Wasn't there a quote from Elon Musk about the fourth launch of Falcon 1, that he was pretty worried, there was a real risk to the entire rocket business idea if Falcon 1 failed again?
Elon Musk levels of optimism.
Branson still claiming service entry this year:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-10/branson-says-space-venture-to-fly-fare-paying-passenger-in-2014.html?cmpid=yhoo
Quote from: vt_hokie on 02/11/2014 07:29 pmBranson still claiming service entry this year:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-10/branson-says-space-venture-to-fly-fare-paying-passenger-in-2014.html?cmpid=yhooThe money quote is: " fare-paying passenger to the edge of space"meaning someone will pay money to fly close to space this year.
Quote from: Danderman on 02/12/2014 10:35 pmQuote from: vt_hokie on 02/11/2014 07:29 pmBranson still claiming service entry this year:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-10/branson-says-space-venture-to-fly-fare-paying-passenger-in-2014.html?cmpid=yhooThe money quote is: " fare-paying passenger to the edge of space"meaning someone will pay money to fly close to space this year.Full disclosure regarding my bias: I hope Virgin Galactic succeeds, I have been watching this development since the time of the SS1 development and testing process. I think it is interesting when mapping the testing process for both SS1 and SS2 that the pattern appears very similar although on a larger scale for SS2 (i.e. more testing since there will be FAA requirements, paying customers = potential loss of "civilian" life and a much longer design life for the vehicle(s)). I have graphed the cumulative flight hours for WK2 and show the SS2 flights. I can't seem to find my analysis on WK1/SS1 at the moment. See attached picture of graph.Parsing the "money quote" above from another perspective, "the edge of space" really depends on your perspective as follows: given that above the Karman line is taken as "space" by international convention, to me, anything within +/- some percentage (say 5 or 10%?) of that line would be the "edge of space".
I have no opinion (that I am willing to share) on the state of the engine development for SS2 and more importantly I have no first hand knowledge of the state of the SS2 RM2 development.I found the WK1/SS1 data and I will refer to my last post (two posts up).Comparing the two charts, and "normalizing" to account for the increased complexity, safety requirements and scale <waves hands at timescale and total flight hours> - the slopes and more importantly the gaps between resumption of testing/flight tests seem very similar between the two graphs (which makes sense for any flight test program IMHO). Only three powered flights so far for SS2 and I would expect on the order of 10 to 15 before even considering taking paying passengers but maybe I am too conservative.Ground firings of RM1 prior to powered flight tests = 12 (4 full-duration)Ground firings of RM2 prior to powered flight tests = 27 (27 "full-scale") *note different terminology - some are noted to be <full-durationTest flights (captive and glide) of SS1 prior to powered flight = 10 Test flights (captive and glide) of SS2 prior to powered flight = 25Powered flights of SS1 prior to >100km powered flight = 3Powered flights of SS2 prior to >100km powered flight = unknown (currently at 3)Flight tests of WK1 prior to CC of SS1 = 23Flight tests of WK2 prior to CC of SS2 = 40Total flights of WK1 prior to first >100km attempt = 59Total flights of WK2 prior to first >100km attempt = unknown (currently at 149)In short, the numbers would suggest double to triple the WK1/SS1 test regime as an expectation and the graphs look like somewhere between a 2 to 3 times stretch. Time will tell, I just find the data to be quite interesting in its similarities. Branson has paying customers that must be eager to fly but Scaled/Allen had a looming deadline for the X-Prize and they just made with a couple of months to spare. No one will ever know if Scaled would have pushed the powered flight testing so fast if they did not have a deadline and a number of competitors. (I thought that there was a deadline of doing the two flights within two weeks prior to Dec 31, 2004 but I can't find the reference now).
Static hot fires of nylon and rubber engines have continued right through the powered flight test program, which tells you they're still trying to work out problems with the designs. ...Correct me if I'm wrong, but once Scaled decided on an engine contractor for SSOne, they didn't go test completely different types of hybrids to figure out which one to use.
There will now be a significant gap in flights because the version of the rubber engine they have flown with can't be fired longer than 20 seconds. They now have to install another type of engine into SS2 before powered flights can resume.
Ten to 15 flights into space before the first commercial mission with Branson aboard might be sufficient, depending upon how well they went. The question is whether they will do so. If they don't, then they will be compressing the schedule and that will raise some serious questions about whether they are putting safety first.
