Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

U.S. Okays Virgin Galactic Plans

Posted by Zonk on from the everything-good-starts-in-wisconsin dept.

Aron writes "Space.com reports that the U.S. Department of State's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls has approved collaboration of technical details between Scaled Composites of Mojave, California and Virgin Galactic of the United Kingdom to build passenger-carrying suborbital spaceliners. The next suborbital ship will be a nine person vessel." From the article: "Details about the new company were unveiled at the Experimental Aircraft Association's (EAA) AirVenture air show held July 25-31 in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. The Spaceship Company will build a fleet of commercial suborbital spaceships and launch aircraft. Scaled Composites is to be under contract for research and development testing, as well as certification of a 9-person SpaceShipTwo (SS2) design, and a White Knight Two (WK2) mothership to be called Eve."

23 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Judging from the headline... by gardyloo · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...finally, News for Nerds!

  2. Sending Slashdot virgins to space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh yeah baby, I'm going next!

  3. Re:Launching by s20451 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does anyone have any details on how it will be launched?

    1. Aim the pointy end at space.
    2. Press the "Launch" button.

    --
    Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
  4. Texas has the best chance by RobertB-DC · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:
    The location to produce the fleet of rocket planes is very likely to be Mojave, California. ?That?s where we expect to be in production,? Whitehorn said, although the takeoff site of Virgin Galactic?s public space trips is a different matter. ... ?We are already in discussion with a number of states in the United States,? Whitehorn said

    When they say "a number of states", I think the number is close to 1. Texas has laws on the books establishing "Spaceport Development Corporations" with the authority to levy taxes, and the three locations that have established these SDCs all have big advantages over anyplace else in the US:

    * One is in the middle of nowhere, for early testing (which might include Things Blowing Up).

    * One is an hour away from Houston, for when suborbital and orbital commercial flights become routine.

    * One is not-too-far away and offers launching above water, for flights after "experimental" but before "routine".

    For further reference, this Houston Chronicle article name-drops about everyone remotely involved in a private space project, from Amazon's Jeff Bezos to Carmack to Armadillo/Id Guy John Carmack.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:Texas has the best chance by pavon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, as much as I would like to see this stuff happening in New Mexico, I think this space port plan that Richardson is putting forth is not going to succeed. While southern New Mexico has tons of empty space, which is great for the risk factor, it is in the middle of the middle of nowhere. There are several other places in the US that have big baren deserts or open oceans that are much nearer to large population centers. Places like south-east California, surrounding Houston, any coastal area (provided weather is not a concern).

      Personally I think that Mojave is going to be the fist hub. A huge portion of your target market is right there is Southern California. Scaled already has relationships with all the regulatory people that could help or hurt them. They will probably expand to multiple sites after things get off the ground, but it just makes sense to start right where they are.

      Regardless, unless other states really drag their feet, or are completely inflexable regarding taxes, I don't think NM has much of a chance of becoming a staging ground for commercial space flight.

  5. OKs technology exchange, not flight plans by jfengel · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since Virgin Galactic isn't a US company, the Department of Defense has a say in whether Scaled Composites can send them certain technological information, under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (the same rules that make those crypto t-shirts "munitions").

    It's not surprising that they passed, since VG is a British company, and the Brits are the good guys. Presumably some guarantees have been made that this isn't going to turn into plans for cruise missiles for Iranians.

    So they haven't been given the go-ahead to fly, just to begin collaboration. They still have to come up with the actual spacecraft, and then there's a whole new set of approvals before they can fly the things.

  6. Virgins in space by multi-flavor-geek · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, who is going to be the first member of the sixty mile high club?

    --
    Like arts? Like cheesy little Indie mags? Check out www.artwerkmag.com, and don't laugh at the bad coding please.
  7. What I want by varmittang · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is to actually go some place. Fly from NY to Paris in a matter of and hour. Not just to go up, OOOOO, AAAAAA, the stars, weightlessness, then come back down to the place I just left. I want to actually travel if I end up going into space.

