Blue Origin's New Spacecraft Can Build Projects In Space (pcmag.com) 38
Michael Kan reports via PCMag: Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin has announced a new spacecraft that promises to help humanity build and maintain projects in outer space. The company today debuted Blue Ring, a so-called "space platform" that can orbit Earth, but also travel around the Moon, with the goal of providing delivery and logistics support to other space projects. To do so, Blue Ring functions as a maneuverable platform that can host, transport, and refuel other spacecraft. In addition, it can relay data while also offering an "in-space" cloud computing capability, according to Blue Origin's announcement.
Other rockets, particularly those from rival SpaceX, can already send satellites up into predictable orbits around Earth. In contrast, Blue Ring is designed to serve customers for more "dynamic" space projects at varying orbits, Blue Origin Lars Hoffman VP tells Aviation Week. "It has a lot of capability and a lot of energy. It is a platform that has versatility across multiple missions and multiple customers on any given launch," Hoffman says.
The company adds that Blue Ring can travel with payloads of over 6,600 pounds. According to Aviation Week, Blue Origin is eyeing 2025 as a realistic launch date for the spacecraft, which has already received some interest from customers. Hoffman also says Blue Ring will be "launch-vehicle agnostic," allowing it to fly on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket or Blue Origin's own New Glenn, which is aiming to be used in its first mission next year.
Other rockets, particularly those from rival SpaceX, can already send satellites up into predictable orbits around Earth. In contrast, Blue Ring is designed to serve customers for more "dynamic" space projects at varying orbits, Blue Origin Lars Hoffman VP tells Aviation Week. "It has a lot of capability and a lot of energy. It is a platform that has versatility across multiple missions and multiple customers on any given launch," Hoffman says.
The company adds that Blue Ring can travel with payloads of over 6,600 pounds. According to Aviation Week, Blue Origin is eyeing 2025 as a realistic launch date for the spacecraft, which has already received some interest from customers. Hoffman also says Blue Ring will be "launch-vehicle agnostic," allowing it to fly on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket or Blue Origin's own New Glenn, which is aiming to be used in its first mission next year.
Why are they calling it a rocket? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
It's a PC Mag article. I don't expect real PC information from them anymore, much less for space tech news.
Of course they confused a space taxi/pickup truck with an orbiting construction vehicle. Entirely different everything except both in space and oh yeah we need to create a false competition and comparison where none exists.
Next week they publish an article on the competition between spacex rocket vs the Hubble telescope rocket.
Re: (Score:2)
Tom's hardware and anandtech and dontknows are pretty good review sites that also tend to explore the underlying technology.
Tom sold his site a long time ago but the management change didn't degrade site quality.
Re: (Score:3)
"Other rockets, particularly those from rival SpaceX" vs "Blue Ring will be "launch-vehicle agnostic," allowing it to fly on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket" Why try to say it's better that "other" rockets then in then talk about how it can use a Space X rocket. Clearly it's not a rocket itself then. Who wrote this crap?
Blame the writers for being either misinformed, or deliberately told to hype the rivalry aspect.
I'd be more interested in Blue Origin figuring out their launch capability so we can get some decent competition going in the commercial space industry. I admire what SpaceX has managed to accomplish. I'd just like to see some other players enter the field. Pie-in-the-sky vehicles like this article mentions are all great fun too, but when it comes to Blue? I have about as much faith in it happening as I do in the
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily, it's probably different engineers with different expertise working on the project. And it's obvious they have nothing else to do while they still can't actually prepare something for near-term launch.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll bite :)
It starts by calling it a spacecraft... which it technically is.
All "things" like that floating in space (is that a better technical term for you? :p) will have a propulsion system to keep it from falling, position it. Those tiny little propulsion systems are called rockets and arguably the whole thingliboop (another technical term) with a propulsion system is a rocket... even if it likely won't reenter earth's atmosphere and
won't ever make it to the moon. To use a car analogy because t
I would not hold my breath (Score:5, Insightful)
and that's it. Blue's is very good at marketing (Amazon heritage?), but they fall short on delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
They follow the more traditional "do lots of testing before launch" methodology. As long as they're getting funded they're in business. I am happy knowing there are multiple companies working on different space projects. More power to every single one of them. Blue in no way detracts from spacex.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is all they do is testing. Has vulcan launched yet? Itnis 3 years behind due to the blue origin engines meanwhile space x has lost more engines in flight yesting than blue origin has built.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't say it was better or faster. It is their methodology. Even if they launch 10x less often and 10 years later and ultimately fail they are still producing results in a lab useful to the future. Elon's way works for him and his goals. Blue has different goals no one else is working on. The article makes a false comparison. Time will tell. 3 years late is nothing in the space industry. NASA would love to have a 3 years late average on their projects yet they still get funded.
