Canadian Team To Launch X-Prize Attempt Oct. 2

FreeHeel writes "A second team of rocketeers competing for the $10 million Ansari X Prize, a contest for privately funded suborbital space flight, has officially announced the first launch date for its manned rocket. The da Vinci Project, led by Brian Feeney of Toronto, Ontario, said Thursday the group plans to loft its Wild Fire Mark VI spacecraft on Oct. 2, just days after the planned launch of another X Prize contender, the U.S-based SpaceShipOne. The balloon-launched Wild Fire event will be followed by a second launch within two weeks to snag the X Prize purse, according to the plan."

Comments

Days after huh?

[cephyn]

Is the SpaceShipOne team planning for a rapid turnaround (48hr? 72hr?) to try and grab the XPrize before DaVinci has a chance?

Re:Days after huh?

[jfoust]

Is the SpaceShipOne team planning for a rapid turnaround (48hr? 72hr?) to try and grab the XPrize before DaVinci has a chance?

Burt Rutan has suggested that the second SS1 flight could be as early as October 4. (Note the historical significance of the date.) If so, then the only way da Vinci could win is if they have a very tight turnaround time: no more than about 48 hours. Given the October 2 Wild Fire flight will be its very first, that short of a turnaround time may be infeasible.

Re:Days after huh?

[Rei]

You know, you could launch the space shuttle again after a rather small turnaround, too. It would just be more likely to.. well, blow up/break up/kill the crew/etc. The goal should not be just low turnaround time and turnaround cost, but *safe* low turnaround time and cost.

Rutan has clearly decided to try and push the envelope to win the prize, like he did by doing his last test flight in high-wind conditions. Lets just hope that he doesn't kill someone in the process.

Re:Days after huh?

[Bitsy Boffin]

Rutan has clearly decided to try and push the envelope to win the prize, like he did by doing his last test flight in high-wind conditions. Lets just hope that he doesn't kill someone in the process.


At the end of the day, it's the pilots (both of White Knight and SS1) who make the final go/no-go call, if after everything the pilot's feel it's unsafe then they don't go. No different than any other flight operation.

Much Cheaper, I hope they win.

[njcoder]

While the SpaceShipOne people have spent $20 Million on their attempt, DaVinci has spent considerably less.

If they win, they'll make a profit and be able to throw one kick ass party.

If this is based on the feasibility of commercial space flights, my vote is for the one that does it first and makes money. :)

Re:Much Cheaper, I hope they win.

[jfoust]

While the SpaceShipOne people have spent $20 Million on their attempt, DaVinci has spent considerably less.

True, but if one assigns a fair market value to tens of thousands of hours of volunteer labor reportedly spent on the project, the difference between the two becomes much smaller.

If they win, they'll make a profit and be able to throw one kick ass party.

Hopefully the project has its eyes on longer-term goals than the short-term profit realized by winning a prize.

If this is based on the feasibility of commercial space flights, my vote is for the one that does it first and makes money.

That analysis is flawed primarily because it confuses development costs with operational costs: while Wild Fire may be cheaper to develop than SpaceShipOne, it could end up being more expensive to operate. (Reliability, in addition, is an issue for obvious reasons.) In any case, this is a moot point because neither Rutan nor Feeney plan to put their first-generation suborbital vehicles into commercial service, electing instead to develop larger second-generation vehicles capable of carrying more passengers.

Re:Much Cheaper, I hope they win.

[bwy]

I'm skeptical. I admit it. Have these guys done test flights? Have they flown the balloon to 80K feet yet? Have they test launched the rocket enough, or at all? Do they HAVE a rocket that isn't a prototype?

Also, what is up with needing 500K to go ahead and finish up and launch? I really think perhaps this is all about publicity and not going into space, but I hope I'm wrong. Because Scaled seems to be all about going into space and only doing publicity when they feel like they are obligated to.

Weather

[stoolpigeon]

would make or break their timing w/the baloon thing. It is 1000 feet- baloon top to rocket at bottom. I've got to think you need a calm day to get it going. No?

Re:Crime in Space.

[Mr_Matt]

The sad thing is, they've never really tested their gear. From what I can tell from their webpage, they've fired the engine (unmanned) and had a few parties deciding who got to paint the ship. It seems to me that the Wild Fire crew launching this early, without any real tests of their hardware, is making a foolish decision.

