The failure of the upper stage is a bummer. If it triggers a months-long review, that will almost certainly bump back the schedule for the prototype Blue Moon lander launch.
It's a hard problem, and both SpaceX and Blue Origin will probably have failures in the future too, I am encouraged that they both see failure as a way to do better and looking forward to both of them eventually succeeding. It's a good time to be a space nerd.
There's a saying in the racing business. If you're not walking back to the pit now and then carrying the steering wheel, you're not trying hard enough. If you're walking back to the pit too often, you're incompetent.
Nobody else has anything remotely like Starship. If they pull it off, and it's looking like they will, they will extend their dominance for another decade if not more.
Yes, Starship development has been slow and occasionally explodey, but they've successfully demonstrated all the fundamentals and it's "just" iteration from here. (They haven't gone into full orbit, but that's by choice, not lack of capability.)
I know insurance for a launch is typical, but seems really tough to do that for this still “rather experimental” launch. I got to imagine it has costs something like 50% on a project like this.
Space is hard.
Losing payloads hurts though, especially for a new platform.
What I was not aware of is how many satellites Amazon already has in LEO for it's own Internet service.
They've been flying under the radar there it would seen.
The failure of the upper stage is a bummer. If it triggers a months-long review, that will almost certainly bump back the schedule for the prototype Blue Moon lander launch.
Once Elon showed how to do it, and how cost-efficient it was, a rocket company that doesn't do it is not viable.
Spacex first landed an orbital booster just over 10 years ago and have now landed 600 times.
The entire rest of the world combined has done it twice.
For a long time people would scoff when it was said they had a 10 year lead, and that others would catch up quickly. Proof meets pudding.
FTA: "SpaceX suffered upper stage failures on three test flights of the massive Starship rocket last year. "
SpaceX has also had numerous failures with the larger generation of second stages and currently doesn't have a lead there. Nobody does.
It's a hard problem, and both SpaceX and Blue Origin will probably have failures in the future too, I am encouraged that they both see failure as a way to do better and looking forward to both of them eventually succeeding. It's a good time to be a space nerd.
There's a saying in the racing business. If you're not walking back to the pit now and then carrying the steering wheel, you're not trying hard enough. If you're walking back to the pit too often, you're incompetent.
If you always fail, you aren’t trying.
If you never fail, you aren’t trying.
Nobody else has anything remotely like Starship. If they pull it off, and it's looking like they will, they will extend their dominance for another decade if not more.
Yes, Starship development has been slow and occasionally explodey, but they've successfully demonstrated all the fundamentals and it's "just" iteration from here. (They haven't gone into full orbit, but that's by choice, not lack of capability.)
I know insurance for a launch is typical, but seems really tough to do that for this still “rather experimental” launch. I got to imagine it has costs something like 50% on a project like this.
Video of the booster landing: https://xcancel.com/JeffBezos/status/2045874068763632017
Stupid question I know, but are there people on that boat?
It's a drone boat, so no.