Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

kuroimakina OP t1_j7ycakm wrote

Not entirely sure how I feel about Blue Origin getting a contract like this with their current track record. I don’t like how space is becoming a playground for billionaires lately. But, if they push science forward, then in the end it’s a net win.

I’ll reserve judgment until the supposed launch date

13

Cosmic_Voya93r t1_j7ytnis wrote

Those that have the resources and can serve their own interests, rather than the interests of the masses, are how things are going to get done. Like it or not, the US government had gave up on space exploration before billionaires started showing interest.

8

dman2864 t1_j7z2m06 wrote

Then they should do it with their own money. I have as much achievement as blue origin. I built a rocket and launched it, the rocket didn't make it to orbit or space but that paper towel tube sure did go high. The government should give me a couple of billion dollars for a mission OR nasa should be doing things in house and not contracting with private for profit companies on the tax payers dime.

−9

wgp3 t1_j7zexw0 wrote

This take is laughably bad and shows a real lack of understanding or intelligence. New Shepard may not be an orbital rocket, but you're vastly under stating the amount of hard engineering that has to go into a vehicle like that. Developing rocket engines in and of itself is one of the hardest parts. And the rest isn't much less difficult. Last time nasa tried to get something similar developed, they failed.

This mission doesn't cost a billion dollars either. The class of mission it is in puts it at under 80 million. Blue origin is all but guaranteed to be taking a big loss in money to launch this payload. And despite your paper towel tube, they actually do have a track record of doing complex engineering and a plan to have a partially reusable heavy lift launch vehicle, unlike you.

Lastly, nasa has always, and I mean always, done things through contracting. Saturn v, space shuttle, SLS, all made by contractors. Nasa owned those designs but again, made by contractors. Not to mention even back decades ago they were launching satellites on rockets that they didn't own. This is no different. They also still do things in house.

Your terrible argument is like saying nasa shouldn't by cars from Ford. And instead should build them from scratch rather than giving tax payer money to Ford, a billion dollar company. It's completely ignorant of how things work for one. And for two, it shows a lack of understanding about why nasa would use services rather than doing every single thing in house. It would be a bigger waste of tax payer money to do it your way.

So instead it is more beneficial to nasa to use the rocket developed by blue origin which has near totally been funded by bezos and his money. So i reiterate that your complaints are just laughably unintelligent and, well, pointless.

15

Ukulele_Maestro t1_j7zdb4y wrote

Blue origin has as invested billions of dollars into the development of the Blue Glenn rocket.

It's going to become another player in the commercial launch industry and NASA wants that to happen.

I don't see any problem here

9

zardizzz t1_j7z4t6z wrote

The taxpayer dime NASA gets is a grain of sand in the US taxpayer budget, if you took it all out you wouldn't even notice. Sorry.

The irony is that NASA finding is net positive for the economy, at least has been, honestly not sure of current status but if this is the hill you want to fight on, we can have a look of any recent info on the topic.

7

Bewaretheicespiders t1_j80bxc4 wrote

>I have as much achievement as blue origin.

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

−1

decomposition_ t1_j7zmfcv wrote

Well a middle class man with $300,000 to his name certainly isn’t going to afford anything in the space industry

8

seanflyon t1_j81hthp wrote

Peter Beck was not wealthy when he started Rocket Lab. Elon musk was a millionaire when he started SpaceX. Clearly it does not take a billionaire to start a successful space company.

1

LordBrandon t1_j80z40e wrote

Remember before the billionaires the rockets were more expensive and less ambitious. Unless you can build a rocket on Kickstarter this is as good as it gets.

4

teslam3lrrwd36 t1_j7z77xe wrote

Don't you mean the "revised launch date"?

1

sifuyee t1_j80wmdc wrote

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

3

GhettoFinger t1_j851rar wrote

Keep in mind that this isn't yet a playground for billionaires. None of these companies would exist without NASA, they are glorified apparatuses of NASA. This is actually in NASA's best interest. Without these companies, they would have to do the space launch themselves and bureaucracy would balloon the costs to most of their budget. By delegating this to outside organizations, they can keep the cost of space flight down, while allocating their budget more wisely.

If these companies do anything NASA doesn't like, they would be dropped and disappear over time. If they further get too uppity, the federal government can regulate them out of existence. These companies should be used for what their worth, then when we get what we need, we crush them.

1