Slashdot Mirror


YAPSLP: Yet Another Private Space Launch Plan

rleyton writes: "The BBC is reporting here that UK Rocket enthusiast Steve Bennett of Starchaser Industries is planning on launching himself into space soon. He's unveiling a rocket at a London exhibition. Other Rocket enthusiasts here in the UK are claiming it's "Suicide", but perhaps the momentum for a manned Private Space exploration is building?" First step: buy more D engines.

83 comments

  1. Luck shines upon those who risk it all.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Its not about ego... Its about accomplishing something that people say you can't with less than is possible by most standards... I support him wholeheartedly... It is people like him that allow our society to leap forth from stagnation and become more than the some of our parts.... If I were in his place I would do the same... -daemon

  2. Romantic Twaddle Re:Bon Voyage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    Yes, there's a huge difference between the two.

    Columbus was an experienced sea farer; he'd made some very long voyages in his youth. The Spanish and Portugese had the basic techniques of ocean travel down.

    Bennet, on the other hand, is either a starry-eyed fool or a con artist. He's fooling with high power rockets and calling it the next big thing in private space travel.

    If Columbus was considered looney, it was because of his genuinely asinine idea that the Earth was pear shaped, and thus had less of a circumference at northern latittudes, allowing the trip to China to be possible. (No one doubted that you could reach "the Indies" by traveling West; they just thought, quite logically given that they didn't know about the Americas, that crews would starve or die of thirst traveling the immense ocean they imagined stretching from the Azores to China.)

    The suggestion that all it takes to get into space is gumption and spunk and a thumb in the nose of authority is romantic twaddle.

    Stefan

  3. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by Nate+Fox · · Score: 1

    So this is how my family feels when I talk to my friends in pure acronyms. I'm confused:

    ISP: I thought that meant Internet Service Provider. But it makes no sense in this context.
    SSME: Second Series [of Windows] Millenium Edition (ala Win98SE)?
    SRB: ...not even the slightest...

    -----
    If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...

  4. Re:Sounds like a candidate... by Tet · · Score: 2
    This sounds like a great candidate for: DAR-WIN!

    Or do you mean Darwin?

    --
    "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
  5. We threw gasoline of the fire, and now...well... by chips · · Score: 1

    Ahh... D Engines, that brings back memories. You know, I always wanted to strap like 50 of those to one poor rocket and see what happens. Anyone ever tried something like that? I sure would like to (and hey, i might even do it with out blowing myself to smitherenes!) Also, I'd like to just put 3 fins right on an engine and launch it, who ever wanted a rocket with a real body anyway?

    --
    -- Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people. Guns just make bullets go really, really fast.
  6. Re:D engines? no .... by jlv · · Score: 1

    Maybe you didn't know, but Aero-Tech now builds reloads for the Kosdon casings.

    FWIW, here's a picture of an Aero-Tech M1419 in a test stand: http://www.tripoli.org/Photos/TMT/TMT3.jpg

    Next high power launch in Massachusetts: July 7. Free and open to the public. See my club's website: http://www.cmass.org/

  7. Re:D engines? no .... by jlv · · Score: 1

    Sorry, here's links http://www.tripoli.org/Photos/TMT/TMT3.jpg

    Next high power launch in Massachusetts: July 7. Free and open to the public. See my club's website: http://www.cmass.org.

    Our field normally has an FAA waiver that goes to 7000' AGL; we can only launch up to 'K'-class motors.

  8. YAFLA! by ergo98 · · Score: 1
  9. Read some Heinlein by dduck · · Score: 1

    "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" more or less covers this situation. The topic is the first lunar revolution, and it's consequences. A classic read.

  10. Re:...the way poorly-built rockets work... by FreeUser · · Score: 2

    I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...

    There is absolutely no moreal responsibility to protect idiots from themselves, and in trying to do so you will end up trampling the rights, and dreams, of those who you misidentify as idiots and who would otherwise choose to take a big risk in order to achieve an even bigger payback.

