Hacker News Reader

Comment by the-pigeon | Hacker News Reader

SpaceX's BFR is planned but there's never been a BFR launch.

I don't think plans count.

Seems reasonable to compare it with other rockets that have never been launched, then. I think it is a much more impressive concept than anything anybody else is seriously talking about building in the near future, but it really is next on SpaceX's "list". BO's next planned rocket doesn't get a pass on its non-existence just because it's less impressive (maybe a bit more impressive than what SpaceX has already flown to orbit).

Personally a lifetime of learning to be cynical makes me think that BFR is too awesome to be true and that it will never happen. Maybe BO's careful approach and Bezos' deep pockets will let them succeed where SpaceX will ultimately fail.

On the other hand, SpaceX has not yet given us any concrete reason to expect them to fail. Quite the contrary, in fact.

New Glenn hasn't launched either. They're on similar schedules, BFR has suborbital testing scheduled for 2019.

The big difference being the SpaceX can use Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9 launches to continue to pay the bills while they develop BFR and as yet Blue Origin is just being funded by Jeff's massive wealth.

Which to be fair, Bezos will die long before he runs out of money, even pouring several billion a year into Blue Origin.

Bezos’s “play money” is a far larger pile than SpaceX will accumulate from operations. Hopefully both can succeed.

No doubt Bezos has a deep pool to draw from, and the folks at Blue Origin always know that their investors are aligned with their goals.

Operationally though, I think the jury is still out on how much money SpaceX can pull in there. At 22 launches per year that would be nominally $2.2 billion in revenue per year. Make three of those launches Falcon Heavy and that takes it closer to $2.5 billion. How much of that ends up on the bottom line is a good question, I'm guessing we won't know for sure until the S-1 drops.

Is that on the same time scale as Falcon Heavy doing it's first launch in 2013?

In fairness Falcon Heavy was delayed as SpaceX managed to double the capacity of Falcon 9 making a business case for the heavy version less clear.

Both New Glenn and BFR are effectively paper rockets at this point. Seems reasonable to compare them.

BFR is the main engineering focus of the company. They've already started fabricating and testing many of the parts (including the engines, fuel tanks, and fuselage). It is far past the point of existing only on paper.

That sounds disingenuous to me. This was a reply to a comment for an upcoming rocket that is currently just a blueprint. I don't understand why people actively choose to discount Musk's blueprints but other companies' blueprints don't get the same responses.

And BFR is well past the blueprint stage anyway. They're doing actual fabrication and testing of many parts of that rocket already. It's the main engineering focus of the company -- Falcon 9 is effectively done and Falcon Heavy is a side project (also mostly done).

I am aware. I'm following r/spacex closely. But with lack of official confirmation of a test article I was taking the worst possible stand against SpaceX to still prove my point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com