3 ms·

Why would NASA consider Blue Origin for any Moon mission when they’ve yet to even put something in orbit? The hubris is… ahem… astronomical.

by atonse 5y ago

lumost 5y ago
In fairness blue origin seemingly jumped straight to a successful launch with their founder on board. Spacex is known for their unplanned disassemblies. It’s possible that blue origin is just taking a different set of tactics. Manned moon missions involve a lot of risk with minimal opportunity to recover, maybe a more methodical approach gets you there faster.
- nyokodo 5y ago
  > In fairness blue origin seemingly jumped straight to a successful launch with their founder on board. Spacex is known for their unplanned disassemblies. Taking 20 years to launch your first customers is more a figurative crawl than a jump. You’ll see their fair share of RUDs from Blue Origin once they start testing orbital rockets instead of impressive toys. In the meantime SpaceX is landing orbital boosters on autonomous barges at sea and testing a giant interplanetary grain silo. All the best to Blue Origin but don’t be fooled, they are playing a desperate game of catch-up and failing a bit right now. Go Team Space!
- lupire 5y ago
  SpaceX is knowing for everything because they are actually getting work done at a fast clip.
- jjk166 5y ago
  This was Blue Origin's first launch with humans on board, but they've been flying their rocket for years. Bezos' flight was the 16th launch. They had one unintentional crash in 2015, and a few intentional aborts. Actually during their 15th launch, they did have crew onboard briefly while the rocket was fueled as part of the launch rehearsal, but they exited before liftoff. SpaceX, for comparison, did not try launching humans until its 85th Falcon 9 mission. While several falcon 9s have failed to land, only one has ever failed in flight, on its 19th flight. The Falcon 9, unlike the New Shepard, is orbital capable.
chews 5y ago
Why? Maybe the bribe they’re being offered...
zardo 5y ago
The contract is to build and operate a manned lunar lander, not a launch vehicle.
- mlindner 5y ago
  He was proposing to launch his lander on his non-existant rocket though.

Why would NASA consider Blue Origin for any Moon mission when they’ve yet to even put something in orbit? The hubris is… ahem… astronomical.

by atonse 5y ago

Why would NASA consider Blue Origin for any Moon mission when they’ve yet to even put something in orbit? The hubris is… ahem… astronomical.

lumost 5y ago

In fairness blue origin seemingly jumped straight to a successful launch with their founder on board. Spacex is known for their unplanned disassemblies. It’s possible that blue origin is just taking a different set of tactics. Manned moon missions involve a lot of risk with minimal opportunity to recover, maybe a more methodical approach gets you there faster.

nyokodo 5y ago
> In fairness blue origin seemingly jumped straight to a successful launch with their founder on board. Spacex is known for their unplanned disassemblies. Taking 20 years to launch your first customers is more a figurative crawl than a jump. You’ll see their fair share of RUDs from Blue Origin once they start testing orbital rockets instead of impressive toys. In the meantime SpaceX is landing orbital boosters on autonomous barges at sea and testing a giant interplanetary grain silo. All the best to Blue Origin but don’t be fooled, they are playing a desperate game of catch-up and failing a bit right now. Go Team Space!
lupire 5y ago
SpaceX is knowing for everything because they are actually getting work done at a fast clip.
jjk166 5y ago
This was Blue Origin's first launch with humans on board, but they've been flying their rocket for years. Bezos' flight was the 16th launch. They had one unintentional crash in 2015, and a few intentional aborts. Actually during their 15th launch, they did have crew onboard briefly while the rocket was fueled as part of the launch rehearsal, but they exited before liftoff. SpaceX, for comparison, did not try launching humans until its 85th Falcon 9 mission. While several falcon 9s have failed to land, only one has ever failed in flight, on its 19th flight. The Falcon 9, unlike the New Shepard, is orbital capable.

chews 5y ago

Why? Maybe the bribe they’re being offered...

zardo 5y ago

The contract is to build and operate a manned lunar lander, not a launch vehicle.

mlindner 5y ago
He was proposing to launch his lander on his non-existant rocket though.