The Blue Origin-led National Team submitted its Option A proposal to land the first woman and next man on the Moon in partnership with NASA. Blue Origin leads the HLS National Team, which includes Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Draper. Together, these partners guided Apollo, established routine orbit cargo transfer, developed today’s only crewed lunar spaceship, and pioneered planetary precision landing with liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen vehicles.
During the base period alone, the National Team is completing 25 technical demonstrations and counting, making key progress toward NASA’s mission. Learn more about the technical demonstrations and the approach to get America back to the Moon to stay: bit.ly/33UXOl3
"Meanwhile at Boca Chica..."
😂😂😂
yeah🤣🤣
'Meanwhile at Boca Chica some space cowboys launched a steel thing with wings that looks like a pen to 12.5 km, then making it fall in style and finallly not landing it" *n o i c e*
@@googleacc7472 still better than blue origin which has done nothing
this is the past not the future
They complimented the reusing of old controls for astronauts, but actually the astronauts found the new controls on SpaceX Dragon superior and had no trouble getting used to them.
@@batugunduz3950 exactly
The old dudes cant handle change. All the Apollo astronauts hate Spacex cause they are different... also a few of them are invested in the heritage companies.
@@batugunduz3950 and even then it is more expensive ;)
@@OBTX91 I believe some Apollo astronauts have changed their opinion on SpaceX.
No they didn't. What are you talking about? They said they're using the same control system as Orion. It's mind-blowing how much hate this is getting.
"It's safer, it's so much safer" Anyway, the crew capsule is 30 feet up
I don't know about you buddy but I'd rather have an abort to orbit option than having the crew module low riding close to the surface.
@@odysseyvoyager2354 p I’m pretty sure they all will have an abort to orbit option, and being lower to the ground is definitely safer too. Image if there is an emergency, would it take more time to get up a 30 ft. ladder in limited mobility EVA suits, or be right there at the ground ready to go?
@@odysseyvoyager2354 you guys should watch the angry astronaut lol
@@odysseyvoyager2354 watch Angry Astronaut's video about this. He has conducted an interview with Dynetics. Dynetics had raised some concerns about this.
@@odysseyvoyager2354 Even the Apollo missions had abort-to-orbit capability, and they weren't 30 feet off the ground. It's not a matter of safety, it's a matter of the dimensions they can cram into payload fairings for the descent mass they want.
damn blue origin making animations and a short documentary and space x flying one of the most innovative rockets ever.
It even landed, a bit enthusiastically. But I think it was a problem with the raptors. Everything else went perfect.
Step by step, on the video editing room.
@@RogerWilco1 it was a header tank pressure failure, it looks to me as if a burst disc on the O2 tank popped just before landing.
they probably planned to make this animation a year ago too
SpaceX: Executing a near-perfect maneuver no one has ever seen in the history of spaceflights Blue Origin: L A D D E R S go *BRRRRRRRRR*
Ah yes rent a girlfriend fan,and yes,she's too cute
@@Hygix_ im surprised theres anime fans here other than myself
@@rc-pf1wq you are not alone brother
I saw that airlock on top of so called starship soooo
Over 10 minutes to get that ad revenue, Bezos you sneaky guy!
ads? are there ads on youtube? oh, yeah, i'm using brave. sorry, moving on.
@@poyaque-estamos3032 same😂
I see no ads on KZhead, except for integrated ones, and whole videos like this one, which are purely for advertising purposes.
@@poyaque-estamos3032 very cool bro lol everyone uses ad-block, tis a joke
actually videos only need to be 9 mins long to get ad revenue these days! Nice try tho
But where is the demo of an astronaut trying to go up and down the massive ladder?
In 1/6G one would imagine it wouldn't be that difficult.
@@morskojvolk in a pressurized spacesuit though
3:53 lower right corner
@@morskojvolk astronauts at 0 g at the iss find it hard to move... your point is absolute bs
@@ivantimofeev2233 Your kind words aside, none of the astronauts who landed on the Moon expressed any difficulty with ascending the LM ladder, even though the first rung was about 4 feet off the ground. Granted, that ladder was only about 2/3 the length of this proposed lander, but I can't imagine a 30% longer ladder would be much of an obstacle.
Not sure why BO thinks they can achieve a moon contract when they have not even achieved orbit. One sphere at a time?
They will probably ride delta v or someone else.
I'm not sure why Bezos thinks he can make any contribution to the space infrastructure for future generations. His best work is that his competition might make SpaceX more motivated.
Will you say the same when they actually achieve orbit one day?
Next year is when Vulcan and New Glenn fly for the 1st time.
@@Nowhereman10 the same year starship will likely achieve orbit for the first time. It's a great time to be alive.
"Brings innovation" then continues to list an 7 year old Cygnus Cargo craft and an 6 year old Orion capsule...
