Canadian Team Plans Balloon-Aided X-Prize Entry

canning writes: "The National Post has an article briefly explaining the Canadian entry for the X Prize, the da Vinci project. The site includes visuals and a volunteer section, among others. The team plans to avoid almost the first half of the earth's atmosphere by launching the craft attached to a hot air balloon. The rocket will then fire it's engine and detach simultaneously. Interesting approach and believe it or not it gets better."

Comments

Re:Question for Carmack

[Sludge]

bspparse

I wrote it last night. No, really.

\\\ SLUDGE

Flight-schedule

[Accumulator]

He is obviously only going some minutes out of the atmosphere, and then down again:

1. The rocket carrying passenger Brian Feeney lifted to an altitude of 18km -- suspended 300m below a piloted hot-air balloon. The computer-controlled engine ignites and the rocket simultaneously separates from the balloon tether.
2. After 7 - 8 seconds of flight at 60 degrees followed by thrust vectoring to 90 degrees, the four fins separate from the rocket. The main engine cuts off at 40km, and the rocket glides for about five minutes in zero - G.
3. The rocket begins freefall for about 100 seconds. The reentry ballute is then deployed. The ballute protects the rocket from heat of thousands of degrees Celsius, and cushions the engines upon landing.
4. The main chute deploys at 7.6km and slows the rocket to a speed of 4m per second. The rocket lands and falls on its side -- supported at 52 degrees by the ballute.

Re:That's what's wrong with the X-prize

[Christopher Thomas]

Ok, so what's the payload to orbit for this six foot rocket?

Payload for a six-foot rocket would be about 5 kg (10 lbs) or so, assuming that 1% of the rocket's mass is cargo. This is a conservative estimate.

You can fit many kinds of research satellite into this weight restriction. Sensor, camera, and Earth-observing telescope packages don't have to be that large or heavy, and as long as you have a large ground station to handle communications, the satellite's power requirements will be low.

It would be tempting to try to launch something like a low-earth-orbit cell phone repeater, but you'd need a much heavier satellite for that (a communications satellite uses a lot of power).

Right now small satellites like I've described are already used; they're just launched in the leftover cargo space on larger rockets, or in large groups from larger rockets that a coalition of users buys space on.

Why has nobody built a small payload launch facility at altitude somewhere that there is a mountain range on a tropical east coast? Because while 20 miles is good, 2 miles is still above a lot of the atmosphere, no? Just political reasons?

Mainly because the payoff doesn't justify the cost. At 2 miles, you'd still have about 70% of the atmosphere above you, so your rocket would still be quite large. And if you can afford to build a rocket base on top of a mountain and transport rockets there, you can afford to build big rockets in the first place, and don't have a problem with atmosphere thickness :).

Good thought, though.

it would still be nice to see people aiming for orbit.

Agreed.

A rocket that could launch a human's worth of cargo would probably be big enough that you could launch it from the ground (and be expensive as all heck, alas).

Re:I think this needs asking...

[Bearpaw]

I've noticed something disturbing - that any time a story mentions Canada, everyone jumps in to make fun of it. I understand that most readers of /. are Americans, but does that mean we have to ignore the posted story and focus on unimportant details like nationality?

Well, not everyone disses it, but yeah, there does seem to be a lot of that.

I think it's partly the seemingly common misperception of an annoying number of Slashdotters that they're Really Smart, and that nobody else gives anything any real thought. So they assume that any possible little objection they can think of -- usually without even reading more than a paragraph or two of information -- is an idea-killer that the people who are actually doing something are too dumb to have thought of. Usually, of course, it's the sort of thing that the folks actually working on something easily worked out a long time ago.

(That part's not really relevant to this being worked on by Canadians. It's just really common here.)

I think it especially comes up with Canadians, 'cause a lot of folks in the US dislike being laughed at, despite how laughable many of us are. So when people in the US make fun of Canadians, it's often the sort of sad, fake, forced "yer rilly dum, ha, ha, ha" that some insecure kids do to other kids.

Re:hey hosers...

[JabberWokky]

I don't know if I'd catch an American saying "we dumb Americans"...

