Author Topic: Space Ship Two - General Thread (Read 757148 times)

Malderi · « **Reply #340 on:** 02/08/2011 06:25 pm »

Does it worry anyone else how many people are retiring? Didn't the CEO step down a little while ago, the head of Spaceport America resigned/was fired, and Rutan announced his retirement too?

It's very likely that they are all coincidental and unrelated - but there's that little doubt in my head, too...

docmordrid · « **Reply #341 on:** 02/08/2011 07:23 pm »

Rutan has health problems, and strictly speaking Scaled isn't "his" any more - it's Northrop Grumman's.

The CEO of Virgin Galactic was a PR specialist and not really the operational commander, necessary in the early going when the "CEO" is more about media face time.

Politics 101 -

Spaceport America's "CEO" was actually a political appointee of Governor Bill Richardson (Democrat) of New Mexico and had only been in that chair a few months. Richardson was term-limited and so couldn't run again.

In November a new Republican Governor was elected, and the normal practice is for the previous Governors appointees to offer their resignations. His was accepted and she'll appoint her own person.

Par for the course whoever won the top job in November.

Jason1701 · « **Reply #342 on:** 02/14/2011 10:27 pm »

Looks like another captive carry test.

http://twitter.com/mojavewatcher

Does anyone know if glide flights 2-4 were done with WK2's gear retracted? Have they fixed that problem?

Also, are there any images or videos of those other glide flights? Someone tweeted about new footage at the commercial spaceflight conference.

Spiff · « **Reply #343 on:** 02/22/2011 02:15 pm »

Seems like there have been two captive carry flights on 14th and 15th of February. In both cases the glide flight was cancelled due to weather constraints.

http://scaled.com/projects/t1b/logs-WK2.htm

Quote

Flight:    49 / 05GC (CC08)
Date:   15 Feb 11    Flight Time:    1.83 hr
WK2 Pilot:    Stucky    WK2 CoPilot:    Nichols    WK2 FTE:    Inks
SS2 Pilot:    Siebold    SS2 CoPilot:    Alsbury
GS Crew:    Binnie, Tighe, Basset, Verderame, Maisler, Kelley, Reid, Zeitlin, Knupp, Cassebeer

Objectives:
Clean release
Expand flutter envelope
Weight expansion
Pilot proficiency

Results:
Due to deteriorating weather, conducted simulated mission and systems testing

Flight:    48 / 05GC (CC07)
Date:   14 Feb 11    Flight Time:    1.35 hr
WK2 Pilot:    Stucky    WK2 CoPilot:    Nichols    WK2 FTE:    Inks
SS2 Pilot:    Siebold    SS2 CoPilot:    Alsbury
GS Crew:    Binnie, Tighe, Basset, Verderame, Maisler, Kelley, Reid, Zeitlin, Knupp, Cassebeer

Objectives:
Clean release
Expand flutter envelope
Weight expansion
Pilot proficiency

Results:
Due to out of limit winds, conducted simulated mission and systems testing.

Garrett · « **Reply #344 on:** 02/24/2011 01:05 pm »

Quote from: Celebrimbor on 01/14/2011 08:43 am

Fourth glide flight has occurred!
http://www.scaled.com/projects/proteus.html

There's a photo of the 4th glide flight ,with the water contrail visible, on the Virgin Galactic website:
http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/test-flights-continue/

yg1968 · « **Reply #345 on:** 03/31/2011 02:29 am »

Some very cool videos of the interior of spaceship one in this BBC report from today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12909071

There is also a cool video of the hangar at Spaceport America.

Robert Thompson · « **Reply #346 on:** 03/31/2011 02:55 am »

"Everybody will know somebody who has been into space in the next 20 years." Chain reaction.

Does the aerodynamics here support a business case for commercial suborbital space planes? I.e., once you break out of the drag proportional to velocity^2, is the lift energy less for typical commercial flights, say, transcontinental? I'd imagine that it could be for longer commercial flights like transatlantic / Oceanic.

mlorrey · « **Reply #347 on:** 03/31/2011 05:44 am »

Quote from: Hernalt on 03/31/2011 02:55 am

"Everybody will know somebody who has been into space in the next 20 years." Chain reaction.

