Slashdot Mirror
SpaceShipOne to Attempt Second Flight on Monday
m_member writes "There is a very cool video of the recent SpaceShipOne flight (on the Scaled video page) as covered by Slashdot. It shows some angles not on the webcast and most impressively has internal footage from when the roll occurred in the ascent. There are no M&Ms this time but Melville takes a few holiday snaps!" Gogo Dodo writes "After a successful first flight for the X Prize, SpaceShipOne is a go for launch to claim the X Prize on Monday. Takeoff is at 7am Pacific, ignition at 8am." October 4 will be the anniversary of the Sputnik launch.
Congrats the the Scaled Composites team! While I hope the $10M prize will give you guys a nice shot in the arm, why not put it toward developing space travel for high-speed human transport rather than tourism? It just strikes me as something that's much more financially viable than tourism....
Does/Should the X-Prize Foundation get federal funding for the efforts they are making towards space travel? Certainly NASA could learn a thing or two about budgets from these space explorers. I think perhaps it is a better investment for the government to fund private groups like this, considering the results of the state-run programs.
It is about time that we had someone other than Government make it to space. This should open up the market! Now, if they can just make this afforable to those of us who can't afford 100K or so...
Hope they go for the $50M prize for a vehicle that will house 5 to/from orbit....
If SpaceShipOne reaches the 100km mark on Monday, will the other competitors just give in, or will they too try to prove that they have the design and technology to reach space? Even if SpaceShipOne did not launch Oct. 4th, would anybody even be close enough to take advantage of this? (Hoping that any failure of the SSO mission would not result in casulties)
Damnit, where am I going to get 10 million dollars?
One thing that's amazing is that Melvill turned off the rocket something like 40 seconds early!! I wonder if SS1 could survive the stresses of atmosphere reentry falling from 200km altitude.
Moderation: +1 pwnage
It'll be interesting to see how the media covers any potential problem that occurs this time. They hyped up the whole roll situation like it was the end of the world, even after he safely made it back down (a majority of the questions asked of him were about the unexpected roll). Gotta love how reporters constantly repeat nearly the same question when they don't really understand the situation....
I have to go out right now, but when I return (soon) I will have the videos mirrored on my website here: http://www.css-auth.com/ss1/ Perhaps within the hour.
Ads? What ads?
Could be taken on a holiday.
..but still.. WOOOAAAHHHhhh
Photographs, ey? He asked him knowingly...
no
There is a mirror at mirrordot ... ;)
http://www.mirrordot.org/
It was more like 11 seconds.
CNN story
about what exactly caused the roll last time? Given that now they had time go to through the telemetry data one assumes they would know for sure exactly what happened: did they make the info public?
-- the cake is a lie
What were the development costs of the X-15 program???
Actually, the method SpaceShipOne uses to re-enter the atmosphere is pretty robust and safe. Most times, entry vehicles use a blunt end - think the bottom of the Apollo capsule - to slow down through a process called 'aerobraking'. If a vehicle starts to spin rapidly during that time, bad things happen. SSO can enter the atmosphere in any orientation - nose down, nose up, sideways - and it will be OK because of it's back wing surface. In an orientation the Scaled guys call "feathering" the back end flips up 90 degrees in a high drag configuration. This forces the nose into the atmosphere at the right angle, so spinning isn't a vehicle loss issue Still, you go a lot slower re-entering from a suborbital flight than an orbital speed re-entry a la Columbia circa 2003
Download video via BitTorrent at X-Prize-flight-1.wmv.torrent
You're not the only one suspecting that he did intend to perform a one or two turn roll... and that the roll turned out to be vastly more intense than he bargained for... maybe due to the lack of atmospheric friction against the aircraft in the roll. A little control input perhaps goes a loooooong way in this craft, once beyond the point where there is no more atmospheric drag.
...with FreeCache or Coral.
Or just make it Slashdot-policy to use the past-tense when describing off-site content, like this:
Kind of pre-empts the whole /. effect, don't you think?
It would be great to start moving away from the whole organised-DDOS attack thing...
From the site:
"(sorry slashdot.org visitors, overloaded...start a bittorrent feed?)"
How did they know we were coming?
You won't hate yourself in the morning if you don't get up before noon.
They do have to carry 3 people, or the pilot and weight of 2 passangers (probably used sand bags).
BTW, Burt Rutan mentioned just after the last flight that he might be a passenger in the next one.
Personally its not God I dislike, its his fan club I cant stand (bash.org)
We got to the moon. And back. Multiple times.
We sent probes to Mars. And Venus. And beyond. And some of them still work.
We sent rovers to Mars. That still work.
