5 ms·

This is overall a good, and needed thing. While the BE-4 engines from Blue Origin are fantastic, they need the level of system maturity that is represented by U

This is overall a good, and needed thing. While the BE-4 engines from Blue Origin are fantastic, they need the level of system maturity that is represented by ULA. Together, I see a real chance to be competitive with SpaceX long term. Yes, they have work to go before they could do reusable launch, but the combined company probably has the best chance to do so. The more reusable launch providers the better for the industry and for human kind.

panick21_ 3y ago
> BE-4 engines from Blue Origin are fantastic Are they? Outside of being staged combustion they aren't that impressive. Their chamber-pressure is still really low. The TWR isn't that great. For a staged engine they are entry level. Their re-usability is theoretical at this point. The early engines the delivered to ULA are not the reusable version that will later go on New Glenn. > I see a real chance to be competitive with SpaceX long term. 'competitive' as in actually peer competition, not really. But I guess they can 'compete' by 'Jeff Bezos is gone finance the company for many 100s of million of $ every month' for the next decade.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dotnet00 3y ago
  The reusability on BE-4 is not theoretical. Yes, the ones flown on Vulcan do not do relighting. However, we do know of engines BO has test fired where they have tested restart capability. https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1521204214084796416 https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1521204214084796416
  - panick21_ 3y ago
    Many engines that are not reusable can be started multiple times. Actually having the certification that you can relaunch with the engine after you have done a reentry and landing is required.
    - dotnet00 3y ago
      That's a pretty convenient goalpost to move to. Raptor also is only theoretically reusable by that metric.
      - Teever 3y ago
        it's not goalpost shifting at all. BO doesn't have a reusable engine until they demonstrate that their engine is reusable.
afiori 3y ago
According to some commentators Blue Origin has more than a fighting chance to compete with SpaceX https://youtu.be/1slJdJTzfzc?si=V7HNxAvBz0TQtMTW https://youtu.be/1slJdJTzfzc?si=V7HNxAvBz0TQtMTW
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- heisgone 3y ago
  This video highlight the difference of culture between NASA and SpaceX, for better or worse. Kimbal Musk talks about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiT0B1C7ow0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiT0B1C7ow0
- nothercastle 3y ago
  They don’t though. They are a good fit for UAL because they are already run by accountants and ex-Boeing managers. Merging 2 failed businesses into one is not a recipe for success.
  - afiori 3y ago
    As far as I understand SpaceX plan requires dozens of launches in close succession with never-tested in orbit refill, while Blue Origin does not. For another view of some considerations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU
- panick21_ 3y ago
  Common Sense Skeptic is a ridiculous person whos literal whole identity is to trash everything related to SpaceX. When you said some commentator' I already knew who it was before I looked it up. SpaceX could cure cancer and he would make a series of tweets about how its not an accomplishment because not every person with cancer is already cured. For years now he has always used the worst interpretation possible and declared everything SpaceX hasn't done as impossible, and if they do it it suddendly becomes unimportant and something that others have done already done much better. And every prediction on the future is a worst case prediction. And then he does the opposite for anything not called SpaceX. He is also not an actual journalist with deep research or even really educated on the topic. His audiance seems to be mostly the anti-Musk people who dont usually care about space but need to say negative things. He basically a meme, more like somebody playing character. He took the thunderfoot playbook and in order to make money on Musk hate. And yes, there are lots of only pro-Musk hype people around as well, and they are equally stupid.

panick21_ 3y ago

> BE-4 engines from Blue Origin are fantastic Are they? Outside of being staged combustion they aren't that impressive. Their chamber-pressure is still really low. The TWR isn't that great. For a staged engine they are entry level. Their re-usability is theoretical at this point. The early engines the delivered to ULA are not the reusable version that will later go on New Glenn. > I see a real chance to be competitive with SpaceX long term. 'competitive' as in actually peer competition, not really. But I guess they can 'compete' by 'Jeff Bezos is gone finance the company for many 100s of million of $ every month' for the next decade.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dotnet00 3y ago
The reusability on BE-4 is not theoretical. Yes, the ones flown on Vulcan do not do relighting. However, we do know of engines BO has test fired where they have tested restart capability. https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1521204214084796416 https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1521204214084796416
- panick21_ 3y ago
  Many engines that are not reusable can be started multiple times. Actually having the certification that you can relaunch with the engine after you have done a reentry and landing is required.
  - dotnet00 3y ago
    That's a pretty convenient goalpost to move to. Raptor also is only theoretically reusable by that metric.
    - Teever 3y ago
      it's not goalpost shifting at all. BO doesn't have a reusable engine until they demonstrate that their engine is reusable.

afiori 3y ago

According to some commentators Blue Origin has more than a fighting chance to compete with SpaceX https://youtu.be/1slJdJTzfzc?si=V7HNxAvBz0TQtMTW https://youtu.be/1slJdJTzfzc?si=V7HNxAvBz0TQtMTW

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
heisgone 3y ago
This video highlight the difference of culture between NASA and SpaceX, for better or worse. Kimbal Musk talks about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiT0B1C7ow0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiT0B1C7ow0
nothercastle 3y ago
They don’t though. They are a good fit for UAL because they are already run by accountants and ex-Boeing managers. Merging 2 failed businesses into one is not a recipe for success.
- afiori 3y ago
  As far as I understand SpaceX plan requires dozens of launches in close succession with never-tested in orbit refill, while Blue Origin does not. For another view of some considerations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoJsPvmFixU
panick21_ 3y ago
Common Sense Skeptic is a ridiculous person whos literal whole identity is to trash everything related to SpaceX. When you said some commentator' I already knew who it was before I looked it up. SpaceX could cure cancer and he would make a series of tweets about how its not an accomplishment because not every person with cancer is already cured. For years now he has always used the worst interpretation possible and declared everything SpaceX hasn't done as impossible, and if they do it it suddendly becomes unimportant and something that others have done already done much better. And every prediction on the future is a worst case prediction. And then he does the opposite for anything not called SpaceX. He is also not an actual journalist with deep research or even really educated on the topic. His audiance seems to be mostly the anti-Musk people who dont usually care about space but need to say negative things. He basically a meme, more like somebody playing character. He took the thunderfoot playbook and in order to make money on Musk hate. And yes, there are lots of only pro-Musk hype people around as well, and they are equally stupid.