You've never seen Married with Children, the Simpsons or All in the Family. We're very aware that the average is stupid. Including the American average. One thing you also have to be aware is that "American" is a two century old concept. Many of us still have very very strong ties to our Irish, Jewish, Germanic or other history, and even stronger is our regional origin. We speak differently (different accents, different terms), and eat completely different foods (we southerners gag at the concept of some northern food, and the damn yankees can't get it through their skull that iced tea, and biscuits with thick white sausage gravy is a great breakfast).

Having said that, as a southerner, I can make redneck and hick jokes among my friends, and they are funny. A northerner does the same thing, and we take offense. There is no logic - don't search for any - but it is a fact of how people view themselves.

A friend of mine has a really awful mother. He goes on and on about what a bitch she it (I've seen her screaming at him). We were chatting when a tactless friend of ours (every group has one), said: "Yeah, but your moms a psycho-bitch".

The group got quiet, and everybody got uncomfortable, and he said "What? You always say that yourself!". I turned to him and said: "Yes, that's his right... it's his mom. But it's not cool for someone else to slam her like that".

It seems to be a fairly human trait. And trust me, yes, we Americans are ruthless about how much we make fun of ourselves. Here in Palm Beach, for example, we constantly go on about how dumb people here are (especially the elderly which makes a good chunk of the people living here). Plenty of jokes about driving habits, grocery store behaviour, etc. We have phrases like "Oh, they're from *Boca*..." or "Typical island resident". The same kind of jokes any region has about themselves. But when the world turned on us during the election, we all got pissed.

Human nature - we make fun of ourselves and laugh... as long as we're the only ones laughing. Look at Homer and Bart Simpson.

--
Evan

Re:hey hosers...

[JabberWokky]

Which is, actually, an interesting point about Canadian humour. We're constantly making fun of ourselves (well... Americans, too ;). Americans, though, don't seem to have the same sense of humour about themselves and their culture

I think it's pretty much human nature that a group can make fun of themselves, but dislike when others try to do the exact same. Witness the word "nigger", used by blacks amongst themselves. Hell, witness the word "geek" used amongst computer experts. And I have a japanese friend (spent a few years growing up in England, less than a year in the US) who got all pissed at some ass talking loudly at a airshow about how those japs can't build airplanes worth a shit, but when he screws up, or a fellow japanese screws up, he uses his phrase "all us dumb nipsters".

As far as "hicks of the far north" humor goes, could you see Red Green try building a rocket for the X-Prize? It would somehow involve duct tape, a drill, a watering trough, and lots of fire. Ah, PBS... land of the Boston Pops, Nova, and lit fart jokes.

--
Evan

Re:Less Fuel?

[Webmonger]

Furthermore, you don't need to hit escape velocity to get to orbit. Even one mile per year, as long as you maintain it, will eventually take you into orbit.

Not exactly

[delmoi]

You need to be moving at a certan speed tangental to the orbit you want to be on. The speed is defined by how far away you are. If you were really, really, far away then you could orbit the earth at 1mile/year, but you would be much more affected by the sun and other celestial bodies.

Is the hot air Katz provided?

[Unknown Poltroon]

He seems ilke an enviornment friendly source.

Re:Is the hot air Katz provided?

[Fjord]

Sure, it seems like an environmentally friendly source, until you consider what going into manufacturing a John Katz. Couple that with the waste it produces while in use, the relatively short life span, and the disposal problems, propane is much better.

Re:JP Aerospace

[taniwha]

yup - and as they've found while it seems easy - tie a rocket on a balloon, let go of the balloon, launch the rocket when it get high enough - it's not - I've watched those guys (JP's mob - all volunteers) at Blackrock work their way up from small scale models in baby steps over the past few years, they'll make it eventually - it's hard, harder than it seems - launching big balloons is a hard problem in itself

Re:Canada in Space

[Nastard]

It's okay. I liken it to watching a child grow up, discovering the same things you did, making the same silly mistakes, and learning the same valuable lessons. And they have us to learn from, so they will eventually catch up.

I look forward to Canada reaching the point where they can build a challenger.

--

Top Secret Canadian Plan To Take Over The World

[roman_mir]

movie

some news: Canadian government is preparing itself for a top secret operation code name: "the da Vinci Project" to take over the world. Apparently a hot air baloon, a medium sized air to space and back to Earth missile and a large parachute will be used. The idea is to cover the rest of unpopulated area with large images of red maple leaves thus confusing the beavers into believing that the fall is coming with all the horrible consequences... 95 to 99 percent of population is expected to be eliminated from the face of the planet.
On the lighter note Appeals Court Denies Microsoft Request for Rehearing, more tba later.

