Connect with us

News

SpaceX vs. Blue Origin: The bickering titans of new space

Close up of SpaceX Falcon 9 ahead of SES-11 mission from Cape Canaveral. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)

Published

on

In the past three years, SpaceX has made incredible progress in their program of reusability. In the practice’s first year, the young space company led by serial tech entrepreneur Elon Musk has performed three successful commercial reuses of Falcon 9 boosters in approximately eight months, and has at least two more reused flights scheduled before 2017 is out. Blue Origin, headed and funded by Jeff Bezos of Amazon fame, is perhaps most famous for its supreme confidence, best illustrated by Bezos offhandedly welcoming SpaceX “to the club” after the company first recovered the booster stage of its Falcon 9 rocket in 2015.

Blue Origin began in the early 2000s as a pet project of Bezos, a long-time fan of spaceflight and proponent of developing economies in space. After more than a decade of persistent development and increasingly complex testbeds, Blue Origin began a multi-year program of test flights with its small New Shepard launch vehicle. Designed to eventually launch tourists to the veritable edge of Earth’s atmosphere in a capsule atop it, New Shepard began its test flights in 2015 and after one partial failure, has completed five successful flights in a row. The space tourism company has subtly and not-so-subtly belittled SpaceX’s accomplishments over the last several years, and has engendered a fair bit of hostility towards it as a result.

Admittedly, CEO Elon Musk nurtured high expectations for the consequences of reuse, and has frequently discussed SpaceX’s ambition to reduce the cost of access to orbit by a factor of 10 to 100. However, after several reuses, it is clear that costs have decreased no more than 10-20%. What gives?

Well, Musk’s many comments on magnitudes of cost reduction were clearly premised upon rapid and complete reuse of both stages of Falcon 9, best evidenced by a concept video the company released in 2011.

Advertisement

The reality was considerably harder and Musk clearly underestimated the difficulty of second stage reuse, something he himself has admitted. COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed earlier this summer and discussed SpaceX’s updated approach to complete reusability, and acknowledged that second stage reuse was no longer a real priority, although the company will likely attempt second stage recovery as a validation of future technologies. Instead of pursuing the development of a completely reusable Falcon 9, SpaceX is instead pushing ahead with the development of a much larger rocket, BFR. BFR being designed to enable the sustainable colonization of space by realizing Musk’s original ambition of magnitudes-cheaper orbital launch capabilities.

Competition on the horizon?

Meanwhile, SpaceX’s only near-term competitor interested in serious reuse has made gradual progress over the last several years, accelerating its pace of development more recently. Blue Origin’s second New Shepard vehicle, designed to serve the suborbital space tourism industry, conducted an impressive five successful launches and landings over the course of 2016 before being summarily retired. NS2’s antecedent suffered a failure while attempting its first landing and was destroyed in 2015, but Blue learned quickly from the issues of Shepard 1 and has already shipped New Shepard 3 to its suborbital launch facilities near Van Horn, Texas. While NS3 is aiming for an inaugural flight later this year, NS4 is under construction in Kent, Washington and could support Blue’s first crewed suborbital launches in 2018.

More significant waves were made with an announcement in 2016 that Blue was pursuing development of a partially reusable orbital-class launch vehicle, the massive New Glenn. On paper, New Glenn is quite a bit larger than even SpaceX’s Falcon 9, and appears to likely be more capable than the company’s “world’s most powerful rocket” while completely recovering its boost stage. In a completed, manufactured, and demonstrably reliable form, New Glenn would be an extraordinarily impressive and capable launch vehicle that could undoubtedly catapult Blue Origin into position of true competition with SpaceX’s reusability efforts.

 

However, while Blue Origin executives brag about “operational reusability” and tastelessly lampoon efforts that “decided to slap some legs on [to] see if [they] could land it”, the unmentioned company implicated in those barbs has begun to routintely and commercially reuse orbital-class boosters five times the size of Blue’s suborbital testbed, New Shepard.

Advertisement

Apples to oranges

The only point at which Blue Origin poses a risk to SpaceX’s business can be found in a comparison of funding sources. SpaceX first successes (and failures) were funded out of Elon Musk’s own pocket, but nearly all of the funding that followed was won through competitive government contracts and rounds of private investment. To put it more simply, SpaceX is a business that must balance costs and returns, while Blue Origin is funded exclusively out of billionaire CEO Jeff Bezos’ pocket.

As a result of being completely privately funded, Bezos’ deep pockets could render Blue more flexible than SpaceX when pricing launches. If Blue chooses to aggressively price New Glenn by accounting for booster reusability, it could pose a threat to SpaceX’s own business strategy. If SpaceX is unable to recoup its investment in reusability before New Glenn is regularly conducting multiple commercial missions per year, likely no earlier than 2021 or 2022, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 pricing could be rendered distinctly noncompetitive.