Everything, even SpaceX is building on the shoulders of those who came before. SpaceX and Blue Origin's efforts are all based around the old DC-X/DC-XA program from the early 1990s. The technology for Crew Dragon and Cargo Dragon 2 was derived from the original COTS/CRS Dragon, a more than 10 year old system and was contemporary with Cygnus.
@@Nowhereman10 The DC-X never did manage to make an orbital flight. SpaceX, not shackled by government funding, seems to be able to bring a Starship orbital flight about. I'm sure @Beta Boi realises what previous programs have done for contemporary ones.
@@Nowhereman10 Starship is pretty fucking unique bro
@@Nowhereman10 Look there is no doubt that obviously everything is built on the shoulders of those who came before However there is a key difference between literally just redesigning and refurbishing old technology and techniques like the idea of a decent and accent section. Yes a proven and tried technique but thats not innovating, thats literally a carbon copy of the lunar missions 40 years ago. However SpaceX's Starship not choked by the economics of politics are able to conduct a sub orbital flight with 3 methane rocket engines, conducing a belly flop (as far as I know, the first ever) then conduct a flip manoeuvre (The first ever). That is literally true innovatiion and has never been done before.
@@Nowhereman10 Orion is fucking great, though.
As if it was designed by lobbyists, so everyone can their piece of the cake
That's part of the problem with the government contracting out a lot of their work. It gets lots of lobbyists involved and distracting interests. It isn't perfect but getting multiple companies involved still seems like the best way they could do it. Eventually, it should work out. SpaceX seems to be doing well now. It was hard to know what companies would actually deliver and succeed several years ago but it is getting clearer now. It is good that they're going to the moon first before Mars because the moon is a huge first step. Sending humans to Mars won't happen without the many lessons learned and technology developed putting people on the Moon. That milestone isn't part of some corrupt scheme to profit Blue Origin, SpaceX, and other contractors. Going to the Moon first is the safest and most efficient way to get to Mars. As easy as the Moon might look to some people, astronauts will still be in lots of danger there. On Mars, it'll be suicide until we know what we're doing on something less than 1% of the distance.
this is why it will be selected. government programs are also about job creation and these guys know how to appeal to lawmakers. its a shame because the costs will limit the amount of missions but at least people on earth will have good, high paying jobs for the foreseeable future.
This is just a government hating circle jerk.
@Kilal Googlestaffers it would be far cheaper and easier to solve our existing problems than to go and ravage some other planet.
@Kilal Googlestaffers Like I said, it would be easier and cheaper to solve the worlds existing problems that what you’re proposing. The trouble is that you think this is easy because one publicity whore has told you it would be. It’s not. What you’re talking about would take at least decades and probably centuries to set up, by which time we may not even exist anymore or we will have resolved a lot of this. There are lots of things we’re doing now that all but eliminate our need for some resources. Meanwhile, we have to figure out how to resolve out problem with plastics. Trashing the earth and then expecting to be able to just go to another planet is ridiculous. We are evolved to live on one planet and this is it.
By coincidence Blue origin just happens to release this video on the day STARSHIP has just launched SN-8 😆😅🤣😂
.... and crashed it.
@@Nowhereman10 at least they’re trying to actually make space travel sustainable.
@@Nowhereman10 and gained incredible data for the next launch
@@TheCosmicGuy0111 Interesting factoids here. Both SpaceX and Blue Origin have made fairly cheap rockets. New Shepard, according to Bezos only costs a mere 10,000 dollars to turnaround and according to Musk, a Falcon 9 around 250,000. Both numbers match up well when you compare the rockets' respective sizes and other factors.
@@Nowhereman10 how many non-demo missions have New Shepard flown vs Falcon 9? Also isn't NS a different class rocket it's not really a comparison.
3:50 "It's amazing to think that we're only six months into this program." _Meanwhile in a field in Texas..._
🤣
Wow a prototype that can't even reach orbit cool
@@loranmorash8532 what would you define as a prototype exactly and what would its objectives be for an only use in space lunar lander? They tested a subscale tank and the descent engines. Seems like pretty good progress so far to me
@@iamarokotmanson sn5 and sn6 boom, there you have, both have successfully hopped, and that is exactly how they are supposed to do it on the moon meanwhile BO? doesn't even have a mockup.... YOU ARE PATHETIC
@@ivantimofeev2233 exactly how? Where are the upper landing engines? The wider stance landing legs? Far from exactly.
"Brings innovation" They have to be joking please let them be joking
when they said that I died of laughter. This video was them trying to make them feel good about themselves because SpaceX is absolutely dominating them
@@zaksullivan4093 watching right after the 12 km flight of starship!
@@Jesus_Christ_loves_you_alot i recorded the launch and have it set to my left monitor background XD it gets very distracting but its so beautiful
@Thijs Kievit or imagine the amount of times someone is at the top and as they start climbing in they drip something, and have to climb alllllll the way back down to pick it up
Didn't even knew this channel existed until I watch that angry astronaut dude
Same here😅
I think it’s funny his response has three times as many views as this video
@Phalkhonieng Gangte with rockets
What dude?