William Gibson

[No Such Agency]

"Red Star, Winter Orbit" features spacecraft launched from solar-power balloons that people had colonized. They make their way up to an abandoned Russian space station just in time to move in...

"We're from the balloons. Squatters, I guess you could say. Heard the place was empty. You know the orbit is decaying on this thing?" The man executed a clumsy midair somersault, the tools clattering on his belt. "This free fall's outrageous."

"God," said the woman, "I just can't get used to it! It's wonderful. It's like skydiving, but there's no wind."

Korolev stared at the man, who had the blundering, careless look of someone drunk on freedom since birth. "But you don't even have a launchpad," he said.

"Launchpad?" the man said, laughing. "What we do, we haul these surplus booster engines up the cables to the balloons, drop 'em, and fire 'em in midair."

"That's insane," Korolev said.

"Got us here, didn't it?"

That's what's wrong with the X-prize

[btempleton]

I understand the desire to make a target that can be more easily attained by a private group, but the real problem in getting to space for real -- ie. to orbit, is momentum, not the atmosphere.

So this group has figured that in getting to 120km of altitude, the atmosphere is a big part, so a baloon can make the difference. Great, but what use is it in getting us closer to private space ventures, which is what the X prize was supposed to be about?

Re:That's what's wrong with the X-prize

[btempleton]

Ok, so what's the payload to orbit for this six foot rocket? Why has nobody built a small payload launch facility at altitude somewhere that there is a mountain range on a tropical east coast? Because while 20 miles is good, 2 miles is still above a lot of the atmosphere, no? Just political reasons?

Well, if the x-prize results in something that can launch a nanosat, I guess I will have to eat my words, but it would still be nice to see people aiming for orbit.

Re:That's what's wrong with the X-prize

[Christopher Thomas]

So this group has figured that in getting to 120km of altitude, the atmosphere is a big part, so a baloon can make the difference. Great, but what use is it in getting us closer to private space ventures, which is what the X prize was supposed to be about?

It's useful because the same technique lets you build much smaller orbital spacecraft.

To have enough delta-v to reach orbit with chemical fuels, your rocket has to be mostly fuel (between 90% and 95%, depending on the specific impulse of the fuel).

The strength-to-weight ratio of your rocket's frame gets better as your rocket gets smaller. This makes it much easier to build, say, a six-foot rocket that's 95% fuel than a 60-foot rocket that's 95% fuel.

Your rocket will lose energy as it plows through the atmosphere. As you make the rocket bigger, this becomes less of a problem. The balance point is where the cross-sectional mass of your rocket (mass per unit cross-sectional area) becomes greater than the cross-sectional mass of the column of air that it's plowing through.

At sea level, that's about 10 tons per square yard. Your rocket has to be about 30 feet high to reach the balance point, and would ideally be much larger. This will be a big, expensive rocket, and making it 95% fuel will be difficult.

Go up 20 miles or so, and you're above 90% of the atmosphere. The tradeoff point happens when your rocket is 3 feet long. Remember how I said building a 6-foot rocket that's 95% fuel is easier than building a 60-foot one? You could build something like this in a garage. All you need to have an orbit-capable mini-rocket is a way to bring the launch platform 20 miles into the air.

A mini-rocket would still be very commercially viable. Do a web search for "nanosat" and "picosat" to find projects that could be launched on a rocket this size.

A balloon is a great way to do this. Various types of powered aircraft might be able to make the trip too.

*That* is the benefit of this type of project - researching a practical launch platform that could be used for small, orbit-capable rockets.

Re: Wow. They read in Canada.

[Spameroni]

Not only that, but William Gibson IS Canadian.

Re:Reusable Balloon?

[bwohlgemuth]

Am I the only one who is wondering about this:

"From there, the rocket will simultaneously disconnect from the balloon, ignite its engines and shoot out of the upper atmosphere and into space."

"Mr. Feeney hauls himself into the seven-metre-long bullet, carefully avoiding the pair of ominous black rocket nozzles and works his way up to the front windows that look as though they were stolen from the alien invaders of War of the Worlds".

