What I really want to know is if there's any spare capacity for secondary payloads with this opportunity. The New Glenn looks to have a lot of GTO capability so getting to a C3 for Trans Mars Injection should be well within their capacity to bring some additional payloads. Anyone have any intel on that possibility? NASA's general policy is to make secondary launch available whenever they can so I'm hoping this is the case here.

[deleted]

That's actually a big concern with a new player. The launch window to Mars doesn't care what bugs you're ironing out. If they miss the closing of the launch window it's another 2 years before they can make the trip to Mars. I wish them luck.

Not in rocket science. It is famously difficult to get to orbit. At least companies that have tried understand what they don't know. Blue Origin only knows how to build gas powered shaftless elevators. Which isn't nothing, but certainly is an order of magnitude easier than orbit.

Jeff's engines are on the launch pad right now. The ULA Vulcan rocket uses two of them in the first stage. New Glenn will use 7 of them and be reusable (eventually).

Vulcan is a standard throw-away rocket intended to replace the Atlas that has flown for many years.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[deleted]

[deleted]

It's in NASA's interest for their to be healthy competition. They don't want to be reliant on the whims of SpaceX (and by extension Musk). SpaceX being dominant is an argument for diversifying the contracts.

One would think so. Bezo's has been using his fortune to sue NASA at damn near every turn, setting back science missions for years to come. NASA having to spend their funds to fight litigation is insanity. But Bezo doesn't care. He wants a cut of the pie, even if he isn't ready to do anything.

[removed]

NASA bought more Starship landings. They seem to have quite a bit of confidence in the rocket.

>I have as much achievement as blue origin.

And you did it for cheaper :) People saying "just wait til New Glenn launch next year" are hilarious. Ive been reading this since 2015 at least, when half of today's redditors were in grade school.

Yeah I'd agree, and good thing the risk was taken back then, just as it's good to do so now with BO

That's the point of this launch, to establish a track record

SpaceX is the most advanced launch organization in history, lapping the rest of the world twice over in mass to orbit with a nearly perfect safety record and dirt cheap vehicles.

Blue origin hasn’t been to orbit and their suborbital rocket just failed.

Investing in starship is smart based on track record, blue origin? They literally have no track record.

I mean... is that really worse? Wouldn't it be worse, had they tried for a decade and never managed?

Oh there are similarities when you describe the two cases at a surface level. But any kind of deeper look at the two scenarios should make it super obvious that it's not really things that are comparable

The contracts that SpaceX won very early on when they were basically a very young startup with no proven track record. Those contracts are comparable to this contract that BO has been awarded

> SpaceX in particularly has also paid Russia for access to Soviet rocketry,

They what now?

Yeah blue origin will be losing money on this launch. Seems pretty good for NASA.

[removed]

Interesting. I have always thought rocketry is considered rather strategic, so I am surprised private companies could just willy nilly get access. Maybe I was wrong. I am just surprised countries like those in the middle east didn't pay their way into space exploration considering their vanity.

[removed]