ceding to the industry leaders ultimately result in stagnation? The VG and BO launches were both underwhelming for me - but it's still exciting to see the different engineering approaches, it's like hedging a bet, and I am sure each of them will pay dividends - one way or another.

[flagged]

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#463

Post by 5555624 »

loloquwowndueo wrote: post #122
5555624 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It really shouldn't count as space travel unless they go into orbit around Earth. So, Alan Shepard would not be the first American in space? Gus Grissom's first flight wouldn't count, either? I'm all for making a distinction between space tourists and astronauts; but, I don't know if orbiting the Earth is the distinction. (Yes, I know Shepard and Grissom orbited the Earth on subsequent space flights; but,those firs…

Maybe you were just told they counted as going into space because otherwise the first American to orbit earth only did so a full 10 months after Gagarin, which looks worse than saying “oh we launched an American into space less than a month after the Russians did”.

I always learned Gagarin was first into space first. Likewise, I learned Shepard was the first American and Glenn was the first American to orbit the Earth. (I always have to stop and think about Grissom, since the fire of Apollo 1 is the always first thing that comes to mind.)

Saying that someone has to orbit the Earth or do something while in space in order to be an astronaut seems like changing the definition. That would mean Shepard wouldn't become an astronaut for another 10 years. (Of course, then he would be in a very select group of astronauts, because he had walked on the moon.)

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#464

Post by itsoktocry »

darknavi wrote: post #402
caconym_ wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BO has plenty of funding, and lofty ambitions far beyond New Shepard, but they just haven't made much progress toward achieving them. I haven't done the math, but it seems like Starship is potentially an incredibly cheap heavy lift rocket even in total or partial expendable modes, e.g if SpaceX fails to realize their full reusability goals. At this point, I think BO and others are only falling further behind.

It's worth noting that BO is much less open (pretty much the other end of the spectrum as SpaceX) about its progress. We aren't really sure exactly how far along a lot of their projects are other than "not really close".

Exactly this. SpaceX and Blue Origin take the opposite approaches when it comes to PR. You can see the results in this thread; people comparing BOs current tech with a hypothetically functional Starship.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#465

Post by mmmBacon »

machiaweliczny wrote: post #220
double0jimb0 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Scale up”, a software term that has almost zero value when translated to aerospace engineering.

Will see how Elon's 100 of Starships per year will affect costs of transport to space.

I suspect that as they scale up their costs will increase due to logistics and maintenance costs not necessarily scaling linearly with launches. Furthermore, I suspect that the failure rate will also increase as the launch frequency goes up and hence costs associated with launch failures also increase.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#466

Post by caconym_ »

itsoktocry wrote: post #464
darknavi wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that BO is much less open (pretty much the other end of the spectrum as SpaceX) about its progress. We aren't really sure exactly how far along a lot of their projects are other than "not really close".

Exactly this. SpaceX and Blue Origin take the opposite approaches when it comes to PR. You can see the results in this thread; people comparing BOs current tech with a hypothetically functional Starship.

A lot of people seem to make the mistake of identifying SpaceX with Starship alone, forgetting that they've also achieved effective dominance of the commercial orbital launch market with Falcon 9, broken into the heavy lift game with Falcon Heavy, and recently delivered the only operational manned orbital launch capability in the western hemisphere.

So, IMO, you don't need to invoke Starship to illustrate the width of the current gap between SpaceX and a company like BO that has never flown substantial hardware in orbit or beyond, on their own launch vehicle or otherwise. When they do start delivering spaceflight systems, we can re-evaluate the competitive landscape. New Glenn could absolutely put some real pressure on Falcon 9, if they can deliver it before Starship eats its lunch.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#467

Post by mkhpalm »

gameswithgo wrote: post #406
rtkwe wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's pretty underwhelming and then is further diminished because it feels so much like Bezos and Branson just spending their obscene amounts of money to notch a win in this billionaire one upmanship game. First there was Bezos's Blue Origin crowing about their early launch and land success vs SpaceX like they were in a similar league of difficulty. Then with this you have Virgin Galactic coming out of seeming…

come on, our billionaires are spending money advancing space tech. what a grand improvement over billionaires bribing governments and having people slaughtered instead, as happens through much of the world and history. applaud this.

I can't even fathom blowing the money on stunts like this before all my people's basic needs were met. Like, you know... even the janitors.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#468

Post by bamboozled »

_fat_santa wrote: post #22

Seems that between Musk, Bezos and Branson, we have in essence restarted a space race but this time it's billionaires in the private sector versus governments. Some will surely say that they have better things to spend their money on (Bezos for sure) but I gave to say it's still mindblowing. I would imagine if you're one of those guys, you've basically have enough money to solve any problem, so these guys it seems ar…

I'd say climate change would be the real hard problem, considering we've already been to the moon.

Jeff Bezos' company has contributed significantly to the problem, I get his plan is to manufacture things in space, but who is that really designed to benefit.

The real hard thing to do would be to invest his personal billions into the issue, today.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#469

Post by bamboozled »

afavour wrote: post #449
rhdunn wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our planet will only last so long until the Sun becomes a Red Giant. At that point we will need to venture to at least the outer planets, if not beyond the solar system if we want to continue as a species. Even in smaller time frames, I read somewhere that one of Bezos' plans is to move manufacturing into space. And if/when we do get colonies on other planets and moons, some people would want to live there.

> Our planet will only last so long until the Sun becomes a Red Giant. In, what, five billion years? I’m not sure we need Bezos to be focusing all his money on that timeframe.

We have no time to waste on climate change and corona virus.

Re: Blue Origin first human flight

#470

Post by agloeregrets »

nautilius wrote: post #275
agloeregrets wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Christa was trained and fully qualified for her role.

All on board today were trained and fully qualified for their roles.

In which their role was 'sit there, when sign says you can unbuckle, dso that, then get clicked back in when it's time.

Christa was legit trained how to spacewalk.

Post reply on HN