Slashdot Mirror


Designing the World's Tiniest Manned Suborbital Vehicle

cylonlover writes, quoting Gizmag: "Generally speaking, companies developing suborbital manned vehicles brag about how much elbow room their spacecraft will provide passengers. They say there will be plenty of room to float around during the weightless portion of the flight, that there will be no fighting for windows, that passengers will comfortably endure the high-g portions of the flight ... and then there's Copenhagen Suborbitals' Tycho Brahe. CS's Tycho Brahe is a one-passenger capsule intended for a purely ballistic flight to a peak altitude approaching 100 miles. The passenger is just along for the ride, with no mechanism to steer or otherwise pilot the capsule."

153 comments

  1. You WILL watch... by icebike · · Score: 5, Funny

    Looks so small you haven't even got room to put you hands up to cover your eyes, let alone wipe your breakfast off the glass.
    One can only hope the canopy is made of Peril Sensitive glass, and you get the option of editing any inflight videos so your friends don't get to see you screaming like a schoolgirl.
    I hope they subcontract with Depends, because you know someone's going to need them, especially since the parachute is at the bottom, and the final descent should be sufficiently terrifying that you wouldn't want anything else floating around your screaming mouth.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:You WILL watch... by Moheeheeko · · Score: 5, Funny

      On this weeks episode of "Who Wants to be a Human Cruise Missile...."

    2. Re:You WILL watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that looks scary as hell. What's their business plan? Abduct people and ask a ransom to their family for NOT launching them into this tin can?

    3. Re:You WILL watch... by mhajicek · · Score: 1

      Saw the pic in TFA years ago. Reminds me of the cyborg missiles in Gunnm.

    4. Re:You WILL watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I may be misreading the schematics, but it appears the the parachute is stowed at the feet, but the anchor point is at the head. So when you descend, you'll be (gently?) flipped back over by the drag, then fall feet-first.

    5. Re:You WILL watch... by Tifer · · Score: 1

      Maybe this will give bullet manufacturers a new perspective.

    6. Re:You WILL watch... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

      I have to say this doesn't look like a good idea.

    7. Re:You WILL watch... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I'm sure Wolowitz will have plenty of elbow room.

    8. Re:You WILL watch... by kiehlster · · Score: 1

      Have no fear about your breakfast blocking your view. With the velocity you'll be traveling in standing position, it's more likely to come out the other end anyway along with yesterday's lunch and dinner. You should be more worried about losing your lunch when first seeing the re-usable flight suit.

    9. Re:You WILL watch... by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      They should market this as a once-a-day pay-MUCH-extra ride at an amusement park.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    10. Re:You WILL watch... by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      If people are willing to pay for this experience, for $5 I'll let them ride shotgun while Grandma drives to bingo.

    11. Re:You WILL watch... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      close, it's to abduct mother-in-laws and take bids for the crash-cam youtube footage

    12. Re:You WILL watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On this weeks episode of "Who Wants to be a Human Cruise Missile...."

      FIRE ME, BOY!!!!

    13. Re:You WILL watch... by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      Mod up Funny! Amazing how in 2012 the USA has no capability of its own any more to even send up spam in a can.

    14. Re:You WILL watch... by amorsen · · Score: 1

      What's their business plan?

      The three step process has been modified somewhat:

      1) ???
      2) Profit!
      3) Launch stuff into space

      Stage 1 is already over... You too can contribute, see raketvenner.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    15. Re:You WILL watch... by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 1

      Worst day to run out of mod points! For SPOON's sake, someone mod this funny!

    16. Re:You WILL watch... by schlachter · · Score: 1

      you mean ballistic missile....

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    17. Re:You WILL watch... by random+coward · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the Space-X launch last night?

    18. Re:You WILL watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well this is last years design. Based on a launch in the summer of 2011 we decided against devoloping this capsule further. It was shown to have a tendency to wobble in flight. It was decided to go on with a more conventional capsule design based on Apollo/Mercury. The current test vehicle will be tested this summer in the Baltic Sea 30 km from te danish cost. Link to the new design - http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/tychodeepspace.php.

