Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Virgin Galactic To Unveil New Version of SpaceShipTwo (wired.com)

Posted by yaelk on from the space-travel dept.

New submitter Asep Saepuloh writes: Today, Virgin Galactic will unveil SpaceShipTwo, a vehicle the company hopes will one day take tourists to the edge of space. Just over a year since a test pilot was killed in a crash, Sir Richard Branson's reveal of the newest craft is set to happen in California late Friday at California's Mojave Air and Space Port, where it was assembled. The team behind the latest suborbital spaceplane includes leaders from NASA's mission control and astronaut corps, the militaries from three nations and from high-profile personnel from the aviation and transport industries. Virgin Galactic said: "We've charged them with developing a plan to safely test and operate a reusable spacecraft." The company claims that they have "done their homework" and hope that this time their journey into space can be a success.

45 comments

  1. Why are corporations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    allowed to waste money on "space?"

    1. Re:Why are corporations... by halivar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because they don't have to ask your permission? And why is "space" in quotes? Do you think it's really just a big black tarp with some holes poked in it?

    2. Re:Why are corporations... by Punko · · Score: 1

      Why are TV corps allowed to broadcast "reality TV" ? Same reasons.

      Wait. Actually, there's a better case for banning reality TV than space projects.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    3. Re:Why are corporations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because going 100km up isn't much further away from the ground compared to the size of the universe.

    4. Re: Why are corporations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Tv stations shouldn't be allowed to show that garbage, but for some reason the Party won't take on the Republicans on this.

    5. Re: Why are corporations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it isn't about space. It's about corporate welfare.

    6. Re:Why are corporations... by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Compared to the size of the Universe, nothing is anything.

    7. Re:Why are corporations... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Virgin Galactic can reach "space" (a 100km boundary) but it can't stay in orbit. And this is what actually matters.

    8. Re:Why are corporations... by Pascoea · · Score: 2

      And this is what actually matters.

      Matters to whom? Apparently it matters enough to them to spend an obscene amount of money on it. If it doesn't matter to you why are you on this site leaving comments about it? There are plenty of SpaceX articles on here if LEO is what "actually matters" in your eyes.

    9. Re:Why are corporations... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Matters to anyone who wants something more than an expensive joyride. SpaceX can be used as a building block for further space exploration and Virgin Galactic can not be used for anything more than it is right now. We don't put articles here about super-exclusive $100000-per-seat cruises, do we?

    10. Re:Why are corporations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find that the universe pretty much covers everything. (Shut up, woman, get on my horse!)

    11. Re:Why are corporations... by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      I would argue any endeavor that does something that hasn't been done before is worthwhile. If nothing else, we as a race have have a higher understanding of ballistics, aerodynamics, material science, etc as a result of this.

    12. Re:Why are corporations... by jaa101 · · Score: 1

      Almost all practical applications of going into space require reaching LEO (low earth orbit). This requires forty (40) times more energy than reaching 100km altitude.

    13. Re:Why are corporations... by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      Why does it have to go to space to provide value? You can't possibly see an alternate use for a vehicle that can travel at 4000km/hr? That's nearly twice the speed of the Concorde. How much do you think high-powered business people would pay to be shot across the Atlantic at that speed? I'm not saying that is the goal Virgin is trying to achieve, but if there isn't someone out there thinking of how to put the technologies being developed to a practical use their ought to be.

    14. Re:Why are corporations... by solartear · · Score: 1
      http://spacenews.com/40719virg...

      the company’s service agreements stipulate a minimum height of at least 50 miles, or 80 kilometers. Whitesides said that has been the case since Virgin Galactic first began selling rides on SpaceShipTwo about nine years ago.

      Given their engine troubles, it is not known if it will reach 100km, and they are not required to.

    15. Re:Why are corporations... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      How much do you think high-powered business people would pay to be shot across the Atlantic at that speed?

      Definitely not $250,000 per seat.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    16. Re: Why are corporations... by kellymcdonald78 · · Score: 2

      In what way? Virgin is entirely funded by Richard Branson (and the many people who have provided deposits for future flights)

    17. Re:Why are corporations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up, woman! Get up my horse!

  2. i'll catch the next one by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 1

    In light of recent regrettable events, I'm waiting for SpaceShipThree, thanks.

    1. Re:i'll catch the next one by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      2.1 contains significant security patches and we insist that you upgrade immediately.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  3. Delta Spaceship 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now with Economy Comfort (tm)

  4. CNN ad-blocker friendly link by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Informative

    So the wired link doesn't like my ad-blocker. So I said to myself "screw them" and went and found another link.

    Virgin Galactic to unveil new spaceship

    Yes it does have horrible auto play video that comes with an ad at the start, but I'd rather sit through that than be treated like Wired treats me.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:CNN ad-blocker friendly link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why aren't you using NoScript or something similar?

    2. Re:CNN ad-blocker friendly link by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      " it does have horrible auto play video"

      Since you are using an ad-blocker, you should add a rule that blocks the container for the video.

  5. Wired? PSH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please refrain with the wired.com sources until they remove their adblock policy. Until then... FT;DR (Fuck Them, Didn't Read)

  6. Can't read the article by Punko · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sorry, Wired.

    My adblocker is here to stay and I'm not whitelisting you. Nor are you worth $1 per month. Get proper adds and we'll see about whitelisting you.

    anyone have a link to the story that doesn't flow through Wired ?

    --
    If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    1. Re:Can't read the article by DougOtto · · Score: 1

      Wish I wasn't out of mod points. Nice job editors, greenlighting a paywalled link.

