Author Topic: Space Ship Two - General Thread  (Read 760862 times)

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1420 on: 05/27/2014 04:13 am »
One comment I heard from XCOR was that VG developed the vehicle in parallel with engine while industry norm is to build vehicle after engine is developed. VG is discovering the hard way why this is industry norm.

Offline SgtPoivre

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • Paris - France
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1421 on: 05/27/2014 06:15 am »
One comment I heard from XCOR was that VG developed the vehicle in parallel with engine while industry norm is to build vehicle after engine is developed. VG is discovering the hard way why this is industry norm.


Well the X-15 program did the same back in the days.
And the vehicle also had to begin its flight tests with a substitute engine (xlr-11) while waiting for the definite one (xlr-99).

Also for solids it is the norm to develop the motor in parallel with the vehicle. STS and Ariane 5 were developed in parallel with their boosters, and that is also true for ballistic missiles.
Hydrid are in this aspect akin to solids: you first need a vehicle design to tailor the rubber/nylon block to your needs.
« Last Edit: 05/27/2014 06:17 am by SgtPoivre »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14332
  • UK
  • Liked: 4112
  • Likes Given: 220
Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1422 on: 05/27/2014 06:40 am »
One comment I heard from XCOR was that VG developed the vehicle in parallel with engine while industry norm is to build vehicle after engine is developed. VG is discovering the hard way why this is industry norm.

That's not necessarily true of general aviation, where these guys you should remember they originate from, developmental aircraft often fly with off the shelf engines whilst the actual engine is developed at the same time. Or even in some cases they fly with the engine still being developed at the same time such as the case of the 747.
« Last Edit: 05/27/2014 06:47 am by Star One »

Offline meadows.st

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 161
  • Toronto ON, Canada
  • Liked: 91
  • Likes Given: 6493
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1423 on: 05/27/2014 03:04 pm »
Wow! Serious instability at 20 seconds then again between 26-27 seconds and all shock diamonds are gone by 40 seconds.

For those of us that may not be up on flow dynamics of rocket exhaust, are shock diamonds a good thing? At least for this fuel combination? What sorts of engines are they a good (or at least acceptable) sign?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond says they are unburnt fuel and a sign of either over or under expansion. No way a non variable nozzle can be correctly expanded at all altitudes so? normal?? Is it worth running non fuel-rich to avoid them?

IANARS but from my amateur study over the last decade or so, it is my understanding that at a constant altitude, nozzle geometry, constant fuel chemistry and constant chamber pressure etc, the rocket exhaust plume should remain relatively constant in appearance. At sea level, I would expect under expansion in this case. Obviously for hybrids, since the combustion chamber geometry is constantly changing, the chamber pressure is unlikely to remain constant but I would expect the drop to be smooth (I.e. not cause instability)  due to the chosen grain design and other factors. Liquid engines' exhaust streams, on the test stand appear (to my eye) to remain much more constant. From what I see, there looks and sounds like instability and significant drop in thrust over a significant portion of the burn. Whether this is expected or unavoidable with hybrids, I don't know. Perhaps a real expert could weigh in on this?
« Last Edit: 05/27/2014 03:07 pm by meadows.st »
“A little rudder far from the rocks is a lot better than a lot of rudder close to the rocks.” L. David Marquet

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16056
  • Liked: 8903
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1424 on: 05/27/2014 05:48 pm »
http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/over-a-decade-of-virgin-galactics-failed-space-age-prom-1575643484

15 Years of Virgin Galactic's Failed Space Age Promises
Matt Novak

Back in 2012, I saw a sign outside of a travel agency in Western Australia that filled my cold, black heart with glee. It was an ad for Virgin Galactic, with the implied promise that if I stepped inside that door, I could buy a flight to space from an "accredited space agent."

I knew there was no way I could afford it, but just seeing that sign made me feel — however briefly — like I was living in the future. For those of us living here in the second decade of the 21st century, commercial space travel still usually feels like it's light years away.

Last week we looked at the many times that Terrafugia has promised that its flying car was nearly ready for public sale. It seems only fair that we take a look at another company that's promising one of those perennial dreams of the future—and not yet delivering: Virgin Galactic.