      Btw we tested the largest amateur bi-fuel liquid propelled rocket engine on Sunday - Video from the test (skip to 5:30) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk5S5Q3M4Ek&feature=related

    19. Re:You WILL watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a cruise missile is a ballistic missile dipshit.

    20. Re:You WILL watch... by ZaskarX · · Score: 2

      Incorrect, a cruise missile generates lift like an airplane, dipshit.

    21. Re:You WILL watch... by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      so in other words, first you say it, then you do it?

    22. Re:You WILL watch... by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      That wasn't a manned launch

    23. Re:You WILL watch... by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      You've been reading too much To Serve Man; humans aren't spam.

    24. Re:You WILL watch... by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      No, it was in reference to the Mercury program. Test pilots like Chuck Yeager derisively referred to the Mercury astronauts as "spam-in-a-can" and made fun of the fact that chimps could fly the Mercury capsule. This was in 1959. You'd think we'd've been to Mars by now, but no, we beg rides from Vladimir Putin just to get to low Earth orbit. Alan Shepard is doing cartwheels right now.

    25. Re:You WILL watch... by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      Not in the face! Not in the face!

    26. Re:You WILL watch... by FairAndHateful · · Score: 1

      I like squirrels!!!

    27. Re:You WILL watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've been reading too much To Serve Man; humans aren't spam.

      No, (Wait... Spoiler Alert...) They're Soylent Green! (And red... and orange... and whatever other colors they had, I forget...)

    28. Re:You WILL watch... by gullevek · · Score: 1

      The parachute confused me too, but that is just the holding place, it is connected at the top part. To be seen in the blueprint pages.

      --
      "Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
    29. Re:You WILL watch... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      First comment on /. which actually made me laugh out loud. Many thanks!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    30. Re:You WILL watch... by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      green is people, the other ones were assumed to be not people, but veggie based wafers. But then again, so was the green variety... So who knows.

    31. Re:You WILL watch... by random+coward · · Score: 1

      Dragon is designed to be a manned vehicle though.
      Supports up to 7 passengers in Crew configuration "

  2. Tycho Brahe? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

    One can only hope that the next one will be named "John Gabriel".

    1. Re:Tycho Brahe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, thanks to a notoriously unfunny web comic the name of a great man has been temporarily soiled.

      For all the theoretically capable writing that spews forth from Jerry Holkins you'd think he would have picked a more creative nom de plume.

    2. Re:Tycho Brahe? by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      The next one will be called the 60 mile high club. It will be a bit wider and have room for two people.

  3. So basically. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's a coffin for shooting people into the sun.

    1. Re:So basically. by mhajicek · · Score: 2

      You'd have to add at least a booster stage; this one will only get you to the ocean.

    2. Re:So basically. by hey! · · Score: 2

      It's not as roomy as a coffin. It's more like a straightjacket, which is ironic.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  4. "ballistic" by Tifer · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think I'd be too caught up with the "human projectile" aspect of the flight to ride this myself. Science!

    1. Re:"ballistic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like a minimalistic version of the US Confederate submarine "Hunley" -- with all the safety issues connoted by that (the Hunley sank twice, killing both crews, then went missing with a third crew).

    2. Re:"ballistic" by hackula · · Score: 1
      I am just a block away from the Hunley as I am typing this. Some pretty fascinating stuff has been discovered since they pulled it up a couple years ago. A month or two ago they found a coin on the sub with a big dent in it. Legend had said that the captain had kept this coin in his breast pocket after he had been shot in the heart, but was saved by the pocketed coin (that's a lucky coin!). Historians had long thought this story to be a myth until they found the damn thing on the floor of the sub.

      Interesting story, but you could not pay me to get in that thing or anything like it.

    3. Re:"ballistic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just a rollercoaster with no tracks and only one rise. They need to have multiple rises, several corners and maybe a corkscrew section where the capsule spins round wildly.

  5. Americans need not apply by vlm · · Score: 2, Funny

    an average adult male build and a weight of 70 kg (154 lbs)

    Americans need not apply. This is "SMART CAR" sized not "SUV" sized.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Americans need not apply by icebike · · Score: 2

      The smart car has better engineering.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Americans need not apply by Jeng · · Score: 2

      Also just about anyone who works out on a regular basis.

