SpaceShipOne Captures the X Prize

SpaceShipOne's second flight was a success, the craft successfully launching from mothership White Knight and returning safely about 20 minutes later. If the flight is certified to have reached the X Prize's target height (62.5 miles) before its safe return, it will win the $10 million purse, and more importantly attain the prestige of repeatably (if only technically) reaching space, on a budget embarrassingly smaller than NASA's. Today's flight was manned by 51-year-old test pilot Brian Binnie (rather than Mike Melvill, who piloted last week's trip), and according to spectators present at both launches seemed even smoother than last week's flight. The view from the sidelines was incredible. flapjack submits a link to CNN's coverage of the launch (which lists a claimed height attained of 368,000 feet), noting "Interesting to note that a majority of its funding ($20-$30 million) was put up by Microsoft's own, Paul Allen." See also the official X Prize site for continuing live coverage. Update: 10/04 17:05 GMT by T : I was able to attend the launch; read below for my short sketch of the event. Impressions from the launch:

I got to Mojave yesterday evening (it's a long way from El Paso), slept in my car, and got to the airfield itself just before 4 a.m. Traffic on state highway 58 was brisk already, though not clogged (which it later became), and nearly every car was turning onto the two-lane entrance heading for acres of packed-dirt parking spaces near the runway from which SpaceShipOne would take off.

The crowd which built up in the following hours was surprisingly quiet on takeoff, which happened right at 7:45 local time. Not exactly hushed -- perhaps "hesitant" is a better word, or maybe just waking up. Only scattered clapping (guilty!) as the White Knight / SpaceShipOne piggyback duo lifted off, followed shortly by two chase planes, an AlphaJet and a Beechcraft Starship. The enthusiasm grew, though, as the flight progressed; a P.A. system kept the spectators informed of the trip's progress.

When SpaceShipOne finally separated and fired upward ("Good release, good release!" over the P.A, followed by enthusiastic cheering), it was after three separate two-minute warnings, then for one-minute and 30-second intervals. After an 84-second burn followed by a clean shutdown, SpaceShipOne coasted to its final altitude. At 90 seconds into the flight, the ship was well past 100,000 feet, and out of sight to the unaided eye. At 7:51, an altitude of 328,000 feet was reported, but the ship was still climbing for the next 40,000 feet under its own momentum. The reported peak altitude is enough to top the previous record, set by an X-15 at 354,200 ft. in 1963.

The descent was happily uneventful. At 60,000 feet, Binnie experienced "slight oscillations" -- consistent with previous flights, according to the announcer, who continued to count down the altitude. At approximately 45,000 feet, the conditions are right for contrails, and more cheering erupted when those popped into view. The crowd perked up and cheered even more with the first of two sonic booms audible on the ground (the booms that occur during ascent aren't), pointing and shading their eyes from the sun, following the ship as it traveled in wide arcs to bleed off the energy of the ascent, followed by a smooth 3-point landing.

(Special thanks to the members of the Foothill High School band who traveled the three hours from Orange County to watch the flight and play both before and after the flight. The launch itself was surprisingly low on ceremony, and their playing provided a bit of well-deserved pomp.)

Comments

Summer Vacation In Outer Space

[ackthpt]

Suddenly that old commercial advertisement for a Hilton Hotel in space doesn't sound so wacky anymore. What with Richard Branson investing in the Spaceship One technology for a fleet of commercial spacecraft.

After the first several dignitaries and rich adventurers (and probably pile of useless pop stars and actors/actresses) the thing will probably be booked solid with geeks with telescopes.

i wonder if William Shatner can get me cheap tickets through Priceline...

Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space

[Pharmboy]

Today does not herald in the age of zero-G convention centers.

I would argue that the first manned flight in space was the first step toward zero-G convention centers. Today is just one rung of a very tall ladder.

A very important rung, because it is civilian, privately funded, done on the cheap, was done on the first attempt, has attracted more venture capital, uses a safer fuel, and more importantly it sparks the imagination of millions of kids, of all ages.

Space hotels (of some sort) are not likely in the next 5 years, but as a 40 year old, they just MIGHT be in my lifetime. I had not thought so until recently.

The future is getting closer all the time.

Recalibrating prices

[kippy]

Now that the Mercury missions have more or less been reproduced for ~$25 million, I'd like to hear some reassessments of modern Moon mission costs. Same for Mars. The media (and a lot of slashdotters by the way) like to come up with estimates which go something like "if Apollo cost $X billion dollars, Mars will cost 10 times that cause it's harder".

Based on the fact that this was an order of magnitude or two cheaper than comparable NASA missions, anyone care to extrapolate a Moon or Mars mission if NASA is just turned into a clearing house for prize money? I'm guessing that Zubrin's crazy estimates of less than $25 billion seem a lot less crazy now.

Re:Recalibrating prices

[BigGerman]

>> Now that the Mercury missions have more or less been reproduced...

I knew I would find posting like this one ;-)
No they were not. Early Mercury missions were flying the ballistic trajectory. All the equipment (except the booster) was identical to the later orbital flights. The only different thing to do to a Mercury capsule to go orbital instead of ballistic was to push it harder with a more powerful booster.
As such, SpaceShipOne flights (which go straight up) are NOT sub-orbital in a Mercury sense.

Microsoft Money does something cool for a change.

[daviddennis]

Much as I absolutely loathe Microsoft and their products, it's nice to see this kind of cool thing being done.

I just hope these guys didn't use Microsoft Space Management to run the thing, although I have a nasty feeling that they had to :-(.

Well, it worked. And today, that's all that matters. I lift a glass of metaphorical champagne. For today, a truce -- at least until I see my next Windows meltdown here on the ground.

(Come to think of it, though, I believe Paul Allen has very little to do with Microsoft nowadays -- right?)