First things first (Score:2)
they are still producing results in a lab useful to the future.
Where's the evidence that Blue Origin is doing anything useful for the future? Claiming to continually test things is just another form of analysis paralysis. At some point you need to decide either that you've done enough testing or that the thing you're testing will just never work.
I'm not interested in some vaporware orbital construction platform. I want to see them put up something -- anything -- that gets to orbit and stays there as intended.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not an investor, I assume so it doesn't matter what your level of interest is nor what evidence they provide you.
I am going to make the wild and bold assumption that having invested many years and zillions of dollars following the traditional NASA model they have come up with something.
If they haven't, so what? We'll find out later and it wasn't your money anyway.
Why the rush? "Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mindbogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's
Re: (Score:3)
He's a businessman and always looking for improved efficiency not necessarily better tech.
Improved efficiency is "better tech." Almost by definition.
Reusable boosters. Full flow staged combustion engines. I can guarantee you there is and always be a lot of nattering and whining that "Elon didn't invent that just stole the idea yada yada." SpaceX made it work and made it deliverable. Microsoft didn't invent MS-DOS but made it deliverable. Oracle didn't invent relational data bases but they made it deliverable. Nobody else did when they did it and that's why they got paid.
The fact
Re: (Score:2)
I never said he stole anything. He took what existed and made it better which is a good thing but it is evolutionary not revolutionary.
We will not "improved efficiency" our way with current tech to moon and mars bases or put people in orbit/land on the other planets. Those will require new tech to make them viable and repeatable at a reasonable cost.
The next big steps will require a revolution in space tech, propulsion in particular to get us there. AFAIK, Elon isn't working on anything like that which i
Re: (Score:2)
Even if they launch 10x less often and 10 years later and ultimately fail they are still producing results in a lab useful to the future.
Are they, though? Is their "move slow and test parts of things in a lab" strategy better than SpaceX's "move fast and test whole spacecraft in the air" methodology? Because so far it looks like it isn't. I am a well-known Elon basher but you really can't argue with SpaceX's success.
3 years late is nothing in the space industry.
Yes, and that's sad.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, I have no idea. They will either eventually put something interesting in orbit or go under. Either way, it isn't my money but I wish them the best.
Re: (Score:2)
very good at marketing (Amazon heritage?), but they fall short on delivery (Amazon heritage)
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
The 2 prototype satellites are launched by ULA. Jeff Bezos would like to be able to do it on his own rocket, but it's not yet ready.
The same people who mock computer vaporware... (Score:2)
just slurp up "space" vaporware because they still believe in space fantasies.
Re: (Score:2)
And PC Magazine should definitely know better.
vapor ware (Score:1)
once he has a rocket that can get to orbit. i will get excited about this till then. its abour as hollow as his New Glenn
How about getting to LEO first? (Score:5, Insightful)
Before making big announcements.
Just sayin'.
Blue Ring? (Score:2)
Sounds like something you'd be served with your blue waffles.
In other words (Score:3)
If you're not good enough to be a space trucker, you might as well be a space gas station.
Amazon Oribital Prime (Score:2)
Does my Amazon Orbital Prime subscription include Prime Video?
Re: (Score:2)
Beaming TV content from a satellite? What will they think of next?
Announcing is one thing (Score:2)
Launching is another.
Re: (Score:2)
If they can't build anything in order to get lucrative government contracts, they can at least build something to sell to the company getting lucrative government contracts.
Re: (Score:1)
So let me get this straight (Score:4, Funny)
Their first rocket looked like a giant penis. Now they want a mobile space platform shaped like a ring? These jokes just write themselves.
What's with the present tense? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a real problem with using the present tense in announcements like this. It is rife in rocket news.
It can do this, it can do that, it can build projects in space, in can travel to the Moon, it can refuel spacecraft, ad nauseam.
The fact is... NO IT CAN'T. It doesn't even exist! Given BO's track record so far, even future tense seems pushing it - it will do this, it will do that, etc. What they really ought to say is that "we have this concept, and we hope that some day we might work up to doing some of this cool stuff."
How dem BE-4 injuns comin', hoss? (Score:1)
(Just cue the almost-space cowbow twang.)
Jeffie dun go up to almost-space but now he gots a space ring!
What's next, delivering BE-4s to ULA?
Actually reaching the Karman Line.
Hahahahah.
Y'all. *hat tip*
Orbit first? (Score:2)
Shouldn't Blue Origin focus on actually spending some time in Space first? It seems they've had a hard enough time doing just that.
They have to reach orbit first (Score:1)
Blue Origin's New Rocket (Score:1)