      Just because someone is heavy, that doesn't mean that they are fat.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    3. Re:Americans need not apply by BradleyUffner · · Score: 3, Insightful

      an average adult male build and a weight of 70 kg (154 lbs)

      Americans need not apply. This is "SMART CAR" sized not "SUV" sized.

      That's "average"? Last time I had a physical my doctor said I was UNDER weight at 165lbs. Maybe the average weight of an adult male midget.

    4. Re:Americans need not apply by berashith · · Score: 1

      average for where ? I am not fat, but at my height I will not be able to get down to this weight. I am also not that tall compared to some northern European or Nordic men.

      I have no worries about the weight limit though, as there is no way in hell that I would ride on this. I can imagine even best case scenario that you get to orbit facing the wrong way, and get a view of nothing. Or, the thing spins like crazy and you get to see the earth roll past about 3 times a second. Then the inverted descent for long enough for blood to pool in your head.

    5. Re:Americans need not apply by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      I can imagine even best case scenario that you get to orbit facing the wrong way, and get a view of nothing.

      Best case scenario?

      It's SUBORBITAL - there's no way in hell it'll ever get into orbit, and if it did, there's no way in hell it would be able to survive reentry.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    6. Re:Americans need not apply by berashith · · Score: 1

      sorry... i meant altitude, not orbit...

      screw the semantics, if you go up really high to get a view that few people have, but have no room to turn and actually take in the view, it would suck if the capsule was facing the wrong way.

    7. Re:Americans need not apply by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      How tall are you?
      At 5' 7" I am not a midget and I go under 154lbs. I would say I am on the short side of average, but not outside the normal high range for a White male.

      In short, you sound fat.

    8. Re:Americans need not apply by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      You are honestly going to claim more people are on the high end of the weight scale because they exercise so much?

    9. Re:Americans need not apply by Kreigaffe · · Score: 0

      HYUK HYUK HYUK

      gosh you're funny!

      except I'm 6'2 (that's 1.9m for you people who like measurements that are better in a lab but not as useful for human measurements).
      I'm 180lb.

      That's hardly overweight, or oversized. Hell, I'm built *thin*. And don't think I don't get pissed at idiot engineers who design things for the "average" person -- they forget that short people can pretty simply adjust things to fit things larger than they are but large people can't adjust things to fit. The last time I was in a Mazda, the steering wheel bit into my thighs, with the seat the whole way back and the wheel inclined as high as possible.

      But hey, keep making jokes about fat Americans when the thing in question is being built for the "average" person of 5'7, 150lb.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    10. Re:Americans need not apply by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      You are honestly going to claim more people are on the high end of the weight scale because they exercise so much?

      71kg+ is too much for this rocket.

      But 71kg+ isn't especially heavy as humans go - I'm 188 cm tall, and haven't massed as little as 70 kg in close to 40 years.

      And no, I'm not overweight as such things are measured these days....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    11. Re:Americans need not apply by Jeng · · Score: 2

      No, but it is a significant amount of the population.

      I haven't weighed less than 160 lbs since sophomore year of high school. I've never been described as fat, most people guess my weight around 20-35 lbs less than I actually weigh.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    12. Re:Americans need not apply by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      screw the semantics, if you go up really high to get a view that few people have, but have no room to turn and actually take in the view, it would suck if the capsule was facing the wrong way.

      True enough.

      Frankly, I'm claustrophobic enough that being inside something that size would be enough to keep me from enjoying the view, even assuming I were facing the right direction.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    13. Re:Americans need not apply by element-o.p. · · Score: 3, Insightful

      BMI is a horrible way to determine fitness. Muscle mass is more dense than fat, and therefore, athletes tend to have more weight per unit of volume than the typical couch potato. BMI does not take that into account.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    14. Re:Americans need not apply by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      that's not how you determine if someone is overweight. this is: http://www.bmi-calculator.net/

      a lot of people weigh more than 154lbs and are perfectly healthy. you compare their weight against their height and adjust for gender. if you're a male 6 feet tall or more then you are underweight at 154lbs.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    15. Re:Americans need not apply by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      Yep -- at 6'0", I'm not exactly "tall" but I had a heck of a time getting into the Eagle Talon I used to own while wearing a helmet for a track day. Honestly, it was a tight fit even without the helmet -- I typically drove leaning a little to the left so I wouldn't smack my head on the roof of the car.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    16. Re:Americans need not apply by hackula · · Score: 1

      You are correct. The average american male weighs around 190lbs. It was around 165lbs in the 1920s, but that ship has sailed.

