4 ms·

This time, the difference between suborbital and orbital is a big deal. You'll note that press coverage of BO uses 'suborbital' to describe these flights, while

This time, the difference between suborbital and orbital is a big deal. You'll note that press coverage of BO uses 'suborbital' to describe these flights, while BO's marketing keeps talking about 'space'.

jacquesm 9y ago
They can credibly claim 'space' because of the altitude. I really hope they will stay on schedule to do something more serious than this, I can't wait until there are two private sector parties with orbital launch capability and reusability at their core.
- greglindahl 9y ago
  Claiming 'space' and not saying suborbital is why people are criticizing them.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    For sure, it's exactly why you get these comment threads. They're going after the same press that SpaceX gets without being candid about the vast differences between the two companies when it matters most. Such wilful muddying of the waters serves nobody. Rocket Lab has - at this point - as much or even more credibility than Blue Origin has in spite of the more modest goals and the huge disparity in funding. At some point Blue Origin will simply have to deliver, sooner is better than later.
  - MPSimmons 9y ago
    To be very fair, a large proportion of the population doesn't intuitively understand the difference. Most people think you go to orbit by going "up". Just because SpaceX is doing something much harder than what Blue Origin is doing, that doesn't make it easy or trivial. Even getting a rocket that size to space is incredibly difficult, and not that many nations have done it. The fact that they're doing it, with a (soon to be) crewed capsule, which lands vertically... that's mind blowing. The fact that SpaceX has a ton of success doesn't raise the table stakes. Basically, no one else (except SpaceX) is doing what Blue Origin is doing, nor have they done it in history. That is tremendous. I am very, very happy for Blue Origin, even though I'm rooting harder for SpaceX. Respect all around.
    - greglindahl 9y ago
      So you're saying we should bitch even louder when people say 'space' without saying 'suborbital'?
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      > Most people think you go to orbit by going "up". This is very true. More than one person I know commented on how strange it is that SpaceX rockets go 'sideways'. They think going 'up' is the prelude to going into orbit.
privateSFacct 9y ago
Enjoyed the video! Can't wait to see the orbital stuff. What blue origin is showing currently looks reusable. Curious if it will scale, some of this is easier at lower scale. I am curious about the claim of a feather soft landing - there is pretty much nothing lighter than feather light, even an airplane landing is harder. That's a big accomplishment if true (and looks like there should be at least a jolt of some sort just eyeballing. Props to the team for getting it so light.

jacquesm 9y ago

They can credibly claim 'space' because of the altitude. I really hope they will stay on schedule to do something more serious than this, I can't wait until there are two private sector parties with orbital launch capability and reusability at their core.

greglindahl 9y ago
Claiming 'space' and not saying suborbital is why people are criticizing them.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  For sure, it's exactly why you get these comment threads. They're going after the same press that SpaceX gets without being candid about the vast differences between the two companies when it matters most. Such wilful muddying of the waters serves nobody. Rocket Lab has - at this point - as much or even more credibility than Blue Origin has in spite of the more modest goals and the huge disparity in funding. At some point Blue Origin will simply have to deliver, sooner is better than later.
- MPSimmons 9y ago
  To be very fair, a large proportion of the population doesn't intuitively understand the difference. Most people think you go to orbit by going "up". Just because SpaceX is doing something much harder than what Blue Origin is doing, that doesn't make it easy or trivial. Even getting a rocket that size to space is incredibly difficult, and not that many nations have done it. The fact that they're doing it, with a (soon to be) crewed capsule, which lands vertically... that's mind blowing. The fact that SpaceX has a ton of success doesn't raise the table stakes. Basically, no one else (except SpaceX) is doing what Blue Origin is doing, nor have they done it in history. That is tremendous. I am very, very happy for Blue Origin, even though I'm rooting harder for SpaceX. Respect all around.
  - greglindahl 9y ago
    So you're saying we should bitch even louder when people say 'space' without saying 'suborbital'?
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    > Most people think you go to orbit by going "up". This is very true. More than one person I know commented on how strange it is that SpaceX rockets go 'sideways'. They think going 'up' is the prelude to going into orbit.

privateSFacct 9y ago

Enjoyed the video! Can't wait to see the orbital stuff. What blue origin is showing currently looks reusable. Curious if it will scale, some of this is easier at lower scale. I am curious about the claim of a feather soft landing - there is pretty much nothing lighter than feather light, even an airplane landing is harder. That's a big accomplishment if true (and looks like there should be at least a jolt of some sort just eyeballing. Props to the team for getting it so light.