Last time I checked my physics book, wouldn't the balloon be DIRECTLY IN THE PATH of his planned trajectory? All the pretty windows will give him a nice view of the insides of the balloon. If it's made of Mylar, maybe he will have a nice view of some guy screaming his head off as he zips uncontrolled into the outer atmosphere.

B

Re:I think this needs asking...

[Abcd1234]

Heh, well, while I do agree with you about your observation (I myself am a proud Canadian currently living in the nations capital, and I've noticed a great deal of Canadian-bashing on /.), we do deserve at least a little derision, given the amount of criticism we level at our neighbours to the south. I myself have enjoyed a good bout of American-bashing (as I'm sure many others have, all over the world :), so it doesn't surprise me when I see a little turn-about on an American-based website with a majority American readership.

Granted, the tone of the comments tends to be different (Americans, when bashing Canadians, tend to be haughty, arrogant, and condescending, while Canadians are more self-riteous), but that's mostly cultural and shouldn't really be surprising. After all, many Americans (in my observation) really do think the US is the greatest nation in the world, while Canadians tend to, at least partially, identify themselves as proudly being "not-American" (again, my observation).

In the end, I just view all of this with a certain bit of humour. And, it's not exactly unique to the American-Canadian relationship... Americans have similar stereotypes about the French, British, etc, and I'm sure Canadians have similar sterotypes (eg, the Quebeque, and they're part of our country!). Besides, there are a number of excellent, informative, supportive comments, along with the Canadian bashing, so it's not all bad.

Re:I think this needs asking...

[Abcd1234]

He he, and that doesn't surprise me one bit. :) You know, it's funny, though... after re-reading my post, I realized that even I have that us-vs-them mentality toward Quebec.. I was raised in Alberta, so, really, I have an us-vs-them mentality toward all of eastern Canada :), but, still, it's kind of sad. What's worse is that you guys think of us as "exactly like american"... I suppose it shouldn't be surprising, but it still makes me feel sad, that the country should be so divided...

Re:Canada in Space

[CrazyLegs]

Umm...hate to burst yer bubble, dude, but a lot of the engineering experience that went into Apollo and Shuttle designs was Canadian. A lot of Canadian aerospace engineering talent cut their teeth on the ill-fated Avro Arrow eventually made their was into the US space program. The Arrow, designed during the cold war, was a fighter jet years ahead of its time. The Canadian government mysteriously shit-canned the project, but it's a well-accepted theory in Canada that pressure from the US military was largely responsible for this (they did not want such advanced military tech freely available outside the US at this time).

secret weapon

[rakerman]

Actually Canada's secret weapon is the Canadian Arrow which is based on the design of the V2 rocket.

Re:Less Fuel?

[Phanatic1a]

Actually, NASA gets "escape velocity" wrong on that page. They're saying it's the speed you need to go just to reach orbit. That's obviously not true, because if you're in orbit, you haven't escaped. Imagine a universe comprised entirely of the Earth and a freeze-dried aardvark. The aardvark is floating in space at a distance of infinity from the Earth. It begins to fall towards the Earth, accelerating as it goes. The speed it will have attained by the time it impacts is equal to Earth's escape velocity. It is indeed 11.2km/s, and quite a bit faster than mere orbital velocities.

Could this be used to launch minisats?

[ColGraff]

I just had a thought. Could this system be used to launch the breadbox-sized minisats mit is working on? Once the main space capsule left the atmosphere, couldn't it release a small satellite with a small engine before it re-entered the atmosphere. Even if you couldn't get the minisat in orbit, might it still be usefull for some minutes/hours/whatever before it came down?

Please note, I am not a rocket scientist, just an overcaffeinated nerd.


USA Intellectual Property Laws: 5 monkeys, 1 hour.

Wow, Gibson reads Van Allen.

[Chris Y Taylor]

The concept was invented by James Van Allen (the same guy who invented radiation belts... or something like that) and some of his associates while they were working on sounding rockets back in the late 1940s.

Van Allen was not Canadian, he was from Iowa. I don't know where any of the other co-inventors were from. Not to say anything bad about Canada's contribution to spaceflight; by cancling the Avro Arrow, Canada freed up a lot of good engineers to come down here to the Southern part of the United States and work on the Apollo program.