We built several working space vehicles.
We space-walked.
We build a space station. And then we built another one.
We chased comets. And sent the collected materials back.
We've populated our solar system with several probes that have performed beyond expectation.
We have Tang.
We have titanium hips, golf clubs, glass frames, laptops, and spyplanes.
There are many, many, more places where our investment into NASA has benefitted us enormously.
GPL Deconstructed
- Videos -
... is that sag?
Oct 01 11am - VIDEOS TEMPORARILY UNAVAILABLE (sorry slashdot.org visitors, overloaded...start a bittorrent feed?)
So instead of just everyone jumping all over their site directly, why not use FreeCache first, especially when you know the video is 5.7 megs and it'll be popular...
(sig)^-1
The Canadian Arrow team has put together the world's first private astronaut training centre. If they were only in it for the X-Prize, they wouldn't have built the training centre. They are looking to space tourism, and are also hoping to start a new extreme sport: Space-diving (like sky-diving, except from space).
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
The heat due to reentry has less to do with the altitude and more to do with the actual speed at impact.
Objects that reach orbital velocity are going far faster and thus generate far more heat then something that effectively goes straight up and straight down such as SpaceShipOne (relative to something like the space shuttle that does achieve orbit).
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
I suppose the big question is ... if NASA instead were merely a contracting arm of the goverment which put together specs for tender, would we have gotten further, faster, and cheaper?
And let's not forget the human cost: would we have lost similar or fewer people doing it (safety)?
No, really. I'm serious. This is not intended as a slam against government waste or corporate cost/corner cutting. It's really a question for thought. Is there a middle ground available where we get the same safety, but further/faster/cheaper?
Contractors would need to be able to find ways to compete against others for the research business. There are some things that competition is good for. But, then again, with only one possible customer at the time (NASA), would there be enough competition for those dollars? Now might be a much better time (than, say, the 1950's) to thin out NASA, spin off JPL, and then have NASA merely contract out: the competition will be competing for business from much more than NASA - airlines will be interested in some of this technology, too, I'm sure.
We sailed to England. And back. Multiple times.
We sent messengers to Persia. And India. And beyond.
We sent caravans to India. We still trade with them.
We built several working sailing ships.
We swam in the sea.
We colonized a tiny island. And then we colonized another one.
We chased whales. And sent the collected materials back.
We've sent our driftwood around the world on the ocean's currents.
We have spice.
We have gunpowder, algeabra, paper, Arabic numerals, and modern surgery.
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED FOR US TO FINANCE THIS FLEET OF YOURS, COLUMBUS!!!
Well, because it's harder than you think.
Remember, he's got a stick for subsonic flight. He's got trim for supersonic flight. And then he's got thrusters for space usage. Plus backup systems, which you have to know when they should be activated. So it can't just be an off-the-shelf system.
The thing is, if you *needed* the autopilot, you'd need to have redundancy and reliability and whatnot. If you don't *need* the autopilot, it's an added expense, a waste of time, and it takes up weight that can be used for something else. So, for an experimental aircraft that's going to be flown by Scaled's best pilots, why not?
The other problem is that the main folks who have an off-the-shelf flight computer that would be suitable is the Air Force. Who obviously isn't going to sell one to "just anyone", which means that an X-prize contender can't have it.
Gentoo Sucks
They could put tickets for the two additional seats on E-bay
No, actually they couldn't.
N328KF is registered as an experimental glider. Under Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) that means two things:
a) You can't carry passengers at all until the craft has been satisfactorily flight tested.
b) You can never carry passengers for hire.
Whether or not at this point SSO has been flight tested is up to the FAA. It's usually about 40 hours of testing, and I have no clue whether they've put that much time on the airframe at this point or not and whether the FAA inspector is happy with the suborbital flight tests they've done. In any event, they won't be able to recover costs from passengers until they develop a certificated platform.
This
Ecliptic Enterprises, who makes the onboard videocamera used for much of that footage, has two mirrors of the video footage:
RocketCam (TM) Videos
RocketCam (TM) Video Mirror at RocketCam.Space.TV
MPEG and QT conversions of the WMV will be going up in a few minutes, as well, for all you linux and mac users. (As of 12:30pm PST, should be up by 1:00PST/4:00EST).
Disclaimer: I'm Ecliptic's webmaster by subcontract.
Enjoy.
-Ev
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
The other problem is that the main folks who have an off-the-shelf flight computer that would be suitable is the Air Force. Who obviously isn't going to sell one to "just anyone", which means that an X-prize contender can't have it.
