> NASA must be plowing 80% of their budget on a vehicle that cannot get anywhere.
The number is 25%, not 80%. And last year, NASA spent more on space science (i.e. unmanned probes to the solar system) than they did on the space shuttle. So you can hardly claim that the shuttle sucks away most of NASA's money.
> Of course, NASA on the managerial level, is not comprised of people with a dream of space exploration or colonization.
How exactly did you formulate this generalization? Have you met many NASA managers?
--- With this all said, however, I do agree that NASA needs a more ambitious goal (and perhaps a more ambitious budget).
>Show me where the NASA innovation is from so far >and I bet you can drop the bleeding red ink >shuttle and you won't be missing the innovation. >They might be able to afford real innovative >stuff after that.
NASA actually doesn't spend very much money on the shuttle as a percentage of the NASA budget (which by the way is much smaller than it was in the 1960s). It's about 25%.
In fact, last year NASA spent more money on unmanned exploration of the solar system ("Space Science") than it did on the space shuttle.
>It still doesn't have an engine Actually, they don't have one engine, because they have two engines to choose from. All they have to do is pick one and install it. The details: two companies, eAc and SpaceDev, have both done full duration burns of their hybrid engines already. According to Aviation Week, Rutan is going to pick one of those two teams shortly, then attach the engine to SS1. The first rocket tests will only involve short-duration, level flight. Then they will expand the envelope until they win the X-Prize.
>but an engine burn is at least 8 months away If you don't believe me that the engines are already ready, watch this video: http://ast.faa.gov/COMSTAC/May2003/comstac XPRIZE/R utanVideos-Apr'03/SS1EngineTest.mpg Barring a major disaster, Rutan will take the X-Prize in the next six months.
>his last launch of his Nova apparently used a cluster of Aerotech M-class or similar motors
That's correct, he used solids -- but only for that launch in 2001 . If you look at the Starchaser web-site, the Nova launch was to verify the airframe, electronics, recovery, etc. You can think of the solid engines as a one-time crutch to get the rocket off the ground. Now that the more powerful liquids are ready, the next Nova launch will be equipped with those.
>...he has apparently threatened...I'll check with the guys who went to his open day, they seemed to know a whole bunch.
Wow, that does sound bad. If you find out more, please tell me.
>They said (rather amusingly), that the liquid engine was probably just about good enough for clearing weeds, and not much else.
Looking at the press release, "the liquid oxygen/kerosene powered system generated 2,200 kilograms (app. 4,800 pounds) of thrust for 15 seconds...Starchaser plans to continue testing the Churchill Mark 2, for longer periods of time." That's hardly a mere weed whacker. In fact, I think Carmack's main engine is about the same thrust too (and Carmack hasn't even test fired it, due to lack of peroxide).
>This capsule drop test - looks a bit like a powered parafoil trike with an airframe around it, doesn't it?
I'm not quite sure how appearance matters, as long as it works. And it does work, Starchaser claims.
>Burt Rutan and John Carmack are no doubt, not exactly losing sleep at this point.
Well, of course not. Rutan and Carmack will definitely beat Bennett. But that doesn't mean Bennett won't ever fly -- he will.
Those incidents you refer to were all several years ago. Starchaser has definitely improved its reputation since then, for its three recent major accomplishments in the last 24 months have all been positive: 37-ft. Nova rocket blasts off! Churchill liquid engine test success Nova II capsule test drop success The next few months will be very exciting. Starchaser plans to integrate all three of the above accomplishments in one project: the manned launch of the Nova rocket -- outfitted with the new Churchill engines -- carrying the Nova II capsule as payload!
Captain Loser, you have to remember that NASA is a bureaucratic organization. The purpose of a bureaucratic organization is to extract money from the taxpayers to hire more bureaucrats... And they know that the Shuttle should be replaced by something that does not require an army to operate, but they'd be out of a job.
SysKoll, do you actually know any NASA bureaucrats? Well, my father is one of them. And ever since the Columbia accident he's been working 70-hour workweeks (with no overtime pay, I think). And every day he talks to me about all the discussions at work he's having about how to phase out the shuttle. And all of the other "bureaucrats" he works with are hard-working, honest folks who are neither conspirators nor thieves of taxpayer money.
