Space Ship Two - General Thread

[docmordrid]

l'd imagine VSS Voyager won't get too far until the tests of VSS Enterprise have achieved design lock.  They've already had to make mods like strakes in the nose,  so....

[gam]

hi,

Thanks for info.

gam

[Garrett]

New RocketMotorTwo hot-fire:
http://www.scaled.com/projects/rocketmotortwo_hot-fire_test_summaries

Fire: 08
Date: 29 November 11

Objectives:
Perform eighth full scale flight design RM2 hot-fire
All systems evaluation
Modified pressurization schedule
Fuel formulation evaluation
Nozzle evaluation
Motor structural evaluation
Valve/injector performance evaluation

Results:
All objectives completed. Performed 10 second and then 58 second hot fires.

Thanks to @Suborbi_Science on Twitter for linking to the following article:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2011/12/13/vg-news-latest-rocketmotortwo-hot-firing-summary/

[MP99]

The article, as otherwise-void of details as it is, has the answer right there: the tails stalled.  Without lift from the tails (in this case, the vector of that lift is downward, creating a positive pitch rate), the nose dropped.  The question is REALLY, "Why did the tails stall?"  Where they set at an improper angle at release?  Was release too slow? Etc.

Funny, I read it the other way as it says: "the Spaceship experienced a downward pitch rate that caused a stall of the tails"
So for me it was the initial downward pitch that caused the tail stall and not the other way around. Though I'm no pilot, so I'm not really sure how it works.

Wouldn't one have to suspect the extra ballast as causing the initial pitch rate?

Cheers, Martin

[Moe Grills]

The article, as otherwise-void of details as it is, has the answer right there: the tails stalled.  Without lift from the tails (in this case, the vector of that lift is downward, creating a positive pitch rate), the nose dropped.  The question is REALLY, "Why did the tails stall?"  Where they set at an improper angle at release?  Was release too slow? Etc.

Funny, I read it the other way as it says: "the Spaceship experienced a downward pitch rate that caused a stall of the tails"
So for me it was the initial downward pitch that caused the tail stall and not the other way around. Though I'm no pilot, so I'm not really sure how it works.

Wouldn't one have to suspect the extra ballast as causing the initial pitch rate?

Cheers, Martin

I think the SC engineers already know, but they're not saying.
They're certainly more knowledgeable about it than we are.
Hey!
... Mankind has been gliding successfully with various
aeronautical craft for over 150 years, there are few if any surprises left
in that field, or in the science of physics that measure, analyze & explain
it all.

[yg1968]

This isn't new (September 14th 2011) but hasn't been linked before:
http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=32453
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1109/14/pmt.01.html

MORGAN: Let's turn to one of your great passions at the moment. Space travel. Virgin Galactic is well under way now to getting the first of its vessels into the ether.

Bring me up to date with where you are, Richard. When do you expect to take your first spaceflight?

BRANSON: [...]The rocket tests are going extremely well. And so I think that we're now on track for, you know, a launch within 12 months of today. And you know I think that -- you know, this could be the beginning of a whole new era of space travel which will be commercial space travel.[...]

It's interesting that Branson made a point of saying the rocket tests are going well since there was some rumors that the tests (especially the one on March 24 2011) of the hybrid motors were not going well.

[yg1968]

Here is a link to the payload user guide for SS2 (updated on December 6 2011):
http://www.virgingalactic.com/uploads/VG_Web_PayloadUsersGuide_20111206.pdf

[BrightLight]

The author states that he has seen SS2 mid section open for the installation of the rocket motors, here's the link:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/news/pm-visits-mojaves-burgeoning-private-spaceport

"—SpaceShipTwo and WhiteKnightTwo—were in various states of disassembly on my visit—the mother ship for its annual inspection and overhaul, the spaceship with its mid-section open to the ceiling, awaiting installation of its nitrous-oxide tank and solid-fuel rocket motor. Scaled is notoriously cagey about its test-flight schedule, but word is the spaceship could begin powered flights by the end of the year."

It would be good to see the ship fired-up

[JohnFornaro]

"What drove Orville and Wilbur to Kitty Hawk in 1893," Witt told PM, "was freedom from encroachment of the press, freedom from industrial espionage, and a steady breeze. The fact that we were able to keep this under wraps for nearly nine years says that we still enjoy the three elements that took Orville and Wilbur to Kitty Hawk."

