Mike Melvill Chosen To Fly SpaceShipOne

ansimon writes "Mike Melvill is chosen to fly SpaceShipOne to the outer limits of this rock that we call earth. Mike will be the first to earn his astronaut wings with a privately-developed aeroplane/rocket. A new era of space exploration is about to begin! Godspeed and come back safe, so the rest of us can go too..."

Comments

For the sake of argument . . .

[OverlordQ]

. . . even if something does go wrong, there wouldn't be any better way to go out, especially with a flight history such as his.

On the other hand, not much left to top this if it does go flawlessly.

Going there

[sljgh]

I toyed with the idea of driving down there late last week. I'd get fired for missing work, but it'd be the chance to see something amazing. As it turns out I'm reading slashdot, not that there's anything wrong with that, instead of sleeping in the back of a truck out in the desert.

First since Columbia

[moberry]

If I am not mistaken this will be the first vehicle launched in the USA since the Columbia accident. That alone is something to celebrate. The USA is back in busness. :p

Re:First since Columbia

[Peyna]

Of course, without all of NASA's developments and the tons of spent by the government in the past, would this private venture even be possible?

Re:First since Columbia

[Anonymous Coward]

Insightful my ass!

Once a private company can launch greater than 100 tons to the Moon and NASA can't do more (like the Saturn V), I'll be ashamed. Until then please realize that $20M is not puting anything useful into space, nor can it without going over 200 miles up. Neat for space tourism, but hardly comparable with even the most trivial accomplishments of NASA.

If they want to have a useful prize, a spaceship should be able to:
1) Go into a stable orbit
2) Allow personel excursions
3) Allow ship to ship dockings
4) Carry 20 or more tons of cargo into space
5) Be able to stay in space for multiple days

Until then, any spaceship made is just a tourist platform. The fact that your post got modded insightful just shows how many moderators will give bonuses to anti-US posts (especially ones that insult our incredibly sucessful space program).

Wonderful!

[RLiegh]

I'm thrilled at the strides private space exploration is making. I think it's appropriate that private companies should invest their profits into an endevour that will both profit them and humanity; leaving the government (funds, red tape) free to focus on its' proper obligations to its' citizenry.

Re:To save everyone some time tomorrow ...

[Pharmboy]

That is just plain wrong. Funny, yes, but wrong.

Being a die-hard conservative, I for one welcome our new corporate astronauts and look forward to it creating some new ideas at NASA as well. Obviously, this depends on your link still being funny tomorrow at lunch, rather than prophetic.

Disaster? Unlikely.

[dinodrac]

Scaled Composites seems to have done their homework. The craft has a double presure hull, is relatively small, and uses a propellant that is arguably more stable than what we burn in our cars. Any failure is more likely to result in an abort than in a catastrophe. SpaceShipOne has been tested extensively, and the design, although radical, is comparitively simple when viewed alongside early government funded sub-orbital flight.

Good luck and Godspeed to the SpaceShipOne team.

Re:Disaster? Unlikely.

[Keebler71]

"the design, although radical, is comparitively simple when viewed alongside early government funded sub-orbital flight."

I have to disagree here. This vehicle is significantly more complex than the Mercury missions. Radical - yes, in the sense of using a dual-aircraft staging ascent, but you do not get much more simple than a redstone rocket with a purely ballistic capsule for re-entry. SpaceShipOne is closer to the space shuttle than it is to a Mercury capsule, in the sense that it flys like an aircraft with all the appropriate control surfaces - not to mention the feathering wing during re-entry. Radical - yes, simple - no. Bear in mind, that this design is made possible by relatively modern composite materials, so comparing this design to a 1950's iron capsule is a bit unfair.

Let me preface what I am about to say with the following: I think that what Scaled Composites has done is nothing short of amazing. I don't need to wish them the best, as I have been to their plant, and seen and crawled inside their vehicle. They will win the X-prize tomorrow... That said, I believe that SpaceShipOne is more of a bureocratic and idealogical achievement. First off, SC defined the process by which civilian companies are certified for space flight. Second, this event will usher in a newfound pride and enthusiasm for space exploration that has been missing for decades.

Unfortunately, this design is not very, well, useful other than to make Scaled Composites LOTS of money from space tourists. There is not a lot of interest otherwise in sub-orbital (heck, the Soviets skipped it entirely). SpaceShipOne was point designed to win the X-prize; the approach used is not scalable to an orbital version.

All that having been said, I am very excited for the future of space flight... I know what I will be doing tomorrow morning!

and yes, IAARS.

