Virgin Galactic and SpaceShipTwo Master Thread (1)

[kkattula]

Sub-orbital flight is covered by the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST). http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/

They won't need certification, just an operator license to launch and re-enter spacecraft.

There are NO passengers.  Only informed and trained Spaceflight Participants.

[mr. mark]

I'd be thinking more about if SS2 operates as advertised. We still don't know how she will fly once the candle is lit. There may be things that come up in testing. There still is a ways to go. I'll feel a lot better once powered test flights start.

[Garrett]

They won't need certification, just an operator license to launch and re-enter spacecraft.

There are NO passengers.  Only informed and trained Spaceflight Participants.

From the regulations:

§ 460.17   Verification program.
An operator must successfully verify the integrated performance of a vehicle's hardware and any software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing.

I'm no legal expert, but to me that paragraph sounds like some sort of certification requirement.

[Robotbeat]

They won't need certification, just an operator license to launch and re-enter spacecraft.

There are NO passengers.  Only informed and trained Spaceflight Participants.

From the regulations:

§ 460.17   Verification program.
An operator must successfully verify the integrated performance of a vehicle's hardware and any software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing.

I'm no legal expert, but to me that paragraph sounds like some sort of certification requirement.

Verification, not certification.

[Garrett]

They won't need certification, just an operator license to launch and re-enter spacecraft.

There are NO passengers.  Only informed and trained Spaceflight Participants.

From the regulations:

§ 460.17   Verification program.
An operator must successfully verify the integrated performance of a vehicle's hardware and any software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing.

I'm no legal expert, but to me that paragraph sounds like some sort of certification requirement.

Verification, not certification.

Again, I'm no legal expert, and so the semantics of verification/certification are not clear to me.
Sorry to drag this out, but I'm just curious. Would not the FAA have to certify [see note 1 below] that The Spaceship Company/Virgin Galactic have properly verified their spacecraft?

This discussion probably belongs to another thread, but I can't find a suitable existing one and I'm not prepared to start a new one.

note 1: among the definitions of "certify" in Merriam-Webster, I'm using this one: "to attest authoritatively as being true or as represented or as meeting a standard"

[iamlucky13]

The point to the above semantic discussion is that the FAA does not hold a spacecraft that carries "informed and trained spaceflight participants" (to quote kkattula - I don't know if the FAA uses those words) to the same standard as a commercial airliner that carries people traveling to a destination with an expectation that such a trip is a common activity and does not involve extraordinary risks. Considering the fatality rate per passenger mile, and even per trip is lower on a commercial airliner than in a car, it's fair to say there is no extraordinary risk to commercial flying. Flying into space is not a common activity. It is assumed to carry extraordinary risk.

There is still a requirement to demonstrate you deserve approval to carry passengers, but it is not the same as the certification airliners undergo. In this case, the FAA uses the term "launch license."

In addition to the higher risk acceptance, also keep in mind that Virgin Galactic will be operating in more uniform conditions. At least for the time being, they will be flying from a single airport, operating a fairly consistent flightplan, and no doubt in relatively limited meteorological conditions. A commercial airliner receives certification to fly from pretty much any location, with widely varying flight plans and in almost any weather conditions.

Plus, Virgin Galactic is actually mechanically and electronically relatively very simple compared to a modern airliner. It does have some novel features (particularly the feathered flight mode), but nowhere near the amount of hydraulic lines, actuators, hinges, bearings, wires, sensors, etc.

All of that said, however, I can't really argue with Moe Grills' skepticism that they'll be flying passengers just over a year from now, although I fall short of saying "no way."

The Aviation Week article posted after the first glide test indicated they had 7 phases of testing planned, and that glide testing was phase 3. Phase 4 is short in-flight rocket tests, Phase 5 is long duration tests, Phase 6 demonstrates exo-atmopsheric flight, and Phase 7 demonstrates safety and reliability.

I gather that Phase 7 is substantially the longest, and Aviation Week says it will probably be 50-100 flights. That means a powered flight every 4-8 days in order to complete testing by the end of 2012.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2010/10/12/05.xml&headline=Flawless%20First%20Flight%20For%20SpaceShipTwo

[Garrett]

Thanks iamlucky13 for that reply. I suppose we should leave the whole FAA approval speculation until phase 7 begins. Here's hoping we'll see phase 4 begin in the very near future.