    17. Re:Americans need not apply by amorsen · · Score: 1

      And don't think I don't get pissed at idiot engineers who design things for the "average" person

      If you can weld, maybe you can help them scale their design up a bit. That is also the only chance to fly the thing, they won't be selling tickets.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    18. Re:Americans need not apply by vlm · · Score: 1

      But much poorer vertical acceleration. Possibly lower range per fuel tank too. Its an apples and oranges thing. "Better" also needs some clarification.

      Remember that aerospace works under the opposite optimization scheme from cars and consumer goods. Simplify and add lightness, that sort of thing. From a design standpoint they are not directly comparable.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    19. Re:Americans need not apply by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      It was never meant for use on individuals, only groups. Far more people are fatties than athletes.

    20. Re:Americans need not apply by butchersong · · Score: 1

      Most white males I know are a good deal taller than you. In short... you sound short.

    21. Re:Americans need not apply by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      But much poorer vertical acceleration....

      But with the right rocket motor and maybe a good kicker-ramp, the Smart car would have excellent vertical acceleration.

    22. Re:Americans need not apply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, douchebag? I'm 198cm. You'd throw up if a 70kg ME came knocking at your door.

    23. Re:Americans need not apply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forgot all Americans are overwhelming fat.

    24. Re:Americans need not apply by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Funny I'm 6'2'' and I fit into my Talon TSI just fine (Much better then a Stealth/3000GT). Granted not much room for a helmet. Mine was a '91. Perhaps a different gen?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    25. Re:Americans need not apply by element-o.p. · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I owned both a '92 non-turbo and a '97 TSi. The 1G was a little roomier than the 2G, but the turbo was SOOOO worth it :)

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
    26. Re:Americans need not apply by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      First gen had a 1 inch long 'asthma connecter' between turbo and intercooler. 50HP just by un-de-tuning it. Invisible at smog check time.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    27. Re:Americans need not apply by fleebait · · Score: 1

      sorry... i meant altitude, not orbit...

      screw the semantics, if you go up really high to get a view that few people have, but have no room to turn and actually take in the view, it would suck if the capsule was facing the wrong way.

      Where there's smoke, there's mirrors. Problem solved!!

    28. Re:Americans need not apply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, in the same way all people from West/Central Europe are fags (in the South Parkian sense of the word).

  6. Dr. Strangelove? by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    Sounds like you're just riding a bomb.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Dr. Strangelove? by Ashenkase · · Score: 2

      If someone wants to go sub-orbital or into orbit, "riding a bomb" is the only way to get there. When it comes down to it, it's just a controlled explosion, no matter which rocket on the market you pick.

    2. Re:Dr. Strangelove? by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you're just riding a bomb.

      unfortunately cannot ride this thing on outside like in the movie. however, changing subject here, build a mock H-bomb (maybe something like this http://frogstorm.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/The-Mk15-Hydrogen-Bomb.jpg), take it to a skydiving center that has a Caribou (jumpship with large rear door). Obviously you need to be experienced skydiver, ride the bomb out the back followed by a videographer. Wave a cowboy hat while in freefall. Add proper soundtrack to video when done.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
  7. "Spam in a can" by RetiredMidn · · Score: 1

    ...to quote Gordon Cooper.

    1. Re:"Spam in a can" by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      Two words: Meat Missile

  8. 2001 by SJHillman · · Score: 2

    "The passenger is just along for the ride, with no mechanism to steer or otherwise pilot the capsule."

