Blue Origin scheduled to launch human flight next week from West Texas
EL PASO, Texas (KTSM) — Space technology company Blue Origin announced that its 10th human flight is scheduled to lift off on Tuesday, Feb. 25.
The flight, called NS-30, will have a launch window that opens at 8:30 a.m. Mountain Standard Time on Tuesday. The flight is scheduled to lift off from Launch Site One near Van Horn in West Texas.
This mission is the 10th human flight for the New Shepard program and the 30th in its history. To date, the program has flown 47 humans above the Kármán line, which is often recognized as the boundary of space.
The webcast on BlueOrigin.com will start at T-35 minutes.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Threat to Kill SpaceX Presents One Hidden Safety Concern
Because of a political fallout, tech mogul and SpaceX owner Elon Musk has now attracted the verbal ire of President Trump. While sparring over social media, the President suggested that he could and would cancel Musk's government contracts relative to SpaceX. Briefly, this led Musk to claim that SpaceX would "decommission" the crucial Dragon spacecraft, but later reversed his position, saying, "Ok, we won't decommission Dragon." This is the very same type of vessel which recently led to the rescue of astronauts Butch Wilmore and Sunni Williams who were stranded on the International Space Station for much longer than originally planned. And it's the fate of the International Space Station that is actually the number one reason why an utterly defunded SpaceX might be a very dangerous thing. In 2024, NASA awarded SpaceX a contract valued at $843 million. The purpose? To deorbit the International Space Station by the end of the decade. Basically, the ISS is not designed to stay in orbit forever, and before it is replaced by something more permanent, it will have to be safely moved to a low Earth orbit. This means that SpaceX is currently tasked by the U.S. government to build the United States Deorbit Vehicle (USDV). "Selecting a U.S. Deorbit Vehicle for the International Space Station will help NASA and its international partners ensure a safe and responsible transition in low Earth orbit at the end of station operations," Ken Bowersox said in a NASA statement last a hypothetical world in which Trump decides to rescind all government contracts for SpaceX, that would presumably include killing the all-important job of SpaceX building the USDV. And if SpaceX doesn't build the USDV, who will help mitigate the very real fallout of a large space station? Again, hypothetically, there are other organizations that have spacecraft, but as the stranding of Wilmore and Williams recently demonstrated, SpaceX has proven to be the most reliable way for the U.S. to get people in and out of space. In fact, the whole reason that Wilmore and Williams were stranded was because the Boeing Starliner — a rival aerospace venture to SpaceX — was unable to complete a return trip because of safety concerns. Concurrent with all of this, Blue Origin's New Glenn craft isn't even close to being ready. Notably, Blue Origin's other craft, the New Shepard, isn't designed to go far enough into space to be useful to the ISS. One might wonder if SpaceX really needs the money. And it's possible the company doesn't. As Musk pointed out on June 3, the entirety of what NASA pays to SpaceX ($1.1 billion) is dwarfed by SpaceX's current revenue ($15.5 billion). Basically, SpaceX's Starlink services are making plenty of money for the company, so if Trump rescinded even just that contract valued at roughly $800 million, it wouldn't come close to putting SpaceX out of business. Legally, Trump might be able to try and sever ties between SpaceX and the U.S. government, specifically, NASA. But practically speaking, this seems very unlikely long-term. Right now, SpaceX is the best bet for creating a safe deorbit for the ISS. And, if any more astronauts get stranded — from any country — it seems like Musk's Dragons are still the most reliable space Threat to Kill SpaceX Presents One Hidden Safety Concern first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 6, 2025
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
15 years of launches from Florida: Rise of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket
Much has changed in 15 years, however one thing remains the same: SpaceX still routinely launches Falcon 9 rockets from Cape Canaveral. As new rockets and space companies arrive on the scene, this workhorse of a rocket, the Falcon 9, remains the most common rocket launched from Florida launch pads. It debuted 15 years ago this week, and has changed not only the launch cadence on the Space Coast but the entire industry. "The sustained cadence of successful Falcon 9 launches is remarkable, and combined with the reliable recovery of first stages has changed the launch industry in a qualitative as well as quantitative way," Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, wrote in an email to FLORIDA TODAY. McDowell keeps track of all satellites orbiting the