However, this concern seems almost entirely misplaced. SpaceX has half a decade of experience mass-producing orbital-class (reusable) rockets, (reusable) fairings, and propulsion systems, whereas Blue Origin at best has minimal experience manufacturing a handful of suborbital vehicles over a period of a few years. Blue has a respectable amount of experience with their BE-3 hydrolox propulsion system, and that will likely transfer over to the BE-3U vacuum variant to be used for New Glenn’s third stage. The large methalox rocket engine (BE-4) that will power New Glenn’s first stage also conducted its first-ever hot-fire just weeks ago, a major milestone in propulsion development but also a reminder that BE-4 has an exhaustive regime of engineering verification and flight qualification testing ahead of it.

Advertisement

Perhaps more importantly, the company’s relative success with New Shepard’s launch, recovery, and reuse has not and cannot move beyond small suborbital hops, and thus cannot provide the experience at the level of orbital rocketry. New Shepard is admittedly capable of reaching an altitude of 100km, but the suborbital vehicle’s flight regime does not require it to travel beyond Mach 4 (~1300 m/s). The first stage of Falcon 9, however, is approximately four times as tall and three times the mass of New Shepard, and boosters attempting recovery during geostationary missions routinely reach almost twice the velocity of New Shepard, entering the thicker atmosphere at more than 2300 m/s (1500-1800 m/s for LEO missions). Falcon 9’s larger mass and velocity translates into intense reentry heating and aerodynamic forces, best demonstrated by the glowing aluminum grid fins that can often be seen in SpaceX’s live coverage of booster recovery. Blue Origin’s New Glenn concept is extremely impressive on paper, but the company will have to pull off an extraordinary leap of technological maturation to move directly from suborbital single-stage hops to multi-stage orbital rocketry. Blue’s accomplishments with New Shepard are nothing to scoff at, but they are a far cry from routine orbital launch services.

SpaceX’s future fast approaches

Translating back to the new establishment, Falcon 9 will likely remain SpaceX’s workhorse rocket for some five or more years, at least until BFR can prove itself to be a reliable and affordable replacement. This change in focus, combined with the downsides of second stage recovery and reuse on a Falcon 9-sized vehicle, means that SpaceX will ‘only’ end up operationally reusing first stages and fairings from the vehicle. The second stage accounts for approximately 20-30% of Falcon 9’s total cost, suggesting that rapid and complete reuse of the fairing and first stage could more than halve its ~$62 million price. Yet this too ignores another mundane fact of corporate life SpaceX must face. Its executives, Musk included, have lately expressed a desire to at least partially recoup the ~$1 billion that was invested to develop reuse. Assuming a partial 10% reduction in cost to reuse customers and profit margins of 50% with rapid and total reuse of the first stage and fairing, 20 to 30 commercial reuses would recoup most or all of SpaceX’s reusability investment.

Musk recently revealed that SpaceX is aiming to complete 30 launches in 2018, and that figure will likely continue to grow in 2019, assuming no major anomalies occur. Manufacturing will rapidly become the main choke point for increased launch cadence, suggesting that drastically higher cadences will largely depend upon first stage reuse with minimal refurbishment, which just so happens to be the goal of the Falcon 9’s upcoming Block 5 iteration. Even if the modifications only manage a handful of launches without refurbishment, rather than the ten flights being pursued, each additional flight without maintenance will effectively multiply SpaceX’s manufacturing capabilities. More bluntly: ten Falcon 9s  capable of five reflights could do the same job of 50 brand new rockets with 1/5th of the manufacturing backend.

 

Assuming that upcoming reuses proceed without significant failures and Falcon 9 Block 5 subsumes all manufacturing sometime in 2018 or 2019, it is entirely possible that SpaceX will undergo an extraordinarily rapid phase change from expendability to reusability. Mirroring 2017, we can imagine that SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory will continue to churn out at least 10 to 20 Block 5 Falcon 9s over the course of 2018. Assuming 5 to 10 maintenance-free reuses and a lifespan of as many as 100 flights with intermittent refurb, a single year of manufacturing could provide SpaceX with enough first stages to launch anywhere from 50 to 2000 missions. The reality will inevitably find itself somewhere between those extremely pessimistic and optimistic bookends, and they of course do not account for fairings, second stages, or expendable flights.

Advertisement

If we assume that the proportional cost of Falcon 9’s many components very roughly approximates the amount of manufacturing backend needed to produce them, downsizing Falcon 9 booster production by a factor of two or more could free a huge fraction of SpaceX’s workforce and floor space to be repurposed for fairing and second stage production, as well as the company’s Mars efforts. Such a phase change would also free up a considerable fraction of the capital SpaceX continually invests in its manufacturing infrastructure and workforce, capital that could then be used to ready SpaceX’s facilities for production and testing of its Mars-focused BFR and BFS.

