Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
ISS Space

Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin Wants To Build a Tourism Space Station Nearly As Big As the ISS 88

Blue Origin, the rocket and space tourism company founded by Jeff Bezos, is proposing a massive new commercial space station called "Orbital Reef" that could be used to host science experiments, vacation getaways, and potentially even in-space manufacturing. CNN reports: The company plans to work alongside startup Sierra Space to bring the space station to fruition, and Boeing plans to design a research module on the station, though there are no guarantees the companies can make it happen. Such projects are still exorbitantly expensive and risky, likely costing in the tens of billions of dollars and requiring multiple safe launches before a human ever even floats aboard. Blue Origin and Sierra Space plan to co-finance the space station, though executives declined to give an all-in cost estimate during a press conference Monday. They did add that they are expecting to sign on NASA as an anchor tenant, though it's not exactly clear how such a partnership could take shape.

Blue Origin hopes Orbital Reef could be operational in the late 2020s, though it will have to get quite a bit done to make that happen. The company has only managed a few crewed suborbital flights so far, much like NASA first achieved back in the early 1960s, and it has yet to put a spacecraft in orbit, let alone a person. A space station would take a major leap. New Glenn, the Blue Origin-built rocket that is expected to be powerful and large enough to haul the biggest portions of the space station to orbit, is not yet operational, and its maiden flight was recently delayed to at least late 2022. The orbital reef will be able to host up to 10 people and will have roughly the same internal volume as the ISS.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin Wants To Build a Tourism Space Station Nearly As Big As the ISS

Comments Filter:
  • by Valgrus Thunderaxe ( 8769977 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @02:04AM (#61930923)
    Where are they going to get the rockets to do this? BO doesn't have any.
    • by sg_oneill ( 159032 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @02:10AM (#61930933)

      Buy/Rent them off Musk or Boeing?

      Though I suspect this is more a long term goal, and they'd be looking to upgrade to a larger model, although without that essential NASA contract to underwrite the R&D.

      It would seem Blue Origin doesn't necessarily subscribe to SpaceX's move-fast-and-break-things methodology of just sending up lots to explode until you've figured out how not to explode. Presumably using good modelling. This might reduce their costs somewhat.

      Not that it would be likely to burn through Bezo's absurd wealth any time soon.

      • by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @03:34AM (#61931017) Journal

        And yet another one who acts like Bezos' "absurd wealth" can be repurposed, spent, used, etc at the drop of a hat.

        Unless whoever needs to be paid is willing to be paid in Amazon shares, I don't think Bezos can move all that much. Sure, he can loan money with his "wealth"as collateral but that, too, takes some time and effort...

        I'm not saying you think like this, but that last statement just triggered this ennui in me. People seem to think Bezos' Billions are piled up as actual Dollar bills in his house somewhere...

        • W0t? Bezos doesnâ(TM)t have a money pit like Uncle Scrooge?
        • Billionaires use debt the way ordinary people use cash and, um, credit cards.

        • Money is power (Score:4, Insightful)

          by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @07:46AM (#61931481)
          And because Bezos has so much, even is it's "on paper" he can shape our civilization. He can, for example, borrow at interest rates that are effectively below market level, essentially getting "free" money.

          This is actually the major way billionaires Dodge taxes. They live off ultra low interest loans instead of wages or even investments, keeping their wealth stored away to use as leverage when needed. The end result is when they say jump we say how high on the way up.

          TL;DR; you're mistaking wealth and money for power. When you hit the level of a billionaire it stops being money and becomes raw power. This is why us in the left don't want billionaires to exist. You can't have a free society when anyone has that much power.
          • This is why us in the left don't want billionaires to exist. You can't have a free society when anyone has that much power.

            Just curious - does your "anyone" include the government(s)? If not, why not?

            • I would say, it's complicated.

              "The government" is not one person, it's several hundred in congress alone who hold the purse strings, and who nominally represent the will of the populace, and require a majority agreement in order to do anything.

              Contrast that to one man, answerable to no one, wielding a similar amount of power. Or even to a corporate CEO and board, who generally represents a small group of ultra-wealthy investors that holdin a super-majority stake.

              Government still definitely demands being he

              • So, basically it reduces to "having enormous monetary resources is bad ONLY if the holder of the money does things I don't like"...

                • I would say rather:

                  Concentrating enormous power into the hands of an individual or small group with minimal accountability is always bad.

