SpaceShipONE - Going for the X-Prize

[reekchaa]

Did Scaled's ship Really just power past 105,000 feet ?  8o



Still waiting for an official flight report to be posted at http://scaled.com/projects/tierone/index.htm
The X-Prize is over at the end of this year... Privatization is beckoning!



Post Edited ( 09-23-04 00:28 )

[chris]

Wow, this website fuc.... rule.

Thanks for the tip.

Chris "frenchie"

[freespace2dotcom]

So I read the stuff at the link.. The only problem I have is..

Only a few MINUTES of weightlessness? Oh come on! It's not like it would take up that much more fuel once you're
finally up there, to delay your decent by, say, a half hour or so. (personally, If *I* was gonna shell out the money for
a luxury cruise, it would have to be a couple days worth of weightlessness, but you'd need a full orbit for that... )
the concept is great though...


Well, carry on!

[reekchaa]

Yeah.. that 'few minutes' of weightlessness is kind of a tease... but it's a tiny, first-step for privatization.  
They had some Problems with heat on last powered re-entry... and that was just mach 1 descent that *supposedly*
weakened the gear to fail on impact.  (or was it the Pilot?  hmmm.. )


Still, I was AMAZED to hear that this was the FIRST Privately funded ship/plane to break the Sound Barrier.  All else
have been Govt. Funded!  8o
If this new Thermal Shielding holds up, why not tank on enough power to go Mach 25 and circle the GLOBE!
...Reading past reports... Sounds like One HELL of a roller-coaster Ride!  

[DanSteph]

It's good to see that someone else then the big fat enter in the space race.

reekchaa wrote:
> Still, I was AMAZED to hear that this was the FIRST Privately
> funded ship/plane to break the Sound Barrier.  All else
> have been Govt. Funded!  8o

Are you sure about that ? I have read that some rich men hown
old cold war plane and fly with them. (f86, and soviet plane)

But I'm not sure if they break the sound barrier.

Dan

[freespace2dotcom]

I think he's talking about privately *designed* planes, dan.. those old planes were still designed by government
funded projects, even if they weren't exactly the american government's.  

[UAF_Lt_Brenton]

Hey Dan,

Could you throw together a SpaceShipOne for Orbiter?  There's not anything else out there

UAF_Lt_Brenton

"Sir, there's a smiley in the engine..."

[DanSteph]

freespace2dotcom wrote:

> I think he's talking about privately *designed* planes, dan..
> those old planes were still designed by government
> funded projects, even if they weren't exactly the american
> government's.  

Oh...

Dan



Post Edited (04-10-04 14:57)

[reekchaa]

UAF_Lt_Brenton wrote:
> Could you throw together a SpaceShipOne for Orbiter?  There's
> not anything else out there

There's a fairly descent one in Dev along with some nice screenies at: http://orbit.m6.net/v2/read.asp?id=14804

[reekchaa]

FINALLY... some REAL Data from Scaled about this launch:


Flight 53L / 13P
Date: 8 Apr 04
Flight Time: 1.3 hour / 16 min 27 sec    
       
Objectives:          
The second powered flight of SpaceShipOne. 40 seconds motor burn time. Handling qualities during boost, through
transonic and supersonic. Reaction control system functionality in-flight and feather configuration stability during
transonic re-entry. Evaluation of radar tracking capability.
 
Results:            
Launch conditions were 45,600 feet and 125knots. A planned immediate motor ignition was delayed about 2 minutes
to evaluate a shock induced stall buffet resulting in an ignition altitude of only 38,300 feet. The 40 second rocket
boost was smooth with good control. Pilot commented that the motor was surprisingly quiet; however the boost was
heard by ground observers. Burnout occurred at 1.6M and apogee was over 105,000 feet. There was no noted flight
control flutter or buzz during the climb. Feather recovery was nominal. Maximum feathered speed on entry was 0.9
Mach. The wing was de-feathered and locked by 40,000 feet. Handling quality assessments during descent were
satisfactory and a smooth landing made to runway 30 at Mojave. All video and tracking systems performed well with
spectacular footage obtained onboard, from chase and from ground stations.

[reekchaa]

And follows the Data... Some Real PRETTY Pics!  

[McBrain]

Really nice! How much power does the main motor have?

[reekchaa]

McBrain wrote:
Really nice! How much power does the main motor have?

I think that's Classified for reasons of Pornography.  Okay... maybe Not for that reason,
but wouldn't it make for a good excuse?  

There's lots of Data on this First Non-Government Manned Spacecraft on this page:
http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/New_Index/data_sheets/data_sheets_text.htm

[reekchaa]

...Now how much would you Pay?  

 -Early Morning PreFlight-

[freespace2dotcom]

I still think the space shuttle looks cooler.

[reekchaa]

Oh sure, the shuttle Looks Cooler (and costs 10000 times more) but do they have cameramen hanging out at the
edges of space to bring us...

...Notice the RCS thruster spray from the left wing, here at Apogee



And I'm sure no one's stomach drops-out during this 2-minute dropping descent?  8o  Ahhhhh!!!!

[freespace2dotcom]

You know, how much do you think it would cost to make a shuttle (just shuttle alone, no fuel tank or boosters) after
they become phased out. just think of how cool it would be to have one of THOSE in your back yard, That'd be
something I'd spend good money on. I'm sure it'd be countless times more expensive, but it would last a lot longer
than a few minutes of "sub orbital" flight.

[reekchaa]

I'm sure you could afford it.  

Endeavour, the replacement orbiter for Challenger (and cheapest), cost approximately $2.1 billion.  
Each Launch costs approx $470 million.

[/i]

[freespace2dotcom]

I *SAID* when they get PHASED OUT.

Geez, the people around here...

I was largely kidding though I still think it'd be (slightly) possible if you scimp around on the expensive parts, I'd have no intension of going to space, it doesn't need fancy computers to just sit there. (among other things..)

Also Don't forget that this is *old* technology *now.* when was endeavor purchased? the 80's?
wait a few more years, and we'll see.

God, *FIVE* edits, I'm awful..



Post Edited ( 04-22-04 22:56 )

[reekchaa]

Full Speed Ahead, Pilot!      
   ...might wanna edit a few more times.

[freespace2dotcom]

Hush!
You know it's a dream.
I know it's a dream.

Don't ruin it.



Post Edited ( 04-23-04 00:53 )

[DocHoliday]

Heh, the current family cars, Pontiacs, Renaults and Toyota, look like friggin space shuttle, lacking only wings

Me, I wouldn't mind having a DG in the yard, so I could get to work with style Oh, work of course being, the ISS
administrator

Cheers,

[freespace2dotcom]

Yeah, I like the older cars that aren't made out of pure plastic and dent if you touch them too hard.



Post Edited ( 04-23-04 11:06 )

[DocHoliday]

And weigh a ton and a half eh? And drink up enormous quantities of leaded fuel. Ah, my friend, times move on, the
future lies with (place any of your favourite alternative high-voltage energy source)  powered smarts and renault
clios and ford focus and the likes

[McBrain]

DocHoliday wrote:
And weigh a ton and a half eh? And drink up enormous quantities of leaded fuel. Ah, my friend, times move on, the
future lies with (place any of your favourite alternative high-voltage energy source)  powered smarts and renault
clios and ford focus and the likes

What about a Smart with its own nuclear power plant?