    In addition, by protecting "idiots" from themselves you do a disservice to the entire human race, by preventing nature's own cure for stupidity ... the natural deselection of the idiots and corresponding gradual improvement of the breed.

    Seriously, though, anyone should have the right to follow their dream, no matter how foolish or stupid the rest of us think it to be. Had humans incorporated a "moral responsibility" to protect idiots from themselves any earlier than the second half of the 20th century, the Wright Brothers would have never flown, Columbus (and before him the Vikings) would have never sailed to America, and countless other risky inventions and undertakings would never have been permitted. The aversion to risk we have somehow incorporated into a misguided ethos of "big daddy protecting the small minded people from themselves" in the last century is second only to the Patent system in stifling the progress we could have otherwise made.

    It is past time we put and end to this nonsense once and for all. If RocketDude wishes to launch, let him launch. If he dies (the probable outcome) then the species is rid of one more fool. If he lives, he will have accomplished something remarkable, upon which he and others can build. It is by taking such risks, sometimes failing and sometimes succeeding, that enduring progress is truly made.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  11. In other news.. by RAruler · · Score: 1

    Man attempts suicide by strapping himself into a 'cylinder like' structure and placing a large amount of explosives underneath him. Local suicide experts call this 'A Rocket'.

    ---

    --

    --
    Insert Witty Sig Here
  12. Re:Read your own site, damnit by sholden · · Score: 1

    Are you sure you're not thinking of this?

    Obviously he is thinking of the slashback here. Which is all of a few days old. Recent enough that the link in this article was coloured to indicate I had visited it already...

    Maybe if you read the post before mindlessly replying you wouldn't come across as a moron.

  13. MS still sponsoring him? by TyFoN · · Score: 1

    I saw a small shot about him on Discovery some time ago, and i noticed that there was a Microsoft banner next to the rocket.
    Let's not hope his craft is pushed to "release" as fast as Windows =)

  14. Re:bye-bye rocketier guy by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 5
    A long, long time ago
    I can still remember how the normal people got to space.
    They got together with a team,
    to fulfil a president's dream,
    And be the ones to win the greatest race.

    Yeah, the A-Team could build anything. Oh, wait "a team", not the "A-Team". Nevermind.

    (I pity the fool who can't spell "roketier" correctly!)



    --
    --
    But then again, I could be wrong.
  15. YARFPSA by sharkey · · Score: 2

    Yet Another Redundant Front Page Slashdot Article.

    --

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  16. Re:Missing some of his marbles by Lumpish+Scholar · · Score: 2

    ... solid rockets are capable of vicious acceleration. I'm talking "supersonic by the time it's left the launch rail" vicious....

    Think "Darwin Award for the guy who strapped JATO units to an Impala and flew it into a cliff" ... or the longer, funnier, and even vaguely plausible Legend of the Rocket Car.

    --
    Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
  17. personalspacelaunch.bomb by FatSean · · Score: 1

    It'll happen. A goodly amount of wealthy individuals will throw in some cash on the promise of achieving orbit. The company will hem and haw about supplies of rocket fuel from sketchy eastern block countries, and inevitably fold. It'll be all nice and legal 'cause the pretty-boy fronting the operation had the smarts (or lawyer fees) to incorporate the boondogle.

    This doesn't mean that I don't believe that we will be achieving weightlessness on private carriers, just htat wit won't happen for a couple years.

    I can't wail 'till I see the charge on my Amex for "Fred's Orbital Launchers". It'll be like Bob's Discount Furniture...kinda...

    --
    Blar.
  18. bye-bye rocketier guy by inio · · Score: 5

    A long, long time ago
    I can still remember how the normal people got to space.
    They got together with a team,
    to fulfil a president's dream,
    And be the ones to win the greatest race.

    But now this loony makes me worry.
    He seems to be in such a hurry.
    He have deep enough pockets,
    He's buying lots of rockets.

