Meta question for sci.space.tech moderators

To Derek, Greg and Mary,

I have a technical question I'd like to ask about Virgin Galactic &
Scaled Composites that is mostly technical but borders a bit on a question of
policy because of a highly speculative assumption behind it.

I've speculated here before that I think Branson has an ulterior motive for
Virgin Galactic, but I want to open discussion of some of the technical details
and challenges behind where I think he'd like to take it with those with
aeronautical engineering experience and knowledge.

Would a highly speculative technical question be appropriate for
sci.space.tech? It really isn't a question about policy, but it surely goes
beyond the scope of what is being done or has been done in the past and as
far as speculative assumptions go, is pretty brash.

Dave

On Nov 28, 10:02*am, David Spain wrote:
To Derek, Greg and Mary,

I have a technical question I'd like to ask about Virgin Galactic &
Scaled Composites that is mostly technical but borders a bit on a question of
policy because of a highly speculative assumption behind it.

I've speculated here before that I think Branson has an ulterior motive for
Virgin Galactic, but I want to open discussion of some of the technical details
and challenges behind where I think he'd like to take it with those with
aeronautical engineering experience and knowledge.

Would a highly speculative technical question be appropriate for
sci.space.tech? *It really isn't a question about policy, but it surely goes
beyond the scope of what is being done or has been done in the past and as
far as speculative assumptions go, is pretty brash.

Dave

Design decisions between composite and aluminum structures are given
here in great detail;
http://www.springerlink.com/content/kv6l53907l4461lw/

The cost of propellant for a liquid fueled rocket is about $30 per
kg. The cost for a limited production run rocket is about $4,500 per
kg to $6,000 per kg. Then there are non-recurring costs associated
with any development program and capital expenses (tooling costs)
associated with small production runs.

Any advance in engine design; any advance that reduces control and
engineering costs; any advance that makes handling the thermal and
aerodynamic loads routine - reduces development costs.

I am especially excited by the development of MEMs based motors.

http://www.me.berkeley.edu/mrcl/rockets.html

Arrays of these engines create what I call a 'propulsive skin'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzXwctPXT4c

http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/news-cms/ne...=1127&id=40897

With a 1,000 to 1 thrust to weight, and 50 pounds per square inch, and
$1 per square inch production cost, combined with nearly perfect
efficiencies - mass-produced, these engines offer an interesting
answer to low-cost access to space.

I have developed a piloted round-trip three stage moon rocket design
based on a few simple innovations;

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20053585/M...space-Overview

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NlZmUUWvJw

The $480+ million cost of the program is covered by five tickets at
$85 million each, which is easily supported by the 120,000 ultra-rich
individuals in the world capable of buying such a ticket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhZb7XDaYts

The commercial moon program starts with ONE buyer putting $85 million
in escrow and releasing $15 million immediately. This money is used
to execute a reverse merger and get publicly listed. It also starts
development of the mechanical counter pressure suit, the MEMs based
propulsive skins, the guidance and control system and the lunar
landing stages - the smallest and least costly.

This is the same way the USA developed piloted spaceflight originally
anyway and is detailed here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBi69V8oNuw

Basically, $15 million of the $85 million is non-refundable, and is
the basis of the program start-up. We build spacesuits, and other
hardware, develop training programs, partner with those who offer such
programs, and adapt proven programs to our new hardware. When we have
flight hardware operational, an training completed, the next $40
million is non-refundable. Not just for the first deposit, but for
all deposits. The PR also attracts other buyers. Another buyer for
$85 million - following the first test flight, and completion of a
training program and flight hardware - releases another $95 million

# DEP PH1 PH2
1. $85 $15 $40
2. $85 $55

This is sufficient for completion of the middle of three stages. This
allows flights of up to 12,000 miles to be completed as a two-stage
rocket, or firing to altitudes of up to 1,500 miles. Early buyers may
participate in these 'bonus flights' as well as the PR they generate.
These individuals will likely be a popular as the early NASA 7 in
their heyday.

For PR purposes this is perfect. We basically have an entire PR and
advertising program rolled into the money received from the first
early adopter and expand it as the flight of the test articles
proceeds. This attracts the rest of the buyers, and achieves phase 3
- flight into space, which makes the entire $85 million non-refundable
for all subsequent deposits.

The money remains in escrow over the term of the project. They are
released when the contracted for flights are delivered or within four
years of the first project. Buyers may resell their positions for a
$10 million fee - as long it is not done less than six months before
the scheduled departure date, and the traveller nominated for the
flight successfully completes his training. The fee is non-refundable
once the traveller enters training and receives his custom fitting
spacesuit.

Irrevocable access to escrowed funds allows the company to borrow a
large portion of the funds available for the project. Also, the
ability to sell stock once buyers have placed funds in escrow adds
more capabilities.

The first five to return to the moon will participate also in a world-
wide PR tour, including a ticker tape parade in New York, London,
Paris, Tokyo and Peking and visits with world leaders and receipt of
additional awards bestowed by various governments throughout the
world.

HDTV videos will be custom produced along with professionally written
books and other memorabilia for each traveller.

The five vehicles are fully reusable and remain the property of the
company. The spacesuits and other personal hardware used during the
flight are on permanent loan to each traveller for the rest of their
life.

The supply chain that built the hardware, remains the property of the
company.

So, additional flights will take place.

Also, additional hardware will be built.

Including a 20 ton to orbit RLV - that will launch a communications
network that turns the world into a wireless hotspot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I81ogcX3ONY

This communications infrastructure will expand the aerospace supply
chain, and increase the size of vehicles transporting tourists to the
moon, increase the launch rate, and lower the cost of a moon trip to
$1.8 million per passenger within five years- ushering in a new age
for lunar travel. With weekly flights 500 people per year visit the
moon with far less training and preparation.

The revenue from the communications infrastructure combined with
expanded capabilities of larger lunar vehicles allow the company to
expand to the next phase of operations - space based power network
using infrared lasers which work in conjunction with large terrestrial
arrays to increase hydrogen production at existing solar farms paying
for the satellite network.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvE-bkc0Uxo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWiXDu64c0g

Advanced beam steering technology

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QAUkt2VPHI

Allow satellites to beam power directly to end users as needed - even
if those end users are moving at ballistic speeds. Which radically
transforms space travel again!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxV2FCUESh0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzG4PEureFg

by allowing a spaceship in every garage, powered by laser energy
beamed from orbit!

This transforms the way we live on Earth and our relation to the
cosmos.

Raw Materials
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMefZhA7ifI

Food
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP5DX2NSl7c

Which changes the world in ways that allow us to grow to $1
quadrillion per year for 8 billion people with the bulk of our
industrial and agricultural infrastructure off-world - with the world
a vast residential park serviced from orbit;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcbXSONtBdY

To create the world of our dreams
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E2586kx_Uc

While correcting the problems we face today

Improving our methods of government with global computing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=istE1bpoDPg

Maintaining leadership by appropriate investment strategies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYuK0iJqpNA

Ending our economic problems by not investing in un-rewarding things
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCJl-ZbHOYc

While investing in rewarding things
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1MCq8bekRo

of which advanced aerospace developments and a return to the moon are
part of this larger program of global improvement.