@@keco185 he's an KZheadr.
Can't wait for Scott Manley's video on this!🍿🍺🙂
Manley is a science illiterate hack. Angry Astronaut is gonna be the one to watch.
@@RogerWilco1 you got the two mixed up. Scott is the expert, unbiased, and realistic person. Unlike AA.
Just watch both
@@iamarokotmanson Scott is a non expert pretending to be an expert. He even admits it in is intro.
@@jcf20010 what do you define as expert exactly?
*slaps BO lander's roof* "This bad boy can fit a plenty of lobbies in it"
Best comment
aye that guy talking about inovative my arse - this is the very definition of designed by committee and funded by committee.
mind you that they are the only company out of the three to give more than just the basic details of how things can work.
@@transformatron6203 False. Check out the Angry Astronaut channel for details on the other lander design.
@@transformatron6203 The other competition have both released just as comprehensive videos?
We've been seeing CGI of all this for years, time to start BUILDING it
they won't build it in ten years, they only want money!
The company has been around over two decades, longer than space x and they haven't put anything into orbit and can barely land their first stage that they have working on since the dawn of time, highly doubt it will ever work, tho NASA keeps funding them
It's amazing to me that you've been seeing CGI of lander that isn't even a year old yet
@Scary Gamer nah, 2030.
Im sorry, but i fail to see the sustainability when 2/3 of your lander are not gonna be reused, Please NASA dont pick these clowns to lead our future into space.
NASA won't pick blue origin to lead our space future. BO haven't even launched a rocket into space yet.
@@zaksullivan4093 lobbying exists 😑
@@Jesus_Christ_loves_you_alot true. Jeff will hook up nasa with free Amazon prime XD
@@Jesus_Christ_loves_you_alot I’m sure nasa will not choose BO if the other competitors have superior technology at a similar price. Lobbyists can’t do much on this.
@@Default012 I don't think you're estimating the power of lobbying correctly. Why does Orion/SLS still exist?
Who's here after NASA chose spacex for the lander mission?
Blue Origin: We have built a moon lander similar to the Apollo one that can carry few people. SpaceX: We are doing a test launch for a space vehicle that has never been done before and can take up to 100 people to the Moon and Mars. Blue Origin: Well but you are not "innovating" like we are...
Blue Origin: We have Heritage* 👁 👁 👁️ 👁️ 👁 👁 👄 👄 👄 * lots of old men over-compensating for the risks they took in the late 60s by votind down and dissing all attempts at innovation in the Artemis program
😂
SpaceX: Come back to me on that when you finally reach orbit with your lipstick rocket.
100 people, eh? Not gonna happen any time soon.
@@atlas8827 Yup , people used to say that about flying the starship as well and look , it just did it first test flight. Soon it will be going into orbital flights. Still it can carry 10 times more people than the Blue Origin moon lander
Blue Origin: releases a CGI video SpaceX: launches a rocket-powered, building-sized, built-in-a-field steel silo to 12.5km, does some sick never-before-seen maneuvers and almost sticks the landing on the first try BO better start innovating because soon even govt pork barrel politics won't save them as Starship development and production keeps ramping up. SN9 is already pretty much ready to be rolled out to the pad and that one will probably land successfully if it gets the fix for the fuel pressure issue, and the first Super Heavy booster is under construction. At this rate it's highly likely we'll see Starship attempt an orbital flight within a year or so.
Can't wait for it :D
Amen.
Gwynne Shotwell expects starship to go orbital this year, I definitely think we’ll see starship reach orbit before New Glenn now.
@@spotlizard0374 No way New Glenn will be ready before orbital Starship. I think SpaceX can even achieve orbital refueling before New Glenn goes in orbit
SN9 flight tomorrow I'm excited
Here after starship was selected
0:31 Having to climb a three-story building on an outboard ladder everytime seems like a flaw, doesn't it?
Yeah!
Maybe they should add an electric winch to lift people up and down.
Yep!
A least the one sixth gravity turns it into a half story climb or fall energetically if not time wise.
Well said
Having "Over 1,000,000 lines of code" is NOT a selling point lol
1,000,000 lines where something could go wrong
@@Michaelonyoutub We saw what happened with starliner....
Doesn't seem to bother the F-35 fanbois and that thing is up to 8 million lines last time I looked.
Microsoft Exel: am l joke to you?
Not every simplistic notion birthed in a simplistic mind necessarily has merit.
Never reached orbit. "we are revolutionary!"
What's your problem? SpaceX encourages other rocket companies, nobody needs you to bad mouth blue origin.
@@TheVinnythestick yeah SpaceX sure encourages them, and by that, BO should be having at least 1 partially-reusable orbital class rocket just like Falcon 9, or better (like they always tauted with their New Glenn). But we all know it's just a fancy talk and pretty graphics. Unless BO can get those New Glenn up into orbit, they're practically useless.
