That they had to deceptively edit their relative sizes suggests BO feels a bit. . .inadequate compared to SpaceX.According to Blue Origin's lawsuit, the ladder is just a backup to a powered ascender anyway.
They probably have a point in that a passive backup is a good thing even though there's a slim chance you may fall and hit your head in 1/6th Earth gravity after a trip by rocket to the moon.
A lot. The whole thing is that he's trying to win a PR war against SpaceX after losing the battle for the Moon shot... And he's losing the PR battle too.
Blue Origin's actions in court—in addition to its ham-handed release of infographics that seek to denigrate SpaceX but have been widely mocked within the space community—are having a negative effect on both the company's relationships with the US government and its own employees.
"They will never get a real government contract after this," one NASA source predicted, following the lawsuit filing. The sentiment may be similar at the US Space Force, which is frustrated by delays in the delivery of BE-4 rocket engines for United Launch Alliance's Vulcan rocket.
These tactics have also alienated some of Blue Origin's work force. Several employees have told Ars that they are appalled by their corporate leadership's decision to attack both NASA and SpaceX in the wake of the lunar lander contract decision.
The cases are NOT identical though, the devil is in the details.There is a logic behind this madness,
Blue Origin fight for certain topics on HLS contract.
NASA wants expendable, later reuse landers last fit Starship, first the BO lander.
Little story in beginn of COTS program
in 2004 Kistler Aerospace got $227 million from NASA
A unknown company called Space Exploration Technologies Corp. sue NASA at Government Accountability Office
and they issued a ruling in support of...
A very sharp and angry analyse on case
One thing I didn’t get to during this segment was that I’ve asked each of the Blue Origin “National Team” partners if they’re still onboard:
Northrop Grumman - Yes
Lockheed Martin - No response
Draper - Declined to comment
One key difference between a bid protest at the COFC and a bid protest at the GAO is the requirement for the agency to produce the entire administrative record (i.e., all documents related to the procurement process) at the outset of the bid protest. The protestor then bears the burden of reviewing the record for completeness and requesting any supplementation of the record. Quite often limited discovery will be granted to a protestor to figure out whether the administrative record is truly complete. This is a significant advantage of filing a bid protest at the COFC versus the GAO because at the GAO the agency is only required to produce procurement documents that are relevant to the protester’s stated protest grounds. In recent years, agencies have interpreted this obligation very narrowly and produce only the minimum number of documents they believe are necessary. The GAO typically defers to the agency’s scope of “relevance” which can significantly affect the outcome of the protest. In contrast, at the COFC, the protester gets the entire administrative record which can provide the protester with the opportunity to mine the record for supplemental protest grounds that were not apparent when the initial protest was filed. The ability to identify supplemental protest grounds in a GAO protest is much more limited, especially if the protester does not properly plead its case at the onset.
That his real name? Both first and last palindromes?Guess that tells you what he thinks of BO's chances of getting to the moon.
View: https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1429866261148667908#NewShepard NS-17 is targeting liftoff on Aug 25. This operational payload mission will fly 20 payloads, including an @upliftaerospace installation by artist @AmoakoBoafo and reflight of @NASA lunar landing technology on the booster. More on the manifest: bit.ly/3k86ko6
View: https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1429929083832438795New launch target for #NewShepard Mission NS-17 is Thursday, August 26 at 8:35 AM CDT / 13:35 UTC.
A Blue Origin spokesperson says the one-day delay is to “verify a fix on a payload integration issue and taking an extra look before we fly.”
Yup.This Picture is from Site
Do you notice certain similarity with another Spaceflight Company operate in Texas ?
Turns out Besos retired in order to pursue a full-time job filing lawsuits against SpaceX …