Lunar Descent Element Demo Mission

At our Huntsville, Alabama factory, we built a full-scale pathfinder of our Descent Element lander in preparation for our demonstration mission. This mission will happen a year before landing crew on the Moon. By proving out our technology and pre-positioning equipment, it will start America’s sustainable return to the Moon. To learn more about the Blue Origin-led HLS National Team, visit: www.blueorigin.com/blue-moon/national-team

[@ScienceBreather]

I hope this has all kinds of cameras on it so it can catch the landing of the manned module from an outside angle. That would be awesome!

[@tod4y]

You definitelly mean a humanned one, dont you? :D

[@Vatsyayana87]

If it doesnt i will personally spank blue for making a lander in the 2020's without them..

[@wyattgeorge9364]

@@tod4y “Crewed” seems to be the term used nowadays

[@islandpalm148]

Maybe a Starship crew can film it.

[@wyattgeorge9364]

@Alpha Centauri I agree, but there’s been a push for more gender neutral language in the last couple of years, it just seems like the way the wind’s blowing now. I personally don’t mind, manned and crewed isn’t a huge switch, but it’s tough to kill old habits, I still use them interchangeably here and there.

[@bradjakubowski8987]

Next, they just have to actually get it in orbit.

[@MrArcticPOWER]

I think 95% of Blue Origin's budget goes to animation designers...

[@SpaceNewsPod]

Jeff Who? But in all seriousness, I'm excited about NS-16. Possibly BO first New Shepard human flight.

[@Nowhereman10]

@@SpaceNewsPod To see that we have to hope that Tail No. 4's second flight goes well in a few weeks. The word has it that NS-15 will be a big rehearsal for NS-16 that will include crew at the pad and passengers getting in and out of the vehicle before it launches.

[@cyborghobo9717]

From fresh news Bezos has left CEO chair of Amazon. Seems like he is focused on Blue origin.

[@ronsmith4927]

I get that feeling as I want to see NG fly, but as I understand it the HLS elements can be launched on other commercial rockets.

[@thecapacitor1395]

*Blue Origin:* _"We can deliver a metric ton of stuff."_ *SpaceX:* _"Awe... That's cute."_

[@renew1572]

Spacex: *laughs in starship*

[@Nowhereman10]

@@renew1572 Is that before or after they crash in a big fireball?

[@renew1572]

@@Nowhereman10 both

[@WasatchWind]

@@Nowhereman10 Starship: Conducts multiple test flights, uniformed conclude that the vehicle is a terrible idea, meanwhile SpaceX already has a new vehicle on the pad, and is producing new test articles at a surprising rate, all of which we can be seen being built New Glenn: It's coming soon! 🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗

[@element2612]

@@Nowhereman10 You mean in a controlled test flight where a landing failure is expected because its an entirely new maneuver that's never been done before by anyone (Flip n' Burn)? The company that actually learned how to land orbital-class 50 x 9-meter boosters that can carry New Shepherd to orbit on its second stage? Falcon 9 took 5+ landing attempts before they finally got it going. Now, landings occur with every flight these days. Falcon 9 has only been operational for 5 years and has 100+ flights. Starship will fail to a point of engineering redundancy, because unlike Blue Origin and others - SpaceX doesn't rely on computer simulations to tell them how to improve their engineering. Blue Origin will do something one day and will likely do it well, but they are a "tell, don't show" company. SpaceX is a "show, don't tell".

[@DTHRocket]

Everyone commenting on SpaceX vs Blue Dynetics over here like, "Hey guys, remember us?"

[@WasatchWind]

I think Dynetics is the best option - it is mostly reusable like Starship, but not overkill. It has just enough. It also doesn't have an incredibly deadly looking ladder. Imagine falling off National Team's lander. Starship isn't ideal either with it's massive height, but at least the astronauts don't have to climb up it. I bet it would get incredibly tiring to climb a tall ladder after an EVA.

[@WasatchWind]

@Aerokenises master Starship is very capable, but I think _too_ capable for early lunar missions. On Mars, the size makes sense - missions need to be much longer, and therefore need more cargo. Lunar missions however can be as short as a few weeks. Early missions also will only take a few astronauts to the surface. Then you have the issue of Starship's size sending regolith everywhere. Maybe the lunar variant can fix this issue, but it just seems like Starship will be great for the Moon _eventually_ rather than right now.

[@WasatchWind]

@Aerokenises master No, I haven't.