Does the aerodynamics here support a business case for commercial suborbital space planes? I.e., once you break out of the drag proportional to velocity^2, is the lift energy less for typical commercial flights, say, transcontinental? I'd imagine that it could be for longer commercial flights like transatlantic / Oceanic.

Depends on whether you are doing any skip diving, which highly depends on your L/D. A single ballistic hop is rather energy intensive for the distance you go. The advantage goes to the spaceplanes that can either waveride or skipdive across the top of the atmosphere repeatedly. Waveriders will likely be more comfortable for passengers than skipdivers. Skipdivers feel like you are riding the vomit comet on steroids. Either way, it takes as much energy to get into orbit as it does to fly from NYC to Sydney Australia on an airliner, or so some SF writer once told me. Given that, long distance, transpacific flights using skipdivers or waveriders *may* be more fuel efficient than flying a jumbojet to Oz.

tnphysics · « **Reply #348 on:** 03/31/2011 07:21 pm »

If you use rockets, forget it. They need so much propellant that this alone uses more energy-not to mention the safety hazard.

If you use high performance air breathing engines, maybe.

Robert Thompson · « **Reply #349 on:** 04/01/2011 12:18 am »

mlorrey: "L/D"? Altitude over distance? As for waveriders or skipdivers, I can surmise that choosy clientele of the nautical past have had to tolerate pitch, roll, and buffeting waves, so I think some customer base could tolerate it, with practice.

tnphysics: "high performance air breathing engines". How much room for improvement exists between present high-altitude commercial engines that operate at a consumer price and a Skylon air-breathing engine? My uninformed assumption is that military engines already occupy 'highest performance air breathing engines' and commercial engines are as much high performance as the consumer will financially tolerate. I'll safely assume Skylon is not intended for consumer level people-moving, but for relatively select people-moving.

Jason1701 · « **Reply #350 on:** 04/01/2011 01:08 am »

Quote from: Hernalt on 04/01/2011 12:18 am

tnphysics: "high performance air breathing engines". How much room for improvement exists between present high-altitude commercial engines that operate at a consumer price and a Skylon air-breathing engine? My uninformed assumption is that military engines already occupy 'highest performance air breathing engines' and commercial engines are as much high performance as the consumer will financially tolerate. I'll safely assume Skylon is not intended for consumer level people-moving, but for relatively select people-moving.

Reaction Engines has a plan to use engines similar to the SABRE for intercontinental travel in LAPCAT:
http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/lapcat.html

Robert Thompson · « **Reply #351 on:** 04/01/2011 04:56 am »

Guy Fieri would say that's off the hook. The documents don't state cruising altitude, but it appears like it isn't high enough to dissipate the sonic boom, and thus requires them to thread the needle to get to Australia. But is Australia the only commute this could work for? If the sonic boom cannot be tolerated over land, does that mean it would have to travel over water and land only in coastal cities?

go4mars · « **Reply #352 on:** 04/02/2011 02:11 am »

http://spacefellowship.com/news/art16662/launcherone-virgin-galactic-s-satellite-launcher-project.html

Is this big enough for a solitary human to go up, around once, re-enter and survive throughout?

mlorrey · « **Reply #353 on:** 04/02/2011 02:39 am »

Quote from: Hernalt on 04/01/2011 12:18 am

mlorrey: "L/D"? Altitude over distance? As for waveriders or skipdivers, I can surmise that choosy clientele of the nautical past have had to tolerate pitch, roll, and buffeting waves, so I think some customer base could tolerate it, with practice.

tnphysics: "high performance air breathing engines". How much room for improvement exists between present high-altitude commercial engines that operate at a consumer price and a Skylon air-breathing engine? My uninformed assumption is that military engines already occupy 'highest performance air breathing engines' and commercial engines are as much high performance as the consumer will financially tolerate. I'll safely assume Skylon is not intended for consumer level people-moving, but for relatively select people-moving.

