From Blue Origin: “Sea state conditions are still unfavorable for booster landing. We’re shifting our NG-1 launch date by one day to no earlier than January 13. Our three-hour window remains the same, opening Monday at 1 a.m. EST (0600 UTC).”
So that means that both New Glenn and Starship 7 could occur on the same day.
[Update late Sunday evening in CA]
Launch in 20 minutes.
Maybe. They keep moving the clock. But their window will expire in an hour or so, I think.
[Bumped]
First flights of a new rocket often have delays. People tend to be very cautious to increase the chances of success. Like SpaceX, Blue has to consider the weather conditions at the landing site. It wouldn’t surprise me if more delays happen before the flight attempt. I wish them well.
Any rabid rocket launch fans hoping to witness both NG-1 and IFT-7 have just been handed even more of a travel and lodging challenge than they were already facing. The gods of the launch pads can be cruel sometimes.
Weren’t they both originally slated for January 10, though, thus their original schedules already had the conflict that Monday’s schedule presents?
I seem to recall IFT-7 slipping away from the 10th before NG-1 slipped to the 11th, but I may be misremembering. Both launches have slipped more than once in the past few days – and one or both may yet slip some more.
Apparently I jinxed things by writing the above. According to nextspaceflight.com, IFT-7 has now slipped two more days to Jan. 15.
Is it selfish of me to hope for delay until Friday since I won’t be at work?
From Weatherguesser Central: Winds on Wednesday at Boca Chica are up to near 20mph out of the North at 4pm. Not optimal. Better conditions are on Thursday. Best on Saturday.
Ctrot,
Of course it is – and so what? I’ve got a doctor’s appointment on Tuesday that overlaps the currently scheduled launch time for Transporter 12. I hope that mission slips enough that I can watch it. And Friday for IFT-7 works fine for me too.
Yes they were both originally scheduled for the 10th.
I’m surprised that sea state delays don’t occur more often than they do.
SpaceX has lost at least one Falcon-9 overboard due to sea state and almost lost a second. There’s some speculation that IFT-7 is exiting via the Yucatan Strait, rather than the Florida Strait. That’d be better for the pretend Starlink launch.
New Glenn isn’t really competition for SpaceX. It’s in the same range as Falcon Heavy and upper end of 9, but all it can really compete for is NRO and “anything but SpaceX” customers. And, of course, New Glenn has to really work. And soon Starship will render it and everything else (except Long March 9) obsolete.
It has to work, and work REALLY WELL to overcome Falcon-9’s demonstrated success rate and cost per launch.
Plus the Anybody but SpaceX launches better be governments, because demanding to use a lesser product is financial mismanagement.
“Lesser product” is in the eye of the beholder to a considerable degree. But cheaper, now that is readily and objectively verifiable. Deliberately avoiding the lowest-cost alternative for no good reason has already gotten Amazon in trouble with its shareholders – and resulted in three grudging launch orders by Kuiper on F9. You are correct to point out that Amazon doesn’t have the only investor base that would not be amused if SpaceX gets given the air “because SpaceX” or “because Elon.”
Scrub.
Blue Origin confirmed that the scrub was caused by ice forming in a purge line on an auxiliary power unit that powers some of New Glenn’s hydraulic systems.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2025/01/launch-roundup-011325/
As expected. Blue Origin achieved a good orbit but didn’t get the first-stage landing they wanted. I would have been surprised by any other outcome. Pretty good looking first launch, all in all.
Didn’t exactly boogie off the pad in a hurry.10000 feet in one minute where F9 is nearing 30000 feet. This was with next to no payload. I reckon the BE4s were throttled significantly.
I was thinking the 0-60, 0-100, and quarter mile numbers were not all that impressive. Although it was fun being able to see that information, when NASA never did that in the past.
Quite disappointed by the lack of onboard camera footage. I figured after Columbia, everybody has learned the value of onboard imagery not just for propaganda but also for engineering analysis. Maybe they had more and didn’t share it. If they didn’t, then that’s a shame for them, because being able to visibly see what is happening helps in anomaly resolution, and they have some anomalies to work.
Shame about the first stage generally, but very successful for the first test flight. The real question is how long to do the next? Losing the booster after a successful insertion isn’t a huge loss, in comparison to the past. However, New Glenn hypes its reusability, and they’ll need to have it to be competitive to anyone that isn’t a government launch program. I hope they fly again soon.
We’ve seen a number of “wait, where’d that camera angle come from?” moments during StarShip testing, and the overall look and feel of the BONG flight reflected that of SpaceX flights (though with less polish), so it would surprise me if they didn’t have a whole cadre of cameras on New Glenn that either a) weren’t fed through to the broadcast or b) were too sensitive to share publicly.
Keep in mind, too, that SpaceX has StarLink to aid in data and video transmission during flight. That’s a luxury that Blue may not have and/or want to admit to taking advantage of.
Keep in mind, too, that SpaceX has StarLink to aid in data and video transmission during flight.
This is key. During the video reference was made a few times to TDRS downlink. So by quick comparison (from Grok):
Q: Compare downlink bandwidth between Nasa’s TDRS and Starlink satellites.
NASA’s TDRS System:
Generational Differences: TDRS satellites have evolved over generations, each providing different capabilities:
First Generation: These satellites could provide downlink rates of up to 300 Mbps in the Ku-band for single access service.
Second Generation: Improved to offer up to 800 Mbps in the Ku-band and introduced Ka-band capabilities, although specific downlink rates are not detailed in the available information.
Third Generation: Capable of even higher data rates, with the ground reception rates reaching up to 800 Mbit/s in the Ku- and Ka-bands.
Purpose: TDRS satellites are primarily used for communications with NASA’s spacecraft, including the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station, and other missions, focusing on high reliability and data transfer efficiency rather than consumer broadband.
Starlink Satellites:
Bandwidth Allocation: Starlink satellites operate with a much larger number of units providing global coverage, with each satellite contributing to a network that supports high-speed internet for consumers.
Ku-Band: Starlink utilizes approximately 2000 MHz of bandwidth in the Ku-band for user terminals, suggesting a high capacity for data transfer.
User Experience: Real-world measurements have shown Starlink providing download speeds ranging from 100 to 250 Mbit/s, with a median of 178 Mbit/s, although this can vary based on user density and satellite availability.
Q: What are the typical data transfer rates via Starlink during SpaceX Starship missions?
During SpaceX Starship missions, Starlink satellites facilitate data transfer, particularly for telemetry and high-definition video streaming. Here’s what the typical data transfer rates look like based on available information:
Real-Time HD Video and Telemetry: Starship missions, when utilizing Starlink’s capabilities, can stream more than 120 Mbps of real-time high-definition video and telemetry in every phase of flight. This capability provides invaluable engineering data for rapid iteration across all systems.
These rates are significant for ensuring that engineering teams receive comprehensive data in real-time, allowing for immediate analysis and adjustments to the spacecraft’s operations during the mission. This speed is notably high, especially for the context of streaming from space, highlighting Starlink’s capability to support complex space missions with robust data transmission needs.
I think it’s a lot more than 120 Mbps these days.
Don’t know which generation of TDRS and how much bandwidth had been allocated to New Glenn. But it makes a difference.
I reckon the BE4s were throttled significantly.
Makes sense. l noticed that too. We’ll have to see if there’s a data dump on this. Unfortunately Blue in the past has been very close to the vest on this kind of information.
Private-sector spaceflight no longer has a single point of failure.