    But I agree that if he tries,
    To make his way into the sky,
    Hop in, light up, and let it fly,
    Then he will surely die.

    Sing'n bye, bye crazy roketier guy.
    Gonna fix a cement mixer to some rockets and fly.
    But those who know say 'bennett's gonna die,
    And if he does, nobody will cry',
    Yeah if he dies, nobody will cry.

    Thanks to Don McLean for one of the easiest to rewrite songs ever :).

  19. Maybe we can get free food outta this by miracle69 · · Score: 3

    Hopefully, Taco Bell will stick a target in the English Channel,and if the guy hits it, we all get a free Taco.

    Hey, they tried it with Mir...
    HI Mom!

    --
    Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
    1. Re:Maybe we can get free food outta this by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      Hopefully, Taco Bell will stick a target in the English Channel,and if the guy hits it, we all get a free Taco.
      Taco Hell is nasty...Del Taco is much better. :-)
      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  20. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by wmoore · · Score: 1

    No, actually this isn't the single biggest reason for switching from liquid fuel. In fact, most sources list liqued fuel rockets as generally being safer to operate for manned flights due to the ability to stop the rocket's burn mid-flight. The single biggest reason to use solid fuel over liquid is the ratio of available power to weight. Solid rocket fuel simply packs more punch per pound that liquid propellants...

  21. Re:The man has a passion by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    even if you crash and burn.. you tried..

    Should be the offical slogan for Sourceforge :) If you cant laugh at yourself who can you laugh at? :)

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  22. Re:*blush* by Tackhead · · Score: 2
    > The first thing that I noticed when I looked at the story, though, was that his rocket looks like an enormous dildo.

    Now we know what happened to the guy who designed the :Cue:Cat for Digital :Convergence!

    > Good luck to him, and I hope that his gigantic phallus works as designed. *snicker*

    You hope he gets screwed by a 100-foot dong? Or do you mean "When I die, I wanna be going up like a rocket into ten thousand feet of pussy..."

    (Although I suppose depending on your sex and orientation, either interpretation could be a fun way to go... :-)

  23. Re:Missing some of his marbles by Tackhead · · Score: 5
    > the project, as I understand it to be, in its current form, is extremely unlikely to result in a safe launch and re-entry.

    Well-put.

    I hope the guy makes it too, but I think he's toast.

    You kiddies out there who've only watched "nice and slow barely-haul-yourself-off-the-pad" shuttle launches - solid rockets are capable of vicious acceleration.

    I'm talking "supersonic by the time it's left the launch rail" vicious. Those of you who have ever seen a surface-to-air missile launch, you've got the right idea. (Those of you into model rocketry, scale up 36 or 72 times - as in, a full-size rocket clearing the launch pad in the same time as your model does! ;)

    I don't know what kind of boosters he's using, but I'd sure like to. If someone this crazy is worried about the G forces on launch, I'm putting $5.00 on "The test vehicle launches, but turns him into a puddle of goo in the first second." (I've got another $5.00 on "The test vehicle crash-lands, but it didn't matter because the occupant was already goo before impact.")

    On the off chance (maybe 25%) he survives the test flight, I've got $10.00 on "suffocates because he didn't think he had to test the pressure vessel", which I think is a 90%+ probability.

    I think it's incredibly cool that he's got the brass ones to build a rocket and fly in it, and I definitely don't think the government should stop him from trying it (as long as he points the damn thing away from populated areas).

    But I still don't think he's gonna make it.

  24. Sounds like a candidate... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

    This sounds like a great candidate for: DAR-WIN!
    DAR-WIN!
    DAR-WIN!

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  25. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by sconeu · · Score: 2

    IIRC, the main advantage to SRBs (for ICBM's at least) is that they are always fueled. Liquid fueled missiles had to be fueled before launch. In a MAD scenario, the quick launch time was a major advantage.

