Rutan describes plans for orbital spacecraft

One-man version of SpaceShipOne may be next stage in development of
space holidays

Pasted from:
http://www.flightinternational.com/f...86036&Code=106

A one-person version of Scaled Composites' SpaceShipOne that reaches an
orbit of 130km (81 miles) to rendezvous with an orbiting hotel may form
the next stage of Burt Rutan's private manned spaceflight plans.

Speaking at a lecture organised by the Manx Festival of Aviation at the
Royal Aeronautical Society in London, the aerospace designer detailed
how such an orbital vehicle could be evolved from his existing
three-man, suborbital 3,000kg (6,600lb) SpaceShipOne. The amount of
spacecraft mass dedicated to fuel would be increased to achieve the
greater altitude and speed required.

"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.

In his lecture, Rutan referred to plans by Robert Bigelow, founder of
Bigelow Aerospace, to develop a space hotel based on NASA-originated
inflatable habitat technology.

Before Rutan begins work on orbital flight technology, he will attempt
to win the X-Prize, which requires two suborbital flights within two
weeks carrying a mass equivalent to three people. Rutan's first flight
is scheduled for 29 September and his second for 4 October. But before
he flies for the second time, competing Canadian X-Prize team da Vinci
Project is scheduled to try to reach space in its Wild Fire rocket on 2
October.

Another X-Prize team, Space Transportation, saw its Rubicon One rocket
fail a flight test in Washington on 8 August seconds after launch. The
engines of the $20,000 rocket failed after it reached an altitude of
1,000ft (305m). Rubicon One's remains crashed to Earth 61m from its
launch site after its parachute system failed. It was carrying three
dummies representing the pilot and passengers.

Neil Halelamien wrote:


"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.


Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 03:27:16 GMT, in a place far, far away, Scott
Lowther made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:



Neil Halelamien wrote:


"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.


Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

And you'd want a vehicle that could enter at Mach teens, rather than
Mach three...

In article ,
h (Rand Simberg) wrote:

"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.

Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

And you'd want a vehicle that could enter at Mach teens, rather than
Mach three...

I'm sure that Rutan hasn't overlooked the reentry problem.

As for the capacity -- yes, one person seems a bit on the low side. But
it's a start. It couldn't ferry normal people to orbit but it could
perhaps serve to rotate the highly-trained crew of a space station,
perhaps more cheaply than the alternatives. Or, perhaps you could have
the craft flown remotely or via automation, so that it could in fact
carry an untrained passenger. Though I admit that seems unlikely.

More likely, the plan is to first make a prototype craft in which a
highly trained pilot can reach orbit -- that in itself is a tremendous
achievement! Then to scale it up still further so that it can carry one
or more passengers.

- Joe

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

Joe Strout :

In article ,
h (Rand Simberg) wrote:

"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be
in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.

Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

And you'd want a vehicle that could enter at Mach teens, rather than
Mach three...

I'm sure that Rutan hasn't overlooked the reentry problem.

As for the capacity -- yes, one person seems a bit on the low side. But
it's a start. It couldn't ferry normal people to orbit but it could
perhaps serve to rotate the highly-trained crew of a space station,
perhaps more cheaply than the alternatives. Or, perhaps you could have
the craft flown remotely or via automation, so that it could in fact
carry an untrained passenger. Though I admit that seems unlikely.

Look at the pickle NASA is in now because Shuttle and the ISS. If they had
one man craft that could reach the ISS and return then they could get a lot
more done.

More likely, the plan is to first make a prototype craft in which a
highly trained pilot can reach orbit -- that in itself is a tremendous
achievement! Then to scale it up still further so that it can carry one
or more passengers.

Yes, why build a big monster when you are still testing out your designs.

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos,
SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to
the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp

And you'd want a vehicle that could enter at Mach teens, rather than
Mach three...


Slap on some shuttle tiles.

Tom

Scott Lowther wrote:

Neil Halelamien wrote:

"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.

Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

For a tourist thing but maybe his design can't get more than one guy
there. It starts with this stuff about needing more people and pretty
soon we have that damn Space Shuttle again.


--
"And he did bring them. It took a number of years, but one by one he
brought them here. Except for his father, that old man died where he was
born." -+ "Elia Kazan, "America, America"

In article , ``This is the Battle of
Epping Forest '' wrote:

Scott Lowther wrote:

Neil Halelamien wrote:

"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.

Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

For a tourist thing but maybe his design can't get more than one guy
there. It starts with this stuff about needing more people and pretty
soon we have that damn Space Shuttle again.

Well, if it's going to take three launches the same day to get me and
two women up to the orbiting love hotel, you might as well get a ship
that can do it in one go.

--
Chris Mack "Refugee, total ****. That's how I've always seen us.
'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us."
-'Deal/No Deal', CHESS

Scott Lowther :

Neil Halelamien wrote:

"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that] and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.

Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one guy.

Why, electric rockets or tethers can keep the station up, with one man
rockets you have a lot of traffic bring up supplies. At one time most of
China moved on bikes, it did not stop them from getting to work. Start small
and work your way up. The problem with present day NASA is that it always
wants to start big.

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos,
SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to
the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp

Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:
Scott Lowther :
Neil Halelamien wrote:
"We'd have a small cramped cabin for the orbital flight and you'd
be in
it for a long time. You'd want to go to a hotel [because of that]
and
for orbital tourism you'd want an altitude of 130km," says Rutan.


Yikes. You'd want higher than that, and you'd want more than one
guy.

Why, electric rockets or tethers can keep the station up, with one
man
rockets you have a lot of traffic bring up supplies. At one time
most of
China moved on bikes, it did not stop them from getting to work.
Start small
and work your way up. The problem with present day NASA is that it
always
wants to start big.

This raises an interesting question: With current technologies and a
reasonable amount of consistent power, what is the lowest altitude (and
speed) at which one can sustain an orbit, if you're constantly
propelling yourself upwards?

-- Neil