comcn writes "The BBC have an article about an amateur "rocketeer" trying to send himself into space. After the £7m prize was announced for the first non-commercial person to get into space, it seems there are now several people aiming to win it. Cool."
...is going to get the title Best Darwin Award Ever.
Re:This guy...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
"...is going to get the title Best Darwin Award Ever."
I hate the so-called "Darwin Awards" for their "HA-HA I'm *so* much smarter than these (often drunken) fools HA-HA"-attitude even though I generally like nasty humor, but I despise the attitude displayed in the above post even more. If the Wright who flew the first plane would have crashed and died, and you would have been there, would you have gloated "It's a good thing that imbecile cleansed himself from the gene pool"? I don't know how well this person has planned his rocket trip or even if he's sane, but I applaud him at attempting something I wouldn't have the guts to do.
Currently (about two nanoseconds after the story was posted) the above post has 3 +funnies, I hope that it goes down to -1 troll. But it probably won't, since joking about risky attempts that push the limits of human experience in the vein "HA-HA this idiot is gonna die HA-HA" is very, very popular on Slashdot.:-(
Re:This guy...
by
TMacPhail
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
That would only be a darwain award if he did not actually make it to space. If he did make it I would not consider the way he killed himself stupid at all. He managed to get into space as somewhat of an amature. That is no small acomplishment.
I still tend to agree with you just becasue it is so funny yet also true.
...is really VERY cool. You should see the way in which ITN 'reported' this story on their Evening News show. The put it in the the HILARIOUS '...and finally' slot - basically treating the whole thing as a joke. The two (massively overpaid) presenters - no, they're NOT journalists - were laughing when they went back to the studio. W A N K E R S.
He expected his rocket to get to 1800 m. It reached 1525 m and two of the three parachutes became entangled.
Well, 1525/1800 = 84.7%. He said that the launch was 85% successfull, so he doesn't give a dam about the parachutes (actually, he gives 0.3%).
-- This space left intentionally blank.
It's all about da Benjamins, baby...
by
Knunov
·
· Score: 5, Funny
From the article:
"Mr Bennett...wants to win the $10m...X-Prize. This award...will go to the first non-governmental outfit to put people on a rocket...62 miles...above the Earth...flying twice within a two-week period...[and]...also carry passengers."
In other news:
"A group of loosely organized computer enthusiasts from the website Slashdot have developed a space vehicle called the "Leech".
This craft is essentially a septic tank with enormous velcro straps. They have apparently bribed a NASA engineer with a $1m payday if he lets them piggyback on the space shuttle.
A model rocket engine has been attached to the rear of he septic tank because hey, rules are rules.
Knunov
-- Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
NASA out of business?
by
mind21_98
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
If this does succeed, does that mean NASA will die? Since private companies would be able to do it more efficently than them? Or is there still a use for them?
NASA aren't in business. Atleast they aren't supposed to be. But not even billionaires seem to be able to get into the launch business due to NASA. Check out what Mr. Beal said when he left the launch platform business. But the competition from the Russians and other players is immense (they can launch for 1/4 the price of NASA), and NASA shows no sign of being able to compete, and are falling behind the price curve at a tremendous rate.
NASA's proportion of the space pie is shrinking- commercial operators, some of them NASA contractors are growing, and NASA can't grow due to it's fixed budget from the government- it's actually part of the government. That's a good thing in fact. Companies are supposed to grow, Governments can only grow by increasing taxation.
NASA should stick to what it's good at, exploration, not commercial launching.
They'd just have to specialize. I mean even if it got really cheap to launch sats into space, who can go up there and repair them, or bring them back? NASA. Plus a lot of the stuff NASA does, no one with a profit motive would do. i.e. Hubble and any other experiements.
Link:
Starchaser
He might just do it, maybe. I'll give him a 1/2 chance of doing it within 2010.
Don't forget Brian Walker
by
ruszka
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Brian Walker is an American who has had a lifelong dream of going into space. He's been working for a long time now to get there on his own. His website is here. His story is very interesting considering what all he's gone through to get this far. His launch date is set for May of 2002.
