The State of Blue Origin | Can They Still Succeed?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 тра 2024
- An overview and analysis of Blue Origin. Their unique blend of traditional and modern aerospace cultures at first seems advantageous, yet progress has been slower than desired. I examine their past, good and bad, to learn what may explain this dilemma, and what changes can be made to help them achieve their vision.
Want to support Apogee? Consider becoming a Patreon supporter and earn access to exclusive live-streams and patron-only discord channels - / apogeespace
Checkout the official Apogee Website for awesome merch! - www.apogeechannel.com/
Join in on the discussion on the Apogee discord server, open to all - / discord
Follow me on Twitter for updates - / apogeespace
Timeline:
0:00 - Intro
2:06 - Announcements
3:12 - The Good
5:50 - What's Gone Wrong
13:17 - My Greatest Concern
20:14 - Underlying Causes
24:24 - Potential Solutions
27:31 - Final Thoughts - Наука та технологія
Valid criticism: "Blue Origin has not reached orbit (yet)"
Vision: "Millions of people living and working in space to benefit earth"
Action: "Let's build a suborbital jumping dil... ah, I mean rocket..."
Context matters :)
I'm simply can't unseen this. Every time I saw their rocket, It's a giant dilxx... 😂
If their goal truly is having millions living and working in space. The plan is three steps.
1. Industrialize the moon
2. Build Lunar Orbital Ring
3. Build Earth Orbital Ring
@@rexmann1984 I think a mass driver is a way better option for the moon as the moon doesnt have an atmosphere and therefore the mass driver can be a ground level and doesnt need a vacum tube. Also are you a fellow follower of our lord and saviour Issac Arthur?
@@fallencrow6718 yes I am. The reason we need the Orbital Ring around the moon is to learn the finer points of building one before we try it around earth. Moreover, for materials a mass driver is no big deal for humans you need it to be big enough to not turn them into jelly from the Gs.
@@user-pz6mc2oj3f Blue origin is older than space x and yet they havent even reach orbit. Also fortune favours the brave.
Blue Origin is incredibly frustrating to watch as a fan of spaceflight. Being 20 years old and started by a silicon valley titan, it was poised to be at the forefront of NewSpace companies, and with a virtually unlimited budget behind it, capable of great things. But despite being nominally NewSpace, every decision they've made has been fully OldSpace in mindset and action. Even worse, they are incredibly litigious, bringing down the entire industry and reducing technological innovation across the board. Despite their slow development pace and dinosaur management, you can't help but look at them and see so much potential! If they overhauled their management and started aggressively testing and developing New Glenn (and actually delivered BE-4), they could be on track for great things! But based on their track record, I doubt that happens any time soon...
Yep its true
It's almost as painful as being a fan of the DCEU, you know it can be as big or bigger than the MCU but poor decision making plagues it at every turn. With nothing really getting off the ground despite it having an amazing product with the potential to be spectacular
Damn straight man.
Blue Origin doesn't seem to have the right people in charge.
The fact that they haven't reached orbit yet is inexcusable. How can they even be eligible for the NASA moon landing?
I think Elon eluded to the idea that blue origin is going to waste taxpayers money and show nothing for it. Borderline scam.
If Blue Origin hasn't demonstrated their orbital spacecraft in 5 years the hatred toward Jeff will be real.
@@RobertLutece909 Then they in the wrong game and NASA should not be funding them.
Great video! Blue Origin is a really interesting case in the aerospace industry, and it's also the most depressing in my opinion. They could have been a great new space company but instead decided to adopt the attitudes and strategies of old space, leading to their stagnation.
It's frustrating to watch their motto be such an ironic show of the arrogance, rather than have a more modest view and being tight for cash
It's giving them a bad image in the industry, more so than the older companies
American greed destroying America. Lol
@@sirmiles1820 bingo. You can add envy, spiteful and self-absorbed to the 'mix'. Notice his 'projects' are targeting the Elites.. There's not a tinge of 'service to humanity', but a means of 'entertainment' for the 1% of Earthling who are awash with Moolah and let the 'ordinary humans' drown in their own drool..
Well, they could be a better, but not faster Aerojet Rocketdyne.
One of those strategies was to depend on profit by gouging the government--i.e. the taxpayer. Musk designed Spacex from the very beginning to be cost effective in the private marketplace. Suddenly everybody is talking about sustainabilty/reusability but where were they for decades?
The idea of Blue Origin buying ULA would be interesting, however due to the state of it, ULA is more likely to buy Blue Origin to ensure they get their engines for Vulcan Centaur.
Lockheed Martin moved to acquire Aerojet Rocketdyne in Dec 2020 and the Rocketdyne shareholders approved the acquistion in Mar 2021. So would Lockheed Martin provide engines to ULA in the future via their Rocketdyne acquistion?
🤣😂, this is a violation
@@steveaustin2686 Problem is that Vulcan has been built as a methane fueled system which Rocketdyne doesn't have. They would do better to talk to SpaceX to build a Raptor properly resized to fit the Vulcan. Musk might like the idea.
@@vapoet I wasn't necessarily talking about for Vulcan Centaur in the near term. ULA is pretty much stuck with the BE-4 for now. A future variant of the Vulcan Centaur, or even better, a new reusable launcher is more what I was thinking.
Musk did bet ULA's Tory Bruno that he would eat his hat if Vulcan Centaur flew a NSSL payload before 2023. Since the Q4 2022 USSF-51 launch was moved to an Atlas-V, Musk's hat is safe.
I think that it is more if ULA would go to SpaceX. The Raptor is still in development, so it may not be ready for export to ULA. The Vulcan Centaur only uses two engines, so it shouldn't be too much to pull a few out of the Starship queue. I'm sure re-engineering the Vulcan Centaur to accept Raptors is easier said than done though.