More about James Van Allen: http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/spec-coll/Bai/halas.htm

More about rockoons: http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/lvs/rockoon. htm

Hardcore rocket experts!

[r3volve]

"We've got the expertise ... we've got real hard-core rocket experts."

"The spaceship's connected to the... ballon, the balloon's connected to the.. wristwatch.." -Dr. Nick

First Civilian in space

[elgrinner]

Brian Feeney claims he will be the first civilian in space, but that is not possible. Dennis Tito was the first. At least Nasa considered him a civilian.

Re:Less Fuel?

[Ralph Wiggam]

According to NASA escape velocity is 11.2 km/sec or 25038.72 mph. But what do they know, they're stupid American rocket scientists.

-B

JP Aerospace

[Chairboy]

This is the same technique used by JPAerospace in their CATS prize attempt.

http://jpaerospace.com

Re:No mention of this...

[BobGregg]

>If this were someone from the Southern part of the United States,
>we would all be laughing our butts off at this hair brained scheme.

Uh... balloon launched rockets have been around since the '50s. There's even a well-known term for it: a "rockoon". Try a Google search for information.

And as for "laughing your ass off" at the southern United States... one of the most successful recent rockoon launches, and the highest amateur rocket launch *ever*, was a rockoon launch just 3 years ago by... wait for it... the Huntsville, Alabama, chapter of the National Space Society. It was called Project HALO (High-Altitude Lift Off). The only reason they didn't actually reach space the last time was due to a last-second failure of the balloon; and they're still trying to raise funds to purchase another one. Quite a noble effort.

Re:Canada in Space

[Galvatron]

I look forward to Canada reaching the point where they can build a challenger.

Ouch, that is a tasteless pun. Pretty damn funny though :)

The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.

I think this needs asking...

[RobinH]

I've noticed something disturbing - that any time a story mentions Canada, everyone jumps in to make fun of it. I understand that most readers of /. are Americans, but does that mean we have to ignore the posted story and focus on unimportant details like nationality?

We are living in a global society now, or at least that's what the internet is supposed to be creating, so why are we still concerned with these arbitrary meat world boundaries? Can't we get on with a meaningful discussion here?

The fact that there are companies competing for the X-Prize is reason enough to link this story. Perhaps it should not have featured Canada so prominently in the title - it's not surprising that Canada is taking part in cutting edge research and development, because it always has. So, can we drop the nationalism at the homepage, and address the topic at hand?

Re:I think this needs asking...

[bartle]

After all, many Americans (in my observation) really do think the US is the greatest nation in the world

This attitude comes directly from American culture. We Americans are immersed in American culture to such a great extent that we have to go out of our way to see something that originated from another country. It is simply human nature assume that your way is the best; when you don't see many foreign movies, listen to foreign music, or read foreign books, this belief is continually reenforced.

People in other countries experience American culture as well but they're able to put it in better context. They realize that the American way is just one way of life and leave it at that. For Americans, there is nothing that challenges our lifestyle and our country in any meaningful way.

Don't know if I explained it very well, but I think that's the just of it. Until something comes along and successfully challenges our culture (France overpowers Hollywood, Indian music becomes a worldwide trend, etc.), we're going to remain a pretty arrogant people.

Dirgible Schema

[Digitalia]

This isn't something that deserves to be lambasted and lampooned as much as it seems to be. It's a fine use of some old-school tech to solve a problem of today. Considering the advances in materials science since the days of the Zeppelin, we could produce some reliably safe craft with much greater lifting capabilities than ever before. In addition, the lifting apparatus could also serve as a means of terrestrial transport.

Question for Carmack

[Reality Master 101]

Because I know he's reading. :)

What is your team's ultimate goal? Your web site states that you want to have "manned rockets", but do you want to achieve orbital space ships? Just ships to fly to 7-11 and back? Moon flights?

And is this just a hobby to you? What about the future? Can you ever see rolling your current hobby into a future aerospace company?

--

Re:Question for Carmack

[John Carmack]

Taking things one step at a time is critical for success.

We have a pretty clear plan of attack to take us to X-Prize level vehicles. There will be several intermediate vehicles to learn from along the way, but I am pretty confident that we can do it, and that I can pay for it. The regulatory approval is still uncertain. Things get much more questionable after that.