L/D = Lift to Drag ratio

A capsule, for instance, might be able to skip once, but thats about it, provided its not very round, tho even Soyuz is supposed to be able to skip off the atmosphere once on a lunar reentry trajectory. With a higher L/D, you can skip multiple times without losing much velocity. You may recall that the old Silbervogel plans from WWII specified a rocket launched bomber that would skip off the atmosphere several times to reach New York City.

SS2 could, if it had sufficient Isp and fuel mass, go high and far enough to skip off the atmosphere a few times, but a speed of mach 3.5 or 4.5 really is only good for a few skips. You really want to reach, say, mach 8 or 9 to have a transatlantic range with a skipdiver, unless you have fuel to do reboosts every few skips, you could possibly do transpacific flights. Be sure to bring plenty of barf bags.

A waverider could, however, cruise at mach 5 at 110,000 ft with scramjets on a transpacific flight.

mlorrey · « **Reply #354 on:** 04/02/2011 02:44 am »

Quote from: go4mars on 04/02/2011 02:11 am

http://spacefellowship.com/news/art16662/launcherone-virgin-galactic-s-satellite-launcher-project.html

Is this big enough for a solitary human to go up, around once, re-enter and survive throughout?

A 200kg payload? Hm, human = 100 kg, space suit = 30kg?, MOOSE system? As I recall MOOSE was 215 kg, so thats over budget for this launch vehicle. You could probably get a great flight from Los Angeles to Tokyo, the long way around, though, with a MOOSE on this launcher.

mlorrey · « **Reply #355 on:** 04/02/2011 02:45 am »

Quote from: Hernalt on 04/01/2011 04:56 am

Guy Fieri would say that's off the hook. The documents don't state cruising altitude, but it appears like it isn't high enough to dissipate the sonic boom, and thus requires them to thread the needle to get to Australia. But is Australia the only commute this could work for? If the sonic boom cannot be tolerated over land, does that mean it would have to travel over water and land only in coastal cities?

Sonic boom regulations specify a decibel or pressure level. If your vehicle comes in under those levels as perceived on the ground when flying supersonically at altitude, then you can fly supersonically over land.

Robert Thompson · « **Reply #356 on:** 04/03/2011 11:47 am »

Waverider has this entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waverider

I can find nothing on skipdivers. Do you have a reference?

mlorrey · « **Reply #357 on:** 04/04/2011 10:15 am »

Quote from: Hernalt on 04/03/2011 11:47 am

Waverider has this entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waverider

I can find nothing on skipdivers. Do you have a reference?

Sanger Silbervogel, X-20 Dynasoar, among others. Otherwise known as an "antipodal bomber". It's mode of flight is called "skipdiving" because it doesnt cruise at constant altitude and speed, it is launched into a suborbital trajectory into space, when it starts to reenter, it uses its high L/D capability to skip off the atmosphere like a flat rock skipping across the water of a lake. With each skip, you lose velocity, and thus your next apogee is at a lower altitude, so your next reentry speed is lower, and so each subsequent skip is shorter, slower, and deeper in the atmosphere.

If you have ever used the X-plane flight simulator, I made a plane for that simulator called the Lorrey Ballistijet that would take off from a normal runway with turboramjets like those of an SR-71, and at 70,000 ft and mach 3, would light a rocket engine that would take it to mach 24, almost reaching orbit. It could then be skipdive flown all the way around the planet, if you were a good enough pilot. I dont know if the download is still available.

jabe · « **Reply #358 on:** 04/04/2011 05:10 pm »

WK2 test flight updates at scaled...
nothing surpising
http://www.scaled.com/projects/whiteknighttwo_flight_test_summaries

Jason1701 · « **Reply #359 on:** 04/04/2011 07:30 pm »

Also some more motor testing:
http://www.scaled.com/projects/rocketmotortwo_hot-fire_test_summaries