[@wouterdevlieger1002]

@@WasatchWind if a half empty Starship can allow you to do the same mission as a fully loaded smaller vehicle at half the cost of that smaller vehicle, that's the one you want. The lunar Starship's landing thrusters are high up the vehicle. We'll see if that solves the debris problem. They sure seem to like putting them near flying debris already.

[@wouterdevlieger1002]

@Proxima CentauriThe national team's cost estimate was twice as high as Dynetics, which was higher than SpaceX. Considering it's a fixed price contract, SpaceX can't increase the price until after the contracted missions. Wasn't the 5 refueling ships for Mars, with less for the moon? Especially as the Starship will land mostly empty due to being ridiculously oversized for Lunar missions, and doesn't need to do a TLI burn itself on the second mission. But true, not a point that should be forgotten. The biggest part of the cost of a rocket is not raw materials, but the wages of the people assembling the components, and the high end components themselves, and the high end components of the components. But there is maintenance indeed, and I don't see a lot of Starship maintenance happening off earth. If Starship costs more than F9 per launch, it's a failure. It's waaaaay too big to use the full payload capacity on a regular basis. The only way it lives up to its promise is if it replaces F9 entirely. The way they hope to do this is by cutting out complex systems like helium pressurization (COPV's are not popular at SpaceX, having blown up two of their payloads), using a material that's far cheaper to work with, using commercially available cranes etc for launch pad operations (slashing launch costs relative to custom built systems), no strongbacks, etc etc. 40-50 million, comparable to F9R price today, is probably doable. They already cut 20% of their expendable price, which was already the cheapest option. If Gwynne Shotwell says it can be done, I tend to believe her. I hear no off the cuff 2 million per launch, 500k for a ticket to Mars brainfarts from her 😁

[@unlucky5442]

someone is gonna go all the way to the moon just to fall down that ladder

[@Vatsyayana87]

lol

[@sethjansson5652]

KSP 2 moment

[@silentepsilon888]

... well, we had a small step and a giant leap, now it's time for 'one giant fall for mankind'

[@sethjansson5652]

@@silentepsilon888 The first douche to land on the moon: One giant backflip for mankind

[@MrOverjay]

and to see Starship crew descend onto the surface using elevators. :)

[@dislike__button]

0:52 when you've already delivered the payload, but she keeps docking.

[@siddharthbutala6781]

Lmaoo

[@OHFORPEATSAKES]

lol

[@WasatchWind]

"We're gettin' some wicked shimmies"

[@ANDRSNS]

Love Dr. Squires, he was instrumental in making the Spirit and Opportunity work in Mars for so long. Good luck to the Blue Origin team!

[@OHFORPEATSAKES]

I thought he looked familiar. Good luck Blue Origin.

[@yashjudanbinjahangir9235]

Who is here after starship won the lunar lander program!!

[@devindykstra]

What's going on with New Glenn? We are all super excited to hear and see more about it, but you guys have been awfully quiet lately. Any updates would be greatly appreciated.

[@devindykstra]

P.S. what is the rumoured 'Starship Killer' project

[@Zatack7]

@@devindykstra we know that they’re working on a New Armstrong vehicle, and that’s about it

[@HFilip11]

They are awfully quiet about almost everything. This makes their PR lose to SpaceX as they can't build any sort of fan base.

[@UncleKennysPlace]

@@devindykstra Whatever it is, it's apparently worked-twice! ;-]

[@Vatsyayana87]

@@devindykstra Only rumored by idiots, so pay no attention.

[@DraperLab]

This progress is exciting and Draper is grateful to be a part of this team!

[@iamarokotmanson]

Good luck!

[@Muonium1]

Neat. now actually fly something into orbit.

[@dummyjoe7895]

Do people think reaching orbital is a requirement to get a nasa contract or something. There seems to be the pattern Or is it just “I don’t like them so they shouldn’t get it”

[@Muonium1]

@@dummyjoe7895 I don't care if they get a contract or not. They're a company that's been around for 2 decades and still haven't sent a single fuckin thing into (real, orbital) space yet. They're practically a grift at this point.

[@dummyjoe7895]

@@Muonium1 umm maybe because they were never focused on orbital launch from the beginning. Blue Origin was focused for tourism with what its doing now doing that, they announced new Glenn in 2016, 4-5 years its been and they are Expected to launch new Glenn this new or next year. Plus they didn’t need contracts to stay alive like SpaceX does.

