|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
Does anyone happen to know if Spaceship One made its most recent flight with
a full load of propellant, or what fraction thereof? Obviously this would have substantial implications on their ability to go the last seven miles, and also the upper operating limits of the system. Any ideas, anyone? -- Ian |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
In article ,
"Ian" wrote: Does anyone happen to know if Spaceship One made its most recent flight with a full load of propellant, or what fraction thereof? Obviously this would have substantial implications on their ability to go the last seven miles, and also the upper operating limits of the system. I could be wrong in this, but my understanding is that the last two flights (at least) have been with a full propellant load. The flights are short because they're intended to be -- they're expanding the envelope gradually -- not because they run out of fuel. ,------------------------------------------------------------------. | Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: | | http://www.macwebdir.com | `------------------------------------------------------------------' |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
Joe Strout wrote
I could be wrong in this, but my understanding is that the last two flights (at least) have been with a full propellant load. The flights are short because they're intended to be -- they're expanding the envelope gradually -- not because they run out of fuel. So did they carry ballast, or fly an energy-wasting profile? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
Joe Strout wrote:
In article , (Allen Thomson) wrote: Joe Strout wrote I could be wrong in this, but my understanding is that the last two flights (at least) have been with a full propellant load. The flights are short because they're intended to be -- they're expanding the envelope gradually -- not because they run out of fuel. So did they carry ballast, or fly an energy-wasting profile? No, they shut the motor off when they'd fired it as long as the flight plan called for. So they'r happy landing loaded? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
In article ,
Ian Stirling wrote: No, they shut the motor off when they'd fired it as long as the flight plan called for. So they'r happy landing loaded? Why not? It's just rubber and laughing gas. It's not explosive. ,------------------------------------------------------------------. | Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: | | http://www.macwebdir.com | `------------------------------------------------------------------' |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
Joe Strout wrote:
In article , Ian Stirling wrote: No, they shut the motor off when they'd fired it as long as the flight plan called for. So they'r happy landing loaded? Why not? It's just rubber and laughing gas. It's not explosive. Yes, but it's heavy. However, if the SS1 can slam into the runway fully loaded and not break it's landing gear... that's the sign of a good design. -- Scott Lowther, Engineer Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
Scott Lowther wrote in message ...
Joe Strout wrote: In article , Ian Stirling wrote: No, they shut the motor off when they'd fired it as long as the flight plan called for. So they'r happy landing loaded? Why not? It's just rubber and laughing gas. It's not explosive. Yes, but it's heavy. However, if the SS1 can slam into the runway fully loaded and not break it's landing gear... that's the sign of a good design. It's also better to not waste too much effort testing configurations that are dissimilar from the actual flight configuration. Here, they are testing the full up system and simply exploring the flight envelope. Once they do win the X-Prize, and I'm confident (Hop David, pay attention!) that they will, it'll be interesting to look back and consider how many flights they made with an X-Prize capable vehicle before actually hitting 100 km. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
SS1 propellant load
Christopher M. Jones wrote: Once they do win the X-Prize, and I'm confident (Hop David, pay attention!) that they will, it'll be interesting to look back and consider how many flights they made with an X-Prize capable vehicle before actually hitting 100 km. I'd place my bets on them winning too. But it's sure the hell not your confidence that persuades me this is a good bet. -- Hop David http://clowder.net/hop/index.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vapor as rocket propellant and coolant | Andrew Nowicki | Technology | 21 | July 12th 04 12:26 PM |
Orbit glitch consumes propellant on new satellite | Herm | Policy | 9 | May 21st 04 03:10 AM |
Propellant pressurization | Iain McClatchie | Technology | 14 | February 1st 04 04:29 AM |
Sad turn | Charleston | Space Shuttle | 93 | August 12th 03 02:31 AM |