Slashdot Mirror
X-Prize Overview: To The Edge Of Space, Cheap
_randy_64 writes "The X-Prize competition has gotten a lot of coverage on Slashdot - either because it's cool and geeky or because John Carmack is involved. The Baltimore Sun has a decent background/overview article on the contest in Sunday's edition."
Well although the parent is quick to point out the $200m cost of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) in comparison to the $400m shuttle launch cost thats just plain incorrect.
The correct figures are as follows (taken from http://hubble.nasa.gov/faq.html + NASA STS-82 docs):
Initial Cost: $1.5 Billion
Yearly Cost: $230-250 Million
STS-82 Repair:
Parts: $387 Million
Flight: $430 Million
So if we tally the costs over the first 15 years of operation (up to say ~2000) we come to: $5.3 Billion
**AA: a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
There is a full list of the teams at the x-price website. From the PDF file found there it appers that most of the "serious" contenders are based in either North America or Europe, but then the majority of the teams are from there anywhere (could be many reasons for that). A notable exception which I - with my reasonsable limited knowhow of building and launching manned rockets - believe might create a viable launchvehicle, is the Gauchito (The Little Cowboy) from Argentina.
Mind you, there are a few of the contestants who are rather barmy, and since most of the entries are from the western world, most of the oddballs are from there as well. Check out Micro Space, a somewhat redneck, risky way to get suborbital (more info at their own site, including info on how they plan on using scuba-gear to survive in the rarified atmosphere up there).
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
Ok. I think you might be trolling, but I'll bite:
Homer = From 'The Simpsons' (popular American cartoon).
Is very long-running. Is very funny.
To give up and go home would be uneconomic. Building a suborbital hopper isn't cheap. Gotta commercialize it, to pay the bills. Tourists first, then superfast intercontinental travel. That means commodity parts, spaceports, refuel/repair infrastructure. All of which will help when they announce the prize for LEO...
MIR was always planned to be decomissioned by ploping it into the ocean, therefore not permenant, ISS is too large to be deorbited, so even if it eventually becomes space debris it is in fact the first permenant extraterran habitat (btw skylab predates MIR although of course it was not up nearly as long as MIR (ok not by a longshot, but it WAS occupied by multiple crews independandtly arriving from earth over a period of time))
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
I personally think that Scaled Composites' White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will not only win the X-Prize, but also lead to the idea of travel to low Earth orbit (LEO) with very little throwaway components.
Note that the Scaled Composites entry launches the spacecraft at around 50,000 feet; this means you don't need to lug a big load of propellants just to get to the 100 km altitude minimum as required by the X-Prize requirements. Orbital Sciences' Pegasus launcher has shown that when you launch at altitude you can drastically reduce the size of the launch vehicle to lift a payload to LEO; Rutan's entry could lead to something similar.
Imagine a joint project with the Russians and Ukrainians using a modified Antonov An-124 transport. Modify the An-124 with a stronger structure, twin-vertical surface tail, and replace the original engines with Western-built 65,000 to 70,000 lb. thrust jet engines used on the Airbus A330-300 airliner. Then fit the back of the plane with a decently powerful rocket motor. The result is a launch system that could launch a small spaceplane around 50,000 feet with the launch plane in a steep 35 degree climb, which means the space plane will only need a small disposable fuel tank to carry enough fuel to reach LEO, unlike the giant external fuel tank used on the Space Shuttle.
Indeed, there were serious studies about just such a space plane launched from a modified 747-200B during the late 1980's.
My money is on Rutan I saw him this week at EAA Airventure. It sounds like he is real close. According to Rutan the best reason for XPrize is the children. He says "We cannot afford to bore our children"
An-124 with a stronger structure, twin-vertical surface tail
replace the original engines with Western-built 65,000 to 70,000
That is called AN 225. AKA Mria. Exists in one copy. Flies. At least used to. Carrying a shuttle on its back. To 50000 feet apparently. And there are plans to use it as a launch platform.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Tethers, Inc. supposedly has a tether system design that could reach far enough down out of orbit to snatch an object moving at Mach 16 out of the upper atmosphere. I can't find the exact link, but here's the gist of the idea:
http://www.tethers.com/OrbitToOrbit.html
Just because it works, doesn't mean it isn't broken.
I think it's also worth pointing out that when a car or plane has an accident it's relatively easy to clean up. While these flights are low, space debris is a much more wicked problem. Even a loose screw or bolt is traveling at a fast enough speed to severly damage other crafts and satellites. That's why NASA tracks it all. I even saw a Discovery show where they explained that one good smash up could potentially cause a domino effect and wipe out a bunch of stuff -- even potentially creating a thick enough outer junk sphere to make future launches phenomanally difficult -- perhaps impossible. Wouldn't it be nice if we managed to trap ourselves here?
_________________