[@TheOsamaBinLiner]

DummyJoe ahh yes, they don’t need contracts, but they do need the worlds richest man pumping money into it every year to poach SpaceX employees because otherwise no high level or even aspiring engineer would want to work for Blue Origin instead of SpaceX

[@dummyjoe7895]

@@TheOsamaBinLiner actually a lot of people leave SpaceX after 5-10 years because the work load is just so high, many of SpaceX employees go to Blue Origin or other companies because it’s a better work situation/ environment then SpaceX.

[@Zedach]

Wheres New Glenn?

[@ninwithabin2683]

in a factory, just hidden from us cuz jeff wont show us until its like a few days from launch 😡

[@harrymack3565]

Nice, at this rate they will be able to get people on the lunar surface in time to wave goodbye to a starship headed for mars.

[@apexpredator1018]

Tbh, mars is not happening anytime soon. Be enthusiastic about occupying the Moon 🌝 instead. It is another planet (at least a smaller one) We CANNOT skip steps. Space is UNFORGIVING and RELENTLESS. We struggle even to live on Earth atm. What makes you so sure we could handle a radiated, unbreathable, desert world with EXTREME cold, terrible dust, NO plants/food, lack of gravity, and a plethora of other undiscovered, but bad things? Practice makes perfect 👌. The Moon is the first step and future generations will walk on Mars

[@Vatsyayana87]

@@apexpredator1018 Well, its not skipping a step its adding one we are lucky to have if we choose to use it. Also i would call the moon another world but not a planet. Planetary body yes, but thats basically anything big enough to walk on. But schemantics lol however thats spelled, auto doesnt know either. But lets be clear, we dont have a clear definition to what is what beyond a star being a sun or not.. So say whatever you like i suppose.

[@guilldea]

C'mon this is not playstation vs Xbox, even Elon has admitted a competition environment will push the race forward, I for one am enthusiastic about both

[@clancy5600]

Actually, ILV is more ahead than Moonship. They've already submitted their option A, have a whole mockup and a pathfinder for the DE element. Cygnus and Orion heritage are on this vehicle, and I remind you Cygnus has flown for years. They've got the BE-7 figured out and have made a range of tests.

[@silentepsilon888]

@@apexpredator1018 a moon is not a planet - not even a smaller one

[@brett4264]

BO hasn't even been to orbit yet and we're relying on them for a moon landing?

[@eddjordan2399]

I think you should make that ladder a bit longer.

[@danpeterson1574]

Yes, because the moon needs a cellular tower.

[@burningice1762]

No no they need to orbit first

[@rogertaleson1268]

More rocket engine test on the channel please :)

[@idleeric8556]

Soon after they do one then they will put it up. Prob Q4.

[@michelmilaneh8963]

Let us see some rocket launches

[@Vatsyayana87]

Orbital.. Sheppard is cool but i dont really care to see anymore of those, let them be their 10 minute joy ride, but get onto the real stuff please!

[@clancy5600]

soon enough, within a year or so.

[@michelmilaneh8963]

@@clancy5600 new Glen?

[@milchael]

show us new glenn

[@UncleKennysPlace]

Blue Origin's New Glenn and NASA's SLS ... I've heard of them, I think. I haven't seen much of them in the flesh, however. But that PayPal guy ... he's doing stuff.

[@Vatsyayana87]

lol indeed, both New Glenn and SLS will be awesome, but so many variables and differences in how thing can or should be done that there is huge differences in what we see during the process. Some shoot for the moon, but yeah, one shoots for yes...

[@tiagomendes6767]

Please eliminate the ladder. That is a serious risk for the astronauts.

[@jlebrech]

Wow, the size of it. It looks like scaffolding for a dome.

[@gio.k291]

Good luck blue origin 👍

[@vinayakam3732]

Where is new glen? Come on guys launch it soon. Can't wait anymore.

[@PassifloraCerulea]

Man that thing's big. Surprisingly

[@Neko-uh7cp]

You need to orbit the earth before trying to go to the moon. So far all you have done is shoot a tiny rocket straight up and back down.

[@dummyjoe7895]

Do people think reaching orbital is a requirement to get a nasa contract or something. There seems to be the pattern Or is it just “I don’t like them so they shouldn’t get it”

[@MrArcticPOWER]

@@dummyjoe7895 The pattern is people with eyes who can understand that 2 decades and $20 billion is a lot for doing nothing.