@@steveaustin2686 The problem is that the Vulcan was designed around a Methane engine. As far as I know, there is only one working methane engine and it belongs to Musk. Frankly, at this point, ULA should be suing to take over the engine building portion of Blue Origin.
They have not reached orbit yet, okay that might be a bad criticism considering the engine for their orbital rocket, however their suborbital program is also slow as hell.
They just can't get it up
@@NURDVEVO Elon added: (to orbit) Lol
@@JCStaling who said that was what I meant.
Not ever reaching orbit is definitely a valid argument. They bid on a Lunar Lander project for which they have zero experience in space for, then protest when they don't win the contract? I don't care how great you think New Shepard is, it is in "space" for seconds then re-enters the atmosphere. Their lack of urgency and their arrogance just rubs me the wrong way. Cannot be a fan of this company as it currently exists.
I bet Blue Origin was given anything just to be token competition for SpaceX, purely for politics and appearances. They aren't trying because they've already done their job.
Apogee: "i cannot believe i already have ten thousand subscribers"
i can.
keep making solid content and they will keep coming.
Great video as always.
Thank you!
Indeed, I think this is the first Apogee video I've seen, just subscribed on the back of it.
quality content
For such a small channel, this is one of the best production quality videos I’ve seen, earned my sub
I read this comment and subbed.
don't forget the bell 👍
@@DodgeI :D
Authorising, but not appropriating funds for a second HLS is the perfect way to block the entire programme. Stretching the development period guarantees higher costs, and this can be used as an excuse to terminate the project.
It's not like the second Artemis HLS would ever see use anyway, given that it would also require building another SLS-Orion stack. Who's going to fund that after the flag-planting is done?
They sped up the timeline of the program by 4 years, and cut the budget by 75%
BO`s biggest thread is time. It will eat them alive. Jeff won`t last forever. What will happen when he is gone? Time is their biggest enemy and they just don`t see it. SpaceX is moving so fast, that they actually have a chance beating time. Their momentum is what keeps them alive in the long run.
Jeff who? Is it the Jeff who can't get it up?
spacex already beat them
My cousin worked there. After SpaceX was announced as the winner of the Lunar Lander contract, he moved to SpaceX.
I do not have much confidence in them.
Wow first I've heard of someone moving from BO to SpaceX. What made him switch?
@@alexanderkenway Well for one, he'd worked at SpaceX before. He moved in the first place so he could focus more on raising his kids.
He's gone back now because they offered him a big promotion - he's a senior simulation propulsion engineer. It means he won't have to move back to Texas.
I wonder if this is a sign of people beginning to jump ship from BO? I hope not because I want all the rocket companies to succeed (or at least contribute), but that is not a good sign. I suspect that morale at BO has gotten much worse over the past year.
Not having achieved orbit is a valid criticism. It shows blue origin's lack of drive and commitment from the very outset to have concentrated on sub orbital tourism instead of orbital manufacturing and this shows that they aren't serious about colonising space.
A space launch company that's ultimate goal is the creation of O'Neil cylinders who hasn't even built an orbital rocket let alone attempted an orbital flight is a valid criticism.
With 21 years of experience...
Its slow, waaaay too slow. 🤷♂️
@@jackmerry1972 did you watch the vid?
That is fair, as I said. I think if the criticism is "suborbit was the wrong choice" or "they should have already finished New Glenn by now" then that is fair.
@@AHHHHHHHH21 Yes I get it. Either way, they barely have a single operational rocket.
It doesn't matter if new shepherd is orbital or not. Its only just now becoming an operational rocket. They have a pretty slow development process compared with the "disruptors" of this video.
Blue Origin's target isn't the creation of O'Neill cylinders, their target is access to space for later generations. The more closer target is the moon because the moon is the gateway to space. Something completely different from SpaceX, SpaceX's target isn't access to space but the return to another planet.
23:00 "Blue origins ceo is from a defence contractor" well that explains everything
Step 1) Blue Origin buys ULA
Step 2) ULA dies
The END!
Step 3) Elon Buys Blue Origin/ULA
Step 4) SpaceX becomes a space superpower
ROARING APPLAUSE!!! LOL
@@cameronh3260 nah, Elon will EXPAND SpaceX and HIRE over all the good workers, and leave the executive scumbags out of the equation. Why buy a dogshit company when you can just hire its dissatisfied workers?
I was thinking about that
Meh, if it was owned by anyone else, no one would even be talking about Blue Origin.
Is just the HATE directed to Jeff Bezos...maybe he is not as good looking as Musk....or they just hate Amazon
@@javierderivero9299 he is a villain..how come he is gonna be a good looking 😂
I’m on Team Space, but I’m also on team creative destruction. Blue sucks and I don’t want them propped up by the government so they can railroad Artemis.
I just don’t have any faith in that company anymore
I agree. Blue Origin seems to have no urgency. Must be weird to work there. Now, soon Jeff is going to fly New Shepard with his brother and a wealthy bidder. Great, and he may indeed come back a changed man (the Overview Effect) and start to work seriously from then on. But I am not confident that will happen. It may as well turn out to just be an item checked off of his bucket-list, and Jeff is back on his yacht. He can be satisfied that he went to space before Elon, and lose interest.
Jeff Bezos runs the risk of single-handed repeating the whole Apollo arc of brimming promise and disappointing fade-out.
Public results speak loudly. So the fact they haven't reached orbit is a valid criticism.