Earth, including the numerous Starlink satellites launched by the Falcon 9. With more than 100 launches projected for this year from Florida, most of those will be a Falcon 9. To date, Blue Origin's New Glenn and ULA's Atlas V have only launched once each this calendar year — making only two of the current 47 launches not having been SpaceX rockets. The rapidly flying Falcon 9 rocket has been transformative not only in forcing competitors to chase its reusability, but it also has opened up space in a way previously unimaginable. For example, space was financially out of reach for businesses who wanted to launch small satellites. The reusability of Falcon 9 drastically brought down costs, with private space companies able to launch their payload as part of SpaceX's Ride Share Program for as low as $325,000. To date, private companies have worked to create and successfully fly a multistage rocket with a reusable first stage booster. This was most recently seen with Blue Origin's New Glenn, which sent payload to orbit, but did not stick the landing on the landing platform. As New Glenn has not flown since, Falcon 9 continues to lead. The Falcon 9 also took on key contracts with NASA, delivering not only science missions, but astronauts to orbit. Falcon 9 has even sent NASA science missions to the moon and beyond. In addition to launches for NASA, Falcon 9 has been tapped to fly national security and military payloads to orbit. While ULA's Atlas V and Vulcan rockets have been tapped for national security missions, Falcon 9 leads in this category as well. But, perhaps, what it's best known for is simply how often it launches. Falcon 9 rockets fly almost twice a week from the Space Coast, and the rocket also launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. It's most often carrying SpaceX's Starlink satellites into orbit. Starlink beams internet across the globe to paying customers. As Falcon 9 launches into its 15th year, here's a look back on how Falcon 9 came to be and some of its key milestones. Before there was Falcon 9, there was Falcon 1. SpaceX was founded in 2002 by Elon Musk, who sought to create a rocket that would not only lower launch costs, but make humanity a spacefaring species. The company took the first steps with its Falcon rocket, which was named for the Stars Wars Millennium Falcon. The single engine Falcon 1 rocket first launched on March 24, 2006, from Kwajalein Atoll, which is in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The launch was a failure — as were the following two. Falcon 1 reached orbit on its fourth flight in September of 2008. This made SpaceX the first privately funded company to reach orbit with a liquid-fueled rocket. The fifth and last flight of the Falcon 1 was in July 2009 − as SpaceX's new nine-engine Falcon rocket was ready for debut from Cape Canaveral. The space shuttle's days were numbered as NASA waited for SpaceX to successfully launch its Falcon 9 rocket, which would carry SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft to orbit. NASA was counting on SpaceX and Dragon to carry its astronauts to the International Space Station. The Falcon 9 first launched on June 4, 2010, from Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex 40. Its payload: a test Dragon spacecraft. The launch was a success as the test Dragon spacecraft was placed into orbit. But the success went beyond Dragon. Florida was about to see the space industry change forever thanks to the Falcon 9. The space shuttle made its final flight in July 2011. NASA had signed a Commercial Crew contract with SpaceX for Falcon 9 and Dragon and with Boeing for Starliner. Neither was ready. That would take years. But in 2012, SpaceX began resupply missions to bring cargo to the ISS flying the cargo on a Dragon and launching atop a Falcon 9. Meanwhile, NASA, waiting for an American ride to space, partnered with Roscosmos to rotate U.S. astronauts back and forth to the space station. On December 21, 2015, Florida watched as for the first time in history a rocket's first stage returned to land in one piece. Up until this point, the concept was science fiction. Typically, a rocket's first-stage was permitted to break apart in the atmosphere or be discarded in the ocean. Up until this point, SpaceX either discarded or lost the booster. But returning the booster was necessary to reuse the rocket and bring costs down. That night in 2015, Florida saw a landing burn for the first time as the Falcon 9's booster descended for a landing at the Cape Canaveral Landing Zone, announcing its arrival with a sonic boom heard throughout the area. Next came landing on drone ships in the ocean. Falcon 9 boosters landing on drone ships after launch, followed by the return of the drone ship and booster to Port Canaveral, are commonplace these days. Looking back, it took SpaceX years to land a booster successfully on a drone ship. The first occurrence was on April 8, 2016 – following a resupply mission to the ISS from Space Launch Complex 40. Earlier attempts ended in mishaps on the Of Course I Still Love You