[@r-saint]

And you'll use Falcon Heavy to send it :D Oh the Irony~

[@iamarokotmanson]

*New Glenn or Vulcan

[@OzearEimaj]

As others have said, that's unlikely - especially when you consider it wouldn't even fit in a SpaceX fairing.

[@cyborghobo9717]

Is it possible to stretch up second stage and increase cargo capasity to seventy five tonnes ? It's just enough to replase SLS in artemis program.

[@Lync512]

Really impressive vehicle!

[@piotrek.b]

This is a part of OUR future, SpaceX, Blue Origin and others. Same aim. #ComeTogether #citizensoftheuniverse #CT

[@johnburr9463]

Love this! #TeamSpace

[@jcdavis5871]

How am I in Huntsville and not realizing this is being done in Huntsville...shame on me, that's so cool! Can't wait to see how everything turns out

[@DarnWhippets]

Wow. A whole ton.

[@oldgeezer3269]

Looks like a great concept Guys

[@WasatchWind]

I especially love the giant tall ladder. I bet the astronauts will love climbing that after an EVA several hours long.

[@oldgeezer3269]

@@WasatchWind Yes sir it is quite a climb but its weightless so maybe not too bad

[@WasatchWind]

@@oldgeezer3269 Well like I mentioned, think about climbing this after hours sweating in a big suit, then needing to climb this gigantic ladder after. It may seem like it wouldn't be that bad a fall with the lower gravity, and I bet it would be easier to recover if you fell - but a fall, even if not hard enough to cause injury, could result in puncturing your suit. Remember that the ground is gonna be covered in sharp rocks.

[@oldgeezer3269]

@@WasatchWind Yes i agree with what you are saying sir, i just checked out an astronaut weight with suit and equipment 500 lbs but on the moon he weighs 80lbs Did you see the feather and hammer test by an astronaut here is link its amazing kzbin.info/www/bejne/gXXTYqefitiNrZo

[@WasatchWind]

@@oldgeezer3269 Harrison Schmidt's test was actually what I had in mind in this situation - and that experiment also demonstrates the lack of air resistance on the Moon, another thing that wouldn't be in your favor in a fall. Falling from a great height on the Moon or Mars would be pretty bad, because there's not as much, or no atmosphere to slow you down, so accelerate more quickly.

[@MrHichammohsen1]

Waiting to see real flight articles.

[@silentepsilon888]

me too, I am guessing I'll be watching this on my screen in my SpaceX condo on Mars when they get their first lander on the moon

[@LuciFeric137]

Very impressed BO got Dr. Squyres.

[@Johnny_OSG]

0:05 That ladder is so fckn long

[@OzearEimaj]

Context: National team ladder height: 10-15m Dynetics ALPACA crew cabin: 1-2m above ground Starship elevator height: 30-40m above ground

[@HeidenLam]

@@OzearEimaj But Starship’s is a elevator not a ladder

[@OzearEimaj]

@@HeidenLam Indeed, you'll see that I even listed it as "Starship elevator" in my reply. An elevator has moving parts and is therefore more prone to mechanical failures. Ladders have no moving parts, but an injured astronaut may not be able to climb one, so an elevator is advantageous in this regard. It's a trade off; assuming no astronaut injuries occur, then a ladder is lower risk. Either way, the Dynetics ALPACA wins out in this regard as it is feasible for an injured astronaut to embark the vessel, whereas the Starship requires a functional elevator; not a guarantee given the aforementioned moving parts.

[@Vatsyayana87]

@@OzearEimaj indeed, the context agrees this is a freaking long ladder lol, remember when they left a rung off the bottom of apollos ladder to save weight? lol

[@OzearEimaj]

@@Vatsyayana87 Are you absolutely certain that was for weight-saving reasons, or because the shock absorption systems (crush zones) would have caused any additional rungs to collide with the landing leg feet in the event of a heavy landing?

[@nandureddy6362]

I believe in Blue origin

[@thierry4188]

@@arnavg7401 you actually subscribed to hate 🤨

[@ScienceBreather]

@@arnavg7401 it doesn't have to be one or the other. It can be both.

[@nandureddy6362]

@@ScienceBreather you are the man

[@nandureddy6362]

@@thierry4188 damm right

[@Vatsyayana87]

@@arnavg7401 Better is no reason to not believe in another.. Thats just being a tribalist ass hole.