Eh, Grumman built the Apollo LM without going to orbit. Getting to orbit is not a prerequisite to developing and building a Moon lander. Besides, Blue Origin is the lead company in the National Team of Lockheed Martin (ascent) module, Blue Origin (descent) module, Northrop Grumman (transfer module), and Draper (avionics). NASA was impressed with each company focusing on a specific module and Blue's lead in making sure everything works together. The details are on page 18 of the HLS Option A Source Selection Statement.
www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/option-a-source-selection-statement-final.pdf
@@steveaustin2686 Perhaps the point could be made in the positive that inspiration lies in the fact that Spacex is building the entire package that can and no doubt will carry man to the moons surface, and return him safely to earth, and that this is not being done to amass wealth here on earth thus depriving others, but is being done to achieve a noble dream all of us understand and hope to see come to full fruition. Looking at the surface of the moon without weather and life to cover its wounds, it becomes quite apparent that it is not a matter of IF, but WHEN we are once again struck by another meteorite large enough to destroy the civilization upon, and within which all of our hopes, loves, and dreams reside.
@@PeckerwoodIndustries I'm not doubting Musk's vision as I agree with it. I'm not doubting SpaceX ability with space hardware as they have amply demostrated that they are one of the best in the business besides being one of the youngest major players. I'm just saying that you don't have to put a spacecraft in orbit to be able to build a lunar lander. After all, Grumman did it in the 1960's.
My contention, and why the critique that they haven't reached space yet is a *good* criticism, is that BO *has* acted as if they are regularly reaching orbit and are a contender in that market
It's all well and good to be a space tourism/hotel company, but don't then start making proposals for Lunar landers, or gigantic cargo rockets, or start Twitter beefs with a company that actually *has* real plans for those types of missions
Blue Origin shot themselves in the foot by focusing on tourism and then acting like it is on the same field as ULA, Boeing or SpaceX purely because it has partnered with some of them
It would be like if Mitsubishi, BMW and Toyota took shots at Tesla for making a whole fleet of varied electric cars- like, hello, who has actually been selling and making them for two decades compared to making concepts that are never developed beyond show models to wow car journalists?
You either pursue your vision or not, don't pretend to be pursuing several while not actually making any meaningful progress with it and then acting like you have
Bezos and Musk could have been great partners in space exploration and resource extraction, but instead Bezos is the old-guard from the 70s and 80s pretending he's the new wave while doing all in his power to make sure it's nothing more than a splash
Getting to orbit is not a prerequisite for building a lunar lander. Grumman had never been to orbit and they developed and built the Apollo LM. It's more about Blue's glacial development than them not getting to orbit. New Shepard is a good sub-orbital spacecraft, it just took too long to develop and build.
@@steveaustin2686 The difference is Grumman wasn't proposing to launch their lander on their own rocket before ever even launching one into orbit or real space. Grumman specialized on the lander and left the launching to someone else.
@@steveaustin2686 Grumman was already, like most other Gemini/Apollo designers, experienced in either spacecraft or at minimum aircraft development with numerous successful and commercially sought after models
Blue Origin has neither customers nor production for anything but their space hopping craft, which is useless for anything but sightseeing
They are proposing to launch a lander, which hasn't been built outside of inert models, on a rocket that hasn't even had its engines tested, and all this needing to be by 2024
Its a scummy company too, exemplified by competing for contracts with their "partners" ULA despite agreeing not to, *when they do not even have a launcher and ULA does*
Honestly, Blue Origin just boggles my mind with all the shit they pull
@@lewisyeadon4046 After watching this vid, my wife and I were discussing the orbit tours concepts from Branson and Bezos. Now the BO capsule has a fetching design and kudos for putting windows that can actually be used to look out at. But if I am spending $XXX,XXX dollars to float around for 15 minutes, I would put my dollars down on flying under the spindly-looking Virgin plane, the dropping out and rocketing up on the even more spindly-looking orbital component.
I want to fear death when I go up that high and fast. Otherwise, I'll just strap on my Oculus VR helmet and get airsick in the comfort on of my own couch.
@@MrWaldorfian The ILV is planned to launch on the Vulcan Centaur, so they are leaving the launching to someone else as well.
It's crazy, Bezos doesn't have his CH4 LOX engine, he paralyzes Ula and his Vulcan launcher, the Artemis program etc, in short, selfishness and his narcissism will lose him. You can not admit it, the beautiful presentations of Blue Origin are only fictions
"They don't need the money" - that may be the problem right there. Talk to any rags to riches entrepeneur and they'll tell you that if it doesn't hurt, you'll never have the focus and determination to succeed.
Ever notice the richest people in the world are the ones getting the heaviest government subsidies?
@@wschmrdr apart from Musk, who will get there with or without subsidies!
There's a big difference between a scientific grant and milking the actual taxpayer for all they have.
Has the bill actually passed Congress? I thought it had only passed the Senate and was still be voted on and likely modified in the House....
This is a good clarification. I believe at this point it has only passed the senate.
@@Apogeespace You forgot to mention that the bill also says the awarding of the lunar lander contract to SpaceX cannot be rescinded.
Space payments would be extended over a much longer time, resulting in a very delayed landing.
Although, I would not be surprised if Spacex would accept delayed payments and continue anyway.
@@davidhenry5128 They already did. The payment modification BO and Dynetics keep referring to, doesn't change the total amount it changes which milestones are paid and how much, this shifted payment down the line. SpaceX basically said pay us later. So the Lunar Starship won't cost NASA much the next 1-2 years.
What i dont get is the military consumes 10x or more money than nasa but still always gets more funding each year, but nasa is always seen as the big money eater.
Cool! I just ordered a spacex starship model from amazon plus a short THANKS JEFF!!
it will show " lost in transit " ¬‿¬
ago lovit
Excellent video! Blue Origin is such a disappointment, like a petulant child. We need as many companies as possible competing and driving innovation, but they just want to sit on their hands and complain how it's "not fair".
Man, when you said " buy ULA" my jaw dropped. I wasn't expecting for that in any way shape or form '0 '
And yet it is so logical, from the BO point of view. I smiled as soon as I saw it, because that is precisely what I have been thinking - regrettably, without saying it, so I can't prove it! But if ULA have any sense, they won't sell.
if his goal was to build the space habitat isn't that much faster if he helping funded the spacex development and used theirs spaceship rocket instead as method to transport the logistics to build space habitat.
