9 ms·
New Shepard In-Flight Escape Test [video]
- lmm 10y agoGlad to see a live video. Blue Origin had previously had a reputation of being extremely secretive - hopefully SpaceX has demonstrated the advantages of making things a bit more public, which ultimately benefits everyone.
- robryan 10y agoIt was probably about not getting too much attention before they knew the thing wasn't going to blow up or crash. Now that it is shown to be reliable they likely want as much attention as they can get.
- ISL 10y agoThere's been a launch delay, so there are still ~8 minutes to go before launch!
- Frompo 10y agoToo late now!
- pinewurst 10y agoBoth landings successful, though the capsule didn't seem quite as stable as the booster at separation burn time.
- Frompo 10y agoYeah, that tumbling didn't look like it was intended.
- 6d6b73 10y agoStill better than the alternative.
- trothamel 10y agoI'm not sure about Blue Origin, but the Apollo abort system intentionally introduced a tumble into the capsule as part of the abort process. The reason for this is that it was stable in two positions - nose first, and heat shield first. Only the latter was survivable on reentry. It was more stable in the heat shield first position, so by introducing a tumble, they were able to avoid nose-first and ensure an abort followed by reentry was something that could be survived. I don't know if Blue Origin is doing the same thing - but it's not impossible this was something they might have wanted.
- RealityVoid 10y agoThough this is not a reentry. You would not get the same heating effects when aborting a launch, during reentry you'd get all that lateral speed you need to decelerate from. Not the case during abort.
- ceejayoz 10y agoI believe they stated that the capsule intentionally fires off-center to get away from the booster laterally.
- 6d6b73 10y agoLooks like SpaceX will have some catching up to do. Bezos seems to be getting ahead of Musk.
- coob 10y agoThe Dragon Launch Escape System was successfully tested in May last year. It is Blue Origin who are catching up.
- mariusz79 10y agoBut not on a rocket that flew five times.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- sfeng 10y agoThis is a much simpler rocket than the Falcon 9. For one, it's suborbital. Its flights are so much simpler than the full orbital injections and hypersonic reentries the Falcon flies. A quick list of things Blue Origin hasn't done yet: - Sent anything to orbit (much less paying cargo) - Sent anything to geosyncronous orbit - Landed a ship coming back from orbit - Docked with the ISS
- ceejayoz 10y agoDragon hasn't done an in-flight test with a firing booster, though. They're each ahead and behind the other in different ways. What SpaceX is doing is for the most part more challenging, but I don't mind some competitiveness if it gets everyone pushing for greatness.
- api 10y agoThey haven't orbited anything yet, so not exactly. But it looks like the gap is narrower than some thought. Musk said he hoped to ignite a new space race. He might have one.
- JanSolo 10y agoCrew capsule and booster both went up, seperated, came down and landed nominally. In fact, they made it look easy; everything worked as they predicted and there were no suprises. A couple of points of interest: 1. The Crew Capsule pitched around quite a lot after it left the booster. This would have been quite 'exciting' for any passengers but was easily survivable. SpaceX had a similar problem in their Dragon LES test a while back. Indeed, the BO Capsule looked much more stable under parachutes than the Dragon did. 2. The commentators mentioned that the booster had flown and landed 5 times and would be retired to a museum. 5 times!? There was so little drama in the launch and landing that I expect they could probably launch it another 5 times with few problems. This is what a reliable system looks like. Good job! 3. The gantry tower at the West Texas launch site had what looked like walkways for accessing the Crew capsule. Does that mean crewed tests are imminent? Very exciting! This is a fantastic result for Jeff Bezos and his Blue Origin team; I'm hoping that their new orbital booster is as reliable. If it is, SpaceX and ULA will have some real domestic competition. At last!
- jessriedel 10y agoHi-jacking top comment to point out that the actual launch is at 1h:06m.
- ceejayoz 10y ago1. I'd be interested if they have instrumented crash dummies inside for this sort of thing. I'd imagine they'd get some whiplash, but that's a lot better than blown up. 3. Not necessarily. Their first flight had the same tower. Presumably for engineering access to it when it's stood up. https://youtu.be/rEdk-XNoZpA?t=17s https://youtu.be/rEdk-XNoZpA?t=17s
- jdietrich 10y agoIf you're properly restrained, you can survive absolutely massive g-forces. John Stapp survived 46g on a rocket sled; Indycar and Formula 1 drivers regularly walk away from >100g crashes. Assuming they're using a proven seat and restraint design, the capsule's own sensors should provide satisfactory data on survivability.
- david-given 10y agoThe actual launch is at 1h06 into the recorded video (there were several holds).
- joshontheweb 10y agoReally cool to watch! I didn't know the plan ahead of time and thought the thing blew up when the escape capsule fired. So cool to feel like a space race is warming up.
- xanadohnt 10y ago"Space race is warming up" - You verbalized perfectly what I've been feeling lately. So exciting!
- reddog 10y agoThis is its 5th launch and I love the way the logos and lettering on the outside of the rocket has not been retouched/repainted after the previous launches. You can see it's used space ship.
- hamitron 10y agoMight want to do something about that booster being on fire after landing.
- ceejayoz 10y agoSpaceX's Falcon does the same thing - paint on the landing legs burns a little after the landing. In fact, it's deliberately ablative (https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/24rnci/are_the_landing_legs_reusable/ch9z6vl https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/24rnci/are_the_land...).
- diggernet 10y agoT+2:41: "Phil, also as a reminder, we also have that retro-thrust system on the bottom of the crew capsule to make sure that the touchdown is even smoother for our astronauts." T+2:54: "Just as a reminder, that's also going to kick up quite a bit of dust out here in Texas." T+3:08: "It's going to come down at just about 3 miles an hour by the time it touches down." T+4:15: Capsule smacks into the desert at 16mph, with no sign of retro-thrust or dust kick up before impact.
- g3cko 10y agoYeah, I was curious about that part too...
- funkysquid 10y agoThat's what I thought as well, but watching some other videos on their site, they say the boost happens in "the last second" https://youtu.be/xYYTuZCjZcE?t=2m34s https://youtu.be/xYYTuZCjZcE?t=2m34s. Any sign of thrust before landing really isn't visible in that video either. So unless they've never actually fired it successfully and we just don't know what it looks like, it's possible that it's just so close to touchdown that we can't distinguish the thrust from the landing. I'm assuming that decelerating by 13mph over < 1s is still quite a bit better than by 15mph instantly? But I really don't know.
- BFatts 10y agoI thought 20mph was maximum survivable rate of decent?
- diggernet 10y agoI suppose that a last-instant firing is a plausible explanation, and would greatly reduce physical damage to the capsule. But then the talk of a "gentle" 3mph touchdown is conveniently ignoring the 16->13 deceleration a split second before. As you say, it's likely preferable to 15->0, but I suspect not a whole lot more pleasant to experience. The astronauts would probably not even notice the actual touchdown an instant later.
- agumonkey 10y agoHow many times did they mention "first reusable ...", it felt like jabs at Elon Musk.
- yessql 10y agoThey should be proud of that for sure, but they just go up really high, vs. putting a payload into orbit. It's got to be an order if magnitude easier for BO. Look at how long the booster hovers and corrects it way down so gently. SpaceX just can't carry that much extra fuel to land like that.
- agumonkey 10y agoYeah,spacex had similar hover landing long ago, the trick is handling the suicide burn. BO is grabbing attention.
- MertsA 10y agoThe Falcon 9 also can't throttle low enough to be able to hover when empty. It could do it with extra fuel but that's only because the extra fuel would add more mass, it would have to land before it became light enough that it starts accelerating upwards again.