                  Enormous wealth is one of the ways that can happen. Even if it looks good at first (such as the various pushes Musk is spearheading), once concentrated that power will eventually end up in the hands of someone who plans to abuse it. Because power corrupts, and worse, attracts the already corrupted. We only have all of human history as an object lesson to that fact. Any

                  • Concentrating enormous power into the hands of an individual or small group with minimal accountability is always bad.

                    Like Congress? Small group (500-odd people), minimal accountability (not like anyone is going to look past the -D or -R to decide who to vote for).

                    • You're not wrong, and it seems we have a long way to go yet before we manage to invent a form of democracy that robustly enforces the accountability it is supposed to provide.

                      But for now the choices seem to be get what good we can out of our admittedly very flawed system, hopefully at least slowly improving it as we go (on average). Or topple it and be rapidly conquered by far worse governments.

                      Structured anarchy is a lovely idea in many ways, but I've yet to hear any good explanations for how you're suppo

            • the cure to what you're worried about is Democracy, and lots of it. You need parliamentary govts. The US Senate is fundamentally anti-Democratic. You also need mandatory voting, because it prevents voter suppression (you can't suppress it if it's mandatory) and Universal Suffrage. Everyone, even rapists and murders, gets to vote, again, so that you can't use the legal system to circumvent Democracy (like Nixon did with our drug laws). You also need to do away with Winner Take All, First past the post voting
          • by tragedy ( 27079 )

            This is why us in the left don't want billionaires to exist.

            I'm fairly left wing in most regards, but I can't say that I don't want billionaires to exist per se. I do recognize the problem where accumulation of wealth can basically create its own gravity, warping the system around it. I try to put it into perspective though. How much more wealth does a billionaire have than an average person? The average salary in the US is about $56K, but there are normally also some benefits that make it effectively higher. We will just stick with $56K though. So how many more tim

            • regardless of how it's structured can and will be used to pend all of society to the whims of billionaires.

              You're thinking in terms of "financial opportunities". They've long since stopped doing that. They're wielding power. They're completely disconnected from society by their enormous wealth. You can see this in the way their wealth *increased* during the pandemic. Not just as a percentage, but in raw numbers.

              Re-read your post, you've acknowledged the problem but provided no solutions to it. Inste
              • by tragedy ( 27079 )

                regardless of how it's structured can and will be used to pend all of society to the whims of billionaires.

                I get that, I totally do. Part of what I was trying to say though was that it's not just billionaires. Billionaires have a very high percentage of the total wealth for their small numbers, but it's still not that huge as a percentage. The thing is, it's not just the rest of us that have the rest. Consider that billionaires are the 0.000186%. There's still the rest of the 0.1% and the 1% for that matter who also have greatly disproportionate financial, political and societal power than the average person. Al

        • by NFN_NLN ( 633283 )

          > Unless whoever needs to be paid is willing to be paid in Amazon shares

          Yes... because Amazon shares have no liquidity. It's not like there's a pre-existing exchange where people buy and sell on a regular basis.
          It would be difficult... nigh, impossible to sell shares for cash and then use that cash to purchase goods and services.

        • People seem to think Bezos' Billions are piled up as actual Dollar bills in his house somewhere...

          No, they are piled up in Amazon shares, which are easily salable on a public stock exchange. In fact, he has been selling ~$1B/year [apnews.com] to fund Blue Origin:

          He has said he finances the rocket company by selling $1 billion in Amazon stock a year.

          So couldn't he just sell more than that to fund these plans? Yes, he doesn't have piles of dollar bills but Amazon stock is readily exchangeable for dollars.

      • "Buy/Rent them off Musk or Boeing?"

        Boeing? Why would anybody pay multiple for a crashing rocket?

      • by earl pottinger ( 6399114 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @07:50AM (#61931507)
        Expect Blue Origin was founded in 2000 and SpaceX was founded in 2002. In that time SpaceX build rockets that launched satellites for different people including themselves, supplied goods and people to the ISS and put space tourist in orbit for days. With two extra years and until recently money(assets) Blue Origin has supplied two joy rides to space that lasted 15 minutes and has not put a single thing in orbit. I don't think BO method of development is the way to go now.
        • by rahmrh ( 939610 )

          The simple reality is typically you learn far more from breaking things that you ever could from modeling it. The issue is the model, simulations (computer and physical component/subassembly) and test scenarios are close to reality, but not really close enough. Reality always comes with scenarios and conditions that you would never thought of and/or tested for. Reality also comes up with other issues that the modeling scenarios don't account for. See the Boeing valve moisture/hydrazine corrosion issue