    --
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    12345
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    1. Re:What I want by demachina · · Score: 3, Informative

      Then maybe this would be more your style. Its the design for the CXV, a proposed crew transfer vehicle to to get 4 people to and from LEO and the ISS, also being worked on by Scaled Composites along with Transformational Space. Currently its under a small NASA contract, that is a lesser known little brother to the CEV, though you can tell this is intended to be the orbital successor to SpaceShipOne and they want to use it for private space travel. I'm hoping they can scrape together the funds to make it a reality.

      They've drop tested a 23% scale model launch stack at Mojave, and dropped tested the capsule parachute system off Crescent City, CA.

      The Airforce is funding the Falcon two stage launch vehicle under its QuickReach program. Its fuled by LOX and Propane. Its a VAPAK pressure fed system with no expensive turbopumps. You heat the fuel and build up pressure in the tank instead of using pumps. This isn't viable for launch for sea level but works great for air launches.

      So of course this craft is also air launched like SpaceShipOne for a lot of reasons listed on the web site. A big challenge is they need either a very large new version of White Knight or a used 747 with major changes to the landing gear to accomadate slinging the spacecraft underneath it.

      The capsule is based on scaled up version of the well proven Discover/Corona capsules used 400+ times to return film from spy satellites. The capsule is reusable with minor refurbishment between launches. It uses 2 layers of SIRCA thermal tiles developed at NASA Ames. It ocean lands with parachutes like Apollo, partially since this make it possible to safely land on 2/3rds of the Earth's surface in an emergency.

      --
      @de_machina
  8. Hmm, space travel. by Graviteh · · Score: 5, Funny

    "And on the right, you will see foam flying off."

    --
    Dance Dance Revolution.
  9. Fat chance. Try the Mojave desert. by everphilski · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Mojave is where they did all the R&D. Mojave is a spaceport already. It would make sense to open up shop there. There are other spaceports already in existance - Oklahoma spaceport has been in existance for six years now.

    Burt Rutan gave a speech at an AIAA conference and one prototype trajectory he gave showed launching over the Pacific ocean and landing in Mojave. Lots of pretty scenery (ocean and desert) lots of good abort options, and you wind up where the hangar is.

    -everphilski-

  10. Re:Launching by seramar · · Score: 5, Funny

    1. Aim the pointy end at space.
    2. Press the "Launch" button.

    3. Profit!!!

    --
    australian project gutenberg is better than the original.
  11. I see how it works... by burtdub · · Score: 4, Funny
    They approve it if it's called virgin, not if it's called .xxx

    I'm on to their little game.

  12. Re:First off... by cmowire · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ah....

    But if you launch... say 500 lbs to space at $100/lb and compare that to 50,000 lbs to space at $10,000/lb.... that changes a lot of scales of econonomy as well. Likewise, SS2 is supposed to go up higher, therefore narrowing the gap to orbit.

    You don't need to do everything the shuttle does to revolutionize space travel. In fact, it's probably easier if you don't try to.

    --
    Gentoo Sucks
  13. Re:This reminds me of the old 'space race' by taustin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Think of it, we have one company now that will soon be selling rides on a sub-orbital craft. How long will it be before a competitor steps up and offers LEO rides?

    A long, long while. The technology used on SS1 is utterly incapable of getting anything to orbit. The amount of energy to achieve orbit is about ten times what it took for the parabolic flight SS1 managed. The fuel used simply cannot provide enough thrust to get itself to orbit, much less itself plus a spaceship plus a payload.

    There are also huge differences in the mechanical stresses involved in reentering the atmosphere at suborbital speeds and at orbital speeds. SS1 hitting the atmosphere at orbital speeds, would be confetti in seconds.

    They've got a long way to go.

  14. So... by ENOENT · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How long until we can have ballistic 45 minute rides from Los Angeles to Tokyo?

    --
    That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
  15. Re:First off... by taustin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't need to do everything the shuttle does to revolutionize space travel. In fact, it's probably easier if you don't try to.

    You do, however, have to be able to achieve orbit, and return in one piece.

    Rutan's technology simply isn't capable of it. Not enough delta-vee. In other words, the fuel they use can't launch it's own weight in to orbit.

    Orbit takes about ten times as much energy per pound as the parabolic flight they did with SS1.