    SRBs have this advantage ANYWHERE that fueling may be a problem, such as wing mounted or ship mounted missiles.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  26. Re:We threw gasoline of the fire, and now...well.. by sconeu · · Score: 2

    I'll just take a single LOX/Kerosene F-1 motor.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  27. Steve Bennett IS the test by Louis+Savain · · Score: 5

    Look at it this way, a lot of other private rocketeers are keeping an eye on Bennett and his launch efforts. Whatever happens, success or failure, they will gain from his experience. Bennet is a voluntary guinea pig. It sounds crazy but come to think of it, Christopher Columbus and his crew were willing guinea pigs too. They sure did not have the technology to send a self-piloted ship across the atlantic and back.

    1. Re:Steve Bennett IS the test by RedSynapse · · Score: 1

      Columbus may have been a guinea pig, but a guy trying to replicate his voyage 20 years later in a homemade kayak is just an idiot.

  28. D engines? no .... by taniwha · · Score: 2

    not D engines .... M engines ....

    1. Re:D engines? no .... by kireK · · Score: 1

      Wimpy AeroTech? Naw... try a REAL motor.

    2. Re:D engines? no .... by kireK · · Score: 1

      Aerotech reloads are a peice of (&^@$#@. That is why Frank made them change how they were making them. Now, some of Franks original reloads are great, but if you have any better fly them soon. God Bless Men and their Rockets.

  29. The irresponsibility of the X-prize by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2

    This came up a little while ago at metafilter.com and I couldn't ignore how the paltry sum of the X-prize drives nearly suicidal space launches like this. 10 million to a company that can *safely* deliver the precious and fragile cargo of two human beings to space and back is peanuts, its what they pay for the first 10 seconds of the 4th test flight.

    So the X-Prize now drives people like Steve to build an unusually phallic looking rocket out of a cement mixer. If the lottery is for people who can't do math than the X-Prize is for people who can't do physics. To the company that does pull this trick off, the 10 mil will be more like the cheesy gold-plated trophies they passed out in high school.

  30. Re:Read your own site, damnit by jhoffoss · · Score: 1
    a) your already reported this in Slashback

    So is this why michael is disliked around /.???
    ---

    --
    Linux: The world's best text-adventure game.
  31. *blush* by Glint · · Score: 2

    I saw this a couple of days ago, but didn't submit it. The first thing that I noticed when I looked at the story, though, was that his rocket looks like an enormous dildo.

    Good luck to him, and I hope that his gigantic phallus works as designed. *snicker*

  32. The man has a passion by phunhippy · · Score: 1

    The man sounds passionate about whats he doing. even if all his peers think hes nuts(since the artlcle really did'nt have anyone sayin he has a shot in hell) he has the dedication to try... Good Luck man! even if you crash and burn.. you tried..

  33. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by Chairboy · · Score: 2

    You are correct, I misread his original post. The only thing I will stick to is my assertion that he was mistaken about suggesting solid fueled rockets are more efficient, but you (and he) is indeed correct about the density/thrust ratio.

    ..and yes, manned flight should at best be supplemented by SRBs (like the ullage rockets on the Saturn V), not commanded by them (like the SRBs on the shuttle).

  34. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by Chairboy · · Score: 3

    You are absolutely incorrect. Most liquid fueled rockets have a much higher ISP then their solid equivalents. The SRBs on the shuttle have an ISP of 260 something, if I recall correctly, while the SSMEs onboard the shuttle (liquid) have an ISP of over 400.

    ISP is, basically, a measure of how much a pound of propellent goes towards propelling something.

    The SRBs are cheap heavy thrust rockets, but nowhere near as efficient as liquid fuel.

  35. Re:Space Rule. by RevRigel · · Score: 1

    Aluminum comes from bauxite. Might be useful, since it's a light, alloyable, machineable, weldable, corrosion-resistant building material. :)

  36. Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by BierGuzzl · · Score: 2

    The whole reason the army switched from liquid propelled rockets to solid fuel was because of the accidental explosions (and of course casualties) during the handling and transportation of these dangerous time-bombs. There is no way this guy, whith his hit and miss track record, should be playing with liquid-fueled rockets.