Now, if they could just relocate Congress and put a big vent on the Capitol to re-direct all the hot air, they could improve their "breeze ratio".

But seriously, good to read about the updates.  If Mr. Allen can be persuaded to put a flyable vehicle under his Stratolaunch, I think they'd be on to something.

[simonbp]

"What drove Orville and Wilbur to Kitty Hawk in 1893," Witt told PM, "was freedom from encroachment of the press, freedom from industrial espionage, and a steady breeze. The fact that we were able to keep this under wraps for nearly nine years says that we still enjoy the three elements that took Orville and Wilbur to Kitty Hawk."

Hopefully they are better businessmen than the Wrights, as they were pretty pathetic at it (in addition to being hyper-paranoid and unable to think long term).

[dcporter]

"...word is the spaceship could begin powered flights by the end of the year."

Start powered flights by EOY 2012, isn't that dramatically to the right of the last estimates?

[Moe Grills]

"...word is the spaceship could begin powered flights by the end of the year."

Start powered flights by EOY 2012, isn't that dramatically to the right of the last estimates?

Sigh! If that is correct, Sir Richard Branson and his father will not journey into suborbital space this year.

Well? We can hope that SS2 will start regular service by the year 2020? 2030? 2040? 2050? 2060?

[Garrett]

"...word is the spaceship could begin powered flights by the end of the year."

Start powered flights by EOY 2012, isn't that dramatically to the right of the last estimates?

*Sigh*, yes.
About 6 months ago I posted a comment where I attached a Gantt chart speculating future VG/Scaled milestones, based on media information available at the time.
The chart had powered flights beginning in Q1 2012 and test flights to 100km in Q3 2012. It now looks like those dates can be shifted by up to 12 months to the right.

[vt_hokie]

The chart had powered flights beginning in Q1 2012 and test flights to 100km in Q3 2012. It now looks like those dates can be shifted by up to 12 months to the right.

Government 1, Private space 0?  For all the bravado, so far this commercial stuff hasn't produced much more than hype.

[Garrett]

The chart had powered flights beginning in Q1 2012 and test flights to 100km in Q3 2012. It now looks like those dates can be shifted by up to 12 months to the right.

Government 1, Private space 0?  For all the bravado, so far this commercial stuff hasn't produced much more than hype.

Apples and oranges and you should know that.
Besides, government programs also drag out over painfully long periods and they also have their own form of hype, mainly political.

And by "commercial" I get the feeling you're lumping orbital companies in with suborbital companies, which is pretty disingenuous. The latter is a whole new endeavour which has no true precedent among past government programs.

If you want to keep scores, then it's probably more like:
Government 1 (X-15), Private space 1 (SS1).
But it's a silly comparison and a silly game to play.

[Danderman]

The chart had powered flights beginning in Q1 2012 and test flights to 100km in Q3 2012. It now looks like those dates can be shifted by up to 12 months to the right.

Government 1, Private space 0?  For all the bravado, so far this commercial stuff hasn't produced much more than hype.

Bottom line: in your everyday life, you depend on commercial enterprise to meet your requirements. I have no idea why, when it comes to space transportation, your ideology is no longer compatible with your practice.

[Atlan]

Well at least you have to admit, that especially SpaceX had a big mouth up until now delivered nothing really substantial. If they succeed i will cheer them as well, but from todays standpoint.....
Same is with SS2...its a never ending story...lets see if they even begin testing in 2013.

Launch speak louder then words as it is said.

[JohnFornaro]

... It now looks like those dates can be shifted by up to 12 months to the right.

Government 1, Private space 0?  For all the bravado, so far this commercial stuff hasn't produced much more than hype.

? 

I would just revise that to Government 0, Private space 0. 

WRT launching people to LEO as of today.

[Danderman]

Well at least you have to admit, that especially SpaceX had a big mouth up until now delivered nothing really substantial. If they succeed i will cheer them as well, but from todays standpoint.....

The same could have been said for the Boeing 787, which was over 3 years late.

Does this mean that you think the government should design and build all aircraft?

[Atlan]

Well at least you have to admit, that especially SpaceX had a big mouth up until now delivered nothing really substantial. If they succeed i will cheer them as well, but from todays standpoint.....

The same could have been said for the Boeing 787, which was over 3 years late.

Does this mean that you think the government should design and build all aircraft?

Not at all. All i wanted to say is that commercial space does not better up until now then goverment agencies. But many people act as if it would.