[@mohammedchatar5711]

another animation while spacex is headed to mars with its starship almost finished hahahaha

[@SpaceNewsPod]

I'm a huge fan of Starship. But let's be honest, Starship is far from finished. The SN8, SN9, SN10 (soon) tests are very early tests. BUT, Booster Number 1 may fly in a few months and Starship could get to orbit by the end of this year. SUPER EXCITING!

[@ninwithabin2683]

@@SpaceNewsPod agreed, starship is a very ambitious and awesome vehicle, even with a million people working on it it would still take much time to figure out and develope.

[@MoonWeasel23]

If I were a betting man, I’d say this design and Dynetics will get selected in the down select. That would allow for all the possible pork for two sound lander designs, and then at a later date, NASA can buy some rides on SpaceX through something like CLPS-2.0. Very happy to see some updates from Blue Origin since they’re notoriously secretive.

[@PassifloraCerulea]

That would be an awesome outcome. Dynetics' lander looks amazing, and I'd hate to lose it. This one might be the safe bet, coming in part from 'old space'. Hopefully SpaceX doesn't need more help funding their rocket.

[@WasatchWind]

@@PassifloraCerulea SpaceX got some funding when they threw in their bid. It sounds like it isn't essential to them, but just a way to get some extra cash. At very least, they knocked Boeing out of the running.

[@WasatchWind]

I've heard that the prohibitively high cost of the National Team my prevent NASA from selecting two providers - it's either SpaceX and Dynetics, or Blue Origin. Their lander better not win. It's expensive, inefficient, and dangerous (think about climbing that ladder after a strenuous EVA.) Alpaca and Starship on the other hand could work quite well together. Alpaca could be the lander, and Starship could deliver it, and refuel it, as they both run on methane. It's perfect, and I'll be pissed off if stupid politics ruins it.

[@HeidenLam]

Prove me and other space fans in general Blue Origin can do as well as SpaceX does!

[@WasatchWind]

I realistically don't think Blue Origin will catch up for a good while, but seeing that my cousin works there, I'd love to see more action going on in the industry.

[@HeidenLam]

@@WasatchWind It's a feather, so it's gonna be slow. But not as slow as NASA

[@idleeric8556]

Blue Origin have been, and are being, and until Blue Origin go out of business (which won’t take long); will forever continue to be COMPLETELY CRUSHED BY SPACEX because SPACEX ARE A SERIOUS COMPANY WHEREAS BLUE ORIGIN ARE A FUCKING JOKE.

[@idleeric8556]

If you need proof proof then watch Marcus House.

[@renatinn]

LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[@danpeterson1574]

I presume BO is working an alternative for that ridiculous ladder. Even if that 30+ foot drop was not an injury risk (even factoring 1/6 gravity), I wouldn't want risk damaging the space suit and one can forget getting an injured or incapacitated astronaut back into the crew module. The fact that most of the engineers at JSC use a crane to reach the crew module of NT mock up lander speaks volumes about the "ladder issue".

[@stanleighton3165]

Me: Mum can we get SpaceX Mum: We have SpaceX at home SpaceX at home:

[@Kevin-cw6wh]

You cant say that man, they are also doing something I think

[@jackwhitlock1]

Notice how they avoid showing they ladder...

[@andrewreynolds9371]

Hopefully they'll keep getting the funding and other resources they need to get this mission done.

[@farcasdotpng]

This looks epic

[@SpaceNewsPod]

GO Blue Origin!

[@user-pg3uy9sv5v]

Any news on new Glen??

[@SpiritusGaming]

good job

[@silentepsilon888]

another clickbait video title, please put "future plans for" in front of it.

[@idontlivetoday3186]

Ahhhh another animations Nice

[@mikecali6092]

Great animation as always! Hope you remember to buy Cameras next time

[@jankruchina1559]

wen hop?

[@ZeroSpawn]

Whats underneath the gold sheet?👀

[@senorbentina2745]

‘’Like that’s ever gonna happen’’ -Shrek

[@LuckyLuke3331]

The "ILV" looks like my "KSP lander for the Mun" :)

[@manishlamichhane5506]

Cool

[@heartofdawn2341]

Who is going to be the launch provider?

[@temper44]

This video reminds me of the sales pitch in the original Jurassic Park movie, where the old dude talks about how much stuff he has. "Spared no expense!"