Re:I guess the question here is

[DynaSoar]

A.C. sez: "Whether "the USA" is the government, or all of us"

No it isn't. The answer is Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites using Paul Allen's $20M. Nothing from the government, nothing from "the people". The question is, why do people think they deserve to share in the accomplishments of others when they have contributed nothing to that success?

Honor the successful. Emulate them if you can, aspire to it if you can't, and if nothing else let them inspire you. When you, in the individual or collective sense, accomplish something significant, then you deserve credit.

The last great X-Plane

[dev_alac]

The X-15 was the first plane to fly into space, and I'm sure much of its heritage will be carried on with SpaceShipOne. An excellent history of the program by an actual member of the program is At the Edge of Space" by Milton Thompson. It is amazing to learn about the worries about the reaction control system for out-of-atmosphere flight and how their reentry procedures and much of their data enabled the Shuttle program.

To Mike and the rest of the SpaceShipOne crew, best of luck tomorrow.

Work environment

[SpectreGadget]

I loved looking at the couple of pictures on their site showing the ground crew preparing the vehicle for its next flight. Jeans in tennis shoes vs. NASA's pictures of everyone in clean-room get-up.

Smooth flight guys. As someone said earlier, don't forget your towel!

If there's any doubt about 'space'

[caitsith01]

From the various articles about the x-prize and spaceshipone one could be forgiven for wondering whether these guys are really going into 'space', because relative to NASA's exploits they aren't exactly going that high. However, pictures like this and this from earlier test flights give a practical idea of just how high they are going to get... awesome! I wish there was some sort of webcast... anyone know of anything live?

Re:Yes, but

[lpret]

Actually, this is an interesting question -- I mean, the guy footing the bill is the co-founder of Microsoft. Aren't we cheering on an Evil Empire? Here's the problem with linux zealots who shun all there is about capitalism -- they fail to recognize the development that is only possible by vast amounts of money.

Pretty strong test pilot cred

[Just Some Guy]

From his biography, he was the first test pilot of the Predator UAV. I don't know whether it was originally designed for manned flight and he convinced them from personal experience that it was too risky, or whether he flew in an airplane not designed to carry human cargo. Either way, he strapped himself into something that you couldn't force me into at gunpoint and brought it back home safely.

When I was a little kid, I wanted to be Chuck Yeager. Now I'm sitting at home reading Slashdot. Sigh.

Would a private moon expedition be possible?

[Fiz Ocelot]

Just wondering, is there any international law that would prevent a private expedition to the moon (or any other place for that matter)? It would be quite a ways off, but the thought popped into my mind. I'd doubt there is any such law, but I'd expect a private space station before moon expedition.

Maybe biotech companies would be interested in investing in building their own orbital lab? Or maybe I've just had a bit too much coffee...

Re:Would a private moon expedition be possible?

[sljgh]

I think so. Getting to the moon isn't a real struggle, what like a four or five day trip once you leave earth orbit? Granted that will take a lot more engineering and resources. But considering everything, we already have a great model for how to get there, we know a lot about the physics and math of it all, and we have computer systems far in advance of what NASA had in the 60's. I think that soon many companies will have space stations, or at least automated stations they can send samples to. Zero G is a great place to get research done, and if you're working with nano or micrograms the cost of sending samples to a research station would be little more than the (now high) cost of a ticket up there.

Re:Would a private moon expedition be possible?

[vidarh]

The US ratified the Outer Space Treaty in 1967, and the treaty was proposed by the US and then Soviet Union, so it was more a matter of the UN listening to the US and the Soviets. Now, of course proposing a treaty haven't stopped the US from violating it later on previously, so I doubt it will this time (it contains annoying prohibitions on weapons in orbit, for instance).

Full Power?

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering spacship one is designed to take 3 people to 100km altitude. This flight with only the pilot onboard are they going to just launch to 100 km or are they going to let it rip at full power and just see how high this thing can really go

Re:This puts NASA in a very interesting position

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember: sub-orbital

Also, NASA has been pulled into a lot of science. Missions these days don't get off the ground without major scientific merit. Long gone are the days of the space race, when simple making it to the moon was the goal. I know moon research was conducted, but we did make the trip too collect rocks. We did it to push the limits of our technology (creating newer better technolgies) and to beat the Russians to it.

Why are astronauts wished Godspeed?

[antispam_ben]

... I keep remembering (well, almost, I was only about 2 years old at the time) John Glenn being wished Godspeed (specifically on his first specaflight). And how does Godspeed compare to lightspeed?