    For here
      Am I sitting in a tin can
      Far above the world
      Planet Earth is blue
      And there's nothing I can do

    1. Re:2001 by berashith · · Score: 2

      or ... planet earth is hurtling at me very very quickly and there is nothing I can do

    2. Re:2001 by jockeys · · Score: 1

      you'd better hope your spaceship knows which way to go...

      --

      In Soviet Russia jokes are formulaic and decidedly non-humorous.
    3. Re:2001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again proving that lyrics are just really, really bad poetry hiding behind music.

    4. Re:2001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just a lean to the left

      It's just a lean to the right

    5. Re:2001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking more "Schwarz-gerat" a la Gravity's Rainbow.

    6. Re:2001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's big, it's round. It deservers a big round sort of a name. Round ... round ... g ... round ... ground. I'll call it ground. Wonder if it'll be friends with me?

  9. Tiny airplane seats by johnb10001 · · Score: 1

    I hope the airlines don't read this article because they may replace the airline seats with these tiny capsules to cram more people into an airplane.

    1. Re:Tiny airplane seats by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Too late.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8779388.stm

      Perhaps though if you were laying down people wouldn't complain as much and then they could stack people in.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:Tiny airplane seats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noting how few planes have the verticle room for anyone to stand except in the aisle, standing seats are a pathetic idea.
      In contrast, those little chambers from 5th Element with just enough room for one or two passengers and a blast of knockout gas show promise.

    3. Re:Tiny airplane seats by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      I mentioned above that I'm 6'2 -- that's relevant again here.

      No way in hell any airline would do anything like that. Most flights I take I have to bow my head to walk down the center aisle.
      Or maybe I should rephrase -- maybe an airline would do something like that, but they'd be shutting out a sizable portion of the population. Already the things are designed with short and slim people in mind. Once you start standing-room only or lying-room only, you'd wind up with crap that's designed to maximize numbers and minimize space and that results in.. shit too small for me to fit in.
      It's bad enough that I have negative leg room on planes. Not no leg room, but physically impossible for me to sit with my knees facing forward. And I have short legs for my height.

      Shit's terrible.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    4. Re:Tiny airplane seats by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Also gotta love the built-in head rests that are just around the shoulder level so I end up sitting in a leaning forward position. I'm only 5'10 and I have that issue, I can just imagine how much it sucks for you.

      Oh, and here is real picture of the seats Ryan air was proposing.

      http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSZkjqkDDaG1FAq3L-GlsrQD1sEKAfW3_9Blteu7kLUQhzod34t

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
  10. Spruce goose X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cork rocket!

  11. alpha testing by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the web site, about an unmanned test flight last year:

    Due to trajectory anomaly the spacecraft was separated and the parachutes had to be deployed during great speed in order to save it. The parachutes were not able to deploy correctly due to the speed but even with a "knot" of parachutes we had a low enough impact on water to recover Tycho Brahe as one piece.

    I think I'll wait until a few more "successful" test flights have been performed.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:alpha testing by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points, because this is the funniest comment I have read in weeks!

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    2. Re:alpha testing by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      Indeed. In addition, and making allowances for the fact that the website copy was probably written in a second language, I have little faith in an organisation which has trouble with degress (degrees), parachtues (parachutes) and minuttes (minutes). (Yes, I'm sure I've made my own mistakes in this very post, but I'm not offering to put humans into space).

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    3. Re:alpha testing by amorsen · · Score: 1

      but I'm not offering to put humans into space

      They aren't either -- offering, that is. Peter Madsen is the only one going; although perhaps eventually others in the core team may get to try too. If you get to go, it will be because you have been part of building it, and in that case you have an intimate insight into the risks involved.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    4. Re:alpha testing by jheath314 · · Score: 1

      Go ahead and wait, while those who are more adventurous get to live on the edge and pursue their dreams. By the time the nice, safe, comfortable version of civilian space-flight gets rolled out by some mega-corporation, a good portion of the excitement and romance will be gone. There's a reason why the names Wilbur Wright, Chuck Yeager, Yuri Gagarin, and Neil Armstrong are remembered, while no-one will remember my name despite flying multiple times on commercial aircraft.

      Don't get me wrong... I like my safe, comfortable life. However, I also admire the resourcefulness and courage shown by a bunch of hobbyists who decided to do more than just wait to pursue their dreams.

