SpaceShipOne Rockets To 68,000 Feet

ehartwell writes "According to Space.com, Scaled Composite's SpaceShipOne flew its first rocket-powered flight today, the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brothers' 12-second first flight. SpaceShipOne's engine burned for 15 seconds, pushing it to Mach 1.2 (930 mph) and a peak altitude of 68,000 feet. To win the X-Prize they need to reach 330,000 feet twice within 2 weeks."

Comments

Mirror, just in case....

[RickyRay]

Privately Funded SpaceShipOne Breaks Sound Barrier

A privately financed passenger-carrying sub-orbital rocket plane screamed its way through the sound barrier today, the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brothers historic 12-second flight over Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.

Privately built by Scaled Composites of Mojave, California, the SpaceShipOne cranked up its hybrid rocket motor after being released from the White Knight carrier plane high over Mojave, California.

"This successful and historic flight is important because we are showing that the private sector can perform human space flight faster, safer and cheaper," said Jim Benson, founding chairman and chief executive of SpaceDev, the Poway, California-based company that built SpaceShipOne's engine.

Test pilot Brian Binnie then put SpaceShipOne into a steep climb. Nine seconds later, SpaceShipOne broke the sound barrier and continued its steep powered ascent.

At motor shutdown, 15 seconds after ignition, SpaceShipOne was climbing at a 60-degree angle and flying near 1.2 Mach (930 mph).

Binnie continued the maneuver to a vertical climb, achieving zero speed at an altitude of 68,000 feet. He then configured the ship in its high-drag "feathered" shape to simulate the condition it will experience when it enters the atmosphere after a sub-orbital space flight.

At apogee, SpaceShipOne was in near-weightless conditions, emulating the characteristics it will later encounter during the planned space flights in which it will be at zero-g for more than three minutes.

After descending in feathered flight for about a minute, Binnie reconfigured the ship to its conventional glider shape and flew a 12-minute glide to landing at a landing strip in the Mojave.

The landing was not without incident.

On touchdown, the left landing gear retracted causing the rocket ship to veer to the left and leave the runway with its left wing down. Damage from the landing incident was minor and will easily be repaired. There were no injuries, according to a press release issued by Scaled Composites.

The milestone flight of SpaceShipOne involved development of a new propulsion system, the first rocket motor fabricated for piloted space flight in several decades.

The new hybrid motor was developed in-house at Scaled Composites. The motor uses an ablative nozzle supplied by AAE and operating components supplied by SpaceDev.

This was the 8th flight of the SpaceShipOne completed this year -- the first done under powered flight.

Further Link @ SpaceRef

[anzha]

Here's another one.

With any luck we'll see regular manned access to space within the next ten years without a government involved. The X Prize and its follow-ons will be the equivalent of the barnstorming acts of yesteryear.

With any luck at least...

Re:Looks bad for Carmack

[savuporo]

they're nowhere near completing assembly of their full-size rocket

On the contrary

IMO, they are quite far along, i'd expect a hover test in a week or two ( if not for the _damn_ holidays )
BTW, as you probably know, official X-Prize flight attempt has to be announced at least two months in advance, so everybody still has a chance, as Rutan hasnt made such announcement yet.

But what does it *mean*?

[Spamalamadingdong]

Commercial supersonic flight (at least at Mach 2) does not make economic sense. This was known many years ago; Concorde broke even on operating costs, but never paid for its development. Shutting down the aging, deteriorating fleet makes sense.

SpaceShipOne did more than break the sound barrier, it aimed toward altitudes and conditions unseen by private aviation. With those altitudes and conditions come possible markets, such as small-scale microgavity research on the cheap and even the mother of all roller-coaster rides. Here's hoping that it marks a realization that there are some things which don't work, and some things which do.

Re:Well done and very impressive

[Quarters]

100 years ago manned flight was a hot technology

Not quite. 100 years ago manned, controlled, and powered flight had just become a curiosity. It took the Wright brothers about 6-7 years before they could commercialize on their idea.

On the landing gear failure

[Woutepout]

It appears that White Knight had a landing gear problem on the previous flight as well. Knowing that most systems on the two craft are identical, this could mean that there is a (serious?) problem with the landing gear design. So they're probably in for a very thorough re-examination of the relevant systems. But they're probably on top of things and it's hard to say anything sensible about it without inside-information.

PRIVATE commercial supersonic flight yet to happen

[Julian Morrison]

Concorde was a state funded project, almost exclusively flown by state subsidised airlines bearing national badges (Air France and British Airways).

Voyager...

[Spamalamadingdong]

... was not a turboprop. Both the front and rear engines were rather conventional opposed piston types, though the rear one was liquid cooled. The IOL-200 (Injected, Opposed, Liquid-cooled, 200 cubic inch) engine from Voyager is in a display case at the Smithsonian; I have a picture of it.

I think Rutan's experience with the Predator, the Global Hawk and the aeroshell of the DC-X are far more indicative of his talents than Voyager; a very slow unpressurized aircraft is not much experience for a space-skimming vehicle which has to endure substantial heat loads on return to earth, but the others are much closer.

Physics primer follows

[Spamalamadingdong]

Altitude alone is not especially useful since the pull of gravity will still exert its force upon the craft.

Wrong. At a not-atypical 200 mile orbital altitude, Earth pulls with roughly 90% as much acceleration as at the surface. The difference between an orbital flight and a sub-orbital one is that an orbiting craft moves fast enough that the curve of the earth falls away below it as fast as it falls toward the earth.

The hard part about space travel is achieving orbit, a state where the craft has effectively escaped the earth's gravity well.