@@TheVinnythestick BO: **around for 20 years** provides no evidence of any progression, hasnt even made it to orbit, only launched 13 SUBORBITAL SSTOs in the span of 20 years, backed up by the richest man in the world and doesnt actually do anything but gloat bout how theyre the “future of aerospace” (which they are not), receives funding it doesnt deserve, etc SpaceX: **around for 18 years** Has launched 100+ falcon 9s, has landed a falcon 9 over a hundred times, practically mastered the art of landing the falcon 9, creating a rocket that is actually revolutionary and is aiming to land on mars, shows proof of fast, substantial, major development and progression, has actually made it too orbit, doesnt gloat and get too overconfident just because they landed a rocket one time, has brought humans to space and to the ISS, building one the most complex and complicated ships in record-breaking times, has control of the most powerful (operational) rocket, is trying to provide high-speed wireless internet with starlink, is trying to land and build another civilization on an entirety different planet, etc etc... I dare you to say that again
@@TheVinnythestick The problem is NASA is giving citizen's money to a company that has not proven anything until now. This is just the result of lobbying by these huge companies. Spacex was in the past a gamble from NASA, but their rate of innovation is now so high compared to BO and others. Yes, NASA should have multiple suppliers, but at least price them accordingly. These guys put more money into their marketing than they do on design, and that is just ridiculous. That design, with all these parts bolted together and then they strap a ladder to the outside???? Come on, that is not engineering. Do they really needed 579M USD for that? Meanwhile, Spacex got 135M for a revolutionary design, that will be more useful and expensive to build.
@@urlocalperson2201 How did you deduce all of this? You talk as though Blue Origin should do things the way SpaceX does. Your thinking is totally blinkered. Blue Origin are on a totally different road map to SpaceX and Bezos clearly prefers to play his cards close to his chest. Blue Origin got a rocket to space and back again safely before SpaceX did. They are already build the infrastructure for the first New Glenn to use at the Cape in the first half of this year. They have sold the BE-4 engine to ULA to replace the RD-180 and they already have launch customers signed up. They just don’t Tweet every time someone does up a securing bolt or post a video when Musk has his lunch. I don’t blame them.
Sorry but cant see this winning dynetics isby far better. The only way this will when is favoritism.
This is far safer and far more capable than Dynetics.
@@applemirer3937 Did you miss the 30m ladder that they will have to climb down every-time. And climbing down ladders in a space suit isn’t very easy
It’s definitely wont win without favouritism especially with it having to go against starship
@@zaksullivan4093 I've climbed down a lot of ladders, some of which were quite tall, and I can't imagine it being a considerable problem. Especially for someone who has trained for it.
@@zaksullivan4093 Starship wasn't designed to be a lunar lander. In order to win the contract, I think SpaceX would have to design a more specific lunar lander. I do like Starship though.
SpaceX: Almost executes a perfect flawless prototype test Blue Origin: Releases a video Perfect timing guys
Ya what a coincidence
Yeah! Plus They have their own rocket to get it up there. The other designs need to work with SLS. I reckon we’ll be looking at several moon transporters. They’ll all learn from eachother to strengthen their weaknesses over time. Space x might go ahead regardless, seems like a logical step before Mars (if the commercial demand for moon journeys arise) Space X’s lunar starship has it’s flaws too. I’d like to know if they intend to use the vacuum optimised Raptors to perform landings or if the low gravity means it can be all with the thrusters. For sure they need them to launch off the surface to go back to the Lunar gateway, and to get to LEO for refuelling. We’re still decades/centuries away from a simple 1-ship-does-all without all the caveats. What a beautiful site it will be to see a nasa branded, all white, finless starship standing tall on the moon with the earth behind it.
Hahaha brilliant.
The video is not about carrier rockets
Just shows they are following in the shadows of a true giant.
Just came to see the comments 😂
me too. not dissapointed :D
Same here. I'm not even going to watch the stupid video.
@@tomboard1 😂
@@Raptor828 😘
Lmao !!
National Team: "Look how complex our system is" SpaceX: "Look how simple our system is"
12 redevouz, docking, refueling of 100tn of cryogenic propellant in quick succession to land...... not complex at all righ?
@@iamarokotmanson For a 100% reusable system that consists of one piece once it gets to the moon, yeah.
@@cbale2000 lol definitely
@@iamarokotmanson sure beats climbing down a 12 m ladder in an EVA suit while producing heaps of space junk
@@iamarokotmanson Starship is a simple and clean design I think. No over engineering or over complexity.
Pause at 5:29 They are using a cherry picker. Now compare the height of the ladder to a cherry picker. Dammm that's a big ass ladder.
That ascent module is so *smol* ! Ladder is about 35 steps? If OSHA was involved, they would require the astronauts to be on-belay with fall-arresting gear. That seems sensible - not at all excessive precaution.
I guaranty, that one of the astronauts will fall from those stairs... And honestly this "lunar module" thing looks like from 1970th
I can't imagine myself falling off that ladder. Much less an astronaut.
