Comments on: Blue Origin to reuse first stage on next New Glenn flight

By: Dick Eagleson

Dick Eagleson — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 06:46:25 +0000

I’ve seen a bit of commentary on-line unfavorably contrasting the time it took SpaceX to actually re-fly a recovered booster for the first time compared to Blue’s notional plans for NG-2’s booster. Such shade-throwing ignores the vast difference in payload provider psychology that has taken place since that time – entirely because of the performance of the Falcons.

In 2016-17, both NASA and the DoD were very reluctant to entrust any payloads to “used” rockets. That attitude was widely shared in the industry. Only a maverick outfit like SES – which had already been a pioneer customer for brand-new Falcon 9s – was willing to risk such a launch. A lot of people thought said launch wouldn’t work and were not bashful about saying so.

Needless to say, that is not the dominant mental paradigm now anent rocket reuse. Blue can now take advantage of a mindset that has undergone a complete 180 in orientation over the near-decade since SpaceX’s first operational reuse of a recovered Falcon 9 booster.

By: Edward

Edward — Mon, 26 Jan 2026 00:50:29 +0000

The announcement did not say whether any of the engines would be reused on this second flight. Swapping out engines could give them time to examine the engines at a more leisurely, less frantic pace. Either way, it looks like Blue Origin is reducing their turnaround time and rapidly ramping up their cadence. This is good for their business model as well as the future of space exploration and utilization.

We all have an easier time knowing what SpaceX is up to, because they don’t have huge swaths of land to keep the movements of the various parts and assemblies private.

This is not Blue Origin’s first reusable booster, so they undoubtedly have taken advantage of the lessons applied from the suborbital New Shepard. This is an advantage of experience, the ability to go faster than would otherwise be wise. As I recall, Blue Origin also reflew their second booster on their third flight, too, after having lost the first booster on landing. There seems to be a pattern, here, but at a faster pace than New Shepard.

Ad astra lucrum

By: Jeff Wright

Jeff Wright — Sun, 25 Jan 2026 06:19:41 +0000

To M Puckett,

It shouldn’t matter to rocketry buffs, but a clean vehicle upon return might make or break sales depending on the buyer.

If you superchill propellants, you want the core white—but since they are coked up anyway—maybe Electron black is the way to go.

By: Skunk Bucket

Skunk Bucket — Sat, 24 Jan 2026 07:06:27 +0000

I figure it’s a good thing that Blue Origin is attempting to fly a used booster on only their third launch. At the rate they’ve been going, if they waited until their 23rd flight, like SpaceX did, it might not happen until the 22nd century!

By: Nate P

Nate P — Fri, 23 Jan 2026 22:52:24 +0000

Yes, Blue Origin has multiple boosters in production. Source: https://www.blueorigin.com/news/blue-origin-debuts-new-glenn-on-our-launch-pad

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 23 Jan 2026 22:00:02 +0000

Is this a nearly forced choice in order to increase launch cadence? Does Blue Origin even have other boosters they could fly? I know SpaceX is hardware rich, but I feel like it takes a long time for Blue Origin to build things. Do they have multiple in production?

Regardless it is encouraging to see them taking risks!

By: Richard M

Richard M — Fri, 23 Jan 2026 21:47:06 +0000

“SpaceX didn’t attempt its first reuse of a recovered first stage for a little more than a year after its first successful landing.”

Indeed – and that was not the first booster SpaceX recovered, either. (That one was very toasted on the inside.)

So yes, this is certainly impressive, for what it is.

By: M Puckett

M Puckett — Fri, 23 Jan 2026 18:58:07 +0000

Well, they didn’t have to de-coke it with isopropyl alcohol like SpaceX does with the Merlin’s on Falcon 9. That has to be a time saver.