The next step would be using the X-Prize vehicle as a booster for a upper stage(s) that launch a microsat into orbit. That requires many times for dV, and the regulatory environment, telemetry, and logistics become a lot more challenging. This would get fairly expensive, because making a reusable upper stage(s) is a whole new level of problem, and you just can't test a lot of the systems without going all the way. Even on a shoestring, it could easily get to $100k for each attempt, after you factor everything in. Realistically, it will take a lot of attempts to learn everything you need to know. A lot of people will talk about how straightforward it is, but I have a healthy respect for the challenges. Smart money probably wouldn't bet on any "garage shop" getting to orbit, but it certainly isn't impossible.

After that, you could either work towards reusable upper stages, or scale everything up to the point you could try to orbit a passenger or a semi-useful LEO satellite.

Sure, if all that works out, I would love to make a moon shot, but that qualifies as day-dreaming, not planning. The idea that Dennis Wingo has floated recently about M class asteroids rich in platinum group metals possibly being able to have survived impact on the moon without vaporizing under some conditions is Very Very Interesting.

The extent of my "business planning" for the rockets is along the lines of "If you actually make something really, really cool, you will wind up making money on it somehow". Hopelessly naive? Possibly. We'll see. I hate being involved in business, so we would probably just partner with some of the existing companies interested in suborbital rides or sounding rocket business.

In the short term, watch for us getting a man off the ground in the upscaled lander frame within a couple months.

On topic: I think pretty highly of the DaVinci project, and I would say they are definitely one of the leading contenders. Brian Feeney talks about some technical issues on open mailing lists, which is a good sign. My biggest concern for them would be that, from my experience with JP Aerospace, getting two successful rockoon launches off within the 14 days required by the X-Prize is going to involve a good sized helping of luck.

John Carmack

Re:hey hosers...

[Abcd1234]

Which is, actually, an interesting point about Canadian humour. We're constantly making fun of ourselves (well... Americans, too ;). Americans, though, don't seem to have the same sense of humour about themselves and their culture (although they obviously do about their politicians... look who they elected president... ;).

Re:Reusable Balloon?

[jarodss]

Are we missing something by not reading all of the article???
1. The rocket carrying passenger Brian Feeney lifted to an altitude of 18km -- suspended 300m below a piloted hot-air balloon . The computer-controlled engine ignites and the rocket simultaneously separates from the balloon tether.

2. After 7 - 8 seconds of flight at 60 degrees followed by thrust vectoring to 90 degrees , the four fins separate from the rocket. The main engine cuts off at 40km, and the rocket glides for about five minutes in zero - G.
Emphasis mine of course, but if I am not mistaken the balloon is piloted, so then it should be landable, and the rocket is launched at a 60 degree angle to move away from the balloon then they change the vector to 90 degrees to continue into space.

Less Fuel?

[Phanatic1a]

Not much less. The whole problem to attaining orbit isn't so much that you've got to get up really high, but that you've got to get going really fast. The "first half" of an orbital flight isn't getting to 40,000 feet, it's getting to 8,500 miles per hour. Starting the engines only at 40,000 feet is helpful if all you want to do is fire a sub-orbital shot that leaves most of the atmosphere and comes back, but for actually putting substantial packages into orbit it doesn't help much, except with tiny payload masses. Still, I wish the guy good luck. Hopefully he'll fare better than Larry Waters.

hey hosers...

[turbine216]

Bob: The plans for this craft were written in 3-B, dontchaknow...

Doug: Yeah, 3 beers and it looks great, eh!

Eh-prize

[Aerog]

Firstly, it mentions Brian Feeney as Canada's first civilian astronaut, not the first, but that's just really technicalities.

The important thing is that Canada's finally using some of our precious few research dollars to do something that we should have been working on for quite some time. The benefits are clear and many:

The mission uses less fuel, since overcoming the first half can be done with a reusable balloon.

With the advantages of the balloon, it should be less of a problem as to where the launch site is, thus eliminating the need to ship everything to the deep south

We can finally paint a space vehicle red and white and have an onboard beer-cooler, potentially powered By the engines if we get the Kiwis onboard.

It saves on having to pay NASA for payload capacity to run our countless zero-G experiments

The X prize is potentially more than the entire gov't-funded budget.

Hell, this is exactly what I want to do with an Engineering degree!