I'm sorry if this seems a little harsh, but I am really FED UP with people who bash NASA just to bash NASA.
P.S. In response to your "Each time the crazy engineers rock the boat and create a potential cheaper competitor for the Shuttle, it magically gets killed" I would point out that none of NASA's X-vehicles were competitors for the shuttle. They were technology demonstrators. I agree that NASA mismanaged them, but if they had flown, we would be no closer to a shuttle replacement.
P.P.S. An by the way, there is hope for the future of private space flight, which I think is our only hope for CATS. It's called the X-Prize (www.xprize.org); I think you would enjoy learning about it.
The X-Prize Cup is a great idea, because it will continue the momentum started by the X-Prize.
When the X-Prize is won, I expect to see a surge in interest in space by the general public (and investors). The question, of course, is whether that interest will fade in a few weeks or whether it will translate to ticket sales and investment offers. The X-Prize Cup will hopefully bring about a favorable resolution of this question.
"The X-Prize is a fantastic idea, and the X-Prize Cup is an amazing extension."
I couldn't agree more.
"NASA has failed to excite us"
Wait 'till next January when the Mars Rovers land and I think you'll change your tune.
I'm very pleased that the various organizations have taken the initiative to petition for change, but I don't think that the FAA or Congress will respond anytime soon.
The only way to force change is to demonstrate the need for it.
So when Rutan flies his spacecraft later this year from Mojave, or when the Canadian X-Prize teams fly from the Great Lakes and Saskatchewan, then people will start paying attention and take action.
The trick is to make sure that those actions are favorable to the industry.
> I really wish the Ministry of News would declare this newsworthy beyound the nince websites and occassional backpage news blurb.
Actually, in the year 2003 press coverage has started to pick up. If you pick up a July copy of Popular Science or Wired , the cover stories are about the X-Prize. And I'm certain that as the X-Prize teams near their launch dates, press coverage will pick up dramatically. And once the X-Prize is won -- well, that will be interesting.
One of the greatest side-effects of the claiming of the X Prize will be something that no one could have predicted just a year ago:
The X Prize will be won while the space shuttle is grounded.
So what, you might ask. Well, it's a big deal. For years, various groups have been trying to persuade NASA to work with, not compete with, private ventures. And NASA has always given many reasons to refuse, the biggest one being "when was the last time a private company flew a man in space on their own rocket... er, never?" Of course, that's a perfectly legitimate concern.
But when the X-Prize is won while the shuttle is grounded, I think it will send a big message to both NASA and the people in the Administration who hold the purse strings, and we might see some interesting changes in NASA policy, the kind of changes that might speed up the day when every middle class American can enjoy a trip into space for a reasonable price.
Cool, huh?
And it's clear that the X Prize is going to be won soon. Check out this article, which describes Rutan's plans to fly into space by December.
Re:I have safety concerns, though.
on
X Prize Race Heats Up
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
>I mean, has Armadillo actually started constructing a rocket that can lift three crew members to 62.1 miles altitude, return safely, and do it again within two weeks??
The short answer is yes , the vehicle is almost done. Here's a picture of it parachuting to the ground during a recent drop test on July 5th: http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/Images/RLV/Armadi llo/dropTest-669801-R1-20A_md.jpg . (For more pictures of the vehicle, go to http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Ho me/News?news_id=215 . For an article about the drop test, go to http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/armadillo_test_030707.html .
But I must note that Scaled Composites will probably fly their vehicle to suborbital altitute before Armadillo does. John Carmack, leader of the Armadillo Aerospace team, posted some comments about his progress and schedule at http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=U TF-8&safe=off&frame=right&th=3e74ec8f14362b26&seek m=c0e0a1dd.0307071349.7e9778e0%40posting.google.co m#link7 .
>I believe that the Starchaser team are well-advanced on constructing the Thunderbird rocket that will attempt to win the prize late this year.
Actually, Starchaser's current schedule calls for the Thunderbird launch in late 2004. What you are probably referring to is the Nova rocket, which will be launched this year to a height of 30,000 feet, carrying one man. Check out http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/RLV/PR/ME DIA%20ALERT_%20British%20Company%20to%20Unveil%20M anned%20Rocket%20Capsule.htm .