      --
      Procrastination Man strikes again!
    5. Re:alpha testing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I'll wait until a few more "successful" test flights have been performed.

      Good idea. From a previous article.

      Copenhagen Suborbitals planned the test for last year, though it failed because of a malfunctioning hairdryer

      O_o

    6. Re:alpha testing by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Being remembered by future generations is overrated.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  12. Drop pod by golden+age+villain · · Score: 1

    It looks very much like a drop pod. It could be straight from this ODST ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzkL-vg8MHE.

    1. Re:Drop pod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or the drop pods from Quake 2. That was one of the coolest opening sequences that I've seen.

  13. Yikes - did you see the holes in the side? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

    From TFA:

    Due to trajectory anomaly the spacecraft was separated and the parachutes had to be deployed during great speed in order to save it. The parachutes were not able to deploy correctly due to the speed but even with a "knot" of parachutes we had a low enough impact on water to recover Tycho Brahe as one piece.

    No mention of how badly beat up the dummy was. it did not give me confidence

    1. Re:Yikes - did you see the holes in the side? by berashith · · Score: 1

      spacecraft are expensive, and people can heal. Get you priorities straight. If the person cannot heal, there are plenty more where that one came from.

    2. Re:Yikes - did you see the holes in the side? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Footnote:

      The interior of the capsule only needed to be hosed out with a soapy water solution and ready for the next passenger...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  14. Re:"Spam in a can" (correction) by RetiredMidn · · Score: 1

    Correcting myself: it was Chuck Yeager who called the Mercury program "spam in a can".

  15. Cleverly named... by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. after the largest crater on the moon.

    1. Re:Cleverly named... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At first I thought it was named after the writer over at Penny Arcade.

  16. gravity's hambone by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Looks like these guys are going to drain the world market of imipolex g for their little project.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  17. I'd *never* go inside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My claustrophobia would kill me.

  18. needs room for by P-niiice · · Score: 1

    Needs room for some way to soak up the urine that will pool at the bottom there.

    1. Re:needs room for by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they'll purchase some of NASA's adult diaper technology.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:needs room for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps they'll purchase some of NASA's adult diaper technology.

      Was that a Lisa Nowakcrack? ! Because it certainly seemed like one.

      You know how they say crazy chicks are wild in the sack? Just imagine what a crazy astronaut chick would be like. Now imagine doing your patriotic duty and signing up for a conjugal visit with her in prison.

    3. Re:needs room for by Jeng · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of making a full blown Lisa Nowak crack, but decided to try to be a bit subtle and leave that up to the people responding.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
  19. What? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    one-passenger capsule intended for a purely ballistic flight

    So, how does one handle landing with that purely ballistic flight? Wouldn't this just be a crater on impact?

    I think this got summed up nicely in Armageddon ...

    Rockhound: Yeah, I remember this one. Its where the, uh, the coyote
        sat his ass down in a slingshot then he strapped himself to an Acme
        rocket. Is that - is that what were doin here?
    Harry Stamper: [under his breath] Rockhound.
    Rockhound: No, no, really, because it didnt work out too well for
        the coyote, Harry.
    Harry Stamper: [talking over him] Hey, Rock. Knock it off.
    Truman: Well, actually, we have a lot better rockets than the coyote.

    I'm sure this is slightly more complicated than Wile E Coyote, but it sure as heck sounds like it.

    It's not something I'd be willing to do based on the description, but I'm sure someone will.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:What? by Jeng · · Score: 1

      I would figure it would be a water landing. So you get the pleasure of being a buoy bouncing around in the ocean until you get picked up.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
  20. I'll wait for the Iron man suit. by BetaDays · · Score: 1

    I'll wait for the Iron man suit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man

    --
    Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
    1. Re:I'll wait for the Iron man suit. by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      Dude, it's done something like $1 billion in box office revenue, and this is Slashdot ... do you really think anybody needs a link to know who the hell Iron Man is? ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:I'll wait for the Iron man suit. by tqk · · Score: 1

      Dude, it's done something like $1 billion in box office revenue, and this is Slashdot ... do you really think anybody needs a link to know who the hell Iron Man is?