I guarantee that the system that they will employ will not allow an astronaut to fall from those stairs....
Considering the gravity on the moon I don't think falling would be such a big deal. It's still stupid though.
As we all know, it ought to look cool like 50s SF movie rockets... Meanwhile, in Boca Chica :-)
When you design it so that in order to get in and out you need to climb down a 30 foot ladder is when its clear that you need to redesign it. Its also not reusable.
Uhh.... the SpaceX one has an elevator.....
HLS proposals literally are required at min to be ascent module reuse by 2028. Both descent and transfer element can be upgraded with reusability, though descent requires ISRU which is long term tech; not this decade. Still got nothing on tech required for Starship though.
when you design it so that if the engines you used to land fail, the astronauts die is when its clear that you need to redesign it. It also needs 11 launches of a SHLV to refuel it (Moonship)
@@transformatron6203 Incorrect.
@@angadsingh9314 correct. to get a full tank of fuel to NHRO, you need eleven launches of superheavy
blue origin : makes an animation spacex : "falcon 9 booster touchdown"
pffft, Falcon booster touchdown... tha's so 2015 SN8 bellyflop... hell yeah! :-)
who's here after SpaceX won the contract?
No hate BUT this looks like a 1960's lander CMONBRUH
@FridayGood He is explaining how the National team lander is not very innovative.
@FridayGood Well, it's expensive as hell and you can't get much payload...
@FridayGood It very much does. The more innovation, the more enhanced our tech can get. And as @John theux said, it's really expensive and weak in terms of payload.
How else would you design a lunar lander? What does a non 1960's lander look like?
@@johntheux9238 Not only that , but the National Team's landers so wasteful! It'll turn Luna into a junkyard!
Not too sure about this plan. Dynetics seems to provide a more reusable, simpler, cheaper, and safer option.
Agree, but blue origin has cooler design
@@akunlama89 cooler does not mean safe. And when you're talking about human spaceflight, safety is the upmost priority.
@@akunlama89 Cooler design? Have you seen SpaceX's Starship?
@@sneakytom7416 well I agree but blue origin has the coolest design.
@@aconite72 yes, the lunarship were also cool
Who's here after Nasa selected SpaceX :p
Take a shot every time the guys who haven't been to orbit say "heritage."
I think that's only Blue Origin.
that would be 4 shots =0
Did you forget about Lockheed, Northrop and Cygnus?
@@transformatron6203 No, but this ain't their video, is it?
@@transformatron6203 No. They have heritage.
"meanwhile in Boca Chica..."
Put something to orbit first. Test the hardware. Use metric system! SMH!
Other companies in the partnership have put things into orbit first, and the company that built the LM never made a rocket themselves. They are testing hardware, did you even watch the video? They're using imperieal in this video because its intended for an american audience smh.
@@transformatron6203 mixing imperial and metric is a perfect recipe for disaster. You have to choose one and stick to it to avoid any possible confusion.
@@dislike__button As Transformatron pointed out, they're using imperial _in the video_ for the intended audience. The aerospace industry does, indeed, use the metric system precisely because of _past_ mistakes.
@@morskojvolk If blue origin were serious about being a space faring company, they would be using the appropriate measurements regardless of the audience. I mean, isn't the audience the entire world? America may be big, but there are other places who are just as interested in space, and everything made is for the same goal for humanity.
@@julianemery718 This was a video about a NASA program, who do you think primary audience was: the people _paying_ for the program, or the rest of the world?
Elon Musk: You can delete this video now.
Jeff WHO?
Yes, but I would rather take dynetics and not have to climb up and down a 12 m ladder
If you're too lazy to to climb a ladder, you shouldn't be an astronaut
@@vaclavzajac214 crazy idea, but I don’t think mission success should be based on a a fully suited astronaut with limited mobility being able to ascend and descend a ladder of that scale. And what if things go off-nominal, and one astronaut has to drag another up that ladder?
@@vaclavzajac214 it’s just a way more of a hazard to have to climb a 12 m ladder to get access to the only hatch
@@vaclavzajac214 totally ignore the fact you can fucking die if you fall off
@@vaclavzajac214 It might be the dumbest way to die on the moon
In the end, it didn´t even matter...
WOW. Some more footage of the lobby lander. But lovely to see all the same.
yeah the HLS - Huckster Lobby System on the SLS - Senate Launch System ...
@@tma2001 Ah, Blue Origin and companies like Boeing never cease to amuse and horrify us.
Seems like we watch 2 the future
This will probably be the most expensive yet sadly the first option for Congress
congress always want the most expensive options smh
That's why sls is taking so long, unfortunately
4 months later... nasa chose spacex
500 millions and just a new shepard to show... NASA just done the good choice 😊
I'm wondering why they needed to use that cherry picker to work on the Ascent Element and not use the safety ladder?
Because they know how dangerous a big ladder is. Exactly why it's being used on the lander itself.
