It's been six months since Blue Origin's New Shepard failed during launch:
It's been six months since Blue Origin's New Shepard failed during launch, yet virtually nothing is known about the anomaly or when the rocket might fly again.
Blue Origin's chief architect, Gary Lai, provided an update Tuesday on the investigation into the failed launch of the company's New Shepard rocket in September of last year. Troublingly, it's what he didn't say about the ongoing investigation that's giving us cause for concern.
I'd like to be able to tell you the reason for the September 12 launch failure and when Blue Origin's suborbital rocket will fly again, but I can't.
"We are investigating that anomaly now, the cause of it," Lai told reporters after completing his talk at the Next-Generation Suborbital Researchers Conference being held in Broomfield, Colorado, SpaceNews reports. "We will get to the bottom of it." To which he added: "I can't talk about specific timelines or plans for when we will resolve that situation other than to say that we fully intend to be back in business as soon as we are ready."
No one was injured during the failed NS-23 mission, which took off from Launch Site One in West Texas. The uncrewed New Shepard was carrying scientific instruments to suborbital space, but the rocket never reached its target. Something happened 65 seconds into the launch that caused New Shepard's abort system to engage, jettisoning the capsule away from the failing, fiery booster. The capsule performed a parachute-assisted landing, but the booster, instead of performing its usual vertical landing, was destroyed after crashing onto the surface.
The Federal Aviation Administration immediately stepped in, launching an investigation and grounding the New Shepard rocket. The FAA said it would "determine whether any system, process, or procedure related to the mishap affected public safety." Also chiming in was Don Beyer, chair of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, who in an emailed statement said: "I take our oversight role in this area very seriously." This is all fine and well, but it's now six months later and we're still waiting to learn more.
Blue Origin primarily uses the reusable New Shepard rocket to shuttle passengers to suborbital space, in which the capsule gets no higher than around 60 miles (100 kilometers). Since launching its space tourism service in July 2021, the company has sent 31 people to the edge of space, including Bezos and Lai. Blue Origin has been tight-lipped about how much it charges for these short trips to space, but some passengers claim to have dished out as much as $30 million.
[...] Lai shared no details about the rocket's BE-3 engine and whether it had anything to do with the launch failure. A problem with this engine would be very bad, not just for New Shepard but also for Blue Origin's upcoming New Glenn rocket, the second stage of which uses a modified version of the engine known as the BE-3U. New Glenn was supposed to launch in 2020, but the current plan is for the launch vehicle to finally take flight later this year. NASA recently signed a contract with Blue Origin, in which New Glenn is slated to launch the space agency's ESCAPADE mission to Mars.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DannyB on Thursday March 02, @03:54PM (9 children)
In Ars Technica I reed that ULA is up for sail. Potential buyers of ULA should ask weather suborbital Jeff will be able to deliver enough BE-4 engines to make ULA's Vulcan Centaur rocket profitable.
To make matters worse, Blue Origin itself needs those BE-4 engines for its New Glenn rocket. Thus competing with ULA which is not a good look -- especially if supply of BE-4's is constrained.
Now to be quasi on topic, I would point out that the grounded suborbital New Shepard is really not Blue Origin's biggest problem. In fact, I would suggest that suborbital joyrides for the super rich are a major distraction for the company preventing it from doing what really needs to get done. Wasn't Virgin Galactic's business also suborbital joyrides for the super rich? How has that one turned out?
Lettuce romain calm while we consider whether Jeff's tortoise will ever ketchup to the SpaceX hare.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02, @04:06PM (4 children)
[can'tTellIf.jpg] composing the post using speech-to-text, or just violently punning?
It feels like there should be a Poe's Law corollary for this.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02, @04:42PM
Intentional. He's not funny, so he has to be punny.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by cmdrklarg on Thursday March 02, @06:28PM (2 children)
It's a DannyB thing, and it's intentional. I've considered reporting him for homonym abuse, but there doesn't seem to be a number to call about that.
*shrug* Oh well...
Answer now is don't give in; aim for a new tomorrow.
(Score: 4, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday March 02, @09:11PM (1 child)
I protest! That is an ad homonym attack!
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 3, Touché) by kazzie on Friday March 03, @06:02AM
Can't be: I've got an ad blocker installed.
(Score: 2) by legont on Friday March 03, @05:10AM (3 children)
Suborbital makes a lot of sense once you consider fast travel to Asia.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday March 03, @03:25PM (2 children)
Or fast delivery of cargo via suborbital rocket.
Beep . . . your Amazon order of thermobaric bombs has arrived. It is on the way down to your doorway.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Friday March 03, @06:55PM
Hey, at least China won't complain much. Oh, wait, that's only for when they drop rockets on their own citizens. Probably would have a fairly negative reaction at incoming rockets.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by legont on Saturday March 04, @03:21AM
I have a suspicion Musk is using vertical landing not so much for Mars dreams, but for future floating ports that avoid local regulations. It's PanAm all over again.
After all, strange shape of Russian booster rockets is mainly due to plans of glider style landing.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Revek on Thursday March 02, @04:52PM (1 child)
Its a publicity stunt and a useless platform that wouldn't exist without all the welfare the US gave them to develop their toy rocket.
This page was generated by a Swarm of Roaming Elephants
(Score: 3, Funny) by aafcac on Friday March 03, @12:45PM
I'm guessing that they're trying to figure out how to keep the balls from messing with the guidance system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02, @05:18PM
Lack of transparency, plain old corruption, no other way to be a trillionaire (who probably can't even cash out 0.1%).
(Score: 4, Funny) by corey on Thursday March 02, @09:03PM (2 children)
Getting a bit sick of the garbage reporting of rocketry. It’s always reported as “Musks SpaceX rocket” or “Bezoss rocket”. They are are made by employees working at companies that are owned by these men. It’s not their personal creation nor their asset. It is just an ego thing, “this big guy” vs “that big guy”. You never hear “Bill Nelson’s rocket” or “Bill Nelson’s NASA”.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 02, @09:27PM (1 child)
I suppose the subject headline could s/Bezos/Blue Origin/.
Other than that, the article seems to make good sense[1].
The future of Blue Origin, New Shepard, New Glenn and BE-4 are good questions, and probably interesting to a reasonable subset of SN readers.
Will the FAA give Blue Origin significant amounts of grief? Or does the FAA only provide that service to SpaceX?
Blue Origin's chief architect's statement is not encouraging.
They really don't know by now why the BE-3 engine failed? Would this give ULA some concerns since their future rocket (Vulcan Centaur) is based on Blue Origin's BE-4 engine, which does not seem to be materializing according to promised timelines?
[1](cents, since, scents)
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday March 02, @11:30PM
FAA is the Federal Acronym Authors. They print rubber stamps of approval for Boeing and sometimes others.