D

Shwaaa?

[GodHead]

"prestige of repeatably (if only technically) reaching space"

That is the point - to 'technically" do it. Sure the X-prize is won, but like a first in anything this is a starting point not a finish line.

I'm sure more technically minded will discuss practial applications and new limits to be beaten. But I'm glad I was here to "witness" this. I imagine in 100 years when people will talk about this like they talk about kittyhawk now.

Great job scaled composites!

[hackstraw]

This is an amazing feat. Definitely one of the top 5 space events in my lifetime. I do have a beef with the article summary though. This part:

it will win the $10 million purse, and more importantly attain the prestige of repeatably (if only technically) reaching space, on a budget embarrassingly smaller than NASA's

Although this is a great feat for a privately funded venture. This is only equivalent to NASA's first manned suborbital flight which happened in 1961. NASA has still put many people in space for extended periods of time, including 12 manned flights to the moon. And for all practical purposes, NASA started this adventure with no prior experience or knowledge of space flight. Also, a good portion of NASA's budget is for the first "A" in the acronym.

Again, this is a great feat, and its a first, but this is only the very beginning of private space flight.

Frustrated by the (lack) of coverage.

[MsWillow]

I'm a night owl. I mean, a serious night owl. I rarely get to bed before 2AM, and tend to get up after 9 at the earliest. However, knowing that today's flight was to start at 7AM, I was up, ready and waiting, at 6:30.

I was bebopping from one news channel to another (no, I don't get CNN), looking for coverage of the flight. About 7:30-ish, NBC said they were going to have the seperation live in about ten minutes. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Lots of blather about how Mt. St. Helens could erupt at any time, much blather about Hollywood news, politics, and/or both, but naft on Space Ship One.

Then I caught mention that it had hit the mark, and would soon be landing. Again, live coverage of the landing coming up on MSNBC. Again, nothing. Nothing. More Mount St. Helens blather, more Hollywood, more people selling unsound "treatments" for non-existant "diseases",, then, finally, on Fox, a shot of SS1 landing.

Total coverage, from 6 different networks' news shows? Under a minute. For an event that could well have a major impact on humanity for generations to come. Not even 60 whole seconds of air time. Compare this to Lindberg's landing, and the hullabaloo that caused.

I'm steamed. As NBC claimed they were going to have live coverage, and didn't, and NBC is now MSNBC, I really hope that Paul Allen will raise the roof about this. After CBS' fake memos, and NBC dropping the ball here, I REALLY hate to point out that the place that had the most coverage, and the timeliest, was Fox News.

Scary.

just a reminder

[Peyton Holland]

This is obviously a great situation for innovation, not only here in America, but also in the world.. here's why the SS1 program will go farther faster than NASA. NASA's governmentally funded and based.. they take all of their orders from the government. This is free enterprise at work here. If it took this program less than 5 years to get to the point where it's at now.. imagine where we could be in 5 more years? Trips to the moon, anyone? Wonder who's going to be the first to start researching ways to create artificial atmospheric conditions on the moon. Will there be an X-Prize for that?

Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space As a CORPS

[M1FCJ]

I don't mind dying trying to reach space. I do mind dying while crossing the road.

Some of the others were serious contenders. Unless you research the "wacky" theories as well, no one will find some new rules. Submarines: Huh, everyone knows metals sink in the water. Heavier than Air travel: Duh, of course impossible (according to much reowned Lord Kelvin, discoverer o many thermodynamic rules).

Flying from baloons is quite viable, especially when you are talking about really big payloads. I hope daVinci team will manage to get to space, eventually.

Purpose of X Prize

[heir2chaos]

I think it's wonderful that the SpaceShipOne team one the X Prize. However, I think it went a little outside what the competition was trying to accomplish. I do admit that it is a great achievement, but what I'm referring to is that the prize was for $10 million. In such, I think they were hoping that someone would spend less than that to pull it off with a reusable craft. They obviously spent much more than that. They still did it for less than the US government spends pulling it off though, so they still did prove a lot in the exercize. What do others of you think? I think prizes like this can be great to move our society forward and get individuals active in inovations.

Re:John Carmack's team...

[Baldrson]

Carmack's team also has a better shot at Bigelow's $50M America's Space Prize than any of the other Ansari X-Prize contenders. The 90% peroxide delay resulted in a more economical and safer methanol/peroxide(50%) mixed monoprop booster that is ideally suited for first stage reuse during orbital flights.

Space Station Reaction to the news

[CompressedAir]

I happened to be on the loop while the Space Ship One flight was going on. Pretty much everyone here at Johnson Space Center stopped to watch it.

One of the ground controllers told Mike and Gennady the news about the flight. Mike's statement was moving (hopefully I don't screw up his quote):

"It's nice to know, if only for a few minutes, that we're not the only two people up here."

That's how all of us engineers at NASA feel, as well. Most of us are here because we Believe in spaceflight, and it is a relief when some of that pressure gets taken off our shoulders.

More the merrier. Great job Scaled!

Some car crashes should count on the airline side

[Ungrounded Lightning]

The risk of traveling by plane is lower than by car even if you compute it per mile travelled. It's not lower because you fly by plane less often. You are a lot less likely to die on a 400-mile plane trip than you are to die on a 400-mile car trip.

I've seen that claim often. And suspect it's true. (I was in a plane, for instance, that blew ALL the tires on one side when it touched down - due to improper maintainence. I'm afraid I wrecked the captain's day when I congratulated him on the landing - he'd just bet another crwe member that nobody noticed anything.)

But I'd trust it a LOT more if any auto fatalities of auto passengers in the horrendous traffic near airports (where you WOULDN'T have been driving if you didn't have to go there to transfer to/from the plane) were counted toward the air travel, rather than car travel, totals.