Space Ship Two - General Thread

[parabolicarc]

A story focused on George Whitesides:

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/virgin-galactic-ready-for-lift-off-552176.html

I found this interesting:

Whitesides, who has a private pilot’s licence and is a certified flight coach, will travel also, confirming he will take one of the latter test flights. “Sir Richard flying on the first commercial flight has been a great sign to our customers that we’re not going to let him fly until we think it’s ready,” he explains. “Correspondingly, I think I should fly soon before Richard just to make sure that he knows that I fully believe in the technology.”

Pilot's license or not, this seems more like a stunt than proper flight tests. It doesn't tell you much about safety. Better to look at the number of static engine fires on the ground and flight tests, and the results of all those efforts. My sources in Mojave say there will be a limited number of both hot fires and flight tests. There's a real push to get Branson on a flight this year. And SpaceShipTwo probably won't fly under power until August. Not much time. There's real concern here that they're not going to do a proper flight test program.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

There's real concern here that they're not going to do a proper flight test program.

I really hope Whitesides is pushing hard just to cover his 6, so he can say to Branson they have done everything possible when this year doesn't prove possible.

If it is just what it's alleged to be then VG shouldn't be in this business. Surely their customers wouldn't be that gullible?

[savuporo]

My sources in Mojave say there will be a limited number of both hot fires and flight tests.

Yes, because doing a test runs and iterations with a hybrid engine is a pretty expensive and lengthy undertaking, whereas the incremental cost of firing a mostly working liquid engine once or 100 times is pretty small.

So they have basically set themselves up to skimp on testing, i just hope they and all the passengers will be lucky enough.

[savuporo]

So what exploded yesterday in Mojave ? VG is claiming it was a "very very small, so tiny explosion" that it should not even be mentioned. More like a burp than explosion.

[parabolicarc]

So what exploded yesterday in Mojave ? VG is claiming it was a "very very small, so tiny explosion" that it should not even be mentioned. More like a burp than explosion.

I've got that covered. I was here for it.

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/05/blast-fire-mojave-spaceport-injuries-reported/

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/06/official-statement-mojave-spaceport-fire/

This was pretty scary. The fire was not really that small (despite the statement), and it was right next to the big nitrous tank (rather than being in the vicinity). Someone on the scene had the good sense to tell the firefighters to hose down the tank. Otherwise, it might have blown. And that would have been a very bad day.

Whether there was an explosion is a subject of dispute. There was a loud bang of some sort prior to the fire. Many people think it was related to the fire. Some believe it was a sonic boom.

[mheney]

So what exploded yesterday in Mojave ? VG is claiming it was a "very very small, so tiny explosion" that it should not even be mentioned. More like a burp than explosion.

I've got that covered. I was here for it.

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/05/blast-fire-mojave-spaceport-injuries-reported/

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/06/official-statement-mojave-spaceport-fire/

This was pretty scary. The fire was not really that small (despite the statement), and it was right next to the big nitrous tank (rather than being in the vicinity). Someone on the scene had the good sense to tell the firefighters to hose down the tank. Otherwise, it might have blown. And that would have been a very bad day.

Whether there was an explosion is a subject of dispute. There was a loud bang of some sort prior to the fire. Many people think it was related to the fire. Some believe it was a sonic boom.

I think the link to the first article, with the words "-injuries-reported" is a touch misleading; the actual headline says "NO injuries reported".   I was honestly concerned as I navigated over there - and was relieved (although temporarily confused" to learn there were no injuries.

[parabolicarc]

So what exploded yesterday in Mojave ? VG is claiming it was a "very very small, so tiny explosion" that it should not even be mentioned. More like a burp than explosion.

I've got that covered. I was here for it.

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/05/blast-fire-mojave-spaceport-injuries-reported/

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/06/06/official-statement-mojave-spaceport-fire/

This was pretty scary. The fire was not really that small (despite the statement), and it was right next to the big nitrous tank (rather than being in the vicinity). Someone on the scene had the good sense to tell the firefighters to hose down the tank. Otherwise, it might have blown. And that would have been a very bad day.