[iamlucky13]

Thanks iamlucky13 for that reply. I suppose we should leave the whole FAA approval speculation until phase 7 begins. Here's hoping we'll see phase 4 begin in the very near future.

I wasn't really responding so much to particular elements of speculation as I was to refocus the conversation and give some background info. It was getting side-tracked into semantics about the differences between certification, verification, etc.

The interesting question is what the process SpaceShipTwo has to go through entails, not what it's called.

We don't know much about that at the moment, but one thing I can confidently say is it's not directly comparable to what a commercial airliner goes through.

[js117]

Nice article on www.Space.com

http://www.space.com/13625-virgin-galactic-spaceshiptwo-ride-passenger-experience.html


"In the history of mankind only about 500 people have astronaut wings," Ostrem said. "Virgin Galactic aims in the first year to create almost that many astronauts."

[Wyvern]

Jeez I wonder what would happen if a tourist isn't in his seat when the space plane starts to reentry the atmosphere. 

Btw am I the only one wondering if there is enough of a sustainable market to keep VG going for years.  After all once you've gone up in space once do you need to do it again.  Then again the flight only lasts about 3-4 minutes so I guess people will wont to gain more time? 

[Moe Grills]

Jeez I wonder what would happen if a tourist isn't in his seat when the space plane starts to reentry the atmosphere. 

Ever walked the aisle in an aircraft when it suddenly hits strong turbulence?

Btw am I the only one wondering if there is enough of a sustainable market to keep VG going for years.  After all once you've gone up in space once do you need to do it again.  Then again the flight only lasts about 3-4 minutes so I guess people will wont to gain more time? 

   If there isn't, we'll find out soon enough. What will happen, will happen.

Plenty of airline analogies. Ever heard of PAN AM?---- HUGHES AIRLINES?

[Garrett]

Jeez I wonder what would happen if a tourist isn't in his seat when the space plane starts to reentry the atmosphere. 

I imagine they would experience a very uncomfortable few minutes being pressed awkwardly by g forces against the floor or another particpant.

Btw am I the only one wondering if there is enough of a sustainable market to keep VG going for years.  After all once you've gone up in space once do you need to do it again.  Then again the flight only lasts about 3-4 minutes so I guess people will wont to gain more time? 

You might as well ask the same question about sky-diving, hang gliding, skiing, scuba diving, mountain climbing, and so on ...
We sort of know the answer: if people like the thrill, then they will very likely do it many times.

[Moe Grills]

You might as well ask the same question about sky-diving, hang gliding, skiing, scuba diving, mountain climbing, and so on ...
We sort of know the answer: if people like the thrill, then they will very likely do it many times.

At face value, you present a compelling case, however -
I can do those terrestrial thrills each for less than two Grand.
And I can afford it!
But it will cost you 200 thousand dollars a pop for a thrill-joy ride on the SS2.
   Hard economic times, buddy.  It sinks a lot of businesses.

[Robotbeat]

You might as well ask the same question about sky-diving, hang gliding, skiing, scuba diving, mountain climbing, and so on ...
We sort of know the answer: if people like the thrill, then they will very likely do it many times.

At face value, you present a compelling case, however -
I can do those terrestrial thrills each for less than two Grand.
And I can afford it!
But it will cost you 200 thousand dollars a pop for a thrill-joy ride on the SS2.
   Hard economic times, buddy.  It sinks a lot of businesses.

Before you have more than a handful of folks do it more than once (and after several hundred have flown), prices will begin to come down. I don't know if SpaceShipTwo will be capable of it, but I think the Lynx should be capable of per-passenger costs of less than $20,000, maybe even $10,000 (they're starting at $100,000). Virgin will be competing with that, so their price will sink, too. It might not get down to that level until a decade from now, but if there are folks who can afford the $200,000 ticket for a single ride, there are just as many who can afford several flights for a tenth that cost.

[iamlucky13]

Jeez I wonder what would happen if a tourist isn't in his seat when the space plane starts to reentry the atmosphere. 

G-forces should build up gradually as the atmosphere thickens, pushing you down to the floor and give you a little bit of time to get to your seat before movement becomes difficult. Otherwise, like Garret said, the person you end up sitting on through peak acceleration is not going to speak to you ever again.

