>>12976740Yes, but there's something to be said when you look at:
>>12976710. Not that the reason it wobbles so much is because of the control surfaces. SpaceX's F9 has a central engine that can gimbal significantly, which allows it to control its angle of attack in addition to the grid fins which control airflow at the top of the rocket. New Sheppard has its grid "fins" at the bottom of the rocket, so they're controlling the angle of attack from top to bottom. But there's an additional issue, at the top of the rocket are the slats which act as air brakes. So you now have uneven airflow bottom to top making contact with the top leading to further disruptions in the landing profile.
New Glenn does fix this by removing the slats from the top of the rocket and moves the fins from bottom to the top instead, so maybe it'll be different; but it doesn't look like the central engine can gimbal nearly as much as Merlin or Raptor can. Which means that it will still rely heavily on those fins to orient the rocket. Finally, and most importantly, in the webm above, New Sheppard spends nearly 10 seconds from cutting velocity form ~450mph to ~3m/s. It's basically a super hover followed by a touch down. If New Glenn repeats this, it means it will have to sacrifice a considerable amount of its payload margin in propellant to repeat this landing pattern. Any disruptions in atmospherics in the ocean will fuck that up.
I'm not confident they'll be able to extract reuse out of New Glenn without at least 3-5 rocket losses; and if their entire operational model depends on needing 100% success of each flight, they're seriously FUCKED as a company.
