Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Image of Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the do-you-see-what-i-see dept.

mtargettuk writes "First image of Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo structure: Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo is under construction at Scaled Composites in Mojave, California and Flightglobal has obtained what appears to be the first image of its cockpit section."

82 comments

  1. UH... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Virgin Cockpit. dur hur hur hur.

    1. Re:UH... by sa1lnr · · Score: 5, Funny

      http://home.clara.net/lesmcdm/images/virgin.jpg

    2. Re:UH... by justleavealonemmmkay · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's funny because the Slut plane is actually a Sabena plane. In the 1990s Sabena slept with Air France, with KLM, with BA and finally got a deadly disease from Swissair (who sunk Sabena to delay their own downfall)

    3. Re:UH... by ToadMan8 · · Score: 2, Funny

      LOL how in the world did this get moderated "Interesting" ?! Funny, perhaps!

      --
      I haven't posted in so long, my sig is out of date.
    4. Re:UH... by Plazmid · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is moderated interesting because it is interesting it got moderated interesting.

    5. Re:UH... by prestomation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are the mods all drunk? Who modded this informative?

      Well, maybe it is

  2. Who knew? by word+munger · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who knew the first spaceship for the masses would be modeled after the VW beetle?

    --
    ScienceSeeker.org
    1. Re:Who knew? by maxume · · Score: 1

      For the masses?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Who knew? by Sniper98G · · Score: 1

      The people's spaceship?

    3. Re:Who knew? by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

      Volksraumschiff?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:Who knew? by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      "The masses" in this context are people who can afford to pay six figures for a joyride to take them to a tenth of the delta-V needed for orbit in an vehicle design that physically cannot scale to orbit.

      Meanwhile, actual orbital vehicle development continues. The massive Falcon 9 has not only completed its one engine firing, its two engine firing, and its three engine firing, all flawlessly, but also it's five engine firing. Only one more static firing is scheduled before launch (all nine engines). The smaller Falcon 1, which would have easily reached orbit in its last test flight but for either the lack of a bump *or* the presence of an upper-stage baffle, now is designed both to prevent the bump *and* now has an upper-stage baffle. It will be launching within the next month with its first payload, and the Falcon 9 should launch by the end of the year. The Falcon series represents a two to three fold price cut per kilogram compared to similar sized launch vehicles after almost half a century of price stagnation.

      But hey, by all means, Slashdot is free to continue largely ignoring them (dedicating roughly the same number of articles to SpaceShipTwo, of which only minimal info has been released yet as the entire Falcon series through its history) and to keep reporting on every last detail from this unscaleable joyride.

      --
      Powell: "So, what are we doing?" Cheney: "Oh, crime." Powell: "Crime? Good, OK... crime..."
    5. Re:Who knew? by Dretep · · Score: 1

      Nothing wrong with that except that it's a bit too large. How am I going to fit it in my garage when it's finally available for the masses?

    6. Re:Who knew? by nmg196 · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're hardly comparable are they! Slashdot readers are far more interested in something which will take PEOPLE into space, rather than yet another satellite lifter that's only interesting because it's cheaper to make.

      Apart from anything, SpaceShipOne/Two just simply looks WAY cooler! I know that's not a very good reason, but it probably IS a reason.

      I think most people are interested in feeling like they're going into space, zero-G, black sky, take some pics, then coming back again safely. You don't need an orbital vehicle for ANY of those things.

      Falcon 9 is about as exciting as a Toyota Prius - only interesting if you're the one that's going to be saving the money.

    7. Re:Who knew? by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      They're hardly comparable are they! Slashdot readers are far more interested in something which will take PEOPLE into space, rather than yet another satellite lifter that's only interesting because it's cheaper to make.

      Apparently you've never heard of the Dragon. The Falcon series is designed to lift cargo *and* people to orbit. Unlike the shuttle, they made the wise (IMHO) decision to not require people to be on every liftoff; you include people when you want to lift people, and not otherwise. The first Dragon flight is scheduled for early next year. Both Falcon and Dragon have passed every NASA COTS review so far (example).

      Also, once again, the old fallacy of "being in space is roughly equivalent to being in orbit" rears its ugly head. Sadly, this happens in pretty much every thread about SS1/SS2.