Richard Branson has spent over a decade insisting that he's just a few years away from providing regular commercial spaceflights. And we all want so badly to believe that these flights are truly just over the horizon. The company is still happy to take your money in order to hold your spot in line. But Virgin Galactic has quite a few technical and regulatory hurdles to jump over before they can make this particular Jetsonian dream a reality.

Below we've collected just a few samples of those commercial space travel promises. We're still rooting for you Richard — but we have to keep our expectations in check, if only because we can't keep getting our hearts broken. Smithsonian magazine took a similar look back in 2013, but it's time to update the list of broken dreams.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16056
  • Liked: 8903
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1425 on: 05/27/2014 05:55 pm »
http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/over-a-decade-of-virgin-galactics-failed-space-age-prom-1575643484

So from the above article:

1999 flight date: "Within five years." (i.e. 2004)
2004 flight date: "Next three years." (i.e. 2007)
2005 flight date: 2009 or 2010
2006 flight date: 2008
2007 flight date: 2009 or 2010
2008 flight date: ~2010
2009 flight date: ~2010
2010 flight date: ~2013 to 2015
2011 flight date: 2013
2012 flight date: "late 2013"
2013 flight date: "late 2013"
2014 flight date: "at least 2015"

Note that not all of these are "official" dates from the company, they are what reporters wrote, usually based upon information produced by VG.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1426 on: 05/27/2014 07:20 pm »
For those of us that may not be up on flow dynamics of rocket exhaust, are shock diamonds a good thing? At least for this fuel combination? What sorts of engines are they a good (or at least acceptable) sign?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond says they are unburnt fuel and a sign of either over or under expansion. No way a non variable nozzle can be correctly expanded at all altitudes so? normal?? Is it worth running non fuel-rich to avoid them?

Shock diamonds are inevitable thing when supersonic jet from a nozzle is shot into ambient atmosphere. Steady shock diamond pattern is a good thing, it denotes steady conditions inside the engine.

Here's a better page explaining the phenomenon:

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/propulsion/q0224.shtml

Unburnt fuel does not matter / cause them, inert gases can have shock diamonds too. Running non fuel-rich is a no-no, Isp suffers and combustion temperature rises towards stoichiometric.

Captured a few frames from the test video for comparison. First frame shows things all good and steady for the first 20 seconds. Then the wobbling in the second frame, AFAIK the receded Mach disc denotes a pressure spike. Really interesting things going on in frames three and four, captured that by accident. IANARS but non-axisymmetric jet followed by fast flying chunks means that either part of the grain or ablative protection flew out. Last frame shows pressure decreasing.

But why the stupid fadeout and not showing shutdown?? Highly annoying.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Oberon_Command

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
  • Liked: 62
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1427 on: 05/27/2014 07:34 pm »
Is it possible that the thrust drop could be an intentional throttle-down built into the design of the fuel grain? Perhaps there is some structural limit (dictated by SS2's design) that they need to keep within and running the engine at full throttle exceeds that limit later in the burn?

It also looks to me like the shock diamonds do disappear, but then the exhaust looks like it's getting "dirtier" (ie. more opaque) and so they might still be there, but obscured by the glow of the exhaust products. To my amateur mind that suggests that the engine is throttled down. Maybe they were just testing the throttle limits of the engine?

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1428 on: 05/27/2014 08:36 pm »
I would place bets on how long it will take for them to admit they have to go all liquid propulsion, something like LOX/IPA.
Why have they not sent out an RFP with desired total system mass and volume constraints is beyond me.

I hear SS67B-3 kits are still available to purchase ..
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 678
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1429 on: 05/27/2014 09:06 pm »
I would place bets on how long it will take for them to admit they have to go all liquid propulsion, something like LOX/IPA.
Why have they not sent out an RFP with desired total system mass and volume constraints is beyond me.

I hear SS67B-3 kits are still available to purchase ..

They already have a liquid propulsion team, and two engines in development - for their Launcher One small satellite launcher. See announcement here:
http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/virgin-galactic-announces-successful-test-firings-of-new-liquid-rocket-engines-for-launcherone/

But I would expect that within a year, the larger engine will be adapted for use in SS2.
« Last Edit: 05/27/2014 09:08 pm by Lars_J »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1430 on: 05/27/2014 09:48 pm »
Regards of what happens with SS2, VG have proven there is a large market for suborbital flights. 580 people have put down $70m in deposits on a vehicle that is yet to fly. There must be thousands more that are waiting for it to fly before booking a seat.

