VSS Enterprise completes first flight under its carrieraircraft

Neil Gerace wrote:

Of course that's right, so society (through the FAA or its counterparts
in different countries) can insist that anyone who flies Virgin Galactic
is told about all the known hazards. I don't know, but I expect this
did happen with X-15 crews.

They were test pilots - it was their job to find out what the *unknown*
hazards were.

On 4/4/2010 6:53 AM, Neil Gerace wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:

The thing is, everyone seems to be thinking about it like a airliner
or a business jet.
It's nothing like those; it's a rocket-powered transatmospheric
vehicle that is air launched, flies faster than a SR-71, climbs out of
and reenters the atmosphere, and performs a glide landing.

Of course that's right, so society (through the FAA or its counterparts
in different countries) can insist that anyone who flies Virgin Galactic
is told about all the known hazards. I don't know, but I expect this did
happen with X-15 crews.

I'm sure they knew that the thing was a bit dangerous. ;-)
It just occurred to me that the two share something else in common; both
have suffered a oxidizer tank explosion while their rocket engine was
under ground test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXpEPZ6ZZIs

Pat

On 4/4/2010 8:15 AM, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
Neil Gerace wrote:

Of course that's right, so society (through the FAA or its counterparts
in different countries) can insist that anyone who flies Virgin Galactic
is told about all the known hazards. I don't know, but I expect this
did happen with X-15 crews.

They were test pilots - it was their job to find out what the *unknown*
hazards were.

I guarantee you they weren't expecting the nose gear to start deploying
all on its own at Mach 3.4...or Mach 4.2...or Mach 5.2:
http://www.sierrafoot.org/x-15/adven...dventures.html
The problem was the nose gear was extended by pulling on a cable
attached to a handle in the cockpit, that opened a scoop on the nose
gear doors - causing air to enter the scoop and pressurize the nose gear
bay to blow the doors open...as the fuselage heated up in flight it
stretched in length from the expansion of the metal, while the cable
didn't heat up, so it stayed the same length, pulled taut, and activated
the scoop.

Pat

On 4/04/2010 11:15 AM, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 4/3/2010 6:55 AM, Neil Gerace wrote:

I don't know whether any airliners have escape systems for passengers
that can work while the plane is in the air. If this is so, I see no
reason for a passenger-carrying spacecraft to have them. Other than
politics.

The thing is, everyone seems to be thinking about it like a airliner or
a business jet.
It's nothing like those; it's a rocket-powered transatmospheric vehicle
that is air launched, flies faster than a SR-71, climbs out of and
reenters the atmosphere, and performs a glide landing.

And the SR-71 suffered many losses.

Sylvia.

On 4/4/2010 6:19 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 4/04/2010 11:15 AM, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 4/3/2010 6:55 AM, Neil Gerace wrote:

I don't know whether any airliners have escape systems for passengers
that can work while the plane is in the air. If this is so, I see no
reason for a passenger-carrying spacecraft to have them. Other than
politics.

The thing is, everyone seems to be thinking about it like a airliner or
a business jet.
It's nothing like those; it's a rocket-powered transatmospheric vehicle
that is air launched, flies faster than a SR-71, climbs out of and
reenters the atmosphere, and performs a glide landing.

And the SR-71 suffered many losses.

Actually considering the small number built, yes it did.
http://www.wvi.com/~sr71webmaster/srloss~1.htm
With 20 losses out of 50 Blackbirds of all types built, loss rate was 40%.

Pat

In sci.space.history David Spain wrote:
If you go the compressed air route, you should take along some
cigarettes. If the leak is a slow one, (and assuming these are the
only kind that will be 'recoverable' from anyway) light 'em up when
you got a leak so you can find the hole and patch it.

Insufficiently zen! Bring incense - much more mellow. Or, if the
launch is from California, medicinal ganja...

rick jones
--
web2.0 n, the dot.com reunion tour...
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

John Park wrote:
Rick Jones ) writes:

So, on first detection of loss of cabin pressure above a
survivable altitude, open a valve from the engine's NO2 tank to
feed NO2 ino the cabin. It may not save any lives, but they may
not mind as much

Actually, they'd mind a lot more. "Laughing gas" is nitrous oxide,
*N2O*. NO2, on the other hand, is nitrogen dioxide; it's brown,
acidic and nasty, a bit like chlorine. (And I think you really did
mean NO2--it reacts spontaneously with hydrazine.)

Curse, foiled by chemistry typos again. Yes, I did mean nitrous
oxide, thanks for the correction.

rick jones
--
I don't interest myself in "why." I think more often in terms of
"when," sometimes "where;" always "how much." - Joubert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...