drone ship, including a booster landing on its side and breaking apart in January 2015. Of Course I Still Love You has since moved to the West Coast to support the growing number of launches from Vandenburg. The drone ships supporting Florida are Just Read the Instructions and A Shortfall of Gravitas. The triple Falcon 9 heavy lift rocket, known as a Falcon Heavy, first took off on February 6, 2018, from Kennedy Space Center Pad 39A. The mission carried a test payload, which was a red Tesla Roadster with a SpaceX mannequin inside. The car was released into space. Following the launch, the two side boosters landed on Landing Zones 1 and 2 in Cape Canaveral, creating double sonic booms throughout the Space Coast. SpaceX tried, but failed to recover the core Falcon 9 booster of the triple rocket. That aim has proved difficult, and SpaceX currently does not even attempt it anymore. This is most likely due to an effort to save fuel and get higher masses to orbit. The heavy lift rocket has since flown multiple missions. The most recent launch was Europa Clipper back in October 2024. The next Falcon Heavy launch date has yet to be revealed. SpaceX's satellite internet constellation, known as Starlink, first launched a batch of satellites from Florida in May 2019. Now launching from both coasts, the constellation boasts more than 6000 satellites in orbit. Starlink launches have become almost routine in Florida, with an average of two Starlink launches per week from Cape Canaveral. The Starlink satellites provide internet in some of the most remote places on Earth, including underserved areas and even out at sea. It is even utilized on SpaceX's private missions, allowing astronauts to stay connected while orbiting Earth. While the world was deep in a pandemic, SpaceX became the first private company to carry NASA astronauts to orbit and back − and the first private company ever to carry humans to orbit. The year was 2020. The SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft successfully flew an uncrewed mission to the ISS in 2019. That mission was followed up with the Demo 2 mission on May 30, 2020, which saw the Falcon 9 rocket launch a Dragon spacecraft with NASA astronauts Bob Behnken and Douglas Hurley to the ISS. The mission not only certified Dragon to carry NASA astronauts, but was the first to launch humans to orbit from America since the retirement of the space shuttle in 2011. To date, that SpaceX/NASA Commercial Crew contract has reached a worth of $4,927,306,350 as SpaceX will continue NASA astronaut transportation into the 2030s. Falcon 9 has since launched Dragon on an additional 10 crewed NASA missions, three crews for Axiom Space, and three private spaceflights. These private spaceflights were Inspiration4, Polaris Dawn, and Fram2. SpaceX says Falcon 9 will eventually be retired in favor of its massive Starship, which currently is being launched on test flights from Texas. With the ability to return the booster and the ship directly to the launch tower, SpaceX seeks to lower the cost of launches even more and launch payloads more frequently. Florida already has a Starship launch tower on Kennedy Space Center Pad 39A, and a future one is planned for Cape Canaveral Launch Complex 37. Unlike the Falcon 9, Starship's booster will return to the launch tower − something which has been demonstrated multiple times despite the Starship's upper stage being lost. This will not only speed up turn around time, but bring the cost of launches down. "If it were to land with landing legs on a landing pad, we'd then have to pick it up, stow the legs, and then put it back in the launch pad," said SpaceX CEO Elon Musk during a recent Starship update. "It's quite difficult to transport such a large thing." Until Starship successfully flies from Texas and then Florida, the Falcon 9 will continue to be SpaceX's workhorse rocket. And just recently, SpaceX proposed an increase to 120 launches per year from Cape Canaveral Launch Complex 40, as well as a new booster landing zone. It is evident Falcon 9 launches will not be slowing down in the near future. Brooke Edwards is a Space Reporter for Florida Today. Contact her at bedwards@ or on X: @brookeofstars. This article originally appeared on Florida Today: SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket first launched from Cape Canaveral 15 years ago
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Uncertainty at NASA; Nomination pulled, steep cuts proposed