Quote from: parabolicarc on 02/14/2014 08:02 pmStatic hot fires of nylon and rubber engines have continued right through the powered flight test program, which tells you they're still trying to work out problems with the designs. ...Correct me if I'm wrong, but once Scaled decided on an engine contractor for SSOne, they didn't go test completely different types of hybrids to figure out which one to use. I agree that the start of powered flights coincided with the termination* of RM1 static tests but I don't know if I can necessarily draw the same conclusion that they are "trying to work out problems" from the available data. Playing devil's advocate to this assertion, I find it consistent that they are continuing to evaluate the long term reliability of RM2 given that it will be have paying customers as well as simultaneously testing the effects of upgrades.Quote from: parabolicarc on 02/14/2014 08:02 pmThere will now be a significant gap in flights because the version of the rubber engine they have flown with can't be fired longer than 20 seconds. They now have to install another type of engine into SS2 before powered flights can resume.I was initially puzzled about why the PF03 fire duration (20 sec) was the same as PF02 until I realized that I might be inclined to do the same thing to evaluate the effect of the reflective coating in order to have a control with the prior test. One week after PF03, they performed another EA Checkride (GF28) which provides support for (but obviously does not prove) the hypothesis that they are seeking to reduce uncertainty related to the craft (it is silent on the question of RM2 development). I remain hopeful that the pattern of flight test frequency will trend upward soon (~1 to 2 months between PF tests has not been uncommon in either development project) - you seem to have inside information so I am not saying you are wrong regarding the reason for the delay for the next PF but I sincerely hope you are. Quote from: parabolicarc on 02/14/2014 08:02 pmTen to 15 flights into space before the first commercial mission with Branson aboard might be sufficient, depending upon how well they went. The question is whether they will do so. If they don't, then they will be compressing the schedule and that will raise some serious questions about whether they are putting safety first.I agree. Overall, while I have previously drawn parallels between WK1/SS1 and WK2/SS2 development, I believe they are (and should be) substantially different in terms of their intended purpose (win a prize by flying to "the edge of space" <5 times while risking only a single, well informed occupant vs. fly repeatedly to the edge of space with (wealthy and presumably powerful) paying passengers with profitably/sufficiently low operating costs).* there are no tests for RM1 listed in their test logs and while it is possible that they performed other RM1 static tests after starting PF testing, IMHO it is unlikely given the history of posting positive and negative test results during WK1/SS1 development/testing.
Virgin Galactic just named a new CFO:http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/02/18/virgin-galactic-vice-president-departs-cfo-named/He replaces Ken Sunshine.It's Virgin's third high-level departure in the past two months. The vice presidents of propulsion and safety left in December.
Well, Branson it still putting on a show of confidence but the proof is in the pudding. I have to imagine they're about due for another test flight by now...
what is the SNC exposure in this fiasco. will the ( financial ) buck stop with them if SS2 cannot be made to work or do they have an out?
Quote from: banjo on 02/19/2014 09:12 pmwhat is the SNC exposure in this fiasco. will the ( financial ) buck stop with them if SS2 cannot be made to work or do they have an out?That is a very good question. Also, what are the performance and safety implications for Dream Chaser if the hybrid motors are proving to fall short?
Richard Branson has reiterated his plan to fly with his children on the inaugural flight of his long-planned commercial space operation, Virgin Galactic, despite the relatively untested nature of the technology and a departure date which has slipped repeatedly."Everybody who signs up knows this is the birth of a new space programme and understands the risks that go with that," Branson said in an interview for Weekend magazine at Virgin Galactic's base in the Mojave desert north of Los Angeles. "But every person wants to go on the first flight."While insisting his plan is credible and the first flight, reaching 62 miles above the Earth, will take place later this year – he has previously promised it for this autumn – Branson admits how difficult it has been to overcome the exacting safety expectations of a commercial space operation.He said: "The biggest worry I had was re-entry. Nasa has lost about 3% of everyone who's gone into space, and re-entry has been their biggest problem."For a government-owned company, you can just about get away with losing 3% of your clients. For a private company you can't really lose anybody. Nobody we met had anything but the conventional risky re-entry mechanism that Nasa had. We were waiting for someone to come up with one that was foolproof."The journalist and author Tom Bower, who has just published a biography of Branson, says he believes SpaceShipTwo's engine will need to be redesigned before it can achieve Branson's stated aims, making a full-blown space flight by autumn extremely unlikely."The rocket still hasn't flown at the required speed and to the required height," Bower said. "The point about his rocket is it's very primitive. He's burning rubber with nitrous oxide, and it's never been done before for that size of rocket."For the last 10 years he'd been trying to make it work for the extended rocket and it just isn't working. Where's the evidence he can make it work in the next six months?"
I don't understand how "informed consent" can ever be applied to children. Presumably this is one of those situations where their parent/guardian can consent on their behalf.
So here we have seemingly two opposing viewpoints on their progress.QuoteRichard Branson has reiterated his plan to fly with his children on the inaugural flight of his long-planned commercial space operation, Virgin Galactic, despite the relatively untested nature of the technology and a departure date which has slipped repeatedly."Everybody who signs up knows this is the birth of a new space programme and understands the risks that go with that," Branson said in an interview for Weekend magazine at Virgin Galactic's base in the Mojave desert north of Los Angeles. "But every person wants to go on the first flight."While insisting his plan is credible and the first flight, reaching 62 miles above the Earth, will take place later this year – he has previously promised it for this autumn – Branson admits how difficult it has been to overcome the exacting safety expectations of a commercial space operation.He said: "The biggest worry I had was re-entry. Nasa has lost about 3% of everyone who's gone into space, and re-entry has been their biggest problem."For a government-owned company, you can just about get away with losing 3% of your clients. For a private company you can't really lose anybody. Nobody we met had anything but the conventional risky re-entry mechanism that Nasa had. We were waiting for someone to come up with one that was foolproof."The journalist and author Tom Bower, who has just published a biography of Branson, says he believes SpaceShipTwo's engine will need to be redesigned before it can achieve Branson's stated aims, making a full-blown space flight by autumn extremely unlikely."The rocket still hasn't flown at the required speed and to the required height," Bower said. "The point about his rocket is it's very primitive. He's burning rubber with nitrous oxide, and it's never been done before for that size of rocket."For the last 10 years he'd been trying to make it work for the extended rocket and it just isn't working. Where's the evidence he can make it work in the next six months?"http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/feb/21/richard-branson-first-virgin-galactic-space-flight
