As a lover of all things space related I think space travel is awesome and I'm glad people are able to finally start experiencing the thrill of a quick space trip. I am however annoyed they are using the title as Astronaut's or Space Crew.

This is space tourism, nothing more. To be noted most of these tourist are rich and famous or have their seats paid for. I think it cheapens the real scientist and astronauts who do actual space research.

Having said that, I wish all those heading into space today good luck and a safe return.

From the article -

Blue Origin is receiving some backlash ahead of its upcoming all-female spaceflight.

During a recent appearance on "TODAY with Jenna & Friends," actress Olivia Munn criticized the private spaceflight mission, questioning its value given the economic hardships facing many people in the U.S. and around the world.

Munn highlighted what she sees as the extravagance of the endeavor, pointing out that participants are reportedly receiving full glam preparations, and questioned the necessity and purpose of the 11-minute space expedition aboard Blue Origin's New Shepard vehicle, USA Today reported.

I don't care if you like the passengers or not, if you're calling their trip fake and throwing out the usual arguments like rough hard landing, no burn marks from re entry, or the opened doors thing, you're a fucking idiot.

Look, I get it, you might not understand physics, how spaceflights are operated, or the engineering involved behind them etc etc but making such bold claims based purely on your own ignorance makes you no different from flat Earthers and people who think the moon landings were faked.

There’s a difference between not knowing something and weaponizing your lack of knowledge to discredit someone else’s success. I couldn’t care less about the personal drama surrounding these four people, but the last thing I expected was to see society seriously calling the trip fake.. Where is your fucking critical reasoning?

To expand this post into more than just my personal rage, here are answers to the common arguments these people make:

1. “It was a hard landing” – No, it wasn’t.. The parachutes slow the capsule down from free fall speed of around 200 mph to around 16–20 mph. Just a few feet above the ground, retro thrusters under the capsule fire for a less than a second which slows it down even further to as low as 6 mph.. which is the actual speed at impact. That dust cloud isn't from the landing impact, it's from the thrusters firing, just like you see in tons of other missions both on and off Earth. The camera angle makes it look like a rough landing, but it’s not. Here's what it looks like from the inside.

2. “Why is there no re-entry burn if they went above the atmosphere?” Altitude has nothing to do with it. The burn that you talk about isn't happening during re entry because something’s “high up” it’s because of friction of the craft against air at extreme speeds. The free fall speed is around 200 mph.. When a craft re enters the atmosphere at orbital velocities like 17k-18k mph, which is 4–5 miles per second, the air compresses and heats up so much it turns into plasma. That’s what causes the glow and aerothermal heating. The stuff that burns up is descending from orbital velocities.

3. "Doors aren't supposed to open from the inside, it's not safe" - Apollo 1 fire tragedy was one of the reasons space agencies had to redesign spacecraft hatches to open much quicker and easier from the inside.. Some re engineering later It's been proven to be safer than having a hatch sealed from the outside, thus why it still remains like that to this day on every craft. Plane doors have always been designed to be opened from the inside in case of emergencies. It IS safer.

4. "But then Jeff Bezos uses a tool to open the door after it's closed" - No way? You thought these hatches have cute little doorknobs on each side or something for easy access? Nope, they need a lever like tool to be opened from the outside.. Here is what the door looks like. And yes, they want the picture to look good. They don’t want everyone walking out silently on their own lol, this whole thing serves a commercial purpose too.

This is already too long, I won't go into other arguments, but I hope this is enough for some of you.

Why the hate for this all woman flight versus others from Blue Origin that were predominantly male? I'm seeing issues raised about setting back feminism, environmental impacts, and class wars. Seems like these have been similar issues to other space tourism flights.

https://www.blueorigin.com/news/new- shepard-ns-31-mission

Hi just wondering why does everybody hating on her space flight and kissing the ground? Yes it was an 11 minute space flight but don't she have every reason to be thankful and celebratory after landing home safe? Because launching in space could sonetimes be deadly eh? Dont we remember the The STS-51-L Mission that ended 7 lives?

Saw a clip of the all-woman Blue Origin launch and landing yesterday. I've not really followed the latest developments in space travel, but something really jumped out at me -

When the Space Shuttle was flying, and we're only talking 14 years ago, the preparation and, well basically everything, was insane. Ever seen a video of them closing the hatch - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD6kTtMyv1Q That's a short version - they had all these protective strips around the bottom of the hatch opening, like gaffa tape, each one had to be carefully removed. The closeout crew would carefully check every last bit, then closing the hatch (as you can see just part of there) was endless bolt and parts and checking and double checking. Same in reverse when they landed at KSC.

But when Blue Origin landed yesterday, a small set of steps like you might find in your garage was plonked in front of the door, then Bezos just walks up and opens it like you'd open your front door when a friend visits.

The windows were striking too - most spacecraft windows have been tiny for the entire history of spaceflight, yet the windows on Blue Origin are massive, an enormous part of the craft. The original Mercury capsule wasn't even going to have a window for engineering simplicity and safety, until the astronauts demanded one. Even in modern airliners windows are relatively tiny for engineering reasons.

EDIT - two more things I've thought of -

1. They didn't have flight suits, helmets, oxygen pipes, etc like all space missions used to.

2. The Shuttle would stop for ages on the runway while endless large vehicles/cranes/equipment would surround it because of gases/chemicals from the reaction control thrusters and the like could be dangerous. It was a proper hazmat type situation with everything very carefully controlled. With Blue Origin, people were just approaching it in normal clothes.

Is this just developments in space travel technology that means such careful diligence as seen with NASA isn't needed anymore?

To make clear - I am not into conspiracy nonsense and fully believe this is a real spacecraft that did a sub-orbital flights, so am not interested in "it was all fake and shot on a film set!" rubbish.

I just don't get why until relatively recently space flight was extremely carefully planned and everything took ages, now it seems like jumping in your car to pick up some last minute shopping.

Blue Origin successfully launched—and partially landed—its New Glenn rocket on Thursday. The achievement marks a major step forward in the company’s bid to rival SpaceX as a reliable provider of reusable rockets for NASA and other government agencies.

It's not fake. Space flight is very misunderstood.

Is it considered a step forward for feminism or should be criticized?

Caitlin Reilly instagram

I blurred out the employees