Btw am I the only one wondering if there is enough of a sustainable market to keep VG going for years.  After all once you've gone up in space once do you need to do it again.  Then again the flight only lasts about 3-4 minutes so I guess people will wont to gain more time? 

No, you're far from the only one wondering. However, there's a lot more rich people out there than people realize, who look for novel experiences, however fleeting, are willing to spend lots of money, and in fact, take much bigger risks than they're likely to face flying on Virgin Galactic.

Did you know that over 3,000 people have climbed Mount Everest? The typical cost, including gear, permit, guide fees, and hired Sherpas to help pack your gear to the base camps, is around $50,000. Plus, you have to dedicate several months of your life to training, acclimating, climbing up to the base camps, waiting for appropriate weather, and recovering afterwards.

It's not a weekend activity like a ride on SpaceShipTwo. It's an activity only the rich can afford, which most rich people aren't physically capable of doing, and which even most of those capable of doing don't have the time and/or motivation to do.

Yet 3000 people have done it.

And 219 people have died climbing Everest (7%). In the history of human spaceflight, 18 of 430 crewmembers have died (4%). It's quite credible that given the lower complexity of a suborbital flight, their accident rate will be far below that.

By the way, Virgin Galactic isn't selling a 3-4 minute experience. They're selling a multi-day experience that includes training and health evaluations (which aside from reducing risk, enhance the sense you're doing something special), leading up to a 2+ hour long flight that culminates in 3-4 minutes of official spaceflight, and concludes in countless opportunities to brag to your friends about what you did.

So while I do often wonder if there are enough people to sustain a market for it, I have only limited skepticism they will succeed.

[Jim Davis]

Did you know that over 3,000 people have climbed Mount Everest?

The operative word here is climbed.

The typical cost, including gear, permit, guide fees, and hired Sherpas to help pack your gear to the base camps, is around $50,000. Plus, you have to dedicate several months of your life to training, acclimating, climbing up to the base camps, waiting for appropriate weather, and recovering afterwards.

In other words, climbing Mount Everest is an admirable personal achievement which says a lot of great things about the achiever.

Buying a ticket so someone can fly you to 100 km is not a great personal achievement, any more than buying a ticket to the top of Mount Everest would be.

I have no idea whether Virgin's or XCOR's business cases close or not, but the Everest analogy needs to be put to bed.

[Wyvern]

Wow thanks for the pointing out all the ways people spend money on thrills!

Did you know that over 3,000 people have climbed Mount Everest?

The operative word here is climbed.

The typical cost, including gear, permit, guide fees, and hired Sherpas to help pack your gear to the base camps, is around $50,000. Plus, you have to dedicate several months of your life to training, acclimating, climbing up to the base camps, waiting for appropriate weather, and recovering afterwards.

In other words, climbing Mount Everest is an admirable personal achievement which says a lot of great things about the achiever.

Buying a ticket so someone can fly you to 100 km is not a great personal achievement, any more than buying a ticket to the top of Mount Everest would be.

I have no idea whether Virgin's or XCOR's business cases close or not, but the Everest analogy needs to be put to bed.

Actually I do wonder if Everest climbers really care if they receive personal recognition or if they climb Everest purely to satisfy their personal thrills.  Probably depends on the person.

[dbhyslop]

Buying a ticket so someone can fly you to 100 km is not a great personal achievement, any more than buying a ticket to the top of Mount Everest would be.

If you could buy a ticket for the same $50k there'd be a hundred times as many people who would have done it by now.

There are a lot of people out there who drop that amount of money on a new SUV every year.  Obviously there are fewer who can spend $200k on something like this, but I doubt that well will dry anytime soon.

[pippin]

I believe they at least want recognition for the achievement by _themselves_. I don't think people who would climb the Everest to find out that they _can_ would feel the same sort of satisfaction if the just buy a ticket for a small space hop.

[Garrett]

The recent discussions we've been having on this thread have been very general and do not include any VG updates. However, I cannot see another suitable thread and I'm hesitating on creating a new one. Here are some of my ideas for a new thread:
- Virgin Galactic: General discussion

 - Virgin Galactic/Scaled Composites: General discussion

 - Commercial suborbital flight: General discussion

Anybody else think this is a good idea? Any preferences as to the thread title?

Cheers