Okay so when can we see New Glenn rocket?
Go look through Blue Origin's videos on their channel. They have videos showing hardware under construction and being tested.
@Richard South He means this: kzhead.info/sun/lNqgYLySjGSFdac/bejne.html kzhead.info/sun/rMV-idSyiqdudqM/bejne.html kzhead.info/sun/adGAdL6xrnOgaJs/bejne.html
@@mikedicenso2778 does a piece of metal really count as seeing a whole rocket?
@@thomasackerman5399 Those videos were posted 9 months ago. Blue Origin could have built something bigger than a single piece of metal, haven’t they?
@@zaksullivan4093 It is proof that the rocket is being built and given when the video was released, it's very likely much further along than that.
Decent little lander but I have to say that I like the modular concept of Dynetics better and no one can hold a candle to Starship
Great comment lol blue origin sucks at innovation
Different risks to mission success on schedule, NASA's approach is encouraging we'll actually get there 🌕
Nobody helping to push space exploration sucks, my friend. Fanaticism in this is not a good thing, everyone is pushing in the same direction
@@juanmanuelgonzalez3789 except Blue Origin uses Bezos' political connections and lobbies to choke out any one else they can. If they were more competent they may have succeeded, so yeah, fuck them.
@@juanmanuelgonzalez3789 not trying to be fanatical. I'm just saying BO is kinda lame. Its a frankenlander that isn't very innovative. Of the 3 candidates they are the farthest behind.
1:36 "Orion heritage" the capsule that flew once with no humans, lol. 1:41 talks about familiarity with controls as if it's a selling point. That's bottom of the list. It's pretty darn easy to train astronauts for new control schemes.
I completely agree with you.
7:57 the right small engine? compenetreting inside the solar pannels... KERBAL STYLE!
Hahahahahaah I noticed that
I n n o v a t i o n
Hi Lobby team, nice video. When are you planning to reach orbit? Aren't you older than SpaceX?
they designed a lander then realized that they had to make it reusable
I'll get serious about blue origin when they demonstrate they can reach earth orbit with a launch vehicle. Until then it's just a lot of talk.
To be fair Dynetics hasn't launched any rockets into orbit either but I only see people shaming their lander all the time I think it's the most logical choice of the three, even though none of them is ideal by no means
Same here
What's gonna happen when you'll get serious?
What will you move the goal posts to next year, Jamie when Blue Origin launches New Glenn?
Similar things were said about SpaceX. We will see how it goes.
Looks good, can’t wait for it to be available in 2032.
That's ambitious
@@kirkc9643 you’re right, 2067.
Thank god that this thing didn't win. Still can't believe that SpaceX got this.
There is never too much competition, so I would say: Do it!
I definitely agree! But they should really find an alternative for the ladder. That thing endangers not only the Artemis program, but most of all the astronauts lives.
@@robin9321 It's a boeing pun: twitter.com/elonmusk/status/938816780444745728 I really hope they get to the moon using New Glenn because SLS is too damn expensive.
Starship is the toughest competitor Blue origin have right now...
Of course, but we do not care how tough a competitor is... WE SUPPORT TEAM SPACE!
@@dhanashrikulkarni5878 Falcon heavy is a tough one too. New Glenn has a bigger fairing but it's only an advantage in low earth orbit where the payload capability meets the fairing volume.
Who came here after Space X won the contract?
Draper is excited to bring our experience to such a unique and talented team!
Can you do something more innovative please?
really ? I would be embarrassed to be part of this disposable, wasteful and dangerous to get in/out in an emergency Frankenstein of a lander.
Uhh, how about putting your efforts and time behind and with SpaceX - a company who has actually been to orbit and delivered both cargo AND humans to orbit. These Blue Origin clowns haven’t even made it to orbit yet, never mind delivering anything to orbit. And now they want to play on the moon?
This whole project is a national embarrassment. Being associated with it and part of it means you carry that embarrassment too. Its a disaster of a project, doomed to fail. Its NASA and partners literally recycling 50yr old tech, and to knock it out of the park, taking 50yr old tech and making it worse.
@@greggb557 you're a complete dumbass
By inviting legacy companies, Blue Origin cemented their place in the finals of the HLS. Poor dynatics.
Don't worry, 2 landers get in. And i feel like Dynetics has very high chance of entering
@FridayGood no they didn't? 3 landers entered competition and results are at february. My gues is: Winners: National Team and Dynetics. And NT will probably be on Artemis 3, but it's nothing official yet. No decision was made
@FridayGood Im hoping for Dynetics and SpaceX, ILV is too bulky and complex
They put the word “blue” on a ball. I’ll let you connect the dots....
most underrated comment here
"We're using the same type of Displays and controls that were used before so Astronauts are familiar with them and don't have to learn something new" Yep we're going to send the surviving members of Apollo back to the moon..... That'll be Buzz Aldrin (90), David Scott (88), Charles Duke (85) and Harrison Schmitt (also 85)! LOL
"orion has been in development for a long time" Yup, ya hit the nail on the head with that one bud.