@@OccupyMarsJune The very idea of Asking SpaceX to launch your habitat infrastructure would never even cross Bezos's synapses as it would offend his very being. Bezos doesn't ask for help. He buys the help. However he knows SpaceX cannot be bought or litigated into submission. It would be a valid option for everyone else on the planet but not for Bezos. He could buy ULA somehow sure, but bring in all of the aerospace engineers from NASA, Europe, China, wherever and he would still know he is picking from the second string as most of all the ambitious engineers have gone to SpaceX already.
I am consistently impressed by the quality of your presentations.
What makes BO so unique is that they suck at everything they do
They suck at space tourism(VG is cheaper for experiencing less g forces)
They suck at landers(obviously)
They suck at building rocket engines(where are ULA's engines Jeff?)
They suck at building orbital rockets(new glenn is more expensive and less capable than falcon heavy)
SO
JEFF WHO??
Also good video
@@OccupyMarsJune I think The Jeff who can't get it up HAHA
What I am worried about is that New Glenn is too costly to fail at all. That means they will have to land their first launch which I don’t see happening cause it is extremely hard
Well, Space Shuttle succeeded on its first try, did it? John is wonderful, if Elon never born
@@ThisNoName the space shuttle was held together by magic and the hopes and dreams of children.
@@jesusmora9379 May America wake up from nightmares before it's too late ...
@@ThisNoName STS was a wing and a prayer held together by scotch tape
It's a wonder it flew at all, and it virtually didn't at some points due to grounding
Overall, it failed it's mission anyway, and I think BO will be following that path
@@jesusmora9379 maybe is would have been better if nasa had not been limited by money and not had to buy there parts from several different companies
Maybe it would have been reusable
25:50 my heart stopped for a second there
I’ve been pondering this very question that this video attempts to answer. My only conclusion as to why Blue Origin is coming up short in the space race is that The goal of Bezos is not to advance the human race, which is what NASA has always declared to be a guiding force for, and that Musk also professes. But I believe that the prime directive for Mr. Amazon, is to put his own ego on display.
Bezos reaction to losing out on the NASA moon contract puzzled me. Blue Origin has not shown the technological prowess that it can achieve the moonshot goals in the time frame allowed. It’s not favoritism to point at SpaceX and give them the nod. They are steadily achieving their stated goals. They are doing this in public and sometimes it’s messy and stuff breaks and they go to work the next day and work at it some more and it is freaking exciting to watch.
Bezos cries over losing a $3 billion contract. Why? He personally earns that much cash in a month. It’s pocket change to the man. If he wants to land on the moon, go build a launch facility in Cuba, Venezuela or Indonesia, near the equator and where he doesn’t have to abide by the U.S. flight regulations and fly to the moon himself? Who would stop him? I think, Bezos’s original goal was to build a system for short orbital hops that he could sell 15 minutes of low-g to millionaires (a business plan that Richard Branson is still developing after a long number of years) but Musk has come along and made that goal extremely obsolete and quaint.
Musk has a lot of crazy ideas but he is actually doing something to make them happen. Some will fail, some will not, some will be boring compared to other things he is building. I’m not in love with the guy but he is DOING things. Not complaining or making excuses for falling short. If I was the richest man in human history, I would not spend my time worrying about what the second richest guy is doing with his time.
I agree, except for the part about going outside the US. Rocket technology is regulated like other restricted weapons technologies, so going outside the US to launch would be difficult to impossible, depending on how strictly the government wants to regulate things.
Well said.....but can I add .....Elon is much like the crazy people of the past Tesla, Einstein... Alenxander Lodygon Edison , Benfranklin ....the list goes on and on.... all were crazy.... to a degree but they changed life on this planet......for better or worse
Elon Musk will join these people in the history books ......and your great great grand children will read about it 100 yrs from now ...
@@javaman4584 Thanks for clarifying. I made that remark to be a shade sarcastic and not be be a definitive legal option for BO.
My larger point that I hope came across (and has been intimated several times in this discussion) is that Bezos has more money than any one person has ever had, ever. With that money comes virtually unlimited persuasion. If JB was really serious about his space plans, he is fully equipped to purchase the resources, talent and engineering into making that happen. Even on his worse day, he has no reason to complain about anything and his doing so, just rubs many people the wrong way.
JB does not seem to have the engineers curiosity that Elon has and that may be the difference between the two space programs.
It is valid that they havent reached orbit, it shows their slow progress. “step by step, ferociously” is looking a lot more like “step by step, while theyre asleep”
Now it may be that true that it is low hanging fruit or doesnt contribute much to conversation, but eh, opinions differ
Eh, getting to orbit is not a prerequisite for making a lander. Grumman had not been to orbit when they developed and built the Apollo LM.
You are right on that their “step by step, ferociously” is taking the steps WAY too far apart as their development is very slow.
This is the most underrated channel I have ever seen , just imagine how much research goes into just one vid you have previously earned my sub but now you have earned all the subs form my family lol
It's only because he's relatively new; the content quality is to the moon and back, he's gonna be big I reckon.
@@jasonlast7091 yep and we will be his true fans
Indeed
Cool I can order a spacex tshirt on amazon also thanks jeff!!
Out of all of your videos, this is by far my favorite.
Excellent video, most likely the best sum up on Blue Origin. Your channel is now among the great space-themed UA-cam channels, possibly the best one. On the way to 100k subs!
Thanks!
I love this channel. Such quality content and it’s great to have a new voice in the space UA-cam community.
Great delivery and content. Keep up the quality, this channel will take off.
Good work, another great video. Eagerly awaiting the next installment.