Offline parabolicarc

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1431 on: 05/27/2014 10:21 pm »
One comment I heard from XCOR was that VG developed the vehicle in parallel with engine while industry norm is to build vehicle after engine is developed. VG is discovering the hard way why this is industry norm.


Well the X-15 program did the same back in the days.
And the vehicle also had to begin its flight tests with a substitute engine (xlr-11) while waiting for the definite one (xlr-99).

Also for solids it is the norm to develop the motor in parallel with the vehicle. STS and Ariane 5 were developed in parallel with their boosters, and that is also true for ballistic missiles.
Hydrid are in this aspect akin to solids: you first need a vehicle design to tailor the rubber/nylon block to your needs.

The guys developing the X-15 could draw on a solid decade of experience in developing and flying liquid motors for rocket planes. It still took a while to get the big engine completed, but given their experience in rocket planes it was probably an acceptable risk.

Scaled's experience with hybrids was minimal; I believe it was one motor type and six powered flights with SSOne. Not much. Scaled was an aircraft builder that had gotten into rocket development. They also decided to bring development in house for SpaceShipTwo. That ended badly with the cold flow accident in 2007. About a year later, they brought in SNC -- which had bought out SpaceDev, which had been involved in the original SSOne motor development. 

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1726
  • Liked: 2258
  • Likes Given: 676
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1432 on: 05/27/2014 11:14 pm »
Is it possible that the thrust drop could be an intentional throttle-down built into the design of the fuel grain? Perhaps there is some structural limit (dictated by SS2's design) that they need to keep within and running the engine at full throttle exceeds that limit later in the burn?

It also looks to me like the shock diamonds do disappear, but then the exhaust looks like it's getting "dirtier" (ie. more opaque) and so they might still be there, but obscured by the glow of the exhaust products. To my amateur mind that suggests that the engine is throttled down. Maybe they were just testing the throttle limits of the engine?

The firing clearly shows a throttling motor.  By way of comparison, see the still below (which shows Mach disks quite clearly) and then the video (which doesn't).  Depends on camera capabilities…

(The engine images below were of a 12-ton thrust stage two liquid ablative engine developed by HMX in 2005-2006, burning vapor-pressurized LOX-propane.  Due to low Pc, the nozzle is highly truncated for sea level operation.)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9271
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4493
  • Likes Given: 1131
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1433 on: 05/27/2014 11:16 pm »
Interlaced video will do that.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1434 on: 05/28/2014 07:15 pm »
And from a followup article , repeats what was reported before, but this is new i think
Quote
“We’ve been planning for this,” Whitesides said, adding that Scaled’s permit application to the Federal Aviation Administration includes use of both types of fuel grains. “We’ll be able to go able to go straight up to our PF (Powered Flight) 4 goals … and we’ll just keep expanding the envelope out to about 60 seconds” of engine burn time.
www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/40719virgin-galactic-hoping-for-spaceshiptwo-altitude-boost-with-new-fuel

They will skip re-testing the new engine in flight incrementally. So the next flight, whenever that happens, would burn longer than 20 seconds.
« Last Edit: 05/28/2014 07:15 pm by savuporo »
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline meadows.st

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 161
  • Toronto ON, Canada
  • Liked: 91
  • Likes Given: 6493
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1435 on: 05/28/2014 09:20 pm »
And from a followup article , repeats what was reported before, but this is new i think
Quote
“We’ve been planning for this,” Whitesides said, adding that Scaled’s permit application to the Federal Aviation Administration includes use of both types of fuel grains. “We’ll be able to go able to go straight up to our PF (Powered Flight) 4 goals … and we’ll just keep expanding the envelope out to about 60 seconds” of engine burn time.
www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/40719virgin-galactic-hoping-for-spaceshiptwo-altitude-boost-with-new-fuel

They will skip re-testing the new engine in flight incrementally. So the next flight, whenever that happens, would burn longer than 20 seconds.

