3 ms·

> But the F9 first stage doesn't get to orbital velocity, either, remember. It gets a whole lot closer (and is _much_ larger). I really can't emphasize enough

> But the F9 first stage doesn't get to orbital velocity, either, remember. It gets a whole lot closer (and is _much_ larger). I really can't emphasize enough how much of a difference the ability to hover makes for New Shepard. SpaceX has been doing "New Shepard" type flights for a long time now (they didn't bother going that high, but 'high' isn't really that interesting, it's 'fast' that matters). However, Grasshopper (like New Shepard) was able to throttle down to a TWR less than 1. That makes landing so much easier (the rocket can 'stop' and get settled before it proceeds to land).

darkmighty 11y ago
To give people an idea, this is the difference of scale: http://i.imgur.com/RVOKED2.jpg http://i.imgur.com/RVOKED2.jpg Blue Origin's achievement is nice; just as older prototypes that achieved suborbital landing (Grasshopper, DC-X), but it's unclear yet what it meant for the industry (hope they keep going though, they're a good track). SpaceX's landing is a landmark for space travel, rapid reusability is now much closer. I'm much more confident now this will change the cost structure of the whole industry, seeing how launch is a dominant factor.