![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
And you'd want a vehicle that could enter at Mach teens, rather than
Mach three... Slap on some shuttle tiles. Tom |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Neil Halelamien" wrote in message oups.com... 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 Perhaps JP Aerospace will find out with their electric propulsion powered giant airship. Mike Walsh |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rutan plans commercial tourist spacecraft | Joe Strout | Policy | 21 | June 21st 04 05:44 PM |
Decision on the Soyuz TMA-4 spacecraft prelaunch processing | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | April 1st 04 01:12 PM |
orbit question | Jan Philips | History | 7 | September 29th 03 06:16 PM |
SMART-1: The First Spacecraft Of The Future | Ron Baalke | Misc | 0 | September 22nd 03 04:47 PM |