Just to confirm, do you read Whitesides' statement as "for the first PF using the new polyamide-based grain, we will perform a burn of XX seconds which is what we have always planned for PF4"? If so, do you think that PF 3 was always planned to be the same burn duration as PF 2?

Full disclosure: I am not associated with VG in any way but have been a fan of this project (and its predecessor WK/SS1) and really want them to succeed.

Based in part on a conversation with @parabolicarc and the video of the polyamide ~58 second firing (youtube links upthread) I strongly suspect that the first PF of polyamide (PF4 of SS2) will not happen until they have performed a few drop tests and I further believe that they will not exceed 20 seconds by much (if at all) - I would guess 22 seconds max. 

Compared to their PF test flights of SS1, this test program is expanding the flight envelope extremely conservatively and while I think this is a prudent and warranted approach it really makes doubt that RB will be flying before the end of 2014.
“A little rudder far from the rocks is a lot better than a lot of rudder close to the rocks.” L. David Marquet

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1436 on: 05/28/2014 09:28 pm »
Just to confirm, do you read Whitesides' statement as "for the first PF using the new polyamide-based grain, we will perform a burn of XX seconds which is what we have always planned for PF4"? If so, do you think that PF 3 was always planned to be the same burn duration as PF 2?

The way i read it was that they'll continue powered flight test program where they left off - and this will mean either the same or longer duration burn in flight.
I do not think that PF 3 was planned to be the same length as PF 2, i think it was planned to be longer but they had to reset that based on some PF 2 results, but that is just guessing.

However, the spin master that Whitesides is, you can construct his statement to mean whatever later, such as that PF 4 was always planned to make a small burp only and they always planned a series of drop test for some random reason between PF 3 and 4. The man is good at his job.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Online Chris Bergin

Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1437 on: 05/29/2014 12:12 pm »

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Virgin Galactic Media Contact:

[email protected]

 

Spaceport America Media Contact:

[email protected]

 

VIRGIN GALACTIC AND SPACEPORT AMERICA SIGN KEY AGREEMENT FOR ACCESS TO AIRSPACE FOR SPACEFLIGHTS FROM NEW MEXICO

Agreement between Virgin Galactic, Spaceport America, and the Federal Aviation Administration is the first to cover a commercial spaceline

LAS CRUCES, NM. – May 29, 2014 – Virgin Galactic, the privately-funded space company owned by Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group and Abu Dhabi’s aabar Investments PJS, and Spaceport America announced today that they have signed a joint agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that helps clear the path for commercial flights of SpaceShipTwo. The historic agreement sets out the parameters for how routine space missions launched from Spaceport America will be integrated into the National Airspace System. Specifically, the agreement spells out how the FAA’s Albuquerque Air Route Traffic Control Center and the New Mexico Spaceport Authority will work with Virgin Galactic to smoothly and safely provide clear airspace for SpaceShipTwo.

“Our team is working hard to begin routine and affordable space launches from Spaceport America and this agreement brings us another step closer to that goal,” said Virgin Galactic CEO George Whitesides. “We are grateful to the FAA and New Mexico for their partnership to achieve this milestone.”

The agreement provides procedures for the safe integration of commercial, licensed space launch operations into the National Airspace System from Spaceport America.  The New Mexico Spaceport Authority also has an agreement in place with the US Army’s White Sands Missile Range to support space launch activities within WSMR airspace.

In addition, Virgin Galactic now has agreements in place with Edwards Air Force Base and the FAA’s Joshua Control Facility to cover spaceflights in California.  As a whole, these agreements provide coverage for the company’s airspace needs through the remainder of the test flight program in California and into commercial service in New Mexico.

Last year, Virgin Galactic began paying rent on a 20-year lease to conduct space missions from the 110,000 square foot “Gateway to Space” building at Spaceport America, which was recently awarded Gold Status under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification process. NMSA already holds a Launch Site Operator License issued by the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST).