Over the past several days, NASA's ambitious space exploration plans have experienced major setbacks. First, on Friday, newly released budget documents revealed the extent of the significant budget and personnel cuts proposed by the Trump administration. Then, just a day later, President Donald Trump withdrew the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA administrator just days before an expected confirmation vote. From my perspective as a space policy expert, these events signal problems ahead for a space agency that now faces stiff competition in space exploration from the commercial sector. Without a leader and facing a fight over its budget, NASA faces an uncertain future, both in the months ahead and longer term. Budget problems When the Trump administration released a preview of its budget proposal in early May, it was clear that NASA was facing significant cuts. After the agency received $24.9 billion for 2025, the president's proposal would allot NASA $18.8 billion in 2026. After accounting for inflation, this amount would represent NASA's smallest budget since 1961. Space science programs are one of the largest targets of the proposed budget cuts, seeing an almost 50% reduction, to just $3.9 billion. Specific programs targeted for elimination include the Mars Sample Return mission, the currently operating Mars Odyssey and MAVEN missions around Mars, and several missions to Venus. Several ongoing and proposed astrophysics programs, including the Chandra X-Ray Observatory, would also end if the proposed budget passes. NASA's human spaceflight programs also face potential cuts. The budget proposes canceling the Space Launch System, the Orion crew vehicle and the Lunar Gateway after the Artemis III mission. Artemis III, planned for 2027, would be the first crewed flight back to the lunar surface since 1972. The mission would use the Space Launch System rocket and Orion crew vehicle to get there. The proposed Lunar Gateway, a mini-space station in lunar orbit, would be abandoned. Instead, the budget proposes to establish a Commercial Moon to Mars program. Under this initiative, NASA would utilize commercial systems such as Blue Origin's New Glenn and SpaceX's Starship to put Americans on the moon and Mars. A smaller budget also means a smaller NASA workforce. The budget proposal suggests that the number of NASA employees would be reduced by one-third, from more than 17,000 to 11,853. Advocates for space science and exploration have criticized the cuts. The Planetary Society has stated that these cuts to space science represent an "extinction level event" that would all but end NASA's ability to perform meaningful science. Democrats in Congress were also quick to push back on the proposed cuts, arguing that they would hamper the United States' ability to carry out its missions. The budget documents released so far are just proposals. Congress must make the final decisions on how much money NASA gets and which programs are funded. While this might be good news for NASA funding, my research has shown that Congress rarely appropriates more money for NASA than the president requests. Leadership challenges The release of the president's proposed budget was followed with the news that the president would withdraw his nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA's administrator. In a Truth Social post, Trump wrote, "After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA. I will soon announce a new Nominee who will be Mission aligned, and put America First in Space." Like the budget proposal, news of Isaacman's withdrawal has also hit the space community hard. Following his nomination, Isaacman won the support of many in the space industry and in government. His confirmation hearing in April was largely uncontentious, with support from both Republicans and Democrats. NASA will now need to wait for the president to make a new choice for NASA administrator. That person will then need to go through the same process as Isaacman, with a hearing in the Senate and several votes. Given the amount of time it takes for nominations to make their way through the Senate, NASA is likely to face several more months without a confirmed administrator. This absence will come while many of its programs will be fighting for money and their existence. The months ahead Like many federal agencies right now, NASA faces a tumultuous future. Budgetary and leadership challenges might be the immediate problem, but NASA's long-term future is potentially rocky as well. Since its founding, NASA's mission has been largely centered on sending humans to space. If that role shifts to commercial companies, NASA will need to grapple with what its identity and mission is going forward. History provides some insight. One of NASA's forerunners, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, or NACA, largely focused on advanced research and development of aeronautical technologies. For instance, NACA researched things such as proper engine placement on airliners, as well as advances that helped air flow more efficiently over those engines. A new NASA that's more similar to NACA might continue research into nuclear engines or other advanced space technology that may contribute to the work commercial space companies are already doing. Choices made by the Trump administration and Congress in the coming months will likely shape what NASA will look like in the years to come. Until then, NASA, like many government organizations, faces a period of uncertainty about its future. Wendy Whitman Cobb is a professor of strategy and security studies at Air University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