      Apart from anything, SpaceShipOne/Two just simply looks WAY cooler!

      You hit the nail on the head.

      --
      Powell: "So, what are we doing?" Cheney: "Oh, crime." Powell: "Crime? Good, OK... crime..."
    8. Re:Who knew? by elrous0 · · Score: 1
      The Falcon 9 is just a cargo rocket. And it hasn't even completed a successful test flight yet. The SpaceShipTwo is the first passenger rocket that will put space within reach of non-billionaires and it's based on the SpaceShipOne, which has already PROVEN its viability with several successful test flights.

      No one gives a shit about engine tests. Call us back when the Falcon 9 actually puts some passengers into space (and "in theory" doesn't count).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    9. Re:Who knew? by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      1) Falcon 9 is far closer to "completing a successful test flight" than SpaceShipTwo. It has completed four static test firings, compared to a resounding zero for SS2.

      2) No, it is not a "cargo rocket"; it's designed for either cargo *or* the Dragon spacecraft, which is scheduled to launch in Q1 of next year. You see, back in the real world of orbital rocketry, there's this little thing called "staging" that you have to deal with. And no, the tiny bit of extra altitude and speed from the White Knight hardly counts. In real, orbital rocketry, you can't generally afford to be hauling around the mass of what got you there.

      will put space within reach

      Count "2" for the number of times that "space" and "orbit" have been predictably treated as though they're roughly equivalent, when they're not even close.

      which has already PROVEN its viability with several successful test flights.

      Just the first stage of Falcon 1 gave more delta-V in a single launch than all of SS1's flights combined. It was only the second stage that failed, and really, it only "failed" in that the engine shut down early due to a slosh, which has been corrected in two different ways. Even the payload separated normally.

      You're comparing a Segway with an EV1 here. The flight envelope of SS1 and SS2 isn't even remotely, slightly, trivially comparable to that of the Falcon series.

      --
      Powell: "So, what are we doing?" Cheney: "Oh, crime." Powell: "Crime? Good, OK... crime..."
    10. Re:Who knew? by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, and by the way, please elaborate on the proven viability of SS2.

      For years, I was warning people that Scaled was playing fast and loose with safety. I wrote this in 2006 (and updated with the latter link in early 2007, before the accident):

      "Rutan, on the other hand, nearly killed his test pilot by launching in high wind shear conditions, and launching before resolving the cause of wild rolls at rocket ignition. With just a small handful of flights. On a task that is incredibly easy compared to reaching orbit. Some view the rocketplane tourism industry as a disaster waiting to happen."

      I would rather have been proven wrong.

      --
      Powell: "So, what are we doing?" Cheney: "Oh, crime." Powell: "Crime? Good, OK... crime..."
    11. Re:Who knew? by TornCityVenz · · Score: 1

      Wow who would have guessed, it would be rounded..and have windows. So glad I could see the image to verify.

      --
      I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
    12. Re:Who knew? by Rei · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Blowing up wealthy passengers isn't exactly an attractive business model, no matter what waivers you make them sign. And if the current disregard toward safety continues, that's exactly what's going to happen.

      --
      Powell: "So, what are we doing?" Cheney: "Oh, crime." Powell: "Crime? Good, OK... crime..."
    13. Re:Who knew? by Samah · · Score: 1

      I read that then as "System Shock 1/System Shock 2"...
      I'm thinking... Virgin are building Citadel Station now?

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    14. Re:Who knew? by snoggeramus · · Score: 1

      I'll believe it when they put the engine in the front of the ship.

    15. Re:Who knew? by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      Yes I realise you put humans on as a payload, but theoretically you could do that with an Ariane rocket. The interesting bit therefore, is not the Falcon rocket but the Dragon payload. Even though it's cheaper, I would expect that the cost of launching the Falcon *massively* exceeds the cost of a flight in SpaceShipTwo?

      SpaceShipTwo is also closer to people's dream of just going to a normal airport to take a trip into space. You don't really need a dedicated Cape Canaveral style space port for SpaceShipTwo - you just need ANY runway that's long enough. Thats a big selling point and will also help to keep the launch costs down. The concept of SpaceShipTwo/Three/Four is always going to excite ME far more than something that looks like a 1950's rocket.

