World's first commercial spacecraft completes manned flight

World's first commercial spacecraft completes manned flight
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/10/11...ht/index.html?
hpt=T2

Actually, it sounds like it completed a drop test similar to what
Enterprise did back in the 70's. This is definitely an exciting time
for commercial space.

Jeff
--
42

On Oct 11, 6:29*am, Jeff Findley wrote:

Actually, it sounds like it completed a drop test similar to what
Enterprise did back in the 70's. *This is definitely an exciting time
for commercial space.

Given that private companies other than Boeing, Rockwell, Martin-
Marietta, and so on, have previously built gliders that have flown
successfully, I am somewhat underwhelmed. Certainly it is important to
verify that the craft in question will be able to land safely when it
returns from space, but people will be more likely to gasp in awe and
wonder when it shows that it can actually get there.

However, I can understand the need to hype every step along the way
when doing something that many won't believe can be done - even though
it shouldn't be a surprise that it is possible to do essentially what
the X-15 did so very long ago.

What would be exciting, of course, is if it is possible to build on
that kind of design to achieve something that can reach LEO. The Space
Shuttle, and even the DynaSoar, started, or would have started, from
relatively conventional rocket propulsion from the ground up.
Something that starts its journey in a more airplane-like fashion
would, presumably, lower the cost of getting to orbit significantly.

John Savard

In article c816ef18-8d1f-4ba5-b4b7-91e5526d1ba8
@m1g2000vbh.googlegroups.com, says...

What would be exciting, of course, is if it is possible to build on
that kind of design to achieve something that can reach LEO. The Space
Shuttle, and even the DynaSoar, started, or would have started, from
relatively conventional rocket propulsion from the ground up.
Something that starts its journey in a more airplane-like fashion
would, presumably, lower the cost of getting to orbit significantly.

That's not likely to happen any time soon. The design that Virgin
Galactic is using almost certainly isn't suited for orbital launch and
landing, even if you stuck it on top of a suitable launch vehicle.

It's that velocity squared term in the kinetic energy equation that gets
you every time...

Jeff
--
42

On Oct 11, 1:26*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:

That's not likely to happen any time soon. *The design that Virgin
Galactic is using almost certainly isn't suited for orbital launch and
landing, even if you stuck it on top of a suitable launch vehicle.

I was sort of thinking of doing it the other way around - making a
bigger version of what they're using now, _not_ the exact same design,
and sticking something else on top of *it*.

So the first stage is an airplane, the second stage is an X-15, and
the third stage is a rocket.

For manned flight, one has to be able to send the astronaut up in one
piece. So think of a craft like an X-15, with a single air-to-air
missile... except that "air-to-air missile" is, say, a Mercury capsule
on a Redstone (instead of an Atlas) rocket.

So think of an X-15 the size of a B-29, launched from a... rather
large... jet aircraft. Not likely to be practical, I suspect many here
will say, and they will, of course, be quite right.

John Savard

On Oct 11, 11:52*pm, Quadibloc wrote:
On Oct 11, 1:26*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:

That's not likely to happen any time soon. *The design that Virgin
Galactic is using almost certainly isn't suited for orbital launch and
landing, even if you stuck it on top of a suitable launch vehicle.

I was sort of thinking of doing it the other way around - making a
bigger version of what they're using now, _not_ the exact same design,
and sticking something else on top of *it*.

So the first stage is an airplane, the second stage is an X-15, and
the third stage is a rocket.

For manned flight, one has to be able to send the astronaut up in one
piece. So think of a craft like an X-15, with a single air-to-air
missile... except that "air-to-air missile" is, say, a Mercury capsule
on a Redstone (instead of an Atlas) rocket.

So think of an X-15 the size of a B-29, launched from a... rather
large... jet aircraft. Not likely to be practical, I suspect many here
will say, and they will, of course, be quite right.

John Savard

there were leaks just after columbia hat the military has or had a air
launched orbital plane that might have been used to get essential
supplies to columbia if the crew was stranded.

Quadibloc wrote:
On Oct 11, 1:26 pm, Jeff Findley wrote:

That's not likely to happen any time soon. The design that Virgin
Galactic is using almost certainly isn't suited for orbital launch
and landing, even if you stuck it on top of a suitable launch
vehicle.

I was sort of thinking of doing it the other way around - making a
bigger version of what they're using now, _not_ the exact same design,
and sticking something else on top of *it*.

So the first stage is an airplane, the second stage is an X-15, and
the third stage is a rocket.

For manned flight, one has to be able to send the astronaut up in one
piece. So think of a craft like an X-15, with a single air-to-air
missile... except that "air-to-air missile" is, say, a Mercury capsule
on a Redstone (instead of an Atlas) rocket.

So think of an X-15 the size of a B-29, launched from a... rather
large... jet aircraft. Not likely to be practical, I suspect many here
will say, and they will, of course, be quite right.

John Savard


One possibility yes. (Heck, WK2 with the right rocket beneath it could
launch SOMETHING orbitally).

But the other problem is managing the energy on the way back, i.e. re-entry.
--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

In article 5163c257-f7f4-41f8-afda-503ccbc46cc6
@p26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, says...

there were leaks just after columbia hat the military has or had a air
launched orbital plane that might have been used to get essential
supplies to columbia if the crew was stranded.

Not so much leaks as rumors. It's very hard to hide a launch vehicle.
They're too easy to spot and track, so the likelihood that "the
military" has an orbital space plane is about nil.

Jeff
--
42

wrote:
there were leaks just after columbia hat the military has or had a
air launched orbital plane that might have been used to get
essential supplies to columbia if the crew was stranded.

Let me guess, it would have been piloted by some guy named Dougherty
who would have launched through the eye of a hurricane?-) Oh, and a
Soyuz would appear out of nowhere too?-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marooned_(film)

rick jones
--
Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.
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...

In article
tatelephone,
says...

On 10/12/2010 5:47 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:

Not so much leaks as rumors. It's very hard to hide a launch vehicle.
They're too easy to spot and track, so the likelihood that "the
military" has an orbital space plane is about nil.

If the vehicle drops out of the back of a C-5 Galaxy, it would be pretty
easy to keep it concealed; and that launch method was serously considered:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1591/1
And there are the two enlarged C-5C variants that were built for NASA to
haul satellites and rocket boosters and operated by the Air Force:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/0593404/

Concealed until the rocket engine lights up, then any country which
looks for ICBM launches via thermal imaging immediately spots it. And
once in orbit, there are any number of amateur astronomers who would be
likely to spot it, catalog it, and post the orbital elements to the
Internet.

Jeff
--
42

Le 11/10/10 14:29, Jeff Findley a écrit :

World's first commercial spacecraft completes manned flight
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/10/11...ht/index.html?
hpt=T2

Actually, it sounds like it completed a drop test similar to what
Enterprise did back in the 70's. This is definitely an exciting time
for commercial space.

Jeff

Congratulations for coming back to the level of the 60s.

In 2050 commercial ventures will be able to propose LEO.
(Unless you prefer the low cost russian spaceship of course)

The problem is that NASA could afford to send ONE person and spend
millions and millions in getting it into orbit.

Commercial ventures need to send MORE people at a time to distribute
costs, what makes everything MUCH more difficult.

Anyway, it is a huge step... backwards for the U.S.A.
`
Good luck when rediscovering airplanes.