“Gradatim ferociter”

It cannot be overstated that the speculation in this article is speculation. Nevertheless, it is speculation built on real information provided over the years by SpaceX’s own executives. Rough estimates like this offer a glimpse into a new launch industry paradigm that could be only a year or two away and could allow SpaceX to begin aggressively pursuing its goal of enabling a sustainable human presence on Mars and throughout the Solar System.

Blue Origin’s future endeavors shine on paper and their goal of enabling millions to work and live space are admirable, but the years between the present and a future of routine orbital missions for the company may not be kind. The engineering hurdles that litter the path to orbital rocketry are unforgiving and can only be exacerbated by blind overconfidence, a lesson that is often only learned the hard way. Blue Origin’s proud motto “Gradatim ferociter” roughly translates to “Step by step, ferociously.” One can only hope that some level of humility and sobriety might temper that ferocity before customers entrust New Glenn with their infrastructural foundations and passengers entrust New Shepard with their lives.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

News

Tesla adjusts one key detail of Robotaxi operations in Austin

Published

on

Tesla is adjusting one key detail of Robotaxi operations in Austin: service hours.

Tesla’s Robotaxi platform in Austin has been active since late June and has been running smoothly since then. It has its limits, as Tesla has set hours that Robotaxis can operate, as well as a distinct Service Area, also known as a geofence, which has expanded three times already.

While the geofence is currently approximately 170 square miles in size, Tesla has recently enabled freeway drives, which also necessitated an adjustment to the company’s strategy with its “Safety Monitors.”

Tesla explains why Robotaxis now have safety monitors in the driver’s seat

Traditionally, they sit in the passenger’s seat. During highway driving, they move to the driver’s seat.

Advertisement

These are just a few adjustments that have been made over the past two and a half months. Now, Tesla is adjusting the service hours of Robotaxi operation in Austin, but only slightly.

Tesla will now operate its Robotaxi ride-hailing service from 6 a.m. to 2 a.m., extending the hours by two hours. It previously shut down at midnight.

Advertisement

Tesla has implemented a variety of safeguards to ensure riders and drivers are safe during Robotaxi rides, and they have made it a point to adjust things when they feel confident that it will not cause any issues.

Many people have been critical of Robotaxi, especially because a person sits in the front of the car.

However, an accident or some type of mistake could do more damage to the autonomous travel sector than anything else. This would not just impact Tesla, but any company operating an autonomous ride-hailing service in the country.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y ownership two weeks in: what I love and what I don’t

With any new car, I don’t really find things I dislike within the first few months; the novelty of a shiny new vehicle usually wears off eventually.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

I am officially two weeks into Tesla ownership, having picked up my Model Y Long Range All-Wheel-Drive on Saturday, August 30. I have many things I really love, and I’ll do my best to come up with a few things I don’t, although I find that to be very difficult currently.

With any new car, I don’t really find things I dislike within the first few months; the novelty of a shiny new vehicle usually wears off eventually. In the past, I’ve had a car I only kept for nine months, but I loved it for the first two months. I am sure down the road, some things about the Tesla will bother me, but right now, I don’t have too much to complain about.

As for the things I love, I’ll try to keep it to just five, and as I continue to write about my ownership experience in the coming months, I’ll see if these things change.

A Quick Rundown

In the two weeks I have had my new Model Y, I have driven 783 miles. I have driven it manually, used Full Self-Driving, navigated tight city streets in Baltimore, and driven spiritedly on the winding back roads of Pennsylvania.

I traded my ICE vehicle for a Tesla Model Y: here’s how it went

Advertisement

I have had the opportunity to put it to the test in a variety of ways, and I feel like I have a great idea of this car and how it handles and drives just two weeks in.

What I Love About My Tesla Model Y

I am only going to pick a handful of things, but do not take this list as a complete one. I truly have so many things I love about this car, but I want to mention the ones that are not necessarily “novelties.” I love the A/C seats, but it’s not something I feel deserves a mention here, because it would not likely sway someone to consider the car.

Advertisement

Instead, I want to highlight what I feel are things that truly set the Model Y apart from cars I’ve had in the past.

Tesla Full Self-Driving

Available on all Teslas, Full Self-Driving is something I use every day. It is not only a convenience thing, but it is also truly a fun feature to track improvements, and it’s been fun to show a lot of my friends who are not familiar with its capabilities just how safe and impressive it is.

My Fiancè and I have watched Full Self-Driving make slight changes in performance in the two weeks we’ve been using it. I tracked one instance on a Pennsylvania back road when the car stopped at an “Except Right Turn” Stop Sign. Initially, the car stopped, holding up traffic behind it. Just days later, FSD proceeded through that same Stop Sign cautiously, but without coming to a complete stop, which is the proper way to navigate through it.