3:30 "Orion has been in development for a long time" yeah sure that's one way to put it
lmao
So we leave half the lander on the moon? NEXT.
5:09 That's it, that's why you shouldn't go to the moon.
Blue origin should go from a space company to an "animation company". They seem to have fun doing all these animations.
gotta love how they think that apollo involvement is basically being god!
They have to throw the word "Apollo" in there so they can see themselves as associated with the greatest achievement of the human species.
Space X: Stark BO: Hammerdyne 😅
That tipsy ladder looks like a recipe for "That's 39 small steps for man... WHOOPS! One giant lunar bellyflop for mankind!" EDIT: Space is hard and I fully support the dream and everyone's attempt!
A fall from 10m on the moon is equivalent to a fall from less than 2m on Earth, so not quite as dangerous as it looks.
@@AndrewMeyer 2m free fall on a rocky surface... on a presurized suit... ;)
Tether to a slidewire like the Shuttle payload bay had for EVAs. No problem.
@@AndrewMeyer What if they fall and tear open their suit? how quick can they get backup to safety or have another astronaut try to seal the suit?
@@AndrewMeyer still all it takes is 1 breakage in the space suit and that person is dead, espically if they have to climb THAT ladder to get back to oxygen.
As Elon always says “The best part is no part” and I’m seeing to many companies working on to many parts. But gotta get Congress on your side somehow I guess.
As for our malfunctioning Congress getting the job done right, that's wishful thinking.
My favorite part about all of this is that the comment section is full of people reminding bezos that he's getting dunked on by SpaceX on a daily basis. Get dunked on Jeff bezos.
This didn’t age well
Very
All these decades later but to me it doesn't look like this stuff shows we've gone so far. Sure it must be more advanced of course.
"It's safer, it's so much safer." You know what is safer than a 30 feet ladder? Not landing on the moon.
This is savage as hell X)
I never thought about it from that point of view lol. Your absolutely correct.
blue origin and boeing makes animations space x bring it to reality
did anyone else notice at 1:24 and 1:37 they pronounce ascent as "ass scent" man they got some funny characters at blue origin 😂😂😂
I cant hear anything they say over the annoying load background music - its like trying to hear Matthew McConaughey mumbling in Interstellar.
Ok so mostly heritage parts, we've heard this before w SLS and you see how long that has taken. So what are we talking here? 2035? Sorry, I just refuse to get my hopes up anymore after I've seen how Boeing has botched SLS and Starliner. I'm not a fanboy but the only company that I can get behind that really busts their asses and is completely transparent (you guys are too secretive) is Space X. They've been to space w people and have shown how motivated they are to let us watch them do it.
Boeing is not involved in any of this so i don't see how what you're saying has any relevance. LockMart, on the other hand, has delivered Orion and that craft as well as flown a test flight on a ULA Delta IV. Orion, unfortunately, has to wait now until SLS is ready.
@@Nowhereman10 Really hope Boeing is not involved. They need New Glenn done, I don't want to this thing to be launched on the SLS.
@@Nowhereman10 relax I'm speaking about this as a whole, you knew that. SLS is a bloody joke
Artemis... designed by committee. Look what happened on Apollo 13. scrubbers for the command capsule wouldn't fit the lander because they were by different companies.
Oops guess who is not going to the moon! GGs to spacex for winning the lunar lander contract. Take that jeff
fun fact. when they say "going to the moon in a sustainable model" they actually mean "we gona need much more of your money"
@FridayGood Well, mainly Blue Origin here. Despite having a less innovative and reusable landing system than Dynetics or SpaceX, they are getting far more funding than them.
@FridayGood The correct answer here is "yes"
@Alpha Centauri Oh yes. I don't really blame NASA for this, more the senate. They have never seemed exactly keen on spending much money on space policy. But SpaceX will be able to refuel the Starship with tankers, so it could be utilised for reusability. All in all, SpaceX, while not risk averse, have shown themselves to be capable of delivering a reliable and cheap vehicle in the Falcon 9, and Starship could certainly be trusted to work particularly if funding was increased.
Mind you that this is the only lander powered by hydrogen. You can't get methane on the moon. Also, the descent element is capable of reaching LEO with a full tank on the lunar surface, once ISRU is developed iirc. Meanwhile, moonship needs eleven superheavy launches to be refuled.
@@transformatron6203 this "thing" does not exist! and demands even more idiotic SLS project. and by the way . i all for base on mars.all against loonar orbital station as its a waste of money. and musk mars goals look to me like ramblings of an insane person
I think they released this on the wrong day. Just SpaceX’s stream alone got ten times as many views for their test flight, and then there are all the other cottage industry streamers.
This is going to be fun to have all these different systems talking to each other
Jeff who?
Saw the SpaceX Starship test and this showed up. Yawn!