Slashdot Mirror
From an email sent to daVinci members
You seem to have some inside knowledge of the Da Vinci Project. Could you share a few tidbits with us, or is that not allowed?
I'd love to hear how you folks are doing, seeing as all the news lately is about Starchaser, Armadillo, or Scaled.
> NASA must be plowing 80% of their budget on a vehicle that cannot get anywhere.
The number is 25%, not 80%. And last year, NASA spent more on space science (i.e. unmanned probes to the solar system) than they did on the space shuttle. So you can hardly claim that the shuttle sucks away most of NASA's money.
> Of course, NASA on the managerial level, is not comprised of people with a dream of space exploration or colonization.
How exactly did you formulate this generalization? Have you met many NASA managers?
---
With this all said, however, I do agree that NASA needs a more ambitious goal (and perhaps a more ambitious budget).
>Show me where the NASA innovation is from so far >and I bet you can drop the bleeding red ink >shuttle and you won't be missing the innovation. >They might be able to afford real innovative >stuff after that. NASA actually doesn't spend very much money on the shuttle as a percentage of the NASA budget (which by the way is much smaller than it was in the 1960s). It's about 25%. In fact, last year NASA spent more money on unmanned exploration of the solar system ("Space Science") than it did on the space shuttle.
>It still doesn't have an engine
c XPRIZE/R utanVideos-Apr'03/SS1EngineTest.mpg
Actually, they don't have one engine, because they have two engines to choose from. All they have to do is pick one and install it.
The details: two companies, eAc and SpaceDev, have both done full duration burns of their hybrid engines already. According to Aviation Week, Rutan is going to pick one of those two teams shortly, then attach the engine to SS1. The first rocket tests will only involve short-duration, level flight. Then they will expand the envelope until they win the X-Prize.
>but an engine burn is at least 8 months away
If you don't believe me that the engines are already ready, watch this video:
http://ast.faa.gov/COMSTAC/May2003/comsta
Barring a major disaster, Rutan will take the X-Prize in the next six months.
>his last launch of his Nova apparently used a cluster of Aerotech M-class or similar motors
That's correct, he used solids -- but only for that launch in 2001 . If you look at the Starchaser web-site, the Nova launch was to verify the airframe, electronics, recovery, etc. You can think of the solid engines as a one-time crutch to get the rocket off the ground. Now that the more powerful liquids are ready, the next Nova launch will be equipped with those.
>...he has apparently threatened...I'll check with the guys who went to his open
day, they seemed to know a whole bunch.
Wow, that does sound bad. If you find out more, please tell me.
>They said (rather amusingly), that the liquid engine was probably just about good enough for clearing weeds, and not much else.
Looking at the press release, "the liquid oxygen/kerosene powered system generated 2,200 kilograms (app. 4,800 pounds) of thrust for 15 seconds...Starchaser plans to continue testing the Churchill Mark 2, for longer periods of time." That's hardly a mere weed whacker. In fact, I think Carmack's main engine is about the same thrust too (and Carmack hasn't even test fired it, due to lack of peroxide).
>This capsule drop test - looks a bit like a powered parafoil trike with an airframe around it, doesn't it?
I'm not quite sure how appearance matters, as long as it works. And it does work, Starchaser claims.
>Burt Rutan and John Carmack are no doubt, not exactly losing sleep at this point.
Well, of course not. Rutan and Carmack will definitely beat Bennett. But that doesn't mean Bennett won't ever fly -- he will.
Those incidents you refer to were all several years ago. Starchaser has definitely improved its reputation since then, for its three recent major accomplishments in the last 24 months have all been positive:
37-ft. Nova rocket blasts off!
Churchill liquid engine test success
Nova II capsule test drop success
The next few months will be very exciting. Starchaser plans to integrate all three of the above accomplishments in one project: the manned launch of the Nova rocket -- outfitted with the new Churchill engines -- carrying the Nova II capsule as payload!
Captain Loser, you have to remember that NASA is a bureaucratic organization. The purpose of a bureaucratic organization is to extract money from the taxpayers to hire more bureaucrats... And they know that the Shuttle should be replaced by something that does not require an army to operate, but they'd be out of a job.