This quick adjustment was very impressive, and it even caught the attention of my better half. I will say it has been very fun to watch her fall in love with this car after being very reluctant to watch me get rid of our Bronco Sport.

The Handling

Tesla refined the suspension with the new Model Y, and you can surely feel it. Coming from a larger SUV, I did miss being able to really push the limits of my car on a beautiful, sunny, and warm day, and the winding roads of Pennsylvania are calling me for a drive.

The way this car hugs turns and genuinely puts a smile on my face when I’m pushing it. Dare I say I like driving it more than I like it driving me?

Advertisement

Interior Storage

One of my biggest complaints about my Bronco Sport was that, despite being an SUV, it felt smaller than it was supposed to be. I had trouble fitting golf bags and luggage in the back without having other storage options. It led me to install a roof rack and get a cargo container. I would have to put longer clubs in the back seat so the bags could lie without clubs getting bent.

I don’t seem to have a significant problem with this in the Model Y. Plus, the frunk and the additional cargo under the floor of the trunk are great for bags and other things. It offers 10 cubic feet more of space with the seats down than the Bronco Sport does.

The Entertainment

Not only is the sound system in this car absolutely unbelievable, but I also really enjoy the Tesla Theater, which is really something that has revolutionized how we spend our time in the car.

Charging at the Superchargers has become a new way for us to spend time together. Even if it’s just 30 minutes, my Fiancé’s busy work schedule at the hospital means we don’t get to spend as much time together as we would like. The charging lets us go grab a snack, watch a movie or show in the car, and just be with each other.

It’s honestly my favorite thing about the car so far, that we’ve both truly enjoyed what it has done for us. It put a smile on my face to hear her say, “It’s just so much fun to be in this car” last night when we met friends for dinner.

Advertisement

What I Don’t Love

I’m just going to get nitpicky here, because I don’t have much to complain about.

The Paint

I love the Diamond Black, and it gets so many compliments. However, it sure does get dirty fast. I feel like I’m going to have to invest in a car wash membership or set aside time each week to clean it. This is not a Tesla-specific problem, of course.

Climate Control

Another “first-world problem,” but sometimes I do have trouble getting the A/C to go right where I need it. I feel like, to feel the air, I have to put the fan speed to 7 or higher.

Swing Mode has been a real savior in this sense, but my Fiancè sometimes complains that my cold air will hit her when she’s already freezing. I think this is just something I need to get used to, as the vents are significantly different than any other car. It’s really not that bad, but it is worth mentioning that we’ve both said we are still adjusting to it early on.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Cybertruck

Tesla brings closure to head-scratching Cybertruck trim

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has ended the production and sale of a Cybertruck trim level that had many people scratching their heads. The move comes after slow sales on the trim, as many Cybertruck buyers opted for other configurations that seemed to be a better value for the money.

On Friday, Tesla officially brought closure to the Long Range Rear-Wheel-Drive configuration of the Cybertruck, a build that was introduced earlier this year at a lower price point than its All-Wheel-Drive counterparts, but missed many of the key features that made the Cybertruck, the Cybertruck.

Tesla Cybertruck RWD production in full swing at Giga Texas

Rolling the variant out at a price of $69,990, only $10,000 less than that of the All-Wheel-Drive configuration. However, it was also void of many other things:

  • Single Motor
  • Textile Seats instead of Leather
  • 7-Speaker Audio System instead of 15-Speakers
  • No Rear Touchscreen
  • No Powered Tonneau Cover for Truck Bed
  • No 120v/240v outlets

For $79,990, just $10,000 more, owners could receive all of these premium features, plus a more capable All-Wheel-Drive powertrain, which truly made this Rear-Wheel-Drive build of the Cybertruck a sitting duck for criticism.

It was simply not enough meat for the price, and demand was evidently low. From those I spoke to, orders were few and far between; people simply found more value in the All-Wheel-Drive configuration based solely on the additional motor. Adding all the premium interior and functionality features made it a no-brainer.

Advertisement

In a way, it seems Tesla was overly optimistic about the Rear-Wheel-Drive configuration of the Cybertruck, but even after it was launched, plenty of loyal fans were confused by it:

Advertisement

The Cybertruck is a great vehicle, and it is among the best vehicles in the company’s lineup. However, it really missed a price point for the Rear-Wheel-Drive configuration that was effective enough to drive people toward it. Many said they would have considered it if Tesla could have brought the price down into the high $40,000 or low $50,000 range.

I took a Tesla Cybertruck weekend Demo Drive – Here’s what I learned

It seems it just did not have the appeal to keep up. Now, Tesla has the All-Wheel-Drive and Cyberbeast for $72,490 and $114,990, respectively.

Continue Reading

Trending