That's probably no coincidence since a "spacecraft" with an autopilot, is basically an explosive device short of a missile. There may be some heavy federal legislation involving the private production of such systems let alone the government not wanting to share such technology with just anyone.
Just a thought.
Given Bert Rutan's history with experemental aircraft, and the things that can go wrong with automated controls, fully manual flight controls only make sense. By keeping the controls simple, and by having avionics that tell the pilot what to do rather than do it for him, they reduce the expense, while improving pilot safety. Look at all thats gone wrong with NASA's massively redundant computer systems - if the flight computer on spaceshipone completely fails, chances are the pilot will still land the craft safely, and may even be able to complete the mission safely.
If these guys were investigating and developing a radical new technology that's orders of magnitude cheaper than the traditional ways of getting into space, then it would be really interesting. Even a stunt like the X-Prize shot would be worthwhile to help develop it. But it's not radical new technology. It's just the same old chemical rocket stuff all over again. With a lot of cut corners. (And, apparently, "unscripted maneuvers").
And they're not even particularly good chemical rockets. Hybrid rockets burning plastic/rubber/etc and N2O have inherently poorer performance than, say, the hydrogen/oxygen engines that are common on the upper stages of orbital launchers. Hybrids are simpler, cheaper and safer, and they've become very popular among amateur high-power rocketeers for this reason. They're fun. But they just don't have the performance for a practical orbital launcher, as opposed to a suborbital "stunt" flight. Or is "commercial manned space" just about quickie zero-g joyrides for people with too much money? I can already experience zero-g on an airplane or Six Flags' Superman: The Escape a lot more cheaply.
The problem is that there just don't seem to be any radical, new technologies promising to cut space access costs by orders of magnitude just waiting for entrepreneurs to commercialize them. And that means only a tiny handful of humans will ever be able to go into space in our lifetime, and for at least several more. I wish it were otherwise, but we have to face facts. In the meantime, we have to get the very most out of the expensive launchers we do have, and that means putting more and more capable robots into space to give us earthbound humans the best vicarious experience of space travel we can possibly get.
I'm also really put off by all this "go private enterprise, rah rah rah" stuff, as if NASA is full of complete idiots. (It got so thick the other morning that I had to turn the TV volume down.) Who do they think builds the rockets that NASA has been flying for decades? What about the many space launchers that have already been fully commercialized? And where did the money for SpaceShipOne really come from? (Hint: what if the US Government were to actually enforce its antitrust laws against large software companies?)
If you've got the money, you can already buy a launch from any of several commercial companies, and only some of them are American. And there are companies who routinely launch stuff and make money. Space is already big business.
But when I look at SpaceShipOne and similar projects, I see a bunch of rich guys publicly stroking their egos. SpaceShipOne is a dead-end hack. I'd actually be completely okay with that if only they would be more honest with the public about what they're really doing.
*Sigh*
The average person "on the street" frankly is totally clueless about what is even happening. Frankly, they are asking the average geek/nerd/astro guy they happen to know and ask them just what all this hoopla is really all about, and wondering why the geek is wetting his pants. (well, some of them at least)
This is a cool thing, and credit should be given where credit is due. With the announcement of the "America's Prize" (I guess yet to be announced) a new round in the competition for going into space will soon be at hand. If you are correct about Space Ship One, that Burton Rutan can't get it (or a similar ship) into orbit, then it looks like Armadillo Aerospace and the Romanians are going to be much more in the running for that prize.
The ships from those two groups appear to be more upgradeable to make it to orbit, although I would have to agree that reentry issues have not been fully explored. Still, there are a number of private groups now that have working propulsion systems going, and have been at least sending things up a few hundred feet, if not more, and are dealing with scalability issues as well.
I appreciate the fact that the X-Prize has set the tone of the current attitude toward space exploration. While it is more than likely driving nails into the coffin of NASA, there is much more to what is happening in the space industry than even cute rocket stunts. And don't think the big aerospace companies aren't paying attention to what is going on either.
Right now the rocket industry is in a renasannce that looks very much like the early days of the automobile industry or the early aviation industry. There are a couple of very well financed companies (like XCOR, for example) that I would be surprised if they went belly up, but still anything is possible. Boeing certainly struggled in their early days when they were first starting out, and it was a construction team smaller than Armadillo Aerospace, with far less financial backing.
I predict that private commercial space enterprises (like Virgin Galactic) will be within 10 years bringing in more cashflow than the entire computer industry. One reason in particular is because there is much more room to grow into space than there is for the computer industry to penetrate into 3rd World nations. Private space companies "going public" will be the next darling on Wall Street, and will create the next round of Billionaires for those who are getting in right now.