Attempting two space launches in an untested vehicle in an attempt to purse-snatch from a crew who's already flown their ship to the edge of space is only a good decision if your crew-return strategy involves a lot of scraping a smoldering crater with a stick and a spoon.

If it isn't tested

[Zebra_X]

It doesn't work. Scaled has been so meticulous about testing, and it's paid off. I don't see the same level of testing in the the competing team. Component level testing only works to a point... Then you need to test the whole shebang.

Someone is going to get hurt. It's not all about that.

Re:Crime in Space.

[Rei]

Well, their design methodology seems pretty sound, and they have had some pretty big backers, too. Given the extent of time they've put into software simulation of their craft, I'd trust that their abort scenarios are pretty decent.

I mean, there's no comparison with people like Carmack who are just strapping pieces of metal together on a "try it as you go" fashion; even Rutan doesn't seem to have employed such a detailed design process as Da Vinci. Their software actually can back-design the spacecraft due to parameter changes - for example, if they put in a different ISP number, it modifies the CAD design for different tank sizes and re-optimizes the whole craft through a CFD program, while still constraining the craft to basic size/power requirements.

I give them decent odds of making it. Rutan will probably beat them to it (if he doesn't do anything stupid like his last launch in high wind-shear conditions), but Da Vinci has had some good money behind them, has a good design, and a good development methodology.

Re:Blackjack in Space

[Rei]

What, exactly, is proprietary about LOX/Kerosene? As for openness, have you ever seen their website? They're certainly less secretive than Rutan (althouh not as open as Carmack). And what is wrong with balloon-launch, exactly?

Re:No previous testing...?

[jmichaelg]

I think the announcement is just a publicity stunt that appears to be working. When it's time to launch the rocket, there'll be some reason to put it off. Nobody in their right mind would fly in a rocket that has zero flight testing.

Redstone History

[jmichaelg]

When I was a kid, I remember seeing films of rockets blowing up for a variety of reasons. One of the reasons Alan Shepherd (first American Astronaut) was feted was he had the balls to get on top of a rocket that was just as likely to blow up as to fly. Browse through John Camack's blog to see how many times he has had something go wrong.

A worst case scenario would entail the rocket blowing up at 80,000 feet because a valve got stuck or the fuel didn't flow quite the same way at 80,000 that it does at sea level when the rocket is steady versus swinging on the end of tether or the guidance mechanism doesn't work the way they thought it would and the rocket flies into the balloon instead of away from it.

Rutan and Carmack have already demonstrated why you test before you go for the big prize - way too many things can, and do, go wrong.

I doubt anyone is stupid enough to try to fly an untested rocket which is why I think the announcement is just a stunt.

Re:Something smells fishy, unfortunately.

[SpamJunkie]

I'm confused: unless I'm mistaken paraffin=kerosene so the problem with Kerosene/LOX is the LOX part, which is liquid oxigen? As opposed to the nitrous oxide you being your post with. Your post reads as if their choice of propellant is wrong when really all you're saying is that TFA says they're using a different oxidizer than they actually are?

Re:Crime in Space.

[RedWizzard]

I mean, there's no comparison with people like Carmack who are just strapping pieces of metal together on a "try it as you go" fashion;

Still, I'd feel much safer in Carmack's tested vehicle than Wild Fire's simulated one. Don't underestimate the value of knowing what works and what doesn't in practice, as opposed to knowing merely in theory.

Re:Crime in Space.

[Cthefuture]

As experience has shown time and again, nothing can equal the results of a live test.

It's like learning martial arts without ever practicing with full contact. All that simulation is worth very little in a real fight because there are so many more things going on.

I see programmers do this kind of crap all the time. They code stuff up and don't test very well. Then it gets out in the field and the damn thing falls apart.

If I had to guess I would say these guys have a 10% chance of success and 25% chance of catastrophic failure involving loss of life.

Re:Man, if they win

[Anonymous Coward]

Checked the rates lately? Dubya's driving your fucking country into the ground. The Canadian dollar is still gaining ground on the greenback.

It wasn't that long ago when the Canadian dollar was more than the US. If Dubya keeps running things it will be that way again.

Fucking Americans.