Top
Best
New

Posted by enraged_camel 20 hours ago

Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test(twitter.com)
https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/20601649284728548...

https://xcancel.com/nasaspaceflight/status/20601649284728548...

https://twitter.com/SawyerMerritt/status/2060174287563116696...

https://xcancel.com/SawyerMerritt/status/2060174287563116696...

https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/05/blue-origins-new-glenn...

463 points | 512 commentspage 6
lejalv 14 hours ago|
A kid's toy broke.

It makes me happy though -- to see a tax-evader adolescent Ersatz-toy fall into pieces, hopefully will delay the big ongoing tech-bro op to convert narcissism and tax dues into CO2.

RivieraKid 14 hours ago||
Blue Origin's tortoise slow-and-steady approach to development ia increasingly looking stupid.
Aboutplants 9 hours ago|
There does seem to be a certain amount of failure that is necessary to be able to get it right. One would expect that number to decrease over time with each new rocket company but I don’t believe it decreases as much as each company would like to believe.

Move fast and blow things up early rather than slowly. The minimum number of explosions must be met!

WalterBright 15 hours ago||
> A source indicated that one of the lightning towers may not be salvageable, and that the transporter-erector may also be damaged beyond repair.

My first thought is why wasn't the t-e moved away before launch?

ceejayoz 11 hours ago||
Blue’s TEL is part of the launch pad. You can see it retract in some of the explosion videos.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C87e9x0tLix/

NetMageSCW 4 hours ago||
I don’t see how it can do much transporting if it is part of launchpad.
ceejayoz 3 hours ago||
It transports the (horizontal) rocket to the pad, erects it, and provides umbilical connections for power and fuel to the rocket during launch; TEL.

You can see them disconnect in the video I linked.

SpaceX does similar; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporter_erector / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporter_erector_launcher

> SpaceX uses the central spine of the transporter erector as a strongback, restraining the rocket, providing stability until the tanks are pressurized with fuels, and contain the fluid hoses along with power and telemetry cables. Consequently, it remains at the launch pad through the launch and is typically tilted away 1.5° from the rocket just a few minutes prior to launch and 45° away from the rocket at the moment of liftoff.

The Shuttle's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_launcher_platform played a similar dual role.

regnerba 15 hours ago||
It was a static fire, not a launch. Also means that payload was not lost as out wasn’t yet integrated
gregoriol 14 hours ago||
Katy Perry was not lost, the world can go on
mattas 18 hours ago||
Would be really curious to learn more about how rocket scientists are using (or not using) LLMs.
JumpCrisscross 18 hours ago||
This is a fair question on its own. It comes across as pretty disrespectful within the context of the thread.
riffic 17 hours ago||
no one died, relax

OP, one must show respect to the scattered remnants of rocket debris.

JumpCrisscross 17 hours ago||
> no one died, relax

Sorry, hadn’t seen that confirmed yet.

0xffff2 17 hours ago|||
Honestly, why? I can't speak for BO, but at NASA, we're all learning what the technology can and can't do just like everyone else. You can bet your ass that no one is vibe-coding any part of the rocket without thorough review of every line of code and thorough testing at multiple levels though.
hparadiz 17 hours ago||
As long as the thorough reviews are done that is 100% reasonable.
0xffff2 16 hours ago||
I think it can be hard for anyone who hasn't done safety-critical software before to understand just how much testing goes into it. Even for non-human spaceflight, the stakes are so high, we have all of the testing you would expect as far as unit tests, system integration tests, end to end testing, but then we also have full human in the loop software sims, full hardware in the loop sims both at multiple levels of integration, and on and on. For every line of code I've written for a spacecraft, I'm 100% confident that if that line is responsible for a bug in flight, there are at least 10 other people who would share the blame with me.
khazhoux 18 hours ago||
The suggestion being that some software here was vibe coded??
decimalenough 18 hours ago||
That's how rocket science works right? Just vibe code the control systems over the weekend and YOLO the launches.
tristanj 14 hours ago||
I asked Claude Opus 4.8 to estimate the size of the explosion in kilotons of TNT, and it estimated the explosion at 0.18 kilotons of TNT (with an ~0.13–0.26 error range).

For comparison, the N-1 rocket explosion was around 0.5 kilotons of TNT.

NetMageSCW 4 hours ago|
From the video, about 1kT is estimated.
tristanj 45 minutes ago||
Impossible. The N1 rocket was far larger than New Glenn, and when it exploded, the explosion yield was below 1kT. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_artificial_non-nuclear...

If you want to see an actual 1kT explosion, look at the 2020 Beirut disaster. That explosion was approximately 1.1kT and the damage / shockwave is clearly far greater than the New Glenn explosion.

cmiles8 9 hours ago|
An unfortunate setback but rockets are hard.

The fact that the US has multiple extremely active commercial ventures plus a vibrant government programs with launches every few days just highlights har far ahead the US has become in this area of tech. Many people have never seen a rocket launch ever and yet for a big part of the US looking up in the sky and watching the amazing sight of a rocket going through staging is just a normal Tuesday evening.

That sort of expertise and base of scientists and engineers is not something other countries can just quickly replicate. For a while it looked like the US had put space on the back burner but now it’s back and bigger than ever before.

The occasional test going boom is just part of the fun in the end.

ponector 8 hours ago|
Achievements of SpaceX are enormous. But is US actually far ahead? Both China and EU have pretty much the same capabilities for space exploration.
cmiles8 7 hours ago|||
China is behind and making progress, but still hasn’t hit key milestone the US hit decades ago. The EU isn’t even close.
ponector 3 hours ago||
You can say the same about US: still hasn't hit key milestone US hit decades ago.
philipwhiuk 8 hours ago|||
> Both China and EU have pretty much the same capabilities for space exploration.

China maybe soon, but the EU is not close.

Ariane 6 is in no way comparable to either SLS or Starship or New Glenn. It does 10t to low-earth orbit, 4t to lunar-transfer orbit.

perilunar 4 hours ago||
For comparison, the Saturn 5 was 140 tonnes to LEO and 43.5 tonnes to TLI.