Fantastic video. It is obvious you research things well. Can't wait for what you make next. Maybe something on Terran R and Neutron?
That’s exactly the topic of an upcoming video! If not the next video then the one after. So stay tuned!
@@Apogeespace Fantastic. I'm really excited for the growth of the medium lift market - especially because it can support human flights.
@@Apogeespace You should also do a video about which one of these startups, which have yet to get to orbit, is the most promising. Feel like buying some stock. lol
Meh.
First of all: Jeff Bezos doesn't owe you, or me, or any space cadet a goddamned thing in terms of fulfilling our dreams.
I get it. SpaceX has been doing one amazing thing after another. All the space geek frustration is giving way to uncritical rapture. As a space fan who has been frustrated for 50 years now, I understand.
But it's Bezos' company, and what he does and how fast, is up to him. If it's been merely a side interest, if it's going to get to market too late, that's his business.
Bezos chose a more traditional approach than SpaceX, including an emphasis on winning government business in order to make profits. Surprise: even the world's richest man doesn't go into a business to lose money. (He'd probably even less inclined than others. You don't get rich throwing away your money.) He appears to have invested billions of his own money into this already, which is more than contractors like Boeing or Lockheed Martin would do.
You recklessly claim that Blue Origin is 'lying' in their protest about how things went down. That's something s space fanboy who believes NASA is utterly infallible and guileless would say.
Even if SpaceX were far and away the best choice, Blue Origin makes a perfectly valid point that the competition changed, and all bidders should have notified in order to rework bids to the changed circumstances. Even if it were unrealistic that the outcome would have changed, it's astonishing that NASA secretly "selected" a winner on a government procurement, and then negotiated with them afterward. What NASA says was a "selection" was very arguably not.
Given that Doug Loverro lost his job by inappropriate discussions with Boeing in the first HLS phase, NASA should have been far more circumspect, much more careful. But as their own source selection statement makes clear, the evaporating 2024 goal was the big driver in this - despite the plain fact that Congress drove a stake through its heart with its HLS appropriation.
We'll see what the GAO says. I'm sure SpaceX will put a Lunar Starship on the Moon, and I will be very happy for it. But dismissing Blue's point with a wave of your hand as a 'lie' is just obnoxious.
As for Sen. Cantwell working on behalf of a constituent, to bring money to her own state: welcome to the real world. You might do well to google "SpaceX flyers Capitol Hill" to see what happens when billions of dollars are at stake. (Billions SpaceX would seem not to need for completing Starship, and billions that the World's Usually Second Richest Man could arguably pull out of his respective pocket.)
Good luck with Patreon and such. You might at least use some funds to have someone proofread your text. I personally am not inclined to pay for some faceless amateur to spout his naive opinions; my money already goes to better informed, more circumspect video pundits
@@gregzsidisin My gosh. Okay... You latching on my comment in the hopes of getting more attention?
Imagine starting a space company but we're not focusing on obit. This is like starting a car company without building a car that can drive more than 50km lolz
Surface to surface rocketry will be a billion dollar industry. The military will especially be interested look at the recent taliban Afghan disaster. Biden orders the military to return to the embassy and it takes days and hours to get there. With a rocket they could land near a US aircraft carrier and then fly to the embassy. This would take a couple days otherwise.
Quality is generally good. You really need to start running your on screen text through a spell checker as all your episodes have numerous spelling errors.
Great in depth video! Keep 'em coming.
great vlog and good debate and very valid concerns
Blue Origin: *the blue balls of the space industry.*
Take SpaceX out of the equation and Blue Origin would have been looking pretty good (well, reasonable). They've just been savagely outcompeted by SpaceX - but they're not exactly alone in that regard.
You also have to take Rocket Lab out of the equation
@@KhurramJhumra And possibly Astra, Firefly, and Relativity space now
I think I have watched all your videos 3 times now... awesome! Hope you keep them coming!
Amazing video as always!
It'll be funny if SpaceX yeets a permanent mining colony and foundry onto the Moon then uses those to construct O'Neill Cylinders, beating Blue Origin to the punch. Putting them on Aldrin Cycler orbits on Earth-Moon and Earth-Mars transfers would create the foundation we need for all our interplanetary exploration and colonization infrastructure.
I have to say, "yeets a permanent mining colony" made me laugh. If Starship can deliver 100-150 tons to orbit and doesn't cost too much to refuel, 'yeeting' stuff around the system may just be what SpaceX does in the future.
That would be a great path, but I think Elon is too Mars obsessed to go that route. The one thing I do agree with Bezos about is the practicality of O'neill cylinders over Mars colonies. Even a lunar base makes more sense than Mars.
@@OccupyMarsJune Europa?
@@OccupyMarsJune Oh nevermind I searched Europa up...how do you think will reach it first?
@@OccupyMarsJune yes thank you!!! When you wake up can you tell me if you see NASA and Spacex come together?
Rocket lab is about to pass BO. Lol
Rocket lab have all ready passed Body Odor.
In my oppinion they already have passed them
Imagine if RL makes orbit with their Neutron rocket before BO with New Glenn 😂
Virgin Galactic passed Blue Origin years ago.
@@josephastier7421 Eh, not really. SpaceShipTwo is not reaching the Karman line and is still in testing. Blue is ready for the New Shepard to fly crew on Jul 20th, 2021. Both systems took a LONG time to develop. Now smaller startups like Rocket Lab have done as more than Blue has done in less time. Comparing SX and Blue is just ridiculously in favor of SX.
Amazingly great and clear analysis- great work
For a channel of this size the video quality is amazing. keep up the good work.
Great analysis, I’ve been wondering what has been going on with BO. This puts it into perspective and it’s a fair assessment. Cool:)
It is likely that BE4 delays are holding up ULA Vulcan first launch. ULA is substituting Atlas to cover their first several military launches. This is costing ULA a bundle.