    1. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by John+Carmack · · Score: 3

      He is sort of correct.

      It is easier to get a high thrust to weight ratio out of solids, even though they have a lower Isp and generally a lower total dV per stage.

      To get more thrust out of a solid, you basically just need a bigger nozzle, while to get more out of a conventional liquid engine, you need a bigger nozzle, and bigger turbopumps, plumbing, and combustion chamber.

      Not that I think solids on a manned vehicle are very sensible...

      John Carmack

    2. Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything by driftingwalrus · · Score: 2

      Come on! Read a little man, liquid-fueled engines are transported DRY - NO FUEL! Solid fuel engines carry their fuel from the day of manufacture. They have FAR greater potential for disaster in transit than liquid. A liquid-fueled rocket engine in transit is no more dangerous than a hedge trimmer.

      Also, solid fuel engines can't be turned off or throttled. Once they've been lit, it's 100% until they either explode or run out of fuel. The reason solid fuel engines are more popular in military applications is that they're more reliable in starting and require less support equipment. The primary danger with liquid fuel engines is once they've been started. If the fellow ends up dieing, I personally he would have gone the best way I can think of. Think about, name in the papers for weeks, quick, thrilling, painless, and it destroys the body therefore minimizing funeral costs. Far better than withering away with alzheimers and arthtritis, IMHO.

      --
      Paul Anderson
      "I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
  37. Don't make fun of this slahsdot ;) by active8or · · Score: 1

    Starchaser has had a bery successfull line of launches, and is actually sponsored by Microsoft.

    This is not "yeat another" in the sence that is is some rich freak that has way to much time, and builds him/herself a rocket...

    Steve Bennett is also very dedicated, and is one of the few I actually think can make it into space...the only question is if these rockets are powerfull enough to ship large amounts of material.

    I'm still holding my money on laster boosted lightcraft technology!


    Mvh:
    - Knut S.

  38. Non-governemnt launches by Ravagin · · Score: 2

    I just started reading Stephen Baxter's Manifold: time , which is about... um... well, it's kind of complicated. But the main character is a failed-astronaut space nut who launches his own spaceships (one manned by a squid, one manned by him) for his own exploration. The year is 2010, and most governmental space programs have fallen into disrepair.

    It just reminded me a lot of these private launch types.

    And it's a very good book.


    -J
    --

    Karma: T-rexcellent.

  39. Re:...the way poorly-built rockets work... by PaxTech · · Score: 3
    And if he comes back from space in one piece, I would be the first to pat him on the back.

    And if he comes back in more than one piece, we'll ALL be able to pat him on the back.. in several different countries simultaneously! It's win-win!
    --
    PaxTech

    --
    All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
  40. Re:Wimpy AeroTech's by Temkin · · Score: 1

    Yea, but here in the US, to buy anything past a "G", you have to have a NAR cert, and the BATF has been getting really picky about the "magazine" bunker requirements for storage. :-)

    Wouldn't want to slap too many limitations on potential darwin-award^U^U^U^U^U errr... space pioneers!

    Temkin

  41. Read your own site, damnit by Gorobei · · Score: 5
    a) your already reported this in Slashback

    b) Steve Bennett is a self-aggrandizing loon.

    1. Re:Read your own site, damnit by Saint+Aardvark · · Score: 1

      I'd give a lot for mod points to give you right now.

    2. Re:Read your own site, damnit by perlchimp · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you're not thinking of this?

  42. Not bloodly Likely by BiggestPOS · · Score: 1
    This bloke will probably either never launch the bloody thing, or at best blow himself to bits if he does.