😂
LOL. Elon is further along with his moon lander, merely by painting a Starship nosecone white. lol
@@asraharrison he is further along because Starship is actually in development and has done several tests and is wayy far ahead of BO. Not to mention that SpaceX has actually achieved orbit and does so regularly. Also, spacex has had crewed missions. Meanwhile, BO has not
Do any of you have the remotest idea what the Delta V burn would be like trying to put that much weight on the Moon?
@@thethirdman225 28 raptors gooo burrrrr
Suddenly I'm in 70s again. 'pokes with stick' BO do something!
I am sure astronauts will be thrilled to climb up and down the massive ladder with their heavy equipment. Dynetics lander is my favorite for being extremely low to the ground, and quite innovating design.
This video aged well
This aged bad
That’s one heck of a ladder!!!
It's important to remember that the work being done by blue origin is still amazing, I mean, they're trying to go to the moon in 4 years. The fact that their work isn't exciting to follow only shows how much Spacex has changed the industry, nobody saw SpaceX coming and now everybody is trying to catch up.
Blue Origin replace the ladder with some kind of winch system to get astronauts from the cabin to the lunar surface. In case of an accident, there should also be controls in multiple places to allow other astronauts to bring their crew members to safety.
I love it, simply because it means we are beginning the next stage of our Moon missions and that private competition for space exploration is hotting up. Other than that I am surprised that BO and NASA are going with so many things legacy. I'm not trying to be a SpaceX fanboy but they have built a fully reusable vehicle that once tested (might even be today I think?) can be mass-produced, that will be capable to landing humans anywhere in the solar system, and are innovating so rapidly that who knows where they'll be in 20 years time. Blue Origin have taken that same time to produce a new version of an old vehicle and haven't once got a payload to orbit. Once again, I love the push from all these companies, I just don't see that in this case, slow and steady wins the race. It's like I'm designing a hand-crafted, new version of a horse cart while my competitor is designing Teslas for mass-production.
this comment need more upvotes , literally
Heard you tried to trademark rocket landings on drones?
@FridayGood they tried to
@FridayGood woah, someone who fact checks on the internet? Respect.
Blue Origin tried to patent, not trademark, for barge-based retropropropulsive landings because they were going to do that for the early version of what would become New Glenn. SpaceX saw what Blue wanted to do during the early Commercial Crew program presentations and decided that was a better way to go than trying and failing to recover rockets with parachutes in the ocean Space Shuttle SRB style. So naturally they challenged Blue's patent and were able to win in court. Blue is going to still do something similar, but with a ship rather than a barge since a ship moving at slow speed in the recovery zone is far more stable than a barge, even one with thrusters, in rough weather which will go a ways towards preventing the types of weather-related scrubs we've seen lately with SpaceX launches with rough seas forcing one or more day delays.
@@devindykstra they patented it, not trademarked. Learn the difference. A trademark would be if SpaceX tried to use Blue Origin's logo, for example while a patent covers an invention or other similar thing.
@Nowhereman10 I didn't want to bog the conversation down with pedantics. Obviously the difference between a patent and trademark is huge, but the idea is the same, so I didn't feel the need to correct them. Secondly, the reason why SpaceX was able to win in court was because they were already building their first droneship. They both developed the idea of using a boat for landings independently. SpaceX started their Falcon 9 landing tests in 2013, they may have originally planned to use parachutes, but that idea was clearly scrapped a long time ago, long before they saw Blue Orgin's proposed patent in 2015.
Dynetics: cabin is at ground level SpaceX: slick elevator Blue Origins: *_L A D D E R_*
Blue Origin “It’s safer”. Elon, “hold my beer.......”
Hold my starship
Luaghs in elevator malfunction
Go SpaceX
let's go! I'm 36 and I wanna visit the moon before I'm too old for a rocket
with this antiquated approach, you will never get there. It's just a more complicated Apollo.
Better enter right astronaut selection now, later it might be harder
I've been waiting on a Mars trip for 60 years.
Me too, i'm 13 and space travel needs to become really efficient and low cost by at least 2050 to see space travel as a common thing in our lifetimes.
My 2 cents, focus on health, wealth and happiness. Stay healthy so that even when you get old you can handle and enjoy a launch, be successful so that when SpaceX begins offering tickets onboard a Starship designed to carry 100 people, you can afford a ticket, and stay focussed on being positive. I am also 36 and I have made it my goal to fly in space for my retirement, so not as far as the Moon, but this is what is making me take my health seriously, and push harder at work, to learn as much as I can and to live below my means in order to invest for the future, It has made me love what I do and look forward for what is to come. It's a great time to be alive, most are unaware of just how much space will be opening up to everyday people over the next few decades due to companies like Blue Origin, SpaceX, Virgin Galactic etc.
The design is like a 3 story building , having astronauts climb down and up I would think is very dangerous , you need to make it more horizontal or at the very least an elevator for the precious cargo called humans
Quite funny the reasons they are inventing for having the super long ladder! "Gives time for the dust to fall off..." 😂