      If he hadn't, someone else would have kvetched at him demanding "[citation needed]" and "pics, or it didn't happen!"

      And man, I can't remember reading so many negative comments accompanying an article. If the thing goes sideways, it's going to be all over really fast! Like Mac Truck in the back of the head fast. Feature. It almost sounds like you people want to live forever.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  21. Will they yell at you..... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    If upon reentry you scream.... "BANSAI!!!!!!!"

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  22. Prior art by PPH · · Score: 1

    Circus cannon. Just add more gunpowder.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  23. A bungee cord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is suborbital and pretty small.

    1. Re:A bungee cord by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      and even if it breaks, you still get some ballistic flight for a while

  24. spacecraft you wear instead of ride. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we have already been down this road... and almost every craft has had minimal ability to maneuver around very much after orbital insertion.

  25. Doom Coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm having saturday morning flashbacks to seeing the bad guy's flying coffin from Voltron.

    1. Re:Doom Coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the capsule that K'Ehleyr rode in to meet the Enterprise in TNG 'The Emissary'

  26. I dunno by Cornwallis · · Score: 2

    Looking at the drawing I can't help but wonder what that "Aero Spike" will feel like as it drives into my skull.

    1. Re:I dunno by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Looking at the drawing I can't help but wonder what that "Aero Spike" will feel like as it drives into my skull.

      The lawyers thought the term "Catastrophic Failure Euthanasia Device" might put people off.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  27. Doom Coffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm having saturday morning flashbacks to the bad guy's flying coffin from Voltron.

  28. Claustrophobia by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    I don't care for underground railways and caving is my idea of Hell. If I'm going to die, I'd rather do it in the open air, thank you. Perhaps irrationally I don't get claustrophobic in sailplanes, which are hardly very big inside. This vehicle has achieved something I thought impossible: it travels through the air and it makes me feel claustrophobic just looking at the picture.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  29. Why the hell not? by Gonzo+The+Gr8 · · Score: 1

    I'd ride it.

    1. Re:Why the hell not? by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Beat me to it. As I post, 93 comments and you're the first with any spirit of adventure. Wired has been doing an article series on this for going on two years or so. The project's website has some interesting stuff. This is serious backyard engineering.

    2. Re:Why the hell not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'd turn out to see you ride it.

  30. Tycho Brahe by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2

    Worse. Named after an astronomer who made very accurate observations but whose celestial mechanics were comprehensively wrong (he thought that the sun with all the planets orbited the Earth.) Do you want to travel in a space vehicle named after someone who got space wrong?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Tycho Brahe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, a long as it's a suborbital flight (which is implied by their name, Copenhagen Suborbitals), I don't think it matters.

    2. Re:Tycho Brahe by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Worse. Named after an astronomer who made very accurate observations but whose celestial mechanics were comprehensively wrong (he thought that the sun with all the planets orbited the Earth.) Do you want to travel in a space vehicle named after someone who got space wrong?

      Don't be too hard on Tycho Brahe. He was no more "wrong" than Ptolemy, and both of them made important contributions.

      Arguably, if your objective is to predict where the planets will be at a certain time, neither of their models is "wrong." It's just that the Copernican model is much simpler and more elegant, and therefore more persuasive in the sense of Occam's Razor.

      Tycho knew that his model was not popular, and pleaded with his colleague Johannes Kepler to give it some consideration. Like many great men, he was proud of his own ideas and was reluctant to give them up.

      In any case, arguably celestial mechanics didn't exist until Newton. And if you look at Newton's equations for celestial motion in a generalized form, the frame of reference is actually irrelevant.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  31. Never heard of the comic by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    I checked the link.... I'm probably not the only Slashdot reader who isn't interested in US comics, amazing as it may seem. I assumed that it was a film of the children's book by Ted Hughes, who I can't stand, and never investigated further.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  32. Kamikaze ride by bkmoore · · Score: 1

    This rocket resembles the Kaiten suicide torpedo.