[@WasatchWind]

An apt comparison, as this will by far be the most expensive lander. Unlike Jurassic Park though, there are way better, cheaper, safer options.

[@dislike__button]

An yes, another animation.

[@AstroTommy66]

Blue Origin are the best CGI animation company! For actual rockets you better look at SpaceX

[@iamarokotmanson]

Ah yes a fanboy who didn't watch the video

[@reasonforlife214]

Am i nuts for thinking that the one and only vehicle that matters is SpaceX Starship ? I mean,1 metric ton to the Moon ? There is no way to support and mission worth doing with that.

[@effervescentrelief]

It's a metric ton beyond the weight of the ship and other materials. That's actually quite a bit all things considered.

[@OzearEimaj]

I did the maths on a lunar Starship: - To get to LLO in the first place, you first need to fully fuel a starship in LEO. - This requires up to 12 refuelling flights. - After getting to LLO, the SS now has 401t of propellant and payload (combined), this can either: [1] Land on the Moon with 27.1t of payload and ascend with 27.1t payload (the contents of the payload could change once on the surface, but must be equal mass) [2] Land on the Moon with 74t of payload and ascend with no payload. [3] Land on the Moon with no payload and ascend with 43t. [4] Land on the Moon with 147t of payload, using up all of your propellant and stay on the Moon. These numbers are very encouraging, but the issues start to arise when you consider how Starship will be refuelled once in LLO. Even if you substitute the payloads in [1] and [3] with liquid oxygen produced on the lunar surface and the corresponding methane is imported from Earth, this does not even provide enough propellant to land on the Moon again with NO payload! This means the Starship will have to rely on imports of both methane and oxygen from LEO, which means up to 12 more tanker flights for every refuelling trip to LLO. I'm assuming a methalox depot will be placed in LLO to facilitate lunar starships and every 12 refuelling launches from Earth can supply 244t to LLO and return to Earth from LLO (~5,200m/s dV round trip). So while the Starship does have the advantage in terms of sheer brute force and has larger payload capacities, first we'll need a whole fleet of starships to support the 13 launches (1+12 tankers) for every trip/refuel to the Moon! EDIT: as a crude estimate, this reflects a payload to LLO of ~18t per starship launch which is comparable to a Falcon Heavy payload to TLI, albeit you do have the larger payload space to work with! One thing which the Lunar starship clearly excels at is the ability to provide a large near-permanent living space in the case of [4] with plenty of supplies and/or ISRU hardware; this avoids the unnecessary chain of refuelling flights to support future lunar ascents. The BO proposal is modest in comparison and can achieve what it sets out in fewer launches of more "safe" LVs such as the New Glenn.

[@zzubra]

@@OzearEimaj In terms of efficient use of propellant, sure, a smaller lander is more efficient in this regard. However, it’s not yet clear what system will win in terms of economic efficiency. Refueling a Lunar Starship might well end up being significantly cheaper than refueling a National Team HLS (and replacing expended elements). Its certainly suggestive that the overall bid for HLS development (and initial mission operations) for SpaceX looked to be about four times cheaper than the bid from the National Team. It’s wildly speculative and seemingly unjustified to call New Glen a “safer” LV when it hasn’t flown yet. And, although the SpaceX architecture will require more launches, the mission architecture would likely allow a mission to succeed even if a particular launch of a Starship tanker were to fail, which seems less likely to be the case for other HLS architectures. The Starship approach may actually be a more resilient mission architecture in some ways. I hope NASA gets great progress reports from all three HLS contenders, and I look forward to seeing what happens.

[@OzearEimaj]

@@zzubra The reason I referred to NG as "safer" is because although it is indeed unproven, it relies on reusability techniques demonstrated by the Falcon 9; once you look a bit deep, yeah it's completely unique from the propellant mixtures on both stages to the fairing diameter. I look forward to it too!