    Plus, they technology they used to build the air frame could not possibly withstand the heat or mechanical stress of reentry at orbital speeds. It'd disintegrate on impact with the upper atmosphere.

    They've got a long way to go for orbital capability.

  16. Re:First off... by Rei · · Score: 3, Informative

    narrowing the gap to orbit

    *Not even close*. SS2 is going to 135-140km straight vertical. About 90% of the energy of a craft in orbit is horizontal, and the other 10% verticle; the minimum LEO orbit is around 250km. You do the math.

    Listing price per pound on something that goes nowhere useful and doesn't even come close to scaling to somewhere useful is pretty pointless.

    --
    Kneel Before Christ!
  17. its gotta be in the south by rebelcool · · Score: 3, Informative

    the closer to the equator you are, the less energy you need to expend to get into space as you can use the earth's rotational velocity to propel you up there. So you have less fuel or more cargo. Some commercial launches take this to its extreme and launch off converted oil platforms in the ocean, which are towed to the equator by tugboats.

    Of course, there are other considerations. Nasa uses cape canaveral because not only is it very far south, its surrounded by water on 3 sides meaning launch mishaps are less likely to damage anything. And the water location means barges can deliver components too big for truck or rail to deliver, like booster engines and fuel tanks.

    The weather is also a factor. Mojave is popular because the weather there is pretty boring and its sparse land.

    --

    -

    1. Re:its gotta be in the south by afidel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually the Shuttle's SRB's are sized to fit on rails, and there's an interesting tale relating that back to ancient times:

      American railroad tracks are 56.5" wide (the "gauge") because the English built the first railroads in America and they use that width. Why do they use that width? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used. Why did "they" use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that were used for building wagons which used that wheel spacing.

      Why did wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing? Because older wagon ruts throughout England used that spacing, and if they changed it, wagon wheels would break falling into or being forced out of the old ruts, which were 56.5" wide.

      The old ruts were that size because the roads were built by the Romans, who arrived in England in 54 BC and left about 400 AD. Their wagons, and their chariots before their wagons, used that spacing, and that spacing was used all over Europe and wherever Rome conquered, because their wagons used the identical wheel base everywhere. So the modern railroad track width derives from the Roman chariot.

      Why was the Roman chariot track width 56.5"? Because that was the width of a chariot that would equal the width of two "standard" Roman horses. Specifications and bureaucracies live forever!

      Such curious dimensions continue today. A space shuttle sitting on its launch pad has two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs, made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory had to run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is just wide enough to accomodate a railroad car, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses' behinds, (and we now know why) so the booster rockets were made to fit.

      The major design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined by the width of a horse's ass, and the political necessity of building different components in different states (the third ass in the tale being the boobs in Washington).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  18. Re:Wisconsin Represent! by fgodfrey · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, it's got an airfield with a long enough runway to land most large jets (I've seen 747's, C5's, and the big Russian cargo jets there(*)). Even the Concord was able to land/take off there. The airport isn't that busy so it can basically be dedicated to just the airshow the entire week.

    Besides, given that it's a fly-in, I suspect that part of the appeal to the pilots is that they get to fly someplace to go to it :)

    A complete history can be found here .

    (*) I grew up in Ripon, WI under the approach route. Having a C5 suddenly go over your house in a location where the largest plane normally going over is a crop duster is quite an experience....

    --
    Go Badgers! -- #include "std/disclaimer.h"
  19. Re:First off... by webjonesin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You might want to consider what they accomplished...

    For a budget of about $20 million, they did three missions that approximately matched what Alan Shepard did. And...they got to keep the whole rocket.

    And you really need to understand the human spirit...NASA ain't going away, but neither are the dreamers.

  20. Re:Launching by FleaPlus · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'd give very, very serious thoughts to trading both nuts to work in his shop.

    In case you were serious, both Scaled and Virgin Galactic are hiring, as are Blue Origin, Bigelow Aerospace, and SpaceX:

    http://www.scaled.com/careers/
    http://www.virgingalactic.com/jobs.asp
    http://www.blueorigin.com/jobs.htm
    http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=careers&c ontent=http%3A//www.spacex.com/careers.php
    http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/employment.html