Re:To save everyone some time tomorrow ...

[Kiryat Malachi]

Hey, they may have fucked up human spaceflight for the last 20 years or so, but give them credit for Spitzer, Hubble, Chandra, Spirit and Opportunity, Cassini, and all the other wonderful science they've done that I can't remember right now.

Of course, but...

[XNormal]

Of course, without all of NASA's developments and the tons of spent by the government in the past, would this private venture even be possible?

Of course, but everything space-related and government-funded that was really needed for this flight was learned over 40 years ago.

North by Northwest?

[davidsyes]

Two Northwest Airlines Airbus pilots might be the next runners-up for tourist flights into outer upper/space/out-of-airspace...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid= 51 4&e=13&u=/ap/20040620/ap_on_re_us/wrong_airpor t_1

An inquiring mind (mine) wants to know a few things.

After a Northwest Airlines Airbus passenger plane landed at Ellsworth Air Force Base, the passengers were detained for some 3 hours, interrogated, after being ordered to shut their window covers.

So, does anyone know what is so special about Ellsworth that the windows were ordered shut? This does not seem to be the case (ordering shuttered windows) at Portland and some other bases sharing a border with commercial airports.

Could the crew and or passengers have been interrogated as to whether they shot footage or filmed any of the base during descent? Did the military confiscate their cameras, or merely look at each frame and scan every laptop for pictures of the base (or look for quickly-hidden compact flash or other media disks), or did the military fly out with them on the short hop over the hill, ensuring that NO-ONE shot any pix or opened their window covers?

Even more importantly, how can the pilot and first officer of a plane with probably more computing power than a space shuttle land 5 miles off course and onto a MILITARY base, unless they turned off the electronics or doubted the electronics, and landed by VFR, or Visual Flight Rules. And, even MORE telling, does this say the the FAA and the flight controllers were asleep at the controls?

Can such a thing happen again? Will this prompt the military to "paint" commercial aircraft to sternly warn them to get back on course? Why did not the military simultaneously call the plane AND the air traffic control tower and vector the commercial plane away? Doesn't this say that even after 9/11, the military and commercial air traffic control systems, after billions of dollars in equipment and upgrades, STILL/one again let down the public?

SpaceShipOne - Chat available on freenode.net

[pandelirium]

Just wanted to add that we have chat on the irc.freenode.net servers. The room is appropriately named #SpaceShipOne and is now open to the public without password needed.

Since there is apearently no real-time coverage online (unless NASATV desides to cover it), this may be the next closest thing. Share your voice, express your opinion, and just hang out and listen to others.

See you there...

-Pandelirium - registered.freenode.net
Moderator - #SpaceShipOne #maestro #cassini #Pandelirium MaximumPC
http://www.pandelirium.net

You're right

[Anonymous Coward]

" doubt the government will allow any private companies to build a rocket as large as the Saturn V"

Just try to get some of the large Model Rocket engines and you don't know how true that is.

After all, the terrorist could use Estes rockets to, I don't know... bring down the empire state building or sears tower or the pentagon or something.

But then he has to write his will, too

[ianscot]

For my money, Nixon's "The astronauts will die on the moon" speech is the hardest, oddest example of "the other speech" out there. Someone dies suddenly in an accident, that's understandable -- but the idea of being stranded up there unable to get back, that'd be a hard moment for any President to handle.

Tricky Dick did pretty well with the topic.

Re:Ironic... Slashdot cheering for Microsoftie :)

[21chrisp]

Keep in mind that he left Microsoft before it became the Evile Empire that it is today. Back in those days, many people had reason to cheer M$. Unlike Macs of the time, you could FIX a dos computer rather than just get a new one once it started behaving erratically. Dos mode also allowed computers of the time to run much faster, displaying any window manager consumed a majority of the resources on those old machines. Gates obviously had his mind set on dominating the industry, but at least M$ had some quality products. I seriously doubt that modern day M$ would fund something like this.

Clarification...

[El Camino SS]

Look, I think you are missing the point.

This is a private MANNED flight.

So what if the boosters are made by private aerospace firms? All they are launching are toys. Toys that can take zero gravity, zero kelvin, and zero pressure. The big deal about this is about MANNING a capsule into space without a goverment doing anything but giving permits like a building inspector.

You are talking about subcontractors. Look, I understand what you are saying, but to be truthful, your +4 insightful makes no sense here.

MANNED SPACEFLIGHT. MANNED. Non-governmental pilots in space. Big deal. Real big deal considering all the cash that has washed up for NASA.