    16. Re:Who knew? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      You know, the design for SpaceShipTwo is perilously close to the "Orient Express" concept. Besides lifting people into space, couldn't a suborbital trajectory be used for faster and more efficient intercontinental trips? Maybe this is the long-term value of this race. Forget SST, go ballistic.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  3. Don't click that link by Gewalt · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The link in the summary redirected me to a domain squatter.

    --
    Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    1. Re:Don't click that link by adpsimpson · · Score: 5, Informative

      And after only 4 comments, it's already slashdotted.

      Searching on Google suggests the url was probably correct. The google cache link is here

      In case the image doesn't show up (google cache still loads images from origin site), here it is on imageshack

      --
      Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
      John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
    2. Re:Don't click that link by socsoc · · Score: 1

      now it just redirects to flightglobal.com's sitemap.

      takes a long time to load too...

    3. Re:Don't click that link by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Informative

      Works perfectly fine here - problem with your browser?

    4. Re:Don't click that link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More likely a problem with their ISP who redirected them to an advertising page to (illegally) boost their revenue.

    5. Re:Don't click that link by Gewalt · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, I just confused their sitemap with a squatter. It looked like a template squatter page, and definitely did not have the content I was looking for, so I didn't give it a seconds worth of thought.

      --
      Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    6. Re:Don't click that link by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 1

      Nice sig, but fix the "illegel" typo.

      --
      One simple rule for its versus it's
    7. Re:Don't click that link by adpsimpson · · Score: 1

      <blushing>oops...</blushing>

      Thanks!

      --
      Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
      John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
    8. Re:Don't click that link by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      You're blushing about a typo, when your sig is about crushing a child's testicles?? :)

  4. Its Quagmire, Quagmire... by Carl_Stawicki · · Score: 0, Funny

    gigidee gigidee goo

    --
    This is my signature.
    soid st egr.hyTa rsiugm usnin
    Any questions?
  5. Better link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/hyperbola/2008/06/spaceshiptwo-cockpit-composite.html

    -V

    1. Re:Better link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's not a link

  6. Link protected by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    The link in the article appears to be protected against offsite linking. If you want to view its contents, make sure you open it in a new window. If the site detects Slashdot, you will be redirected to the sitemap.

    That being said, I'm not sure if it's worth bothering. The photo is a sneaky shot of a component of the airframe. Specifically the nose-cone and forward portion of the craft. It's gray in color. Really, if you've seen an airplane before, you'll be just about as impressed.

    So unless you're a competitor looking to derive secrets about SpaceShipTwo's construction, just move along. There's nothing to see here.

    --
    Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    1. Re:Link protected by Anoraknid+the+Sartor · · Score: 2, Funny

      I clicked the link and got the article fine.

      I am in Japan - I wonder if they are IP sniffing... (that's like - P sniffing, but your own... )

      --
      Find Japanese addresses in English on Google Maps Japan: http://diddlefinger.com/
    2. Re:Link protected by khallow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So unless you're a competitor looking to derive secrets about SpaceShipTwo's construction, just move along. There's nothing to see here.

      Have you ever wondered whether Scaled Composites and Virgin Galactic were serious about this thing? Or how much that accident almost a year ago set back things? Well this is a data point that indicates some construction (or "bending of metal") is going on. Peeks like this help us understand the progress of another otherwise secretive business.

    3. Re:Link protected by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Burt Rutan is a prick, but he proved with SpaceShipOne that he can deliver (unlike all the other X Prize competitors). I don't think anyone doubted that Scaled Composites was dead serious when they said they're going to build SpaceShipTwo.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Link protected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's not terribly exciting. Nitpick, however:

      It's not actually the nosecone, but rather the cockpit section. It's rounded off in front because it will be pressurized in flight. The nose-cone will attach to the front of this and is basically a fairing for aerodynamic purposes.

      A couple months ago there were pictures released of the major sections of the White Knight 2 carrier aircraft. Those were much more exciting, and easier to figure out what they were.

    5. Re:Link protected by khallow · · Score: 1

      Sure they're serious. They can still fail.

