Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Flight Testing Of Burt Rutan's X Prize Entry

Posted by timothy on from the rutan-tootin' dept.

evenprime writes "The X Prize website is reporting that Burt Rutan's company Scaled Composites did some flight testing on their SpaceShipOne/White Knight launch platform on May 19, 2003. Next up: drop tests. There's also a nice write-up at the BBC website."

5 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The profit is not in underpants. by aiabx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You forgot the details:
    3a) Take passengers for $50k rides.
    3b) Licence technology
    3c) Sell space planes for $5m.
    -aiabx

    --
    Just this guy, you know?
  2. Re:Huge things at stake by Moofie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rutan has a better track record than the rest of the competitors, combined.

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  3. Re:X-Prize & Surreality by Moofie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Complex design? Airborne launch is well-proven technology. The spacecraft is very cleverly and elegantly designed. The vehicle has enough "cargo" space to carry three people. Or two people and 200lbs of cargo. It carries a lot more than my Miata, and my Miata is a damn useful vehicle. Although I don't want to hold up the Shuttle as a great design, it obviously does fine with unpowered landing. Carrying fuel for re-entry and landing is insanely expensive in terms of weight and vehicle size. Unless there's something mission critical that requires fuel during the landing evolution, you /really/ don't want to waste weight with it.

    What do you base your cost estimates on?

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  4. Re:X-Prize & Surreality by maggard · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The pluses to the design are the high-altitude launch (elegant), and the low-speed entry (elegant).
    Agreed.
    The minuses as I see it are the relatively complex design,
    Compared to what? X-33? Personal jetpacks? NCC-X? Sure it could be brute-forced with a big block of steel and a coupla nukes but this whole thing is about design. Indeed this one looks simpler then most of the others once one gets over it not being designed by a T-square.
    lack of cargo space,
    It's not intended to be a tug. Rather it's a demo meeting the X-Pride criteria put together privately in two years. Pull out the seats if you want luggage. Besides, where would it bring cargo to?
    cost,
    Cheaper then most anything else. Heck, privately financed at that.
    unpowered landing.
    This is the beta version. Ruttan's got a long history with aircraft including unpowered or marginally-powered ones, I'm sure it'll land fine, seems to have worked well for the 99 ton SST.
    Oh, and the fact that it is very, very ugly.
    Oh, well yeah, that it doesn't jibe with your sense of aesthetics means it hasn't a chance. Howzabout you post your photo and the rest of us can predict your odds of success?
    A similar re-entry vehicle, but larger with powered maneuverability on re-entry,
    Why? 'Cause you want a commercial passenger service on the 1st flight? You've got some bias against unpowered landings?
    with a high-altitude balloon as a "first stage" would rock.
    Why? Kewler? I think the first flight succeeding would rock, not your backseat redesigning.
    And be cheaper.
    How? Helium costs y'know. And that balloon & helium wouldn't be recoverable. Plus the first meter off the ground under a big balloon is really hazardous, a heck of a lot more then a glider landing.

    Besides, the White Night is also the trainer for the spacecraft. Yep, you heard me, they load a profile on computer in the WN and it flies the same as the spacecraft! Double duty saving lots of money.

    I'm not really sure how huge a balloon (hydrogen or helium) would have to be to drag something that big to the requisite altitude, especially if you intended to go beyond 100km.
    Big. The math isn't that hard for a rough but trust me, big. and expensive. And non-reusable. And a hazard afterwords.
    The second stage would be heavier, unless you had a new fuel or more efficient use of the fuel.
    Yeah, well now that you've pretty much trashed all the other engineering now you want, what, super rockets? Sure, we'll just use the ones off your Voltron doll...

    How about just come out with it and admit you want Star Trek teleporters, forget this nasty uncomfortable dangerous test vehicle stuff? Hell I bet the thing doesn't even have in-flight service with a decent bar cart!

    Frankly you come off as the the exact sort of useless US holiday poster you mention. Lots of inane second guessing, apparently no homework before reading one article, coming up with ridiculous requirements: Cargo? For a test vehicle? Meeting X-Prize criteria? Have you EVER been around ANY sort of engineering project?

    Score you -3 for silly whiner.

    --
    I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
  5. President, no thanks by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My only disagreement is with "Rutan for president". It's an insult to this great man to lump him in with an organization, government, whose whole existence is predicated on force and which can only fund itself by theft.

    To the contrary it's the efforts of Mr Rutan and others like him which will finally put our species out of the reach of government.