 

ABOUT VIRGIN GALACTIC:

Virgin Galactic, owned by Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group and aabar Investments PJS, is on track to be the world’s first commercial spaceline. To date, the company has accepted more than $70 million in deposits from approximately 580 individuals, which is approximately 10% more than the total number of people who have ever gone to space. The new spaceship (SpaceShipTwo, VSS Enterprise) and carrier craft (WhiteKnightTwo, VMS Eve) have both been developed for Virgin Galactic’s vehicle fleet by Mojave-based Scaled Composites. Founded by Burt Rutan, Scaled developed SpaceShipOne, which in 2004 claimed the $10 million Ansari X Prize as the world’s first privately developed manned spacecraft. Virgin Galactic’s new vehicles, which will be manufactured by Virgin Galactic in Mojave, Calif., share much of the same basic design, but are being built to carry six customers, or the equivalent scientific research payload, on space flights. The vehicles will allow an out-of-the-seat, zero-gravity experience with astounding views of the planet from the black sky of space for tourist astronauts and a unique microgravity platform for researchers. The VSS Enterprise and VMS Eve test flight program is well under way, leading to Virgin Galactic commercial operations, which will be based at Spaceport America in New Mexico.

 

ABOUT SPACEPORT AMERICA:

Spaceport America is the first purpose-built commercial spaceport in the world. The launch complex, situated on 18,000 acres adjacent to the U.S. Army White Sands Missile Range in southern New Mexico, has been providing commercial vertical launch services since 2006. Spaceport America has hosted 20 vertical launches thus far. The New Mexico Spaceport Authority continues to work closely with tenants Virgin Galactic and SpaceX, along with other flight customers in support of the commercial space industry. For more information, please visit: www.spaceportamerica.com. Images and HD video of Spaceport America can be found by visiting: www.spaceportamerica.com/press-center/. Tours of Spaceport America are available: www.spaceportamerica.com/plan-a-visit/preview-tours/. Find Spaceport America on Facebook or follow us on Twitter: @Spaceport_NM
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline parabolicarc

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1438 on: 05/29/2014 04:55 pm »
Just to confirm, do you read Whitesides' statement as "for the first PF using the new polyamide-based grain, we will perform a burn of XX seconds which is what we have always planned for PF4"? If so, do you think that PF 3 was always planned to be the same burn duration as PF 2?

The way i read it was that they'll continue powered flight test program where they left off - and this will mean either the same or longer duration burn in flight.
I do not think that PF 3 was planned to be the same length as PF 2, i think it was planned to be longer but they had to reset that based on some PF 2 results, but that is just guessing.

However, the spin master that Whitesides is, you can construct his statement to mean whatever later, such as that PF 4 was always planned to make a small burp only and they always planned a series of drop test for some random reason between PF 3 and 4. The man is good at his job.

The third powered flight was basically a repeat of the second to demonstrate progress. They got to a slightly higher altitude (71K vs. 69 K) because of a somewhat better turn after lighting the engine. And they did some RSC testing as a way to show that this was somehow different from the second test.  I think it was the flight where David Mackay was in SS2. But otherwise, it added little to expanding the flight envelope. At least that's what my sources tell me.

The third flight wasn't done until Jan. 10. It had been scheduled for the week prior to Christmas, and Alan Boyle and his crew from NBC News were down in Mojave for it as part of their coverage deal. I saw them sitting in the Voyager with their VG handler waiting out a weather delay. Winter had come to Mojave, with winds and storm clouds. The following day everyone was beginning to leave for vacation, so the flight was pushed into January.

The point seemed to be to end the year with a bang, as it were. Progress. Three flights in 8 months. Our pilot at the controls. At the same time, they took that version of the engine as far as it could go. 20 seconds. No longer.

Online Chris Bergin

Re: Space Ship Two - General Thread
« Reply #1439 on: 06/03/2014 05:21 pm »
 NASA AND VIRGIN GALACTIC SELECT PAYLOADS FOR FIRST SPACE RESEARCH FLIGHT ONBOARD SPACESHIPTWO

 

12 Payloads Designed by American Universities, Private Companies, and Federal Labs to fly on NASA-Chartered Virgin Galactic Flight

 

MOJAVE, Calif. – June, 3 2014 – NASA and Virgin Galactic, the privately-funded spaceline owned by Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group and Abu Dhabi’s aabar Investments PJS, have identified twelve innovative research payloads that will fly to space onboard SpaceShipTwo, Virgin Galactic’s reusable spacecraft.  Each of these payloads was selected by NASA through its Flight Opportunities Program to conduct research during the prolonged microgravity environment experienced on board SpaceShipTwo.