    --
    What, me worry?
  43. Good Marketing by 0000+0111 · · Score: 1

    I've never heard of Steve Bennett. Now I have. Loony or not loony. Bad or good. Press is still press. Money is still money. And in a world where effective (IOW not spam), cheap mass marketing is hard to come buy, he certainly has his name recognition campaign off the ground. HOMER: Stupid cement mixer! Doh!

  44. This guy did it in a LAWN CHAIR!!! by mcrbids · · Score: 1
    Ever hear about what this guy did in a lawn chair?

    There's pictures, audio clips, the whole nine yards - and he got farther than "rocket boy" prolly will....

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  45. My in-depth analysis by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 4

    If website design skills have anything to do with building space craft, these people aren't going to get further then Wales.

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:My in-depth analysis by the_other_one · · Score: 1

      How far underground do you think they'll get. Can you quantify your in-depth analysis.

      --
      134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  46. YAPOYAPSLP: Yet Another Posting of YAPSLP: by the_other_one · · Score: 2
    --
    134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  47. Re:Bon Voyage by jeko · · Score: 2
    "Is setting off across an unknown sea in a small sailing ship any different to blasting off into space in a homemade rocket?"

    Yes. Untested ship designs generally don't explode on launch. Untested rockets regularly do.

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  48. Anyone remember "Salvage?" by jeko · · Score: 2

    Is it just me, or does this sound like an old TV movie Salvage, with Andy Griffith playing the role of Bennett?

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  49. ...the way poorly-built rockets work... by jeko · · Score: 3
    The people who compare this to early efforts in seafaring or aviation need to keep something in mind:

    A poorly-built wooden ship works like a raft.

    A poorly-built airplane, provided you're not thick enough to push it off a cliff, works like a wagon.

    A poorly-built rocket works like a bomb.

    I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
    1. Re:...the way poorly-built rockets work... by KjetilK · · Score: 3

      I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...

      That is a very interesting and very difficult question. I was thinking about the same thing.

      The critical issue is whether he understands the risks he are taking. There are many people going to different kinds of terapeuts every day, that are little more than swindlers. Many are of course unaware that they are being lifted of their money, and we do have a responsibility to educate them. What if they don't want to be educated? I've met people who are very sick, and that I can see are being taken advantage of, who will not listen to reason. Then, it gets very, very difficult.

      In this case, I don't think it is very difficult. Crazy as he may be, he still seems to be aware of the risks he are taking.

      If he blows himself up, well, at least he died while doing what he loved the most. Not many people do that... And, he seems like the kind of guy who would cheerfully accept a Darwin Award, at least as far as it is possible to accept a Darwin Award... :-)

      And if he comes back from space in one piece, I would be the first to pat him on the back.

      So, I'd say, let him have fun!

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  50. Re:I'm all for it... by hyperstation · · Score: 1
    me too! put it on a cd and sell it!

    --

  51. You laugh at them now.. by flikx · · Score: 3

    But it looks like all the smart ones are leaving first.


    --
    --
    One future, two choices. Oppose them or let them destroy us.
  52. Re:Space Rule. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 2
    That's a great question, and one I've thought about quite a bit myself.

    There are a couple of issues: Unlike the colonization of North America, there is, as far as we know, no indiginous life that exists in space. Suprisingly, this makes things a bit more complicated, because we are not going to be bound by any humainly directed decisions based on the atrocities of past conquests.

    Which means we can grab real estate in space with impunity. If history guides us here, chances are who is first, who claims it first will mean nothing (heck, there are people on Earth now selling land on the moon!).

    My guess is, when we figure out a reason to make space valuable (weather it be minerals, military.. who knows), the people who will end up with it will be the people who can win in the courts and ultimatly, on the battlefield.

    And chances are, yes, we will end up governments on other bodies (the moon, for example) who will want their independance. It's going to be exciting.

    --
    The Internet is generally stupid
  53. Re:Missing some of his marbles by abolith · · Score: 1

    Damn Skippy !!!!