  33. with an aero spike in your head by schlachter · · Score: 1

    And it doesn't help that they've got a diagram of the device with an "aerospike" that looks like a giant fucking nail resting directly above your head and protruding from the end of the missile...err....spacecraft...looking ready to impale you upon your return to Earth!

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  34. special forces delivery mech by schlachter · · Score: 1

    ...and soon the DoD will be funding this project as a way to deliver our best trained special forces to anywhere in the world using human ballistic missile technology. Forget the nukes. They're too messy.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    1. Re:special forces delivery mech by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      One of these loaded with Chuck Norris could make the rest of the US military obsolete!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  35. Nose Cone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hope the nose is gold/copper plated... it's only fitting for a vehicle named after Tycho Brahe.

  36. Do you pay for 1/3 of a ferris wheel rotation? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

    I didn't think so. I want a full whirl or I'm not interested.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  37. Range? by isorox · · Score: 1

    With the right range, I'd be happy cooped up in one of these for 30 minutes -- more room than on the tube.

    Now Concorde's gone, the 7 hour trip to New York is a right pain. Something like this would let me leave home in the UK at midday, arrive in NY for breakfast and a full day ahead, leave NY at 6PM and be home before 1AM.

  38. monyafeek! by jefurii · · Score: 1

    Or rather, "S2-35B".

  39. sci-fi story by issicus · · Score: 1

    there is a short sci fi story with something like that, but it is illegal, due to all the pollution they give off (or some such). so people go out into the desert to evade authorities, which is part of the thrill i guess.

  40. For the Emperor! by cameloid · · Score: 1

    Is it ok to bellow this as you hurtle towards the earth?

    --
    -- Cisk for the Cisk God
  41. It doesn't take much... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ship can be a pretty minimalistic affair. There are no controls, a little window for you to throw-up all over... the engine only has to be powerful enough to make it to the crash site, which is where you're going anyway... this is ideal for anyone who has ever held a gun in his hands, and thought "I wonder what being a bullet is like..."

  42. Yes, I do know by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    It was meant to be a humorous observation. I am well aware that from a purely geometric point of view it makes no difference at all where in the Solar System you take as the reference point. However, there is the awkward matter of why the laws of motion apply. Once we add in the gravitational equation, it is obvious that the centre of the Solar System is a point around which the Sun itself wobbles as the planets move in their orbits.

    The problem with Brahe's interpretation was that it made no sense at all. The Sun, Mercury and Venus orbit the Earth. Mars, Jupiter and Saturn orbit the Sun in paths which cause them for half the time to be on the other side of the Earth from the Sun. Forget orbital mechanics, this is a simple application of Bill Ockham's shaving appliance.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  43. A great way by bsercombe72 · · Score: 1

    To get troops into combat cheap. Just scale up for 250 pound payloads and you're done. Heinlein did something _similar_ in starship troopers.

  44. What happened to the nerds on this site? by madsdyd · · Score: 1

    Reading the comments, is sort of depressing. I thought you guys were nerds!

    The guys behind Copenhagen Suborbitals surely are. The main designer, Peter Madsen, is a true tinkerer, he even built a working submarine. In his spare time!

    What they aim to do, is to put a man into space, without the backing of a large commercial entity or goverment. Meanwhile, their work is Open Source, and based almost exclusively on private donations. Check our their website for more, including a number of youtube videos.

    http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/

    These guys can use all the support they can get.

  45. Hmm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still don't know and didn't click the link cause I'm not interested.
    I'm not entirely sure box revenue has much to do with the popularity of something around these parts.

  46. Ride in it or wear it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's the comment from the Mercury program. There's a reason why John Glenn isn't 6ft tall.

  47. refill? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are the pilots disposable or reusable? Where can you get it refilled?

  48. Remember the Mercury "capsules"? by rhalstead · · Score: 1

    Remember the Mercury capsules? They were about the size of an oil drum but small on top with the heat shield being wider. The things had windows about 3" X 1.5" if that. And I thought "depends" were part of the astronaut uniform. Can you imagine being up there for a week without a change?

  49. Does not look like a good idea. by rhalstead · · Score: 1

    You need to be reclining during acceleration unless it's gentle. After the flight you'd have to take your hemorrhoids out of your shoes.