Is this guy serious?
by
Shade,+The
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
It's one thing to launch an 11m rocket some 5000ft, it's quite another to build a functioning spacecraft!
At the very minimum it would have to carry a ton of payload; most probably quite a bit more. To get an idea of the kinds of equipment involved, this link on the Delta II provides a good overview of the kind of sheer power and equipment needed to put even a relatively small 5 ton payload into space.
Even the new X-34 being developed by NASA for cheaper space-flight still estimates a $500'000 cost per launch, and that's not even including the construction costs!
That an amateur could attempt this at all is ridiculous, let alone be the first non-governmental outfit to achieve this. You have to wonder what's going on in this guy's head.
>Even the new X-34 [nasa.gov] being developed by NASA for cheaper space-flight still estimates a $500'000 cost per launch...
>...That an amateur could attempt this at all is ridiculous, let alone be the first non-governmental outfit to achieve this.
I agree. For any commercial or private organisation to be as expensive as NASA, they'd be laughed out of court.
That's the entire point of this contest. To see if an amateur can find a way to get to space, which will in all likelyhood be significantly cheaper (and with a quicker turn-around) then the Government has been able to do.
It may be a long-shot, but hey, if nobody can do it, then they've lost nothing. If someone can, then they've found a cheaper, faster way into space... easily worth the ten million dollar prize.
To win you need to fly up 100000m. This rocket flew 5000m and the recovery system failed. That 95% remaining height is a big deal and the recovery from that height is going to be a real b*tch. It is not just a matter of putting more fuel in the rocket and stratospheric parachuting is not like the usual parachute descent.
This looks like a fund raising media event more than proof of anything that will win the prize within a year. Still, this is cool.
--
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
Re:Not almost there
by
AndroidCat
·
· Score: 2, Funny
It was 5000' not 5000m. Say! Do you work for NASA by any chance?:^)
Of course that makes the remaining job even harder. What he's got now is just a big model rocket.
-- One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
In other news...
by
Master+Of+Ninja
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The BBC also reports that another group have put a 5.4m rocket 700ft into the air. From what it seems these people have a better chance of putting things into space, since they already hold the UK record for the highest amateur rocket. (Anybody know what the highest a rocket has gone in the USA?)
I would say they have a better chance of getting things into space. Their record rocket went 35,00ft into the air, plus they have developed their own engine. Their fuel is supposed to be efficient - its got nitrous oxide in it! (ok i don't know what this really would mean but after watching "The Fast and the Furious" it just seems cool). Plus their ambitions seems to be getting sattelites and not people into space - more readily acheiveable IMHO.
Re:In other news...
by
NeoTron
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Yes, this group is called MARS - Middlesex Advanced Rocketry Society, of which I am one of the Flight Crew.
Bennet is basically a big joke in the UK, he has got all rocketry groups banned from using military bases to test rockets from, and one of his earlier rocket escapades burned a substantial part of moorland in Dartmoor.
Bennets rocket is nothing more than a scaled-up HPR (High Power Rocket) vehicle, and is nothing more exciting than is flown by many HPR enthusiasts here in the UK and the US.
Our most recent success flew last weekend - it's a true and proper amateur rocket utilising our new Hybrid rocket motor, quite possibly the most powerfull amateur hybrid motor flown anywhere in the world:)
What is the difference between HPR and your type of rocket?
All the Karma Whoring Details
by
1alpha7
·
· Score: 3, Informative
For those of you interested in Darwin Awards, here is the X-Prize site. Here is Robert A. Braeunig's page on how to do it, orbital mechanics and the like. Space.com usually carries the X-prize news. For those of you wondering about the difference between an Ariane and a Proteus, here is the glossary
1Alpha7
-- Live to be Moderated
1500 meters not even close to space.
by
searleb
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
1500 meters is dramatically different than the 100 kilometer reward and still significantly less than even Brian Walker's goal of 30 km. Even commercial airliners fly at approximately 9000 meters.
Still, it's nice to see that the guy got things off the ground and was able to rescue (and reuse?) some of the parts at the same time.
Old stuff...
by
chhamilton
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
After the £7m prize was announced for the first non-commercial person to get into space, it seems there are now several people aiming to win it. Cool.
You make it seem like a new prize... this article is just talking about the same old X-Prize, which has been around since 1996. In fact, almost a year ago there was an article in the BBC discussing several of the contenders, and Bennett was generally talked about as being a crazy risk-taker, and least likely to win. Another (closer to home) competitor is toy-inventor Brian Walker (aka Rocket Guy, about whom there was a Slashdot article, but I can't find it as Slashdot's search is down), as well as famous aircraft designer Bert Rutan and his company Scaled Composites.
There are several other contenders, and lots of cool animations and info to be found at the X-Prize homepage.
Re:I dont think this is so cool
by
Chairboy
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
So true. Also, no way amateur programmers can equal the programming might of those professionals from Microsoft.
One man shooting himself into outer space wouldn't "kill NASA". Building space stations, going to the moon, getting rovers on Mars...etc is what the NASA teams have done.
People comparing this over-optimistic competition (I'm being generous in my choice of adjectives...it's a holiday) to feats achieved by NASA's scientists do nothing but belittle some of the finest minds in the world.
One of these days, Alice...
by
tenzig_112
·
· Score: 2
to the moon!
Average guys bumbling around in space, making all kinds of amusing [albeit costly and dangerous] mistakes... sounds interesting. But isn't there already something like this?
Commercial Rocketry
by
LazyDawg
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
If only NASA would act as a testbed facility, getting through the FAA red-tape with homebrew rockets instead of laughing at them and generally ignoring the X-prize type competitions.
Then I'd be a lot less worried about these amateurs strapping bombs to their behinds and vying for orbit. After a few failed launches, new laws will be implemented world-wide "for our protection" that prevent anyone but registered governmental space agencies from launching manned missions, and commercial spaceflight will be relegated to satellites and probes forever.
-- "Look at me, I invented the stove!" -- Ben Franklin
Re:Commercial Rocketry
by
FlexAgain
·
· Score: 3, Informative
After a few failed launches, new laws will be implemented world-wide "for our protection" that prevent anyone but registered governmental space agencies from launching manned missions, and commercial spaceflight will be relegated to satellites and probes forever.
Actually, there are existing international law, to which I am pretty sure the US has signed up, which make the Government of countries responsible for any mishaps which result from spaceflight. ie, you launch a rocket which prangs some camel in the middle of a desert, and the camels owner (or more likely, his Government) will come after your Government who is then quite likely to want to have a word in your ear about it. This is one of the reasons why totally commercial rocket launches have been a rarity, government bodies like the CAA, FAA, etc, do control what is going to be launched.
(Normal rules apply, IANAL, you are at risk of being locked away and forgotten about if you prang the ISS with your brand new home brew launch vehicle etc)
-- Actually it is rocket science...
John's the man
by
Docrates
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The BBC and CNN do it again. They oversimplify matters so that they sound like better news than they actually are, in order to satisfy their increasing market of people whose IQ is slightly lower than their shoes size. At least this article didn't twist the facts like the BBC has beeng doing during the last few months (I still can't figure out why, and the whistle has been blown broadly).
I'm pretty sure this guy is running low on cash so he hurried up this test in order to get some media attention that would help him get some more funds. It doesn't really matter really, since I already know who's goign to win. That will be Armadillo Aerospace
They had a crash a few months ago and have recovered very well. their plans are the opposite from what most of the other contestant's are doing. They're working on a design that revolves around the ability to seat people on it, instead of trying to get higher than anyone and then picking up the parts. Actually, now that I think of it, I don't even think they're doing this for the prize, which makes them even better candidates.
Of course, now I am also oversimplifying things, but at least I don't make money doing it, so I encourage you to go to John Carmak's site and check out the logs. Maybe someone here can help out with those Windows ME features he's been having problems with (check out the last few log entries)
--
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
At least the thing got off the ground. Remember the old B&W movies (american and german rocketeers) where there are dozens of launches where the rocket falls over and spins crazily on the ground, completely destroying the launch site?
Or what about when it just gets off the ground, and then stalls back into an inferno?
davinci project
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Armadillo Aerospace
by
tjackson
·
· Score: 3, Informative
How can you forget about Armadillo Aerospace? You might know the name of one of the members of the team: John Carmack. They are very serious. They have a few flight test videos, and they have a few prototypes that could carry a person (Though that spot was filled by a punching bag for testing purposes).
A better article on Mr. Bennett
by
dorkstar
·
· Score: 2, Informative
This previous article from the BBC describes Mr. Bennett's lunacy a bit more clearly.
He's not going to win the X-Prize.
Re:IS this really sensible ?
by
Chooker
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Hang on, aren't people getting slightly paranoid here? Have you ever thought that these anthrax scares from Usama (I mean him saying that he had it, not the actual anthrax letters that everyone believed came from him, and yes that is how you spell his name, check out: www.interpol.com/Public/Terrorism/Terrorists/mostw anted.asp ) were only done so that everyone would doubt their safety? Come one, get over it!
--
-- "I feel so cold, on hookers and gin... this mess we're in"
It's one thing to launch an 11m rocket some 5000ft, it's quite another to build a functioning spacecraft!
At the very minimum it would have to carry a ton of payload; most probably quite a bit more. To get an idea of the kinds of equipment involved, this link [af.mil] on the Delta II provides a good overview of the kind of sheer power and equipment needed to put even a relatively small 5 ton payload into space.
It turns out that it's a lot easier than you think to build an X-Prize-winning rocket.
The Delta rockets and other commercial launch vehicles need to get an object into _orbit_. This takes about 30 MJ/kg (the binding energy for LEO), or about 8 km/sec delta-V.
Satisfying the X prize only requires sending a payload up to 100 km. It doesn't have to stay there. This only takes about 1 MJ/kg (1.0e5 metres times about 10 m/sec^2). This corresponds to a delta-V of about 1.4 km/sec. This is much, much easier to achieve.
The reason why this is *much* easier (or more accurately, why anything higher than 2-3 km/sec is *really* hard), is that when the delta-V of your rocket is larger than your exhaust velocity, the amount of fuel needed to give that delta-V to a fixed amount of payload starts growing exponentially (it's roughly linear below this threshold). Typical specific impulses for rocket fuels are in the 2000-3000 N*s/kg range, corresponding to exhaust velocities of 2-3 km/sec. So, anything below about 2 km/sec can be accomplished with relative ease, while anything above about 4 km/sec requires a rocket that's mostly fuel (and probably multi-stage, unless you have extremely strong and light materials).
In summary, building a rocket that can lift a payload into a sub-orbital trajectory that tops out at 100 km is certainly within reach of a small group's resources.
[The real problem will be finding someone willing to pay for it. You can't lift payloads into orbit with this rocket, and cost of developing the rocket will probably be more than you'd get from the X-Prize.]
so much for my humorous title...
by
jpellino
·
· Score: 2, Funny
it was going to say "Thunderbirds are GO!" - but, dag nab it - one of these critters is actually NAMED "Thunderbird".
These run the gamut from "It's hard to imagine betting against Burt Rutan" to John Candy's old "that blowed up REAL good!"
One or two of them is simply missing "ACME Corporation" painted on the side...
I'll be the first to cheer if someone figures out how to do this reliably and cheaply. But you'd think this roster would have fewer - um - "outliers". The plane-to-rocket transition seems to be the favorite approach - on the other hand - MacCready et. al. didn't win the Kremer prizes by thinking the same as the other teams.
Gotta love the flying saucer from Oregon (by the way - we've all spent 5 minntes on the ROTOR ride (big salad spinner) at the county fair - can you imagine the aliens getting out of a spinning saucer after a multiyear trip? "Klaatu! Gort barada nik- URRRRRRRRRP!!!!! RAAAAAAAAALPH!!! Oh God...WOOOOOOOOOOOF!!! Klaatu - kill me now!")
This has to be the ultimate Big Comp for most of these folks. A copy of Strata 3D, a few glam shots in front of someone else's cool plane that ain't going to space? Cute. Dangerous. Naiive. Load people into a rocket that's literally floating in the ocean? You can't load a cup full of coffee in 2ft seas - so why give up the stability of land?
Oh well - we weren't going to have another great meteor storm for a while - this'll have to do.
-- "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Re:This might be very dangerous.
by
ZigMonty
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Such sick evilmen might attack commucinations satellites and bring down the whole internet in no time.
I know this is a joke but it raises a point made in a New Scientist article this year called "The Heavens At War" (Sorry, no link). You don't need much of a rocket to take down a satellite. All you need is the ability to deposit lots of hard objects in the satellites path. Ball bearings would do. The satellite flys into them with the combined speed of both (if they are going opposite directions). This puts puts the impact at about 14km/s. Ouch!
According to the article, dozens of countries are capable of firing this 21st century flak.
Slashdot Mirror
...is going to get the title Best Darwin Award Ever.
Cool until people hurt themselves or others. I hope there is staff to test and evaulate the equpitment before it gets to the 'launch site'
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
The rocketeer said the launch was 85% successful.
Good. So he'll come back safely; just without a head.
From the article:
"Mr Bennett...wants to win the $10m...X-Prize. This award...will go to the first non-governmental outfit to put people on a rocket...62 miles...above the Earth...flying twice within a two-week period...[and]...also carry passengers."
In other news:
"A group of loosely organized computer enthusiasts from the website Slashdot have developed a space vehicle called the "Leech".
This craft is essentially a septic tank with enormous velcro straps. They have apparently bribed a NASA engineer with a $1m payday if he lets them piggyback on the space shuttle.
A model rocket engine has been attached to the rear of he septic tank because hey, rules are rules.
Knunov
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
If this does succeed, does that mean NASA will die? Since private companies would be able to do it more efficently than them? Or is there still a use for them?
US businesses that currently accept chip and PIN/signature
Link: Starchaser He might just do it, maybe. I'll give him a 1/2 chance of doing it within 2010.
Brian Walker is an American who has had a lifelong dream of going into space. He's been working for a long time now to get there on his own. His website is here. His story is very interesting considering what all he's gone through to get this far. His launch date is set for May of 2002.
It's one thing to launch an 11m rocket some 5000ft, it's quite another to build a functioning spacecraft!
At the very minimum it would have to carry a ton of payload; most probably quite a bit more. To get an idea of the kinds of equipment involved, this link on the Delta II provides a good overview of the kind of sheer power and equipment needed to put even a relatively small 5 ton payload into space.
Even the new X-34 being developed by NASA for cheaper space-flight still estimates a $500'000 cost per launch, and that's not even including the construction costs!
That an amateur could attempt this at all is ridiculous, let alone be the first non-governmental outfit to achieve this. You have to wonder what's going on in this guy's head.
To win you need to fly up 100000m. This rocket flew 5000m and the recovery system failed. That 95% remaining height is a big deal and the recovery from that height is going to be a real b*tch. It is not just a matter of putting more fuel in the rocket and stratospheric parachuting is not like the usual parachute descent.
This looks like a fund raising media event more than proof of anything that will win the prize within a year. Still, this is cool.
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
The BBC also reports that another group have put a 5.4m rocket 700ft into the air. From what it seems these people have a better chance of putting things into space, since they already hold the UK record for the highest amateur rocket. (Anybody know what the highest a rocket has gone in the USA?)
I would say they have a better chance of getting things into space. Their record rocket went 35,00ft into the air, plus they have developed their own engine. Their fuel is supposed to be efficient - its got nitrous oxide in it! (ok i don't know what this really would mean but after watching "The Fast and the Furious" it just seems cool). Plus their ambitions seems to be getting sattelites and not people into space - more readily acheiveable IMHO.
For those of you interested in Darwin Awards, here is the X-Prize site. Here is Robert A. Braeunig's page on how to do it, orbital mechanics and the like. Space.com usually carries the X-prize news. For those of you wondering about the difference between an Ariane and a Proteus, here is the glossary
1Alpha7
Live to be Moderated
1500 meters is dramatically different than the 100 kilometer reward and still significantly less than even Brian Walker's goal of 30 km. Even commercial airliners fly at approximately 9000 meters.
Still, it's nice to see that the guy got things off the ground and was able to rescue (and reuse?) some of the parts at the same time.
After the £7m prize was announced for the first non-commercial person to get into space, it seems there are now several people aiming to win it. Cool.
You make it seem like a new prize... this article is just talking about the same old X-Prize, which has been around since 1996. In fact, almost a year ago there was an article in the BBC discussing several of the contenders, and Bennett was generally talked about as being a crazy risk-taker, and least likely to win. Another (closer to home) competitor is toy-inventor Brian Walker (aka Rocket Guy, about whom there was a Slashdot article, but I can't find it as Slashdot's search is down), as well as famous aircraft designer Bert Rutan and his company Scaled Composites.
There are several other contenders, and lots of cool animations and info to be found at the X-Prize homepage.
So true. Also, no way amateur programmers can equal the programming might of those professionals from Microsoft.
One man shooting himself into outer space wouldn't "kill NASA". Building space stations, going to the moon, getting rovers on Mars...etc is what the NASA teams have done.
People comparing this over-optimistic competition (I'm being generous in my choice of adjectives...it's a holiday) to feats achieved by NASA's scientists do nothing but belittle some of the finest minds in the world.
Average guys bumbling around in space, making all kinds of amusing [albeit costly and dangerous] mistakes... sounds interesting. But isn't there already something like this?
Average Slobs Get Chance At Space
"Rocket Scientist" no longer conotes incredible intelligence
If only NASA would act as a testbed facility, getting through the FAA red-tape with homebrew rockets instead of laughing at them and generally ignoring the X-prize type competitions.
Then I'd be a lot less worried about these amateurs strapping bombs to their behinds and vying for orbit. After a few failed launches, new laws will be implemented world-wide "for our protection" that prevent anyone but registered governmental space agencies from launching manned missions, and commercial spaceflight will be relegated to satellites and probes forever.
"Look at me, I invented the stove!" -- Ben Franklin
The BBC and CNN do it again. They oversimplify matters so that they sound like better news than they actually are, in order to satisfy their increasing market of people whose IQ is slightly lower than their shoes size. At least this article didn't twist the facts like the BBC has beeng doing during the last few months (I still can't figure out why, and the whistle has been blown broadly).
I'm pretty sure this guy is running low on cash so he hurried up this test in order to get some media attention that would help him get some more funds. It doesn't really matter really, since I already know who's goign to win. That will be Armadillo Aerospace
They had a crash a few months ago and have recovered very well. their plans are the opposite from what most of the other contestant's are doing. They're working on a design that revolves around the ability to seat people on it, instead of trying to get higher than anyone and then picking up the parts. Actually, now that I think of it, I don't even think they're doing this for the prize, which makes them even better candidates.
Of course, now I am also oversimplifying things, but at least I don't make money doing it, so I encourage you to go to John Carmak's site and check out the logs. Maybe someone here can help out with those Windows ME features he's been having problems with (check out the last few log entries)
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
At least the thing got off the ground. Remember the old B&W movies (american and german rocketeers) where there are dozens of launches where the rocket falls over and spins crazily on the ground, completely destroying the launch site? Or what about when it just gets off the ground, and then stalls back into an inferno?
see:
http://www.xprize.org/~Xprize/teams/davinci/ind
the site also has links to other teams
tres cool!
How can you forget about Armadillo Aerospace? You might know the name of one of the members of the team: John Carmack . They are very serious. They have a few flight test videos, and they have a few prototypes that could carry a person (Though that spot was filled by a punching bag for testing purposes).