Whether there was an explosion is a subject of dispute. There was a loud bang of some sort prior to the fire. Many people think it was related to the fire. Some believe it was a sonic boom.

I think the link to the first article, with the words "-injuries-reported" is a touch misleading; the actual headline says "NO injuries reported".   I was honestly concerned as I navigated over there - and was relieved (although temporarily confused" to learn there were no injuries.

Sorry about that. It's Permalink; it tends to drop certain words. Need to be more careful of that in the future.

[Star One]

Google reportedly wants in on Virgin Galactic's space business.

Fresh from its $500 million acquisition of satellite specialist Skybox Imaging, Google appears to be ready to make another space-related investment. Sky News reports that the search giant is in advanced talks to take a minority stake in Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic business (which already counted Skybox Imaging as a potential customer) with a view to getting its internet satellite project off the ground. Google may invest around $30 million into the company, which is set to begin commercial flights to space later this year, forming a joint venture that would see Virgin Galactic offer up its technology in return.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/12/google-investment-virgin-galactic/

[Elmar Moelzer]

Google reportedly wants in on Virgin Galactic's space business.

Fresh from its $500 million acquisition of satellite specialist Skybox Imaging, Google appears to be ready to make another space-related investment. Sky News reports that the search giant is in advanced talks to take a minority stake in Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic business (which already counted Skybox Imaging as a potential customer) with a view to getting its internet satellite project off the ground. Google may invest around $30 million into the company, which is set to begin commercial flights to space later this year, forming a joint venture that would see Virgin Galactic offer up its technology in return.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/06/12/google-investment-virgin-galactic/

I am not quite sure how they expect that to work. Are they hoping for VGs Launcher One (or whatever it is called) to be available soon? VG does not exactly have a track record of timely delivery.

[savuporo]

I am not quite sure how they expect that to work. Are they hoping for VGs Launcher One (or whatever it is called) to be available soon? VG does not exactly have a track record of timely delivery.

I wonder how accurately this is reported - probably not very. First i doubt Google has much interest in VG's suborbital business ideas. More likely they are looking at technology acquisition, but then they would be talking to TSC, not VG.

Also if they are interested in microlaunchers, they would probably be better off by just hiring or pocketing a team with recent and relevant propulsion experience on their own and start from clean sheet - would get to end goal quicker.

Google is much into a mode of "throwing spaghetti on the wall" and seeing what sticks. They keep doing it with software, acquiring small teams with a product or giving an internal team a chance, let it run for a few years and see what comes of it. Over the last years, they have started doing this with many different kinds of hardware products, too.

[parabolicarc]

This is the same deal I wrote about a month ago:

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/05/11/googlevirgin-galactic-deal-works/

It's a real deal.

Google has a ton of money. It can afford to invest money in high-altitude balloons and drone for broadband. It's also investing in a satellite fleet that will provide that service globally.

Virgin Galactic needs money. VG also has Newton engine technology but doesn't have the funds to complete LauncherOne. So, the large part of the investment would be Google providing the funding for that. And possibly moving development operations up to Moffett Field.

Google would also make an equity investment in Virgin Galactic. That will help VG to finish the flight test program. Aabar provided $390 million for this program, and they've eaten through most of it.

Do a search for Google at www.parabolicarc.com and you'll find a whole bunch of stories on it. The investment in WorldVu for broadband, the hiring of broadband experts, etc.

[vt_hokie]

Google is much into a mode of "throwing spaghetti on the wall" and seeing what sticks. They keep doing it with software, acquiring small teams with a product or giving an internal team a chance, let it run for a few years and see what comes of it. Over the last years, they have started doing this with many different kinds of hardware products, too.

I recently read the book Inside the Iron Works about Grumman's rise and fall, and it sounds like the ill-fated diversification strategy that company took.  Maybe it'll have better results for Google, but it seems like a bad business strategy.

[savuporo]

Google is much into a mode of "throwing spaghetti on the wall" and seeing what sticks. They keep doing it with software, acquiring small teams with a product or giving an internal team a chance, let it run for a few years and see what comes of it. Over the last years, they have started doing this with many different kinds of hardware products, too.