SysKoll, do you actually know any NASA bureaucrats? Well, my father is one of them. And ever since the Columbia accident he's been working 70-hour workweeks (with no overtime pay, I think). And every day he talks to me about all the discussions at work he's having about how to phase out the shuttle. And all of the other "bureaucrats" he works with are hard-working, honest folks who are neither conspirators nor thieves of taxpayer money.
I'm sorry if this seems a little harsh, but I am really FED UP with people who bash NASA just to bash NASA.
P.S. In response to your "Each time the crazy engineers rock the boat and create a potential cheaper competitor for the Shuttle, it magically gets killed" I would point out that none of NASA's X-vehicles were competitors for the shuttle. They were technology demonstrators. I agree that NASA mismanaged them, but if they had flown, we would be no closer to a shuttle replacement.
P.P.S. An by the way, there is hope for the future of private space flight, which I think is our only hope for CATS. It's called the X-Prize (www.xprize.org); I think you would enjoy learning about it.
The X-Prize Cup is a great idea, because it will continue the momentum started by the X-Prize. When the X-Prize is won, I expect to see a surge in interest in space by the general public (and investors). The question, of course, is whether that interest will fade in a few weeks or whether it will translate to ticket sales and investment offers. The X-Prize Cup will hopefully bring about a favorable resolution of this question.
"The X-Prize is a fantastic idea, and the X-Prize Cup is an amazing extension." I couldn't agree more. "NASA has failed to excite us" Wait 'till next January when the Mars Rovers land and I think you'll change your tune.
I'm very pleased that the various organizations have taken the initiative to petition for change, but I don't think that the FAA or Congress will respond anytime soon. The only way to force change is to demonstrate the need for it. So when Rutan flies his spacecraft later this year from Mojave, or when the Canadian X-Prize teams fly from the Great Lakes and Saskatchewan, then people will start paying attention and take action. The trick is to make sure that those actions are favorable to the industry.
> I really wish the Ministry of News would declare this newsworthy beyound the nince websites and occassional backpage news blurb.
Actually, in the year 2003 press coverage has started to pick up. If you pick up a July copy of Popular Science or Wired , the cover stories are about the X-Prize. And I'm certain that as the X-Prize teams near their launch dates, press coverage will pick up dramatically. And once the X-Prize is won -- well, that will be interesting.
Here are the articles:
Popular Science article and
Wired article
One of the greatest side-effects of the claiming of the X Prize will be something that no one could have predicted just a year ago:
The X Prize will be won while the space shuttle is grounded.
So what, you might ask. Well, it's a big deal. For years, various groups have been trying to persuade NASA to work with, not compete with,
private ventures. And NASA has always given many reasons to refuse, the biggest one being "when was the last time a private company flew a man in space on their own rocket... er, never?" Of course, that's a perfectly legitimate concern.
But when the X-Prize is won while the shuttle is grounded, I think it will send a big message to both NASA and the people in the Administration who hold the purse strings, and we might see some interesting changes in NASA policy, the kind of changes that might speed up the day when every middle class American can enjoy a trip into space for a reasonable price.
Cool, huh?
And it's clear that the X Prize is going to be won soon. Check out
this article, which describes Rutan's plans to fly into space by December.
The short answer is yes , the vehicle is almost done. Here's a picture of it parachuting to the ground during a recent drop test on July 5th: http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/Images/RLV/Armadi llo/dropTest-669801-R1-20A_md.jpg . (For more pictures of the vehicle, go to http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Ho me/News?news_id=215 . For an article about the drop test, go to http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology /armadillo_test_030707.html .
But I must note that Scaled Composites will probably fly their vehicle to suborbital altitute before Armadillo does. John Carmack, leader of the Armadillo Aerospace team, posted some comments about his progress and schedule at http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=U TF-8&safe=off&frame=right&th=3e74ec8f14362b26&seek m=c0e0a1dd.0307071349.7e9778e0%40posting.google.co m#link7 .
>I believe that the Starchaser team are well-advanced on constructing the Thunderbird rocket that will attempt to win the prize late this year.
Actually, Starchaser's current schedule calls for the Thunderbird launch in late 2004. What you are probably referring to is the Nova rocket, which will be launched this year to a height of 30,000 feet, carrying one man. Check out http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/RLV/PR/ME DIA%20ALERT_%20British%20Company%20to%20Unveil%20M anned%20Rocket%20Capsule.htm .