[@reasonforlife214]

@@OzearEimaj finally a comment worth of my response. For my calculations i assume Δν from earth surface to LEO is 9.4km/sec. Δν from LEO to Lunar surface of 6 km/sec and LEO to LLO ABOUT 4.3Km/sec So,either my numbers are wrong or yours are. I got my delta-V maps from projectrho/mission tables (google it). Assuming a Vex for raptor vacuum engines at 3600m/sec. You are right about the refueling. And actually the lunar missions require more fuel than Mars,since all the delta-v must be propulsive. Starship with full payload has a delta-v of 6.4 So after 10-12 refuels (depending on the capability,assuming 120t to orbit max) a starship can land on moon with 268 tonnes of TOTAL mass. Assuming again 120 tonnes ship dry mass,you'll have about 100 tons of payload and 48 tons of liquid methane left. The fuel mixture for the raptors is 3.5:1. Meaning in order to burn these 48 tons of methane i need 168 tons of oxygen. So 216 tons of propelant alltogether. Assuming the astronauts and their personal payload are at 30 tons,that will give us a delta-V of 3.2km/sec . It takes 2.88 km/sec to enter Earth Transfer Orbit from lunar surface. So if i refuel with oxygen on the Moon,i will have more than enough fuel to get back to the earth (always assuming aerobreaking). Now without refuelling at the moon your numbers are kind of correct. But don't think that oxygen production at the moon is going to be that challenging. In any case,right or wrong, you sir did your homework before replying,so i salute you !

[@thierry4188]

Looks awesome

[@ERS8]

💙

[@welchphilip]

Spacex vs everyone else basically

[@Vatsyayana87]

Not Vs, leading and encouraging.

[@NoHandleToSpeakOf]

Can it fly on top of reusable booster?

[@iamarokotmanson]

New Glenn

[@sarswatibrilliantacedmyson12]

🙏 .

[@josephamalsabu]

Waiting for New Glenn 🚀

[@josephamalsabu]

💙 from Kerala 🇮🇳

[@kantaimusume3933]

Well, i wish them best of luck. But one thing bugs me, why is the ship so small. Only one metric ton ? Imho, that not much... Iirc, the version of spacex has a bit more....

[@iamarokotmanson]

It's actually able to land about 15tn of payload. In a recent Lockheed webinar this was confirmed. This landing demo is most certainly without the Transfer Stage.

[@_mikolaj_]

You guys already have pathfinder?? This gives hope to see it ready on time

[@silentrain201]

Кто нибудь знает, когда следующий тестовый полет New Shepard?

[@jiveshpanigrahi4648]

Ahhhhh yes I want to see america return to moon with a technology that is exactly the same as we did half a century ago

[@WasatchWind]

I'm sure that y'all are working really hard there - but I still think Alpaca is much better. The tall ladder on y'all's lander just seems way too risky.

[@QueenetBowie]

Hoping they get their stuff together now that Bezos will take the helm at BO closer to full time.

[@TomNook.]

Less resources on 3DS Max, more on engineers building something to test.

[@Masada1911]

Any idea of a timeframe on this?

[@dBager]

With current Blue Origin speed - 10-20 years? : P

[@clancy5600]

2023 for the demo test, 2024 for the Artemis III landing. If Congress decides to fund HLS properly

[@iamarokotmanson]

@@clancy5600 it hasn't sadly

[@iamarokotmanson]

@@dBager *5 years

[@sciarkadatul411]

@@clancy5600 Really? asking government for funding, why not just look for private investors like spacex, or do rocket contracts

[@matthewpeck4016]

When is BO going to deliver any result at all? Having Jeffy more focused on you isn't going to make that easier.

[@PaddyPatrone]

Orbit when?

[@LuciFeric137]

Awesome. Scaled up tech we basically perfected 52 years ago. We've been robbed. We've actually gone backwards, aside from the robotic missions.

[@OzearEimaj]

We had BE-7s 52 years ago?

[@LuciFeric137]

@@OzearEimaj (yawn)

[@OzearEimaj]

@@LuciFeric137 (does that mean "no"?)

[@clancy5600]

How come? This lander is 2/3 reusable from the start and they are planning on making the DE reusable as well. It's the best option to get to the moon ASAP

[@LuciFeric137]

@@OzearEimaj In 52 years we went from the Wright Brothers to the X-15 and Gagarin. What happened?

[@davidandlorihaynes7057]

Go blue origin

[@djstoplichtofficial]

Yeh nice lander and all but what about the ladder tho

[@_mikolaj_]

It's on the moon, maximum speed you can achieve while falling down is like, 5.6 m/s. They are also likely to have safety belt just like on apollo

[@kahim]

Can’t wait for Artemis!!

[@butterballin3686]

I was today years old when I found out that blue origin existed. Jeff who?