    --
    if you want "No More Hiroshimas" then I say "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."
  54. Wording change: by JohnTheFisherman · · Score: 3

    "...perhaps the momentum for a manned Private Space explosion is building?"

  55. Space Rule. by Traicovn · · Score: 2

    I've noticed reccently that there are several members of society trying to launch there way into space. They are just trying to achieve low earth orbit for the most part, but has anyone considered how space will be ruled? Think about it. North America and South America (though already inhabited by the Native Americans) were 'discovered' by Europeans according to your average elementary school textbook. Companies sponsored explorers to colonize this 'new world'. Eventually, after a couple hundred years, these continents revolted and put their own governments in place. One must wonder how space will be ruled. The moon and Mars are both out their waiting to be colonized. The question is, will the settlers allow themselves to be controlled by an opressive earth based government? With companies sponsoring to get into space. Space habitation will be a quicky realized dream. Before we know it, we could have a moon-based government. It's kinda weird.... Of course, besides tourism. What is the moon going to manufacture. Bauxite? What is Bauxite used for anyway? By the way, I know everybody else has mentioned this already. But this has already been covered /.

    [Something witty and intelligent should have appeared here.]

    --

    [Something witty and intelligent should have appeared here.]
    {Traicovn}
  56. Re:Wimpy AeroTech's by kireK · · Score: 1

    Tripoli cert works well to :-)

  57. Listen to Eddie Izzard. by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    It's on HBO all the time. His "Undressed" talks about the UK & space. It'll sum it all up.

  58. Well..... by Sarcasmooo! · · Score: 3

    At this rate there's no need to worry about a "Nike solar system" or a "Microsoft galaxy". Just let'em all launch themselves into deep space on rockets fueled by egotism.

    "I'm rich! I can do anyth---*crash*"

    1. Re:Well..... by JBowz15 · · Score: 1

      I hardly think Microsoft would want to sponser a mere galaxy. Don't you think they'd rather have the exclusive rights to the "Microsoft universe"? It would be a land where 90% of all computers ran some version of Windows and Bill Gates had more money than we mere mortals could comprehend... Oh wait, that's not the future at all.

  59. Missing some of his marbles by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 2

    I've met Steve Bennett and I have to say he seems like a nice guy. I've also met some of the other people mentioned in the BBC News article and they know what they are talking about too.

    I wish Steve all the luck in the world but, from what I've read and heard, he's setting himself up for a very big fall. At best, his rocket won't get off the ground (and perhaps not even off the drawing board). At worst, he's going to end up as a human firework.

    Test, test, test is the mantra of every respectable physicist, especially so in the fields of aero- and astronautics. Anyone who would put his life on the line in an initial test flight of this nature has to be missing some of his marbles.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:Missing some of his marbles by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 2

      Re-read my original post.

      I am not saying that it can't be done, that Steve Bennett can't do it, that I can or that only a government can.

      What I am saying is that the project, as I understand it to be, in its current form, is extremely unlikely to result in a safe launch and re-entry.

      Unlike most people here, I can honestly say that I've done more than read the BBC story and browse a few related web sites. I've actually spoken to some of the players involved, as well as other prominent figures in the British amateur rocketry scene.

      The concensus of opinions (theirs and mine) seems to be:

      • The project is little more than a concept right now.
      • The person heading the project doesn't have a very good record of successful launches.
      • Testing launch vehicles, especially manned ones, is a good thing.
      • Testing launch vehicles, especially manned ones, again and again is a very good thing.
      • Risking your life unnecessarily on the first launch of any space vehicle is a bad thing.

      I, and 99.9 percent of the people out there want to see Steve succeed. However, we don't want to see him throw his life needlessly away. Hence the note of caution.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    2. Re:Missing some of his marbles by f_thegreenbear · · Score: 3
      In any interesting area of research, you get:
      • the people who say it can't be done
      • the people who say you can't do it
      • the people who say only an organisation coincidentally like theirs can do it
      • the people who say only an organisation run by a government can do it
      Usually, most of these people are wrong.