Yep, a few million to tens of millions depending on the configuration needed for the launch.
If BE-4 delays are at fault, BO could potentially end up in breach of contract, depending on the contract's details. Even if it's not breach of contract, if ULA gets screwed by not being able to use Vulcans due to BE-4 delays, there would be a very strong case for ULA to sue BO for damages.
I really do hope that BO is able to deliver the BE-4s soon and that the above scenario doesn't happen, but it is possible. Frankly, it would probably kill BO, not because of any financial penalties, but rather the massive hit to their reputation if they screw over their first customer that badly.
@@Quantorful Looks like a Jun 2021 GAO report is stating that the BE-4 is having troubles and may delay the Vulcan Centaur flight certification. It looks like the first Vulcan Centaur launch has already been pushed to Jan 2022 from the earlier late 2021 delay from the initially planned summer 2021 date. ULA still blaming payload issues, but GAO report says that their engine is in trouble as well.
Vulcan Centaur NET Jan 2022
nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/2425
GAO: Blue Origin BE-4 Engine Technical Issues Threaten ULA’s Vulcan Booster Schedule
www.parabolicarc.com/2021/06/21/gao-blue-origin-be-4-engine-technical-issues-threaten-ulas-vulcan-booster-schedule/
@@steveaustin2686 Yeah, I just saw that a couple hours ago, though in a different publication. Problems with the igniter and "booster capabilities", which like means reaching the performance specs.
Beyond being more evidence that BO lacks urgency and is slow as a result, it also shows that they're bad at estimating and sticking to timelines, and are also inefficient with the resources they have. BO has no lack of good engineers and funding (both from Bezos, plus some of the funding ULA received for Vulcan development from the NSSL program), so inability to produce results with those resources is evidence of poor utilization.
@@Quantorful I agree
Great video, thanks!
Another superb perspective. And well edited video. Well done.
I had no idea how new you channel is, holy shit you’ve done well
So drawings of rockets and the idea of living on space stations came way before blue origin. Even as a think tank they were just copy pasta in that regard. Whether a think tank or a rocket company their production and value are still zero. Don’t get me wrong there’s nothing more than I want then a starship and the new Glenn regularly launching into space to explore and build new architecture. Oh but the last thing I want is more presentations and CG renderings. Let’s also keep in mind this company was formed in the year 2000 formally announced in 2003. Then in 2005 announcing they wanted to build a vertical takeoff and landing rocket. I think they’ve had some time.
Also buying a $500 million megayacht well he still has yet to produce any hardware is a clear sign of Jeff’s priorities.
"buying a $500 million megayacht well he still has yet to produce any hardware is a clear sign of Jeff’s priorities."
That line. ... is the main reason I liked your comment.
Amazing content. Great job. Very fair reporting.
I watch a LOT of videos covering these topics.
Damn, son; this is a REALLY good video.
Great work, great points, great tone and presentation.
Looking forward to more from you.
What differentiates both companies (Blue Origin and SpaceX) most is the specific vision that lead to all the developement. For SpaceX, the vision was always clear (bring people to Mars, therefore you need big rockets). Everything else followed from there. Blue's vision was simply more murky (and it shows)
Jeff Bezos: *instantly purchases ULA on Amazon Prime*
Excellent video! I learned a lot
Your quality of the content is simply phenomenal
Changing design management philosophy, as suggested, which really is company culture, is next to impossible. Anyway, there won't be time. SpaceX is just crushing the entire space launch business, unless Starship fundamentally doesn't work, which appears unlikely. SpaceX with 9, 9 Heavy and Starship will make everything else look years, if not decades behind, and everyone else will need to re-think everything they are doing. New Glenn is just way too late without anywhere near the pace needed to catch anything useful. Every month, every year, they get further behind.
This was a great video and a thoughtful analysis of the state of Blue Origin! My only criticism is the fact that there were multiple spelling errors
Amazing quality!
Love your videos, well done.
Well thought out and presented! Agree that the problem is outdated management theory. (sucking up government contracts instead of innovation)
Criticism that BO has not gone orbital might be dismissed as irrelevant. However, BO has bid on contracts and programs which require an orbital class booster: space station resupply, Amazon internet, and HLS.
HLS does not require an orbital class booster by the winning bid, as you put your lander on an orbital class booster to get it to the Moon. The Blue Origin lead National Team's Integrated Lander Vehicle (ILV) would do just fine getting to LEO on a Vulcan Centaur or Atlas V. The transfer stage being built by Northrop Grumman would get the ILV to the Moon. It also starts the Moon landing burn, before being discarded.
If Dynetics' Alpaca lander was not overweight, it would get to the Moon on an orbital class booster. SpaceX is unique as the lander would be part of an orbital class booster.
Incredible video, loved it!
This is some great content. Well thought out, great visuals, level headed and respectful discussion. Subbed!
"Harmony of Crew Dragon and Starliner.
Uhm, what?
As for BO, their opportunity has passed. If Bezos wasn't riding his ego, he'd abandon the Glenn and just make engines. He's so far behind the curve, he can't see the tunnel.
Well, i see a good vision for Bezos to become a second Aerojet Rocketdyne, if he can increase engine output cadence.
I love your videos
Thank you, that really means a lot!
Underrated channel. Looking forward to their next video.
Great video nice work 👏
I really think that blue origin buying Ula would do nothing but slow down both companies
You may be right. And I meant to include that it is actually something I don't want to see happen personally. But hopefully it gets them thinking of some possibilities. Maybe buy Axiom to get a foothold into LEO Commercial Space Stations.
@@Apogeespace what I DO think might be good is if Blue Origin buys Bigelow, since Bigelow's future is uncertain at best at this point, but the technology is proven
Also, love your videos, but you misspelled experience at 25:30 :)
Other than that, great video. Lots of stuff I had never really considered.