        • by RevDisk ( 740008 )
          The best insight for why Blue Origin is having so many issues can be found here: https://arstechnica.com/scienc... [arstechnica.com]

          - Lack of customer focus
          - Lack of cost as a design constraint
          - Poor cost estimating
          - Lack of vertical integration
          - Lack of employee motivation
          - Not understanding that especially younger employees are willing to work longer and harder for passion projects rather than just a paycheck
          - Giant projects instead of iterative design


          Blue Origins can't and won't be competitive until they sort
        • Yes, but my point (or sub point I guess) is that theres a different philosophy. SpaceX are constantly blowing things up, and thats a good thing, because its giving them a lot of practical data. Blue Origin are trying to get it right the first time, and the problem with that, is Rockets are *hard* and involve physics problems with a ridiculous number of parameters that are incredibly difficult to successfully model. I mean, its *possible* , but its gonna take a lot longer than just building it and seeing if

    • by Megane ( 129182 )
      Seeing as how this is Jeff Who's attempt at a "SEKRIT KLUB NO ELONZ ALLOUD" space station, we know where he isn't getting rockets from! Meanwhile, the BE-4 has shown no progress in being able to stay running long enough to reach orbit without going engine-rich. Orbital Reefer Madness!
    • Considering his penis rocket barely scraped the edge of orbit for is super short flight, maybe the space station only remains in sub-orbit for 45min before crashing back to earth. BO seems to be the space tourism version of "Just the tip"
    • At least they dont seem to be competing with SpaceX in this, so maybe they will not try to slow everyone else down by throwing sue balls whenever a leading competitor gets a government contract.

  • Orbit? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cowdung ( 702933 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @02:08AM (#61930927)

    Maybe they should create an orbital rocket first. As in sending something that can at least remain in space for some time (say a day or two).

    BO talks a good talk. But we have yet to seem them really go to space. A hop above the Karman line is nice.. but hardly getting to space. Because you fall right back down.

    Stop talking BO and show us some real results. Till then congrats on your tourist hops. I hope you join the big leagues soon.

    • by topnob ( 1195249 )
      yep, they keep talking, but doing nothing much, they've been around since before spacex.... they need some runs on the board... and suborbital flights don't cut it...
    • They could always just call up SpaceX

      Realistically, they'd have to :)

    • by zmooc ( 33175 )

      They are working on that with New Glenn but they seem to be suffering from a bad case of strategic understeer in which the marketing department has overtaken the engineering department so as a company they now no longer comply to rocket rule number one: pointy end up, flamey end down :p

      • Don't forget the engines for the Vulcan and new Glenn are still in prototype testing stages and flight capable ones should have been delivered last year still aren't around yet. Let alone a manufacturing facility capable of building a dozen engines a year.

        Meanwhile SpaceX has a pile of raptors built, and set themselves up to build a couple hundred a year to hit production demands.(at 36 per starship super heavy combo you need a lot of engines)

        • by zmooc ( 33175 )

          Oh I won't forget that. But it's irrelevant. Blue Origin is probably going nowhere. Their personnel is going places, though :p

    • Maybe they should create an orbital rocket first. As in sending something that can at least remain in space for some time (say a day or two).

      Not at all necessary to successfully build a station. Thales Alenia Space built all of Europe's ISS modules, many Galileo satellites, as well as numerous other satellites. They're currently building the first module of the Axiom Space station. They have never built an orbital-class rocket. The only rockets they build are for on orbit station-keeping.

      Blue Origin may have finally found a space project they can actually achieve. It will be launched on someone else's rocket though.

    • by hawk ( 1151 )

      >Maybe they should create an orbital rocket first.

      wait a minute . . . you're not suggesting that a five and eventually fifteen minute suborbital flight for a space station isn't enough, are you.

      Clearly you're biased, and will be sued for not awarding such a contract.

  • They plan to use a Falcon rocket to send it to orbit.

  • What a fucking waste of resources. Lock the bastard up.

    • by topnob ( 1195249 )
      :wat:
    • Yes let's lock up that capitalist monster guilty of creating an innovative company that has fundamentally rewritten how software is hosted and how retail commerce is performed in many parts of the world.

      Xi, is that you?

      • by nagora ( 177841 )

        Yes let's lock up that capitalist monster guilty of creating an innovative company that has fundamentally rewritten how software is hosted and how retail commerce is performed in many parts of the world.