  7. looks like Darth Vader's personal fighter by peter303 · · Score: 3, Informative

    OK, its carbon composite, and carbon is black before coating.

    1. Re:looks like Darth Vader's personal fighter by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      If carbon is black when it's uncoated, then what color is it when it's coated?

      (please phrase all serious answers in the form of a whooshing sound)

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  8. So where..... by stainlesssteelpat · · Score: 3, Funny

    does one find me a swashbuckling Galatic Virgin, arggh...

    --
    War is the statesman's game, the priest's delight, the lawyer's jest, the hired assassin's trade.- Shelley
    1. Re:So where..... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      If you're looking for a virgin who can build a spacecraft, just find the nearest NASA engineer.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  9. What kind of plane is it? by bosef1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obligatory quotations:

    Excuse me sir, there's been a little problem in the cockpit...
    The cockpit...what is it?
    It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilots sit, but that's not important right now.

    You ever been in a cockpit before?
    I've never been up in a plane before.
    You ever seen a grown man naked?

    1. Re:What kind of plane is it? by Cloin · · Score: 1

      Surely you can't be serious.

    2. Re:What kind of plane is it? by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      It looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue...

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    3. Re:What kind of plane is it? by barzok · · Score: 1

      Joey, do you like gladiator movies?

    4. Re:What kind of plane is it? by sconeu · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm deadly serious. And don't call me Shirley.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    5. Re:What kind of plane is it? by 93,000 · · Score: 1

      And Leon's getting larger.

      --
      Sweet informative mod.
    6. Re:What kind of plane is it? by JrOldPhart · · Score: 1

      Have we got clearance Clarence?
      What's our vector Victor

      --
      Nothing is foolproof, fools are too ingenious. - Murphy
    7. Re:What kind of plane is it? by Molochi · · Score: 1

      I don't know what to make of that...

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    8. Re:What kind of plane is it? by Zanzibar+Q.+Tarquin · · Score: 1

      "Don't call me Shirley..."

    9. Re:What kind of plane is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can make a hat...

  10. Put the image in the post ! by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

    There is only one image that is interesting, put it in the post !

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    1. Re:Put the image in the post ! by Miladinoski · · Score: 1

      There is only one image that is interesting, put it in the post !

      You don't want Slashdot to turn into Digg .

      Do you?
      --
      [insert lame sig here]
    2. Re:Put the image in the post ! by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      No, I want /. to be able to compete efficiently with it.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  11. Not the First Image by CR0WTR0B0T · · Score: 4, Funny

    I saw an image of the Virgin Spaceship in a potato chip yesterday. I put up for sale on EBay.

    --
    "Nothing to see here. Move along."
  12. Farmer Joe's Truck? by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

    Did they borrow farmer Joe's truck?
      It's a bit disappointing to see such a high tech thing moved by the same truck that moved crates of oranges only days before.

    1. Re:Farmer Joe's Truck? by eln · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Personally, I think it's a smart move. It's a little known fact that private space exploration has failed to take off because most companies are still trying to come up with sufficiently futuristic-looking methods of moving spacecraft parts around before they can start work on the actual going into space bit.

      While few doubt that Virgin will eventually need to come up with some sort of overly-aerodynamic truck design propelled by some sort of weird blue jets that cause it to both hover and move in any direction, the "Grandpa's old Ford" method should be okay for the short term.

    2. Re:Farmer Joe's Truck? by Thrakamazog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was actually quite pleased to see it on the back of a plane old truck. Too many people think spaceflight is some magical unreal thing. The more we see it as part of our everyday life the more we expect it to be there. The more we expect it to be there the more likely it will be.

    3. Re:Farmer Joe's Truck? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I couldn't help but hear the ST:Enterprise theme song when looking at that picture and thinking (jokes about Enterprise quality aside) *this* is what should be happening.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  13. Anonymouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    lmao, look at the punk teens in the hoodiez. you going to trust your life, a $250,000, 5 minute, space-thrill to that??

    i will...sign me up now!