Check out:
Armadillo Aerospace
Comment by JC about his rockets (Hydrogen Peroxide-based, by the way).
Their demonstration video(quite impressive).
This previous article from the BBC describes Mr. Bennett's lunacy a bit more clearly.
He's not going to win the X-Prize.
Hang on, aren't people getting slightly paranoid here? Have you ever thought that these anthrax scares from Usama (I mean him saying that he had it, not the actual anthrax letters that everyone believed came from him, and yes that is how you spell his name, check out: www.interpol.com/Public/Terrorism/Terrorists/mostw anted.asp ) were only done so that everyone would doubt their safety? Come one, get over it!
--
"I feel so cold, on hookers and gin... this mess we're in"
It's one thing to launch an 11m rocket some 5000ft, it's quite another to build a functioning spacecraft!
At the very minimum it would have to carry a ton of payload; most probably quite a bit more. To get an idea of the kinds of equipment involved, this link [af.mil] on the Delta II provides a good overview of the kind of sheer power and equipment needed to put even a relatively small 5 ton payload into space.
It turns out that it's a lot easier than you think to build an X-Prize-winning rocket.
The Delta rockets and other commercial launch vehicles need to get an object into _orbit_. This takes about 30 MJ/kg (the binding energy for LEO), or about 8 km/sec delta-V.
Satisfying the X prize only requires sending a payload up to 100 km. It doesn't have to stay there. This only takes about 1 MJ/kg (1.0e5 metres times about 10 m/sec^2). This corresponds to a delta-V of about 1.4 km/sec. This is much, much easier to achieve.
The reason why this is *much* easier (or more accurately, why anything higher than 2-3 km/sec is *really* hard), is that when the delta-V of your rocket is larger than your exhaust velocity, the amount of fuel needed to give that delta-V to a fixed amount of payload starts growing exponentially (it's roughly linear below this threshold). Typical specific impulses for rocket fuels are in the 2000-3000 N*s/kg range, corresponding to exhaust velocities of 2-3 km/sec. So, anything below about 2 km/sec can be accomplished with relative ease, while anything above about 4 km/sec requires a rocket that's mostly fuel (and probably multi-stage, unless you have extremely strong and light materials).
In summary, building a rocket that can lift a payload into a sub-orbital trajectory that tops out at 100 km is certainly within reach of a small group's resources.
[The real problem will be finding someone willing to pay for it. You can't lift payloads into orbit with this rocket, and cost of developing the rocket will probably be more than you'd get from the X-Prize.]
it was going to say "Thunderbirds are GO!" - but, dag nab it - one of these critters is actually NAMED "Thunderbird".
These run the gamut from "It's hard to imagine betting against Burt Rutan" to John Candy's old "that blowed up REAL good!"
One or two of them is simply missing "ACME Corporation" painted on the side...
I'll be the first to cheer if someone figures out how to do this reliably and cheaply. But you'd think this roster would have fewer - um - "outliers". The plane-to-rocket transition seems to be the favorite approach - on the other hand - MacCready et. al. didn't win the Kremer prizes by thinking the same as the other teams.
Gotta love the flying saucer from Oregon (by the way - we've all spent 5 minntes on the ROTOR ride (big salad spinner) at the county fair - can you imagine the aliens getting out of a spinning saucer after a multiyear trip? "Klaatu! Gort barada nik- URRRRRRRRRP!!!!! RAAAAAAAAALPH!!! Oh God...WOOOOOOOOOOOF!!! Klaatu - kill me now!")
This has to be the ultimate Big Comp for most of these folks. A copy of Strata 3D, a few glam shots in front of someone else's cool plane that ain't going to space? Cute. Dangerous. Naiive. Load people into a rocket that's literally floating in the ocean? You can't load a cup full of coffee in 2ft seas - so why give up the stability of land?
Oh well - we weren't going to have another great meteor storm for a while - this'll have to do.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
According to the article, dozens of countries are capable of firing this 21st century flak.
More can be found at the authors site.