Excellent reporting!
Great video. Thanks.
Blue Origins' Motto is literally "Gradatim Ferociter", which is Latin for "Step by step, ferociously". They're not in a rush. They've never been in a rush.
Going slow and perfecting every step is (frustratingly) a core pillar of their business.
It would be nice if they just took their steps more frequently. If they are not careful, Rocket Lab will get something in the low end of the heavy lift category before Blue gets the New Glenn going. Neutron is said to have an 8,000kg payload (medium lift) and the heavy category is 20,000-50,000 kg.
@@steveaustin2686 I wouldn't be surprised if Rocket Lab put something notable in orbit around Venus by the time Blue Origin have New Glenn online.
Excellent analysis your graphics made it very easy to see why SpaceX as where they are. In the words of Elon Musk you don't get to Mars working 40 hours a week unfortunately blue origin is working 37 it seems apparent that they just don't have the drive that it takes to push the envelope. Unfortunately the idea of purchasing ULA doesnt solve that problem, it only delays it.
Thank you for your time and well-thought-out Analysis I thought it was fair an unbiased.
I look forward to you reviewing Sierra Nevada and the dream chaser.
Congratulations on your 10K success
I appreciate you Apogee.
Sick intro!!!! Gave me chills
SpaceX kicks Blue Origin in the balls every other week.
Everyday if you count starbase development
potentially one of the best videos around BO in the last month.
I absolutely agree with your point that the non-iterative approach ist the one sole biggest issue they have.
Not only in spaceflight - the speed of technological innovations nearly do not allow a waterfall system anymore. This way you will most likely always be outpaced by your competitiors.
As well as losing the ability to react fast. A team that has perfected waterfall must completely reshape to become iterative. This is not done overnight.
So - I think your solution to buy ULA makes perfect sense - and potentially is the only chance to leap forward and give Elon a run for his money.
Yeah, making a culture change will be hard and take time. When people complain that the legacy companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman haven't followed SpaceX down the road to reusability don't seem to realize that first the culture there will need to change and it takes time to design something new. SpaceX has been working on Starship for a while before finally settling on a design and starting testing, so why would other companies just roll out something new in a few years?
@@steveaustin2686 Your last sentence is not really accurate, SpaceX has flown Starship multiple times now and is still making major changes to the design, even scrapping nearly fully built prototypes that have become obsolete. Earlier, before they switched to Stainless Steel and when when the basic design was barely an idea they were building hardware (that big carbon fibre tank) that got scrapped when a better idea came along. The trouble is the old space companies seem to see testing only as a way to validate the final design and not a way to find out what works or doesn't. They could relatively easily and quickly make a "flying water tower", stick an engine on the bottom and do some tests, OK, it would fireball the first few times but that doesn't matter if you have not spent years trying to perfect the design first.
I think part of this comes from the Shuttle which was the great white hope of reusability but ended up horrendously expensive and created the assumption that real reusability was nearly impossible and expensive.
@@chrisglen-smith7662 I was talking about the design changes from when it was announced in 2016 until they started testing in 2019. You know BFR, MCT, ITS, BFR, and then Starship.
Yep, SN12-SN14 were scrapped as the first few test flights did so well. With SN15 sticking the landing, SN17-SN19 were scrapped. SN15 looks to be saved as a display model for now and SN16 may be used again, maybe for landing leg tests if it doesn't go supersonic instead?
The legacy space companies test like crazy and then only finally assemble the expensive production pieces for final testing. SpaceX is going against the current standard with the rapid prototyping. It's not surprising as SpaceX did that with the Falcon 9 series until NASA was like, pick a final design and run with it.
Yeah, the Shuttle was part of it and another part was the capability needed, as you give up roughly 1/3 of your lift capacity for reusability. Most companies didn't seem to want to take that much of a payload hit on something that was so difficult. An expended F9 lifts 22.8 tons, so it can lift 15.6 tons while being recovered. They needed that large capacity to be able to still launch most payloads and recover the booster for reusability. Not to mention, the cheap onboard computing for self landing just wasn't there in the 80's.
This is just what i needed
You earned a sub! Job well done!
I think the heart of this is caution (Blue Origin) versus rashness (SpaceX). Blue Origin are going step-by-painful-step, going sub-orbital before starting on orbital flight. SpaceX started out with Falcon-1 trying for orbit at the get-go. This was a super-risky move. They only had funding for four rockets - and all four failed. The scraped together spare parts and managed a fifth launch - which worked...opening the doors to money from NASA. Had SpaceX failed on that 5th launch - which they easily could - then that would have been the end of the company. By going slow and carefully, and not overreaching - that was unlikely to happen with Blue Origin. However, going slow doesn't win any races - you have to take risks if you want to win big. That's what SpaceX did - and continue to do - and they've gone from struggling to put together a last ditch effort from scraps and spare parts - to being the biggest launch company in the world - lifting more payload than all of the other launcher added together. So - "Go slowly and get there in the end." Or is it "He who dares, wins!"...so far, the latter!
great videos; good content; thoughtfully presented. You are in the @EverydayAstronaut realm of videos.
Spell check everything! Experience not Experiance ...
There you go ... my biggest criticism over 5? videos ;) Keep up the good work!!
Superb video. Congratulations.
THIS IS SO COOL I LOVE IT
The point of "bo haven't reach orbit" is very valid. Its simple results are needed to win competitions. When they became a sore loser asking why they lost, now that point is even more valid then before. Its not valid if they arent trying to chase anything. You cant win when results are absent and your competition are making tech history. Hence why the point keeps coming up. Valid or not other company have already produce results
Eh, reaching orbit is not a prerequisite for building a lunar lander. Grumman built the Apollo LM without reaching orbit. Now Blue Origin's glacial development is a problem.