  14. Link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.flightglobal.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/19717

  15. Looks Shoddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This thing looks unstable. A lot. I would prefer the Soviet Shuttle Buran, as it had ejector seats, none of the issues of the US shuttle as it came later. Did I mention it had ejector seats? And wasnt made of carbon? Carbon has not been proven, as even the 787 will never have a real test. Aviation turning cheap=Death. Just use aluminum!

  16. What a heap of junk! by mccalli · · Score: 2, Funny

    "You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought".

    Cheers,
    Ian

  17. Are you absolutely sure it's not... by Off+the+Rails · · Score: 1

    ...the head section of a big statue of Darth Vader?

  18. NOT the first photos of SS2 by mattnyc99 · · Score: 1

    We discussed them three friggin' months ago: http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/27/1848240&from=rss

  19. SS2 is in serious trouble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They are using N2O as an oxidizer, just like SS1 used, but the plumbing line sizes are much bigger. Testing was done years ago that showed severe detonation problems with N2O in plumbing line sizes greater than 2", which was the likely (although not certain) cause of their previous engine test failure. This problem will most likely only be solvable by switching to another oxidizer, which will result in a multi-year hit to any flight plans.

  20. hehehe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I know that all you l-mart ppl hope that. But the simple fact is, that once the falcon 1 makes it into a PROPER orbit, you will claim that 9 engines can not work. Once falcon 9 makes it into orbit, then it will be that Dragon will not Work. Once Dragaon carries cargo to the ISS, then you will claim that it can not haul ppl. And once that occurs BEFORE 2011, you will still go on about their not being able to get the falon 9 heavy going or their not being able to connect to the BA-300, etc.

    Rather than trying to knock the competition, why don't you folks learn elements from them? There is plenty that Spacex is teaching the air force. Instead, you keep pulling a MS on them.

    1. Re:hehehe by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      It's 2008 and that haven't even had so much as a test flight. Until they can actually show some results, they've got no room to brag. There are about a million defunct designs that promised great things they WOULD do. There are very few that ever actually delivered on any of those promises.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  21. Hmmm. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    I think that you are way too pessismistic on SS2/3. You KNOW that they are not going to use the same engine for SS3. More importantly, the idea is to get as much of the low end dollars as possible, and then move up the ladder.

    As to Spacex, yeah, they SHOULD end up in a pretty good position. I am hopeful that the next launch is a real winner. It would be nice to see. But I will point out that they ran the 5 engine test for only 15 seconds. Seems to me that they need to have a full launch time or more to really know if it is going to be good. In fact, I would love to see them do several LONG static firings once they get the 9 engine working.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Hmmm. by Rei · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You KNOW that they are not going to use the same engine for SS3

      SS3 is vaporware. It's probably had about as much design work done on it as a spacecraft I designed a while back. And if they don't start taking safety more seriously and end up killing paying passengers just once, it'll stand just as much of a chance of actually being built.

      For any SS3 to actually work, they would have to literally start over. On virtually everything. Almost nothing they've developed and almost none of the experience they developed will apply to it, apart from a better understanding of dealing with transsonic and supersonic flight (which they could have just hired people for). the materials are wrong, the engines are wrong, the propellants are wrong, the staging is wrong, and on and on, and they haven't even touched on 95% of the actual challenges of real orbital spaceflight. What they built is far closer to a supersonic airplane than it is to an orbital spacecraft.

      None of this means that they *can't* do SS3. What I've been pointing out is that SS3 is essentially starting over. SS1/SS2 is a technological dead-end as far as reaching orbit is concerned, and it doesn't retire or even begin to approach the overwhelming majority of the challenges involved.

      --
      Powell: "So, what are we doing?" Cheney: "Oh, crime." Powell: "Crime? Good, OK... crime..."
  22. Relax by marcus · · Score: 1

    Rei, you don't have to champion for Spacex all the time.

    The only reason that Rutan/Virgin get the press they do is because they've already put up a manned flight. It doesn't matter that it was just a little suborbital flea-hop(to quote a famous Soviet leader). It was manned. They won the prize they were after. So....they get face time with the camera.

    Soon enough Spacex will go sub-orbital, then orbital and when they do, all the cameras and /.ers will be there.

    Take it easy man. Take a breath, sit back and smile. It'll all work out in the end.

    --
    Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
    - W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO