It’s funny that just 10 years ago this would have an incredible feat, but after watching SpaceX for the last few years this landing seemed so primitive. It looked like a kids toy when it was landing.
I love it when people say Bezos is catching up to Musk. I just laugh and laugh. They seem to comprehend what Blue Origins is doing now is what SpaceX was doing years ago with the Falcon 9.
@@nickbrannan4579lol they aren’t even close to that. The NS gets up to ~2500 mph, which is half of what the F9 commonly gets to before MECO. Four times as much energy (ignoring weight difference, which is only around 25%). Entering the atmosphere from space at thousands of mph instead of rounding error off zero. Until they go orbital, they’re pre-2008 spacex.
I am all for the space adventure, but how can we call Blue Origin "missions"? There is no achievment there, other than giving a roller coaster thrill to some high paying customers. Same for Virgin.
Thumbs Down; you’re wrong. This mission is an example; it’s a real mission, with real microgravity experiments and technology development items onboard; i.e, real customers. People who want to fly in microgravity for whatever reason- developing equipment to manufacture things, to do research, whatever- that equipment has to be tested, first; and where and how to do that testing is NOT trivial, and it is NOT inexpensive. Up until these commercial reusable suborbital vehicles from Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, all that was had were 30 to 180 seconds of microgravity for exceedingly small pounds of payload- and a rough ride at that. These vehicles provide a large payload capability and up to six minutes of microgravity to find out if equipment actually WORKS before being sent to someplace like the space station (ISS is a VERY EXPENSIVE place to find out for the first time that your fancy equipment doesn’t work in microgravity, ok?). Uncrewed missions like these are very, very valuable; they have a rightful place; and just because their are no people flying on them, doesn’t mean their isn’t a business case there. - Dave Huntsman
Love these comments that have no clue what they're talking about. You do realize Blue is responsible for putting robots and drones on other planets and moons, yes? This rocket is just one of MANY aspects to their Space ventures.
Old enough to remember mercury,Gemini and the zoom was at least the same camera, I'm sure they had what we are seeing now but the voices are dumb as you can get.
The industry needs more players. I hope BO can pick up the pace and be competitive.They need to fly more and sue less. The booster recovery is impressive.
Wow.!! thats why spacex is ahead millions of times than these puppies.. You even can't show camera quality at the par (the earth view was literally not less than an oval egg)..leave that you even dont have decent telemetry.. I mean who use data in feet in the era of Km? SpaceX not only progresses day by day alone but also takes us with them and simplifies all those complicated concepts, those figures and empowers the enthusiastic and intriguing people who are on the edge of knowledge. One more thing, whatever SpaceX is doing is for humanity just like NASA did in 60s -70s and onwards.. Here blue origin seems happy only to be in tours n travels segment..
Wow!! Another doofus slurping on Musk's peanuts. How many things has muskrat put on mars or the moon? Oh yeah, none. Blue has already done both of those. Derp.
I don't quite get it, why is this rocket starting with just one engine? What made them chose to built just one engine for the first stage? Normally there should be a couple more, as redundancy at least. I'm glad it worked, more options (especially beside boeing) is good, but it feels like I'm watching a toy rocket. We got spoiled with epic stuff from SpaceX, especially that smoothness of the cameras, and the touchdowns those reusable rockets, it's even heartwarming. Now, the capsule, considering the mega fails of boeing as long as it's intact it's already a great success. Amazon should thank those boeing fools for lowering the bar so low.
24 years and they’ve still accomplished… nothing of note. SpaceX has put around 750 vehicles into space. That’s more than the number of Blue Origin space missions squared.
@michaeleddington5125 "soon enough" lmao. Vulcan hasn't even tried a recovery yet. Only one test. New Glenn hasn't had a flight test and Blue Origin has not recovered anything that can go to orbit. When you say "soon enough" you mean in 5 years? Meanwhile super heavy whos had 5 flight tests, a successful recovery and flight test 6 is likely a successful recovery of the 2nd stage. makes both these rockets obsolete on arrival. The only reason these 2 companies get any funding is to be a backup when spaceX rockets are grounded so the military can still accomplish its goals. Unless SpaceX just stops improving these other companies have about 10-20 years of work before they are where spaceX is today.
@@kawkasaurous Vulcan is now certified for NSSL missions after two launches, and has dozens of contracted launch missions for DOD/SpaceForce through the rest of the decade. More than SpaceX actually. New Glenn is likely only a few months away from its debut launch.
Blue orgin might be the only surviving aerospace company after all humans will abunden earth in worst case scenario & go to mars with spacex. Than our future generations might want to visit earth taking a space ride with blue😂😂😂😂
No, people just stating that other companies build better rockets are NOT obliged to build better rockets themselves. They do not claim they can do it better, only that others can do it better.
Everybody needs to remember what a magnificent achievement this truly is. Okay, so Blue Origin are taking a slower and more systematic approach than SpaceX but what they’re doing is truly adding to humankind’s journey into space. I’m not even American but I feel blessed to be alive at such a historic period for our race. Go America, go Blue Origin.
Slower I'll agree but more systematic than SX, no chance. SX covers all the bases quickly and efficiently with options well defined and ready for implementation as needed.
@@rocroc I just thought the same thing. Everything that SpaceX does makes 100 percent sense and is as systematic as it can be. I cannot say that from some competitors.
Very interesting the aerial dynamic design of SX and BO vehicles. I like the way the BO landing legs deploy as it looks less likely for a landing mishap collapse.
I don't get all the negativity in here. I still like watching these. BO is going at their own speed and still making progress, just not as loudly as Spacex.
RU-vid is becoming borderline unwatchable the way they keep randomly jamming ads in, not to mention the amount of them. Some videos throw an ad interruption in every minute. It's nonsense. I know you have to make money somehow since the content is provided for free, but this is getting ridiculous
@@davet319 ….I agree with your point 💯 %. But I also feel is not RU-vid’s fault alone, meaning there are users that bully other members and tell members you should pay RU-vid and I’m like WoW, if only people would defend people or viewers, organization wouldn’t have this much power on us. But sadly RU-vid’s greed is off the charts.
No, it was 1 mph, wasn't it? Until it was 17 mph to slow it further down? For velocity, not altitude, which I believe you were looking at, although that was 50 feet, strangely enough 😂
Exciting times. I really want to see all of these companies succeed, but the reality is everyone is 5-10 years behind SpaceX at this point. Nonetheless congratulations and good luck on the next one.
Is this overpried carnival ride that popular they gotta have a second one? Just focus on new glenn and blue ring and all the moon stuff and project Jarvis
@@kevinwhitehead1878 The only place it makes sense to use feet is actually for height of air traffic. It is easier for human pilots to use feet for height and meter for distance. In that way it is less chance to confuse the two. But in all other instances metric is better.
Well, I'm going against what everybody else says. I think Blue Origin are doing well considering. At least they aren't throwing up all that StarLink crap into space almost every day that will eventually imprison us here on Earth. Crack on Blue all power to ya.
Amazon is launching their own satellites on a regular basis. The only reason BO isn't doing it is because they don't have the capability to do it. It is a well publicized part of their overall plan.
@@rocroc and also those satellites will return and burn up in the atmosphere within 5 years (about the time they are usable) because they are in Low Earth Orbit so no that debris nonsense he is spouting.
It is really hard to follow and the telemetry data and compare it to SpaceX launches, since they stick to imperial units rather than metric units in this video. Furthermore, you can hardly see the booster separation from the capsule, since it is not shown by an onboard camera.
It’s very useful; just because it’s not carrying people, it doesn’t get headlines. This mission is an example; it’s a real mission, with real microgravity experiments and technology development items onboard; i.e, real customers. People who want to fly in microgravity for whatever reason- developing equipment to manufacture things, to do research, whatever- that equipment has to be tested, first; and where and how to do that testing is NOT trivial, and it is NOT inexpensive. Up until these commercial reusable suborbital vehicles from Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, all that was had were 30 to 180 seconds of microgravity for exceedingly small pounds of payload- and a rough ride at that. These vehicles provide a large payload capability and up to six minutes of microgravity to find out if equipment actually WORKS before being sent to someplace like the space station (ISS is a VERY EXPENSIVE place to find out for the first time that your fancy equipment doesn’t work in microgravity, ok?). Uncrewed missions like these are very, very valuable; they have a rightful place; and just because their are no people flying on them, doesn’t mean their isn’t a business case there. - Dave Huntsman
@@michaeleddington5125 That is great, but how are that hydrogen produced? If it is from the U.S. Grid then it has lots of byproducts yet. I am not bashing, but like to have the total overview.
So whats the total payload that this 1 engine carnival ride can lift? So far the only thing I've seen it lift were some people who were just there for a cheap thrill, up to the edge of space, but never completely INTO space. When they say we lost the technology from the Apollo missions, I guess Blue Origin is re traveling that long, long road to rediscover that ancient knowledge from the distant past. Just saying....
Thumbs Down; you’re wrong. This mission is an example; it’s a real mission, with real microgravity experiments and technology development items onboard; i.e, real customers. People who want to fly in microgravity for whatever reason- developing equipment to manufacture things, to do research, whatever- that equipment has to be tested, first; and where and how to do that testing is NOT trivial, and it is NOT inexpensive. Up until these commercial reusable suborbital vehicles from Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, all that was had were 30 to 180 seconds of microgravity for exceedingly small pounds of payload- and a rough ride at that. These vehicles provide a large payload capability and up to six minutes of microgravity to find out if equipment actually WORKS before being sent to someplace like the space station (ISS is a VERY EXPENSIVE place to find out for the first time that your fancy equipment doesn’t work in microgravity, ok?). Uncrewed missions like these are very, very valuable; they have a rightful place; and just because their are no people flying on them, doesn’t mean their isn’t a business case there. - Dave Huntsman
Dwayne mon merveilleux amour Je t'aime si fort chéri Love so Space with u chéri Love so lifftof with u Dwayne Elliot chéri Its so beautiful so clever so amazing and especialy so magic like u Dwayne Elliot chéri ...