Wrong again. The gravitational binding energy per kilogram is given by the simple equation -GMe/r, where G is the gravitational constant, Me is the mass of the earth and r is the distance from the center of the earth (taking Earth as a uniform sphere, which is good to a first approximation). You can trivially compare this to the kinetic energy of a craft in a uniform circular orbit (v^2=GMe/r^2, ke = 0.5 m v^2 -> ke = .5 GMe/r^2) and prove that orbit is only halfway, energetically, to actually escaping Earth.

Geosynchronous orbit...

has what to do with this, exactly?

These numbers are better than order of magnitude higher than the X-prize requirements.

So I wonder if the X-prize is really meaningful in the scale of realistic space flight?

Google for "Black Colt" or consider what the White Knight could do with a sub-vehicle like a Pegasus. That will let you ask better questions.

Re:What's the big deal about rocket science?

[Dr. Zowie]

It's not hard in principle. As they say, ``the Devil's in the details''. You've got a very hot, combusting mixture under high pressure, right next to large tanks of explosive rocket fuel, and everything has to be light, light, light to fly well -- so you use the lightest, thinnest metal you think you can get away with. And, of course, the metal has to operate at much higher temperatures than you normally encounter, and still have enough strength to avoid blowing up during thrust.

If the rocket didn't have to fly, you could just put loads of engineering margin into every part, and end up with something big and heavy but reliable. But you can't, because "big and heavy" won't get off the ground.

The sheer amount of power that has to converted from chemical to mechanical energy is staggering. In a liquid-fueled rocket engine, you have to push fuel into the chamber against the pressure of combustion. That turns out to be very hard, since you have to move a LOT of fuel and the pressure has to be HIGH for good efficiency. Just the pumping requires a major engineering effort to handle the power required to drive the pumps.

If you have cryogenic liquid propellants (the most efficient for tankage), you have all kinds of material-science problems from the temperature extremes. If you fly less exotic materials, like nitrous oxide, you have less mass margin because the tank is heavier.

Then there are all kinds of weird pitfalls like uneven distribution within the combustion chamber; uneven fuel/oxidiser mixing; choked fuel flow; accumulation of large volumes of fuel mix (which have an alarming tendency to explode later if they don't burn instantly); quenching of the burn by the amazing volume of stuff flowing into the chamber; eddies and cavitation in the turbulent flow out the throat of the engine; detonation (makes your car engine knock, makes your rocket explode); things shaking loose because of the engine's vibration; the nozzle itself starting to combust, ablate, or burn-through; and making a poorly designed nozzle that limits your thrust.

None of those things is unsurmountable -- it's having to get everything more or less right the first time that is the real kicker.

Paul G. Allen and the X-Prize!

[Spacemannn]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 17, 2003

PAUL G. ALLEN CONFIRMED AS LONG-RUMORED SPONSOR OF SPACESHIPONE

Allen Sponsors Scaled Composites' Cutting-Edge X-Prize Entry, Attends Today's Successful Test Flight of the First Manned Privately Funded Supersonic Aircraft

MOJAVE, CA and SEATTLE - Dec. 17, 2003 - Investor Paul G. Allen today confirmed international speculation that he is the long-rumored sponsor behind the innovative SpaceShipOne project, which broke the sound barrier today during its first manned test flight. SpaceShipOne and its White Knight turbojet launch aircraft represent the first private non-government effort to demonstrate a low-cost manned space effort. SpaceShipOne is a contender for the coveted X-prize.

"Being able to watch today's successful test flight in person was really an overwhelming and awe-inspiring experience. I'm so proud to be able to support the work of Burt Rutan and his pioneering team at Scaled Composites," said Paul G. Allen, who has funded the effort since he and Rutan joined forces in March of 2001. "As we celebrate the centennial of flight, it's wonderful to be able to capture the spirit of innovation and exploration in aviation. SpaceShipOne is a tangible example of continuing humankind's efforts to travel into space, and effectively demonstrating that private, non-government resources can make a big difference in this field of discovery and invention."

"Today's milestone and the SpaceShipOne project would never have been possible without Paul's tremendous support," said Burt Rutan, the acclaimed inventor and aerospace engineer who leads the project along with his research and development team at Scaled Composites, which Rutan founded. "Paul shares our energy and passion for not only supporting one-of-a-kind research, but also a vision of how this kind of space program can shape the future and inspire people around the world."

For details about today's test flight, including specifications on speed, altitude, etc., visit www.scaled.com

For details about the X-prize visit www.xprize.com.

ABOUT PAUL G. ALLEN

Paul G. Allen owns and invests in a suite of companies exploring the potential of digital communications. Allen's business strategy includes encouraging communication and synergy between his portfolio companies for mutual benefit in the areas of technology, new media, biotechnology, entertainment, telecommunications and entertainment. His primary companies include Vulcan Inc. of Seattle and Charter Communications of St. Louis, the nation's fourth-largest cable provider. Allen is owner of the Portland Trail Blazers NBA team and the Seattle Seahawks NFL franchise, and a partner in the entertainment studio DreamWorks SKG. Allen co-founded Microsoft Corporation with Bill Gates in 1975 and served as the company's executive vice president of research and new product development, the company's senior technology post, until 1983. Allen gives back to the community through the six Paul G. Allen Charitable Foundations, which support arts, health and human services, medical research, and forest protection in the Pacific Northwest. He is also the founder of Experience Music Project, Seattle's critically-acclaimed interactive music museum, the forthcoming Experience Science Fiction Museum and Vulcan Productions, the independent film production company. For more information about Paul G. Allen visit www.vulcan.com