 

This NASA flight will be the first of its kind for Virgin Galactic. SpaceShipTwo is widely known for its pioneering potential for human spaceflight, but another key function will be enabling new research by offering scientists, engineers, and educators a unique research experience in space. SpaceShipTwo adds an important new research platform by providing a safe, affordable, and high-capacity environment (by volume and by weight) that offers several minutes of high quality microgravity and exposure to outer space and the Earth’s upper atmosphere.

 

The twelve payloads are each designed to deliver important and technically rigorous results to researchers at universities and organizations, spanning a diverse range of topics that include biological monitoring, on-orbit propellant storage, and next-generation air traffic control systems. As required by the Flight Opportunities Program, each payload is an engineering experiment designed to advance a field relevant to NASA’s overall technology roadmap.

 

“Virgin Galactic is thrilled to be working with NASA and researchers at such a range of prestigious institutions, and we look forward to flying these research payloads into space,” said Virgin Galactic CEO George Whitesides. “Our vision for Virgin Galactic is to increase access to space, not just for individuals to experience spaceflight, but to advance humanity by driving significant technological advancement and research.  We are proud to have NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate as a customer and to be able to facilitate their important work.”

 

The twelve payloads manifested for testing on the first SpaceShipTwo research flight include:

 

·      Made in Space, Inc., Moffett Field, California, has designed an advanced manufacturing experiment intended to feed the development of future 3D printers customized for use in space.

·      The On-Orbit Propellant Storage Stability investigation by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, Florida, continues a microgravity research program to determine stability data for a prototype orbiting fuel depot that could enable future long duration space missions.

·      The Electromagnetic Field Measurements payload from John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Maryland, will characterize the electromagnetic field environment inside the spacecraft. This payload will serve as an integration platform for scientific research and instrument development while providing insight into interference from the spacecraft.

·      The Collisions Into Dust Experiment from the University of Central Florida, Orlando, will fire an impactor into simulated regolith to observe the subsequent behavior of the fine particles ejected in microgravity.  The knowledge of this behavior can help in understanding future operations on asteroids or low gravity moons for scientific study or resource collection.

·      The Validating Telemetric Imaging Hardware for Crew-Assisted and Crew-Autonomous Biological Imaging project from the University of Florida, Gainesville, will test biological fluorescent imaging instrumentation for suborbital applications. Fluorescent protein-based, gene-expression techniques allow direct observation of how biological entities react to the stresses of spaceflight.

·      The Variable Radiator demonstration from Texas A&M University, College Station, will test a modulating fluid-based spacecraft thermal energy rejection solution. Fluids behave differently in microgravity; understanding that behavior is critical to the operation of spacecraft radiators and other systems that transfer fluids.

·      A Micro Satellite Attitude Control System from the State University of New York, Buffalo, will test the application of a carpal wrist joint to the momentum management and control of small satellites. Use of the wrist joint to articulate a reaction-control gyroscope should enable precision pointing of a small satellite on multiple axes.

·      The Saturated Fluid Pistonless Pump Technology Demonstrator from the University of Colorado, Boulder, is a cryogenic fuel pump system developed by Flometrics, Inc, which can pump fuel without turbo machinery. This potential advancement for in-space and rocket propellant propulsion would reduce the weight, complexity and cost of spacecraft fuel systems.

·      The Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) transmitter is an experimental payload sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation and based on aviation equipment designed by MITRE Corp. and modified by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, Florida. ADS-B technology will enable integration of suborbital reusable launch vehicles and stratospheric balloons into the FAA’s next-generation air traffic control system.

·      Controlled Dynamics, Inc., Huntington Beach, California, has built a Facility for Microgravity Research and Submicroradian Stabilization that is a prototype system using active vibration suppression to increase the quality of microgravity experienced by an attached payload.

·      Ames Research Center's Suborbital Flight Environment Monitor is a suite of sensors designed to measure the flight accelerations and microgravity quality achieved.

·      Johnson Space Center's Microgravity Multi-Phase Flow Experiment for Suborbital Testing will assess the sustained microgravity operation of a two-phase flow system with a passive gas and liquid separator. This technology is applicable to a number of space applications including water purification.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1