I recently read the book Inside the Iron Works about Grumman's rise and fall, and it sounds like the ill-fated diversification strategy that company took.  Maybe it'll have better results for Google, but it seems like a bad business strategy.

The problem for Google and other internet giants is often that their enormous revenue hits the limits of addressable market size, because they already reached everyone possible with their core bread and butter product and are hitting diminishing returns.
Now they have to figure out how to make some parts of that mountain of cash go into something that might work out as a new thing in the future. Microsoft, Apple, Google, FB etc all have the same problem, and sometimes the problem is that the mountain of cash sits on the wrong continent and moving it would cost immensely in taxes. So they just use it to buy something that has a chance of working out in the future. A lot of these deals dont work out for anything, too.

Grumman was not in a similar situation.

But thats massively OT here, so i'll stop.

[meekGee]

Google is much into a mode of "throwing spaghetti on the wall" and seeing what sticks. They keep doing it with software, acquiring small teams with a product or giving an internal team a chance, let it run for a few years and see what comes of it. Over the last years, they have started doing this with many different kinds of hardware products, too.

I recently read the book Inside the Iron Works about Grumman's rise and fall, and it sounds like the ill-fated diversification strategy that company took.  Maybe it'll have better results for Google, but it seems like a bad business strategy.

Diversification may not necessarily be bad, but even when you diversify, you should be diligent about where you put your money. 

[QuantumG]

It'd just be nice if one company that is "focused" on human spaceflight actually flew someone this decade.

Ya know, other than Space Adventures flying Sarah with the Russians.

[yg1968]

More details on the google investment:
http://news.sky.com/story/1280919/google-in-talks-to-take-virgin-galactic-stake

A person close to Google said, though, that its £17.8m investment could value Virgin Galactic at as much as £1.2bn, equating to a shareholding of approximately 1.5%.

[Vultur]

It'd just be nice if one company that is "focused" on human spaceflight actually flew someone this decade.

Ya know, other than Space Adventures flying Sarah with the Russians.

Unless SpaceShipTwo blows up or something during testing (I certainly hope not), I think they'll fly commercially this decade... that's 6 more years.  If they claim to only be doing 3 more test flights or whatever [is that correct?], even with a big "slip" factor I don't think that would take 3 years, much less 6.

Whether they reach the Karman line is of course quite another question ...

[Herb Schaltegger]

It'd just be nice if one company that is "focused" on human spaceflight actually flew someone this decade.

Ya know, other than Space Adventures flying Sarah with the Russians.

Unless SpaceShipTwo blows up or something during testing (I certainly hope not), I think they'll fly commercially this decade... that's 6 more years.  If they claim to only be doing 3 more test flights or whatever [is that correct?], even with a big "slip" factor I don't think that would take 3 years, much less 6.

Whether they reach the Karman line is of course quite another question ...

Just recall that Virgin Galactic has been planning to fly people on revenue-producing flights Real Soon Now!™ for several years already.

[Vultur]

It'd just be nice if one company that is "focused" on human spaceflight actually flew someone this decade.

Ya know, other than Space Adventures flying Sarah with the Russians.

Unless SpaceShipTwo blows up or something during testing (I certainly hope not), I think they'll fly commercially this decade... that's 6 more years.  If they claim to only be doing 3 more test flights or whatever [is that correct?], even with a big "slip" factor I don't think that would take 3 years, much less 6.

Whether they reach the Karman line is of course quite another question ...

Just recall that Virgin Galactic has been planning to fly people on revenue-producing flights Real Soon Now!™ for several years already.

True. And perhaps I am just being over-optimistic. I thought they were really pushing for this year due to the 2014 deadline from Aabar and that's why they were supposedly only doing 3 more test flights?

[Star One]

I hope this isn't too OT but it's been bugging me for a while, how is it this vehicle is described as a space plane, yet something like an SR-72 which if it existed would probably fly just as high is called an aircraft? Is it the engines that mark the different definition between the two?