[@damitcam]

This is sooooo much larger then it needs to be for what they want to do

[@OzearEimaj]

It's bigger because it uses hydrogen as fuel; it has a density of 70kg/m3 (7% of water). This means for the same propellant mass as a more dense propellant mixture like aerozine50/NTO (used on the Apollo LEM), you'll get bigger tanks.

[@damitcam]

@@OzearEimaj ill give you that but the ladder is still dangerously tall for being landed on a body without hospitals.

[@OzearEimaj]

@@damitcam If we're going to assume astronauts are so clumsy that a ladder poses a problem for them, then they surely wouldn't have passed basic training?

[@damitcam]

@@OzearEimaj im not assuming they are clumsy im saying worst case thats a huge problem

[@OzearEimaj]

@@damitcam Alright let's apply the same worst case scenario to all of the proposals: Blue origin: 15m fall Dynetics: 1m fall SpaceX: 40m fall Now do you see why I pick up on this point? In a worst case scenario, it doesn't matter whether the vehicle uses a ladder or elevator; the astronaut is going to fall.

[@johnvonludd1738]

We can, we can, we can... until we can't

[@user-kb4by8km3i]

I'm sure it will get into orbit* next year.🙃 *(Launch by Starship)

[@user-kb4by8km3i]

SpaceX：Wanna hear a joke？ Blue Origin：Sure！ SpaceX：Orbit Blue Origin：I didn't get it SpaceX：Exactly

[@magiccarpet6951]

what's with those wristbands?! 0:36 0:42 (honest question)

[@occen]

Those are antistatic so you don't fry your expensive elctronics

[@Vatsyayana87]

Other person is right, they keep you grounded so you cant build up electricity that could be transferred to sensitive goodies.

[@rodd1000]

But you haven’t even made it to orbit yet 😂

[@heraldthegoose7877]

And?

[@rodd1000]

@@heraldthegoose7877 And?

[@djstoplichtofficial]

@@rodd1000 so you can't work on a lunar lander system if you haven't made it to orbit yet?

[@RODDERZzz]

@@djstoplichtofficial Try telling a new born baby to get up and run 😂

[@djstoplichtofficial]

@@RODDERZzz then where's the hate towards Dynetics at hmm? They haven't even left the ground lmao. Stop fanboying for SpaceX, just look at all the great things every other company is achieving and/or developing.

[@vast634]

Amazon build several huge game development studios, hiring industry talent. They never finished a serious product to the market and shut those studios down again. It was in big part due to too much burocracy forced onto development.

[@grahamwilkinson6902]

This is awesome. Literally.

[@heraldthegoose7877]

YOOOOOOOO

[@larryjing]

poggers

[@akshaymhatre1335]

Well now they can just use the mock up as a slide and convert the facility into a park for kids

[@backwoodsjunkie08]

We need to see some actual test. So far you haven't even broke leo. Start puttin ships in the sky my guy! Im all for it, just would like to see somthing other than a fancy cgi video

[@Nowhereman10]

What actual test? Are you not F-ing paying attention when New Shepard flies to the Karman Line and back? Where Charon, Goddard, and PM2 were flying?

[@EpicLib]

Bezos now will have lots of idle hands moments, let's hope Blue Origin goes Moon pretty soon ;)

[@valbrend9819]

Hmmm anyone just ramdomly click this vid after SpaceX won the lunar lander contract by any chance?😅

[@Diptonil_Mukherjee]

Blue Origins is dreaming of future too fast.

[@thomasroberts664]

There’s no point pretending anymore, we all know you won the HLS downselect 😂

[@bramdepraetere5653]

who?

[@alexandrexholtal696]

No, dynetics >>>>>

[@WasatchWind]

@@alexandrexholtal696 I sure hope Dynetics wins. National Team's lander is extremely inefficient compared to Alpaca, and has a ladder that's dangerously tall. Imagine ending a strenuous EVA, and having to climb that thing. Then imagine falling off it. There is real risk to these astronauts. Starship is a little better with its lift, but the height is still concerning. Alpaca on the other hand is a small walk up some steps. It was designed with this in mind. The National Team lander however just feels like it was mashed together for pleasing congressmen.

[@williamsantos2593]

The power of lobbying: You can have the worst lander, but still be selected.

[@proesterchen]

Nice animation, I hope you'll share more information on your orbital rocket(s) soon! 👍

[@andrewmorris483]

Next they have to build a flying be-4

[@arisaos]

Come on, this is not Apollo era anymore, we can't leaving trash into lunar surface anymore