        Yeah. Software hosting a la 1965 and monopoly abuse. Fucking lock the bastard up.

    • Space is the future. It is never a waste of resources helping us get there. Space has nearly infinite resources and gaining access to them means we don't need to keep abusing Earth's dwindling resources. Not sure how anyone would see that as anything but a huge win.
      • by nagora ( 177841 )

        Space is the future

        It really isn't. It's a nice luxury but the time for luxury is later.

    • What a fucking waste of resources. Lock the bastard up.

      Soyjak: "We have to get mankind into space, fast! The stars are the right of every human!"

      Jeff Bezos: "Cool. I'll make that happen"

      Soyjak: "FUCKING MONSTER! HOW DARE YOU! TAX THE RICH UNTIL THEY DIE!"

      • by nagora ( 177841 )

        What a fucking waste of resources. Lock the bastard up.

        Soyjak: "We have to get mankind into space, fast! The stars are the right of every human!"

        Jeff Bezos: "Cool. I'll make that happen"

        Soyjak: "FUCKING MONSTER! HOW DARE YOU! TAX THE RICH UNTIL THEY DIE!"

        Who's Soyjak? Anyway, the stars are not the "right" of anyone. They're not even available. And a space hotel for rich arseholes won't change that.

  • by Barny ( 103770 )

    Good thing they have their own heavy-lift rockets to put such a thing in orbit, as well as orbit-capable rockets to get people there/back. It'd get expensive otherwise!

  • where is he going to make that? and does he have rockets for that? if not from will he get them?
  • "It was the Dawn of the Third Age of Mankind, ten years after the Earth-Minbari War. The Babylon Project was a dream given form. Its goal: to prevent another war by creating a place where humans and aliens could work out their differences peacefully. It's a port of call, home away from home for diplomats, hustlers, entrepreneurs and wanderers. Humans and aliens wrapped in two million, five hundred thousand tons of spinning metal .. all alone in the night. It can be a dangerous place, but it's our last, best
  • Neroâ(TM) s fiddling is attracting an ever greater audience (sigh).
  • by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @06:03AM (#61931195) Homepage

    I guess I just don't see it. Are there really that many people with enough money to justify a substantial investment in tourism? Manufacturing, that's great, but that's not likely in a human-inhabited station. AFAIK, the only reason to manufacture in space is either (a) very pure vacuum or (b) zero vibrations. Being part of a human-habitable station is a problem for both of those. Which leaves research, which is one wobbly leg to stand on.

    Love him or hate him, that's one thing you have to give Musk: He has managed to provide the necessary synergy himself: SpaceX needs to fly more, so he builds a satellite-based ISP that needs lots of launches.

    • Musk's goal for Spacex is a Mars colony, not "flying more".

      Starlink is a way of helping to fund Spacex, it was not started to use up launches so Spacex can fly more.

      • However, "flying more" is important for bringing the costs down, uncovering more subtle/unlikely problems, and increasing customer confidence. All of which contribute to making a Mars colony more achievable.

        Last I heard Starlink is still a *huge* money sink for SpaceX, they hope that will eventually change, but the immediate benefit has been an excuse to make a lot more flights to improve their hardware, and especially their flight-control software, which I suspect will be migrating to Starship. I serious

    • At this point I think the writing is on the wall that costs to space are about to plummet.

      Musk has repeatedly said that when Starship enters service it should immediately cost less *per launch* than the Falcon 9 - which costs $62 million for a launch with a new booster. So, instead of $62M for up to 7 passengers (and more regularly 4) in Crew Dragon at a cost of $9M to $16M per person to orbit, a 100 seat passenger Starship would immediately drop the cost to around $620K per person. And then they hope to

    • "Are there really that many people with enough money to justify a substantial investment in tourism?"

      Don't worry, it can only host up to 10 people at a time! Surely there's ten people that can be served by this substantial investment!

  • Can New Glenn really lift large enough parts of this not to need dozens of missions, like the ISS ?

    Surely New Armstrong, Bezos' heavy lift rocket would be needed ( and who knows when that will become a real thing ) ?

    • by Megane ( 129182 )
      Not until it gets some engines that actually work!
    • What makes you think it won't take dozens of launches? Or at least several. If each launch costs only a tiny fraction of those that launched the ISS, does it really matter?