      --
      Solving Unix problems since 1989...
    2. Re:Can't read the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adblock Options -> Filter Lists -> Adblock Warning Removal list (removes warnings about using ad blockers). I'm sure Adblock Plus and other adblockers have similar options.

      I don't know why people are fine with blocking ads but they won't block the stuff telling them that they're blocking ads (like they didn't already know that). Complain about forbes or wired or whoever else....or just fix the advertisement problem altogether like you halfway already have. I'm reminded of the many people I know that complain about advertisements but still won't install and adblocker.

    3. Re:Can't read the article by Punko · · Score: 1

      I have that option running. You still get warnings.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    4. Re:Can't read the article by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Strangely enough, it works for me even with wired in the blacklist. I can read the article text, I just can't see what's in the big frame up top, which is probably a picture of the ship and I already know what it looks like. You didn't miss much anyway. The text of the article is a few brief paragraphs that doesn't add much to what somebody following the story knows already.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    5. Re:Can't read the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works on my machine (TM), using uBlock Origin

    6. Re:Can't read the article by nuckfuts · · Score: 1

      Nor are you worth $1 per month.

      I'm not advocating for or against Wired, but surely the amount of time you spent posting this response and (presumably) looking for a different link was worth more than one dollar?

  7. "Back in the space game"? by The+Eight-Bit+Link · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, they've already lost. It's a cute idea that they have, giving 'spaceflights' to tourists with a wad of cash burning a hole in their pocket, but considering SS1 only just got to space and SS2 killed someone and has yet to get there, I don't see them as a competitor. The only reason they're on the map at all is because they just barely got a private astronaut to space. Their competition is running resupply flights for NASA and launching the satellites they claimed they would be doing by now. This is just the desperate wheezes for attention by a company still trying to pimp their vaporware.

    1. Re:"Back in the space game"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their so-called "spaceship" can't even orbit the earth!

    2. Re:"Back in the space game"? by merky1 · · Score: 1

      Different markets entirely. Virgin was never selling an entry point to space based operations. It has always been a "vomit comet" http://www.livescience.com/291... style ride for rich people. The only thing that may come out of this is commercial sub-orbital aviation, but it would probably a decade after this service operates and returns viable data points. Realistically, the more projects like this start operating, the move efficiency and sustainability of these operations will filter down to "normal" aviation.

      Dreaming of the day I can go coast to coast (us) in 2 hours.

      --
      --WooooHoooo--
    3. Re:"Back in the space game"? by The+Eight-Bit+Link · · Score: 1

      You might think that they were different markets, but in 2013, they stated that the SpaceShipTwo was capable of launching 100 satellites daily. Seeing as they have yet to get the thing into space in the first place while others have launched satellites successfully and their competition is looking to get into manned craft themselves, things are not looking good for them. Similarly, the tech they're using (rubber and plastic based solid fuel rockets) doesn't seem to be very efficient compared to current technology. The Concorde flew at supersonic speeds because it was more efficient for it to do so, but modern aircraft don't because advances in the old designs caused them to become more efficient. It's certainly a neat idea, but I don't really see the technology they're using filtering down to casual aviation.

    4. Re:"Back in the space game"? by jaa101 · · Score: 1

      You might think that they were different markets, but in 2013, they stated that the SpaceShipTwo was capable of launching 100 satellites daily.

      LauncherOne is what's doing the launching of satellites. It's an expedible two-stage launcher carried by SpaceShipTwo. At best, consider SpaceShipTwo its first stage but, unlike conventional first stages, it contributes only a very small percentage of the energy required to reach orbit.

      The Concorde flew at supersonic speeds because it was more efficient for it to do so, but modern aircraft don't because advances in the old designs caused them to become more efficient.

      No, Concorde flew very fast because it wanted to get passengers to their destination twice as fast as other airliners. Modern aircraft don't because, it turns out, not enough people are willing to pay the extra cost to travel supersonically, especially since sonic booms mean you're only allowed to do so over water.

    5. Re:"Back in the space game"? by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      Actually, they've switched LauncherOne to use a Boeing 747. IRC they couldn't get enough payload out of the White Knight Two/launcher combination.

    6. Re:"Back in the space game"? by SpaceDave · · Score: 1

      Recently they've been talking up other aspects of their business and trying get generate enthusiasm for possibilities such as fast trans-continental flights. It seems they see the writing on the wall and are putting less emphasis on sub-orbital spaceflight as the main attraction in itself. Rightly so; as others such as SpaceX move steadily closer to crewed orbital flights it's hard to see much future in sub-orbital space tourism.

  8. Space Ship Three by mveloso · · Score: 1

    If it's a new version, shouldn't it be called SpaceShipThree?

    1. Re:Space Ship Three by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1

      or at the very least 2.1

  9. "a test pilot" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice that no one can be bothered putting the guy's actual name in the story.
    Being a commercial astronaut is a different gig I guess.
    When a corporation wants as little negative publicity as possible you need to accept that you'll just become a footnote if things don't "work out".

  10. He should volunteer Donald Trump to pilot SS2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If he's not ready for piloting spaceship, how can be ready to pilot a country?

  11. For all of you getting the ad-block message... by Foxhoundz · · Score: 1

    Try this bookmarklet: https://gist.github.com/joepie... Don't set a precedent by walking away to another website. You have a right to keep your computer secure from unwanted scripts.

    1. Re:For all of you getting the ad-block message... by omtinez · · Score: 1

      It didn't work for me. I added the javascript:[...] as a bookmark, then navigated to the Wired page, and after the anti-adblock pops up I click the bookmark but nothing happens. Am I doing something wrong?