Quite right, you've caught an error of omission on my part. Satelite services are already providing orbital launches services for unmanned craft. Nevertheless, if you don't find this achievement to be of any value, you're missing the point. My advice, try and appreciate it for what it is. This has been a $20 million project that has developed a new launch system for manned suborbital flight.
The capacity for sub orbital flight may not seem to be an industrial commodity, no more so than a very short airplane trip, for instance, or a trip in a very small plane. Charles Lindburgh didn't offer to use the Sprit of St. Louis for commodoties transport, the wright brothers didn't offer to provide commercial air transport. Lack of practicallity notwithstanding, I would have a hard time being convinced of the quality of the reasoning behind an accusation that Lindburgh was looking for an easy way to snuff it.
I don't understand the statement "when your launch package is 99% fuel, re-usability of the vehicle is overrated". I think that there's a disconnect right at the coma. So far as I can tell, you'd want to re-use the vehicle no matter how much of it's payload is fuel.
You've provided solid points that illustrate the difficulties of orbital space flight and the huge gap in difficulty between orbital space flight and sub-orbital space flight. I agree, it would be nice if private industry were providing orbital space flight. However, this isn't an orbital flight, and Scaled Composites isn't pretending that it is. If you're actually asking why this is interesting, then I'd be happy to provide my point of view on the merits of this milestone flight.
A novel rocket design was put into use, that rocket delivered a man into sub orbital space. Due to the implementation of a new re-entry technique, the space craft didn't encounter the same sort of re-entry friction that traditional sub-orbital delivery vehicles have encountered, of course the riggors of reentry from a stable orbit would be considerably greater, but once again, it's not an orbital flight, and wasn't designed to be.
I'm sure that aerospace afficionados will be able to contribute other achievements to this list. Nevertheless, there you have two innovations brought about by this project. I'm interested.
Yes, the cost is already at $20 and they haven't crossed the finish line yet. This flight does not satisfy the requirements of the Ansari X-prize . But then again, who cares ? This is a historic event, not a game show. The purse isn't the prize at all. Scaled Composites developed a new rocket motor as well as a novel re-entry scheme. In short, they may or may not win 10 million dollars, but they have definately made aviation history and contributed to the school of aerospace engineering.
Slashdot Mirror
Quite right, you've caught an error of omission on my part. Satelite services are already providing orbital launches services for unmanned craft. Nevertheless, if you don't find this achievement to be of any value, you're missing the point. My advice, try and appreciate it for what it is. This has been a $20 million project that has developed a new launch system for manned suborbital flight. The capacity for sub orbital flight may not seem to be an industrial commodity, no more so than a very short airplane trip, for instance, or a trip in a very small plane. Charles Lindburgh didn't offer to use the Sprit of St. Louis for commodoties transport, the wright brothers didn't offer to provide commercial air transport. Lack of practicallity notwithstanding, I would have a hard time being convinced of the quality of the reasoning behind an accusation that Lindburgh was looking for an easy way to snuff it. I don't understand the statement "when your launch package is 99% fuel, re-usability of the vehicle is overrated". I think that there's a disconnect right at the coma. So far as I can tell, you'd want to re-use the vehicle no matter how much of it's payload is fuel.
You've provided solid points that illustrate the difficulties of orbital space flight and the huge gap in difficulty between orbital space flight and sub-orbital space flight. I agree, it would be nice if private industry were providing orbital space flight. However, this isn't an orbital flight, and Scaled Composites isn't pretending that it is. If you're actually asking why this is interesting, then I'd be happy to provide my point of view on the merits of this milestone flight. A novel rocket design was put into use, that rocket delivered a man into sub orbital space. Due to the implementation of a new re-entry technique, the space craft didn't encounter the same sort of re-entry friction that traditional sub-orbital delivery vehicles have encountered, of course the riggors of reentry from a stable orbit would be considerably greater, but once again, it's not an orbital flight, and wasn't designed to be. I'm sure that aerospace afficionados will be able to contribute other achievements to this list. Nevertheless, there you have two innovations brought about by this project. I'm interested.
My apologies, I mentioned that the project already costs $20 dollars, that is of course a mistake. The project has cost over $20 million. Thank you
Yes, the cost is already at $20 and they haven't crossed the finish line yet. This flight does not satisfy the requirements of the Ansari X-prize . But then again, who cares ? This is a historic event, not a game show. The purse isn't the prize at all. Scaled Composites developed a new rocket motor as well as a novel re-entry scheme. In short, they may or may not win 10 million dollars, but they have definately made aviation history and contributed to the school of aerospace engineering.