@@steveaustin2686 well you're right but bo hasn't show anything. All they have shown so far is cg and a model of the lunar lander. But so far other companies has lower prices and has shown significant results. And they have the balls to say space x is cheating.
@@last5902 Blue Origin has the New Shepard, which is a good, man-rated, sub-orbital vehicle. It just took way too long to develop.
With how little Blue has to show for New Glenn, I see why NASA was concerned with the maturity of the ILV. You can get the details here.
www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/option-a-source-selection-statement-final.pdf
The Air Force (USSF) has some pretty harsh criticism of both Blue Origin's New Glenn and Northrop Grumman's OmegA. From this Aug 2020 article
Despite political pressure to not end the LSAs, the agreements will be terminated, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition Will Roper said Aug. 7 during a video conference with reporters. “We will work with those two companies to determine the right point to tie off their work under the LSA agreements,” Roper said. The intent of the LSAs “was to create a more competitive environment leading into Phase 2,” he said. “The point is not to carry them indefinitely.”
spacenews.com/air-force-to-end-agreements-with-blue-origin-and-northrop-grumman-prepares-for-launch-contract-protests/
@@steveaustin2686 yeah i see what you mean😅. Its just BO is just way too slow and i hate that they use political power to get their way.😂
@@last5902 Corporations using political power to get their way is an old and 'honored' (among thieves) tradition. ;) ;)
BO doesn’t even have a flight qualify BE-4. BO is a hobby and tax write-off for Jeff Who?
I think the Jeff who can't get it up HAHA
I couldn't agree more, excellent video
A video that is clearly a cut above so many others I've seen on the topic of Blue Origin. This very high quality has garnered you another subscription -- and I don't subscribe to channels easily.
It's not just that Jeff bough ULA flights. It's that he bought Atlas 5 flights, which oddly enough are both more expensive than Vulcan, but also doesn't depend on the Blue Origin engine that ULA bet their future on. Which apparently Blue Origin can't actually supply to ULA. Want to bet Tory Bruno is wishing he'd gone with Aerojet Rocketdyne for the Vulcan main engine?
Lockheed Martin moved to acquire Aerojet Rocketdyne in Dec 2020 and the Rocketdyne shareholders approved in Mar 2021. I wonder if Lockheed will provide ULA with engines in the future? ULA is kind of stuck with the BE-4 for now as the USSF-112 mission is set for Q2 2023 on a Vulcan Centaur and the VC has to fly two certification flights, before it can fly a national security payload. ULA already had to move the Q4 2022 USSF-51 mission to an Atlas V and eat the cost difference. By law, the Atlas V can't be used for national security payloads after Dec 31st, 2022 as it uses Russian engines. ULA will be in a hard place if the BE-4 isn't delivered on the revised schedule. BTW, moving the USSF-51 flight saves Elon from having to eat his hat with mustard on the side.
@@steveaustin2686 "moving the USSF-51 flight saves Elon from having to eat his hat with mustard on the side"
I'm missing something here. Could you explain what you're referring to? Did Musk making a comment that Vulcan wouldn't deliver USSF-51 before 2023, or is this about Falcon Heavy's new fairing not being ready?
@@Quantorful When ULA and SX got the USSF Phase 2 national security payload contracts there was some smack talk passed back and forth, on twitter I believe, between Elon Musk and ULA CEO Tory Bruno about the Vulcan Centaur launch vehicle. Apparently, Musk said that he would eat his hat with a side of mustard if the Vulcan Centaur flew a national security payload before 2023 with the Vulcan Centaur. Some background is needed.
In reference to Russian sanctions I believe, a law was passed that after Dec 31st, 2022, launch vehicles with Russian engines can not be used for national security payloads. Commercial and/or NASA missions would be fine to fly with Russian engines. It may also restrict other components as well. ULA flies national security payloads on the Delta IV Heavy & Atlas V currently I believe and plans to add Vulcan Centaur to that list. The Delta IV Heavy uses US engines and is going to be retired when the last one flies. The Atlas V uses the Russian RD-180 engine, so it can't fly national security payloads in 2023 and after by law.
The Vulcan Centaur has not flown yet and needs 2 successful flights before the USSF will certify it for national security payloads. The VC was going to fly the Peregrine Moon lander in the summer of 2021 and the Sierra Nevada Dream Chaser for its CRS demo mission in Q2 2022. So then it could be certified to fly the Q4 2022 USSF-51 national security payload. Apparently, the Blue Origin BE-4 engine for the VC first stage has been delayed and the Peregrine launch has been moved back to late 2021 and the Dream Chaser launch has likely been moved as well. This evidently impacted when the VC could be certified for the USSF-51 launch, so it was moved to the Atlas V as it is flying before Dec 31st 2022. So the next national security payload for VC is in Q2 2023 and that means that Musk was right that the VC would not fly a USSF mission until 2023 and his hat is saved. :)
Note, the Atlas V is more expensive than the Vulcan Centaur. The Phase 2 contract is a fixed price contract, so ULA has to cover the diffence in cost. ULA claims that the payloads are what is delaying the VC, but that smells fishy. The national security payload contracts are lucrative and highly sought after when they come up for bidding. If the VC was truly ready, you would think that ULA would launch a demo payload to satisfy one of the successful launches required like SX did with the roadster in the first Falcon Heavy launch. That way ULA would not imperil their USSF launches on VC. So the reported delays of the BE-4 seem like they could be true.
@@steveaustin2686 Thanks. I knew all the background info, though good summaries like yours are always appreciated, but didn't know (or forgot) the back and forth banter. And I agree that it seems unlikely that the payloads are delaying VC.
@@Quantorful I saw your other posts after this and figured I may have given you info you already knew. Either way, someone else coming along who doesn't know will have the basics.
Yeah, the payload story just seems fishy.
Jeff Who?
Great video. I like how you think. Ride on.
Great video well done 👍