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

New Glenn Update

blueorigin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 154 posts

Re: New Glenn Update

#71

Post by pinewurst »

dotnet00 wrote: post #44
dylan604 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems BO is taking the NASA approach of not being so cavalier with testing. You can tell people you expect the thing to fail, but repeatedly seeing them fail is still seen as a negative.

New Glenn is manufactured with a different philosophy, so Blue can't be Starship levels of cavalier with testing. It would cost way too much to do with their current approach. The factory tours for the two show this difference. New Glenn production is a lot more classical aerospace in terms of a high tech cleanroom factory being built from the start, versus a rocket that started out being built in tents that is slowl…

Even old space got further in 20 years than Blue Origin.

Re: New Glenn Update

#72

Post by fooblaster »

jmyeet wrote: post #65

I think Blue Origin's biggest problem is they don't currently have a planned or real Falcon 9 competitor. These expected and incremental updates (to a years late system that still needs to be proven) are putting the payload capacity in the Falcon Heavy range and there's roughly 1 Falcon Heavy launch per year. There are over 100 Falcon 9 launches per year. Yes a bunch are Starlink so you can exclude those when estimat…

Not terribly familiar with the details, but Amazon kuiper has a contract with blue origin and other providers.

Re: New Glenn Update

#73

Post by dotnet00 »

pinewurst wrote: post #71
dotnet00 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Glenn is manufactured with a different philosophy, so Blue can't be Starship levels of cavalier with testing. It would cost way too much to do with their current approach. The factory tours for the two show this difference. New Glenn production is a lot more classical aerospace in terms of a high tech cleanroom factory being built from the start, versus a rocket that started out being built in tents that is slowl…

Even old space got further in 20 years than Blue Origin.

Did I miss a privately funded, reusable heavy lift rocket coming out of old space in the past 20 years?

Re: New Glenn Update

#74

Post by anovikov »

exomonk wrote: post #60
bryanlarsen wrote: post #31

This is also good news for SpaceX. Satellite and payload designers generally design to common fairing sizes so they have a choice in launch providers. The 8.7m 9x4 fairing is similar to the 9m Starship fairing so more designers will now be designing payloads that use the full Starship capacity.

Such standardization will set a design envelope for the Golden Dome weapons..

Indeed, exciting times! What looked like science fiction in Reagan's era (brilliant pebbles)? now seems almost too banal and simple to even build.

Re: New Glenn Update

#75

Post by JumpCrisscross »

timschmidt wrote: post #67
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Few of us like having our work critiqued by an "outsider" I said aerospace community. Not NASA. Plenty of people hate Artemis. Most people hate SLS. But they hate it for good reason. Destin touched on some of that. But because he missed Artemis's purpose, he bungled that criticism too. I like Destin. But he missed the mark pretty badly on that video, and I judge him for now following up with clarification.

> I said aerospace community. Not NASA. NASA doesn't build rockets. ULA (Lockheed Martin + Boeing), Northrup Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, etc. do. That's what I took "aerospace community" to mean. The community of people working in aerospace. Artemis has shifted focus several times now, since before it was called "Artemis" as each political administration has emphasized different goals, and as mission planning has ev…

> ULA (Lockheed Martin + Boeing), Northrup Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, etc. do. That's what I took "aerospace community" to mean

Fair. Not who I talk to. None of them get their bread buttered by Artemis. A few would if it were dumped.

> I don't see any problem with the way Dustin presented the situation, nor do I feel any kind of need for an apology or clarification

Fair enough. I thought the "we're going, right" was childish. But it works for YouTube, and it's not like NASA didn't know they were inviting an influencer.

But suggesting NASA should just redo Apollo was dumb, and he should realise it's dumb. If that were the case, I'd argue for cancelling the programme.

Re: New Glenn Update

#76

Post by buu700 »

nancyminusone wrote: post #51
irjustin wrote: post #38

I REALLY wish they would stop displaying ft, mi, lbs. It actually angers me.

Good lord, find something else to be angry about. Decades of metric vs imperial threads should have you convinced by now that no matter how hated they are, these units aren't going away any time soon.

Intel should announce their new 40ni (40-nanoinch) process node next April Fools' Day.

Re: New Glenn Update

#79

Post by dopa42365 »

exomonk wrote: post #60
bryanlarsen wrote: post #31

This is also good news for SpaceX. Satellite and payload designers generally design to common fairing sizes so they have a choice in launch providers. The 8.7m 9x4 fairing is similar to the 9m Starship fairing so more designers will now be designing payloads that use the full Starship capacity.

Such standardization will set a design envelope for the Golden Dome weapons..

Launch cost was already a single digit percentage of total cost when using Falcon-9s. Reduction in launch cost doesn't really change anything at that point.

Ignoring that weaponizing space would backfire badly (you want hundreds of nukes in orbit? yeah actually let's just not do that) and thus no one considering it either.

Re: New Glenn Update

#80

Post by riffraff »

nutjob2 wrote: post #62
satiric wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to Earth. Some countries use different unit systems. (Some even use a hodge podge of multiple systems!) Please enjoy your stay.

By "some countries" you mean United States, Liberia, and Myanmar

Fwiw, Myanmar has been transitioning to metric since 2013 but, well, they had other worries.

Likewise, Liberia set up a transition program in 2018.

AFAIU both still use a bunch of traditional non US units too, like the UK.

Post reply on HN