      But they do serve to put people off doing it.

      Space travel is too important to leave to chance. The more of us try it, the more likely it is that some of us will succeed at it.

      So it might be dangerous? Big f'ing deal. In the country I live in, 10 people are killed by cars every day. Three guys in a rocket looks much more useful than that.

      Go on, try doing something interesting today!

      --
      anarcho-roboticist [lopster incomplete: 6.5% of 2.5GB]
  60. Re:We threw gasoline of the fire, and now...well.. by terrymr · · Score: 1

    No I prefer just one J Motor actually .....


    Rockets with big motors

  61. Re:We threw gasoline of the fire, and now...well.. by terrymr · · Score: 1

    Do the math ... E=2*D F=4*D g=8*D H=16*D I=32*D so J=64*D

  62. No .... Buy more E engines by terrymr · · Score: 2

    Seriously Estes has E Engines back in production :-)

    Or check out my web site for a whole bunch of people who have forgotten more about rockets than Steve Bennett Knows.

  63. Re:Bon Voyage by Tech187 · · Score: 1

    The difference is, Columbus, certain members of the Vikings, and so on were venturing out into the unknown. That's different from taking risks to do something you'd like to try, without there really being any unknown element except the risk itself.

    This is more like gambling than exploration.

  64. Hardboard... by the+bluebrain · · Score: 2
    Reading the article
    • But other rocket experts are worried, not least because the Thunderbird capsule is actually a converted cement mixer, containing sheets of hardboard and a few computer joysticks.
    ...it occurrs to me that maybe he should be putting the hardboard on the outside, the way the Chinese do it (No. 96).
    Or perhaps he intends for the mixer to break up, so he can float down a la Lawn Chair Larry, no doubt frantically gripping his SideWinder 3D.

    On that note (I am far, far from being a rocket scientist): does anyone know what the reentry problems are? AFAIK, the atmosphere reaches up to 40km (well, just gets thinner and thinner, but 40km is a nice number), so crashing down from 100km gives 60km of free fall, giving him a reentry speed of mach 2.7 - so not exactly the MIR, but still perhaps an LD50. Or are my numbers completely screwed?
    --
    yes, we have no bananas
  65. Thats all well and good but... by jupiter$spectre · · Score: 1

    From the article, it sounds like this guy has lied at every public appearance he makes. He's probably got some healthy dreams, but claiming centrefuge experience at a non-existant centrefuge isn't going to get my support!

    --
    um, no.
  66. Old Man Rant by JBowz15 · · Score: 2

    You kids have too easy these days...

    Back in my day, we had no money. When we wanted to go into space we couldn't buy ourselves a ticket aboard some "spaceship". We had to build our own rocket (made from wicker of course, until they levied that tax on wicker goods) and then we pushed it uphill both ways in the snow. And we liked it! Bah!

  67. Re:Bon Voyage by Silver222 · · Score: 1
    It's not like gambling at all. When I'm playing blackjack in Vegas, I know that the odds are slightly against me.

    This is more like playing the lottery, I think.

    --
    "It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom. Keep that in mind at all times." Bill Hicks
  68. And the award goes to .... by nicodaemos · · Score: 3
    "I've come from nothing to being the leading contender in the X-Prize," counters Bennett.

    Sounds like he went from nothing to a leading contender for a Darwin Award.

    "I wish I were a real boy, because then my mommy would love me." Really? I think I see a dead movie.

  69. Darwin.... by A+Commentor · · Score: 1

    Hopefully his launch will occur before he has a chance to pass on his genes....

    --

    Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com

  70. Bon Voyage by femto · · Score: 1
    I guess Columbus, certain members of the Vikings and so on were placed in a similar loony category by their peers. Is setting off across an unknow sea in a small sailing ship any different to blasting off into space in a homemade rocket?

    He'll probably kill himself in the attempt, but good luck to him!