      Even if BO never even gets the New Glenn operational, Starship will be available. Maybe the optics aren't as good as using their own rocket, but it might actually be cheaper, and if they believe a commercial space station makes good business sense then the optics aren't going to change that calculus. And it's not like there's a shorta

  • by nbritton ( 823086 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @06:31AM (#61931245)

    Hi, I'm Clippy, it looks like you're trying to build Elysium. Would you like help, I could e-mail Jodie Foster to see if she wants to reprise her role as Defense Secretary Jessica Delacourt?

  • by stealth_finger ( 1809752 ) on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @06:41AM (#61931281)
    Didn't he come back from kinda, nearly, not quite space all mind blown that the earth was a precious resouce and needs proteciting and all that other stuff most people learn by age 5? Now he wants to go back and set up a space hotel for all his mega rich buddies?
    • Didn't he come back from kinda, nearly, not quite space all mind blown that the earth was a precious resouce and needs proteciting and all that other stuff most people learn by age 5? Now he wants to go back and set up a space hotel for all his mega rich buddies?

      Like all advancements, it'll start out very expensive, for just the rich, and then it'll get more affordable, until eventually the market will become more affordable for the non-rich. Like automobiles, air travel, and computers. All once prohibitively expensive, all now ubiquitous across all classes.

  • Did someone mention global warming?

  • It's going to be watching earth and notifying the cops!
    • Well, of course it's going to be ring shaped. His penis rocket is going to dock there.

      And yes, it will spy on everyone too. It's a Bezos project after all.

  • Given Bezos signature dick-shaped rocket, I wonder if he'll be sticking with the Flesh Gordon theme for his space hotel ?

    Maybe make it a theme hotel complete with animatronic penissaurii ?

    • Jeff: Think about it. She's out in the middle of space with some dude she barely knows. She looks around her, what does she see? Nothing but open space. "Oh, there's nowhere for me to run, what am I gonna do, say no?"

      Mac: Okay... that seems really dark though.

      Jeff: No, no, it's not dark. You're misunderstanding me, bro.

      Mac: I think I am.

      Jeff: Yeah, you are. 'Cause if the girl said no, then the answer obviously is no. The thing is that she's not gonna say no, she'd never say noâ¦because of the implication.

      Mac: Now, you said that word "implication" a couple of times. What implication?

      Jeff: The implication that things might go wrong for her if she refuses to sleep with me. Now, not that things are gonna go wrong for her, but she's thinking that they will.

  • Jeff Bezos (at ~$200 bn) "could afford" "an ISS" at ~$150 bn.

    Though, Elon Musk, at $300 bn, could afford two.

    • Jeff Bezos (at ~$200 bn) "could afford" "an ISS" at ~$150 bn.

      Though, Elon Musk, at $300 bn, could afford two.

      The next low Earth orbit station is already being built. Thales Alenia Space is building the first module of a station for Axiom Space and will be building a second one. It will not cost remotely close to $150 billion. In fact, it will cost 110 million Euros [axiomspace.com]. Building the first of anything is expensive. Building the second, when you're the builder who built several pieces of the first one, is much cheaper. The first module is expected to launch in 2024 and the second in 2025. Both your and CNN's spec

  • ÐÐÐÐ ÐмÑf Ð ÑÑfÐÐ.

  • Musk just announced his plan for orbital manufacturing a few days ago. And now Bezos is gonna do a space station? Yeah right. Maybe try getting to orbit first ya chode.

    • I missed that, and can't find any mention of it. Link?

      • He must have seen the same speculative video I did. I was half listening to it while I worked, so didn't catch that this was just some youtuber losing his shit over a business deal.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJiyMrAXz4Q

        I should have known better.

        • Shucks.

          I tell you, it gets really annoying following SpaceX when well over 90% of all the "news" on YouTube is either wild speculation presenting itself as fact, or news from a year ago rebundled as something new. I guess we need more people reporting such videos for violating the community guidelines (deceptive titles and thumbnails that misrepresent the content are theoretically prohibited)

  • Otherwise Leisure Suit Larry won't come.

  • Blue Origin's penis-shaped pop-gun would have to go 4 times higher to reach the space station. It might be easier just to give Elon a call :-)

  • I hope the BO folks "child-proof" their space station installation.

    Just wait for some space newbie visitor to wander through the station wondering what this cable or tubing or pipe does.

    And then the entire mess starts tumbling in orbit and eventually crashes back to Earth ... wiping out an AWS mega data center or Amazon mega warehouse in the process.

    Yep. Karma can be a real b1tch.

PL/I -- "the fatal disease" -- belongs more to the problem set than to the solution set. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra, SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 17, Number 5

Working...