Virgin Galactic and SpaceShipTwo Master Thread (1)

[Robotbeat]

...
Also, I hope that the people who use Virgin Galactic will be called "space travelers" or something like that, keeping the term "astronaut" an achievement in itself.

Doubtful.

[DiggyCoxwell]

   There's some "test" that the combined Eve and Enterprise
are undergoing today.
Is it going airborne as early as today?

Sir Richard Branson has also said that the first "test" flights into space
are in eight to ten months from now.
That contradicts someone's 18 months timeline I think.

[Robotbeat]

What the heck happened to that Virgin LauncherOne thread? Why was it removed?

EDIT:I ask this because it was an interesting conversation. Was it moved? Is it somehow inappropriate for this category? Can I start another thread about the same topic? It also seems appropriate to continue discussion under this thread, since it is something that Virgin Galactic is actively pursuing. The information posted in that thread (although not the discussion itself) is easily found with a quick google for "LauncherOne."

[jimvela]

   There's some "test" that the combined Eve and Enterprise
are undergoing today.
Is it going airborne as early as today?

Sir Richard Branson has also said that the first "test" flights into space
are in eight to ten months from now.
That contradicts someone's 18 months timeline I think.

First flights will be development flights, then qualification flights, certification flights, and only then actual paying operational flights.

I'm surprised the two dates are so close together.

[bad_astra]

During Tier1 there was a pretty rapid development program with a lot of flights packed in.

[William Barton]

How much would it cost to spend 10 days "in space" via Virgin Galactic? Hmmm. Soyuz is cheaper?

[Alpha Control]

How much would it cost to spend 10 days "in space" via Virgin Galactic? Hmmm. Soyuz is cheaper?

$576 million.

5 minutes in space x 12 flights = 1 hour in space x 24 x 10 = 2880 flights.
2880 flights @ $200K ea = $576M. Soyuz is definitely cheaper per unit time.

[bad_astra]

If you only need  a few minutes for your micro-grav experiement, or for bragging rights, VG is the better deal.

[MikeMi.]

What on Earth does SS2 have to do with the Apollo missions? Absolutely shocking how Branson is pumping this crap.

With respect but I wouldnt call SS2 a crap. Its a beatuful machine and messing its name with marketing of Bransons is mistake..

[Norm Hartnett]

VSS Enterprise,  how cool is that? 

They even got the font right! 

So the first Enterprise to enter vacuum will be carrying a British flag, I would have thought you would be stoked Chris. 

In your face, dimwitted anonymous NASA bureaucrat that decided that the Space Shuttle Enterprise would be a non-operational bird.

[robertross]

In your face, dimwitted anonymous NASA bureaucrat that decided that the Space Shuttle Enterprise would be a non-operational bird.

Well, look on the bright side. It's still here with us to admire.

I'm not too keen on the name myself...would have preferred something more 'original', and it somehow takes away that intrinsic value of the shuttle models on Picard's wall...lol.

[vt_hokie]

I'll certainly follow the test flights with interest, but I remain skeptical about the long term business viability.  Can they keep a steady stream of ultra-wealthy thrill seekers coming back at a sufficient rate for the world's most expensive amusement park ride to remain profitable?  What failure rate can they tolerate?  Given the high flight rate, as much as I hope otherwise, I have to think a catastrophic failure is a matter of when, not if. 

[Jorge]

VSS Enterprise,  how cool is that? 

They even got the font right! 

So the first Enterprise to enter vacuum will be carrying a British flag, I would have thought you would be stoked Chris. 

In your face, dimwitted anonymous NASA bureaucrat that decided that the Space Shuttle Enterprise would be a non-operational bird.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

[MichaelF]

In your face, dimwitted anonymous NASA bureaucrat that decided that the Space Shuttle Enterprise would be a non-operational bird.

Death to Trekkies. BSG 4Life.

[mlorrey]

In your face, dimwitted anonymous NASA bureaucrat that decided that the Space Shuttle Enterprise would be a non-operational bird.

Well, look on the bright side. It's still here with us to admire.

I'm not too keen on the name myself...would have preferred something more 'original', and it somehow takes away that intrinsic value of the shuttle models on Picard's wall...lol.

Picard would never have a model of a space ship that made a profit on his wall, he didn't believe in money....

[Ben the Space Brit]

In your face, dimwitted anonymous NASA bureaucrat that decided that the Space Shuttle Enterprise would be a non-operational bird.

Well, look on the bright side. It's still here with us to admire.

I'm not too keen on the name myself...would have preferred something more 'original', and it somehow takes away that intrinsic value of the shuttle models on Picard's wall...lol.

Trivia note: In DS9, on a display table at the back of the commander's ready-room, there was a 1:144 model of the ISS with a shuttle docked at PMA-2.  The shuttle was, of course, the Enterprise.

FWIW, I think that the name 'Enterprise', in terms of the spirit of commercial innovation and the desire to do the new and untried, well suits SS2.  Of course, Branson chose it for the Trek chic but that doesn't undermine my point.

[William Barton]

I'll certainly follow the test flights with interest, but I remain skeptical about the long term business viability.  Can they keep a steady stream of ultra-wealthy thrill seekers coming back at a sufficient rate for the world's most expensive amusement park ride to remain profitable?  What failure rate can they tolerate?  Given the high flight rate, as much as I hope otherwise, I have to think a catastrophic failure is a matter of when, not if. 

It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. It's hard for me to believe there are all that many thousands of people willing to pay $200K for what amounts to a high-altitude airplane ride, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong. $20K I would believe in easily. $200K, I don't know. The problem for me is not the availability of so many people with that much money to burn, there are millions of millionaires around, but the necessary intersection of millionaire + thrillseeker + spacenut. What percentage of millionaires own cigarette boats, for example?

[mlorrey]

I'll certainly follow the test flights with interest, but I remain skeptical about the long term business viability.  Can they keep a steady stream of ultra-wealthy thrill seekers coming back at a sufficient rate for the world's most expensive amusement park ride to remain profitable?  What failure rate can they tolerate?  Given the high flight rate, as much as I hope otherwise, I have to think a catastrophic failure is a matter of when, not if. 

It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. It's hard for me to believe there are all that many thousands of people willing to pay $200K for what amounts to a high-altitude airplane ride, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong. $20K I would believe in easily. $200K, I don't know. The problem for me is not the availability of so many people with that much money to burn, there are millions of millionaires around, but the necessary intersection of millionaire + thrillseeker + spacenut. What percentage of millionaires own cigarette boats, for example?

Well, they've got 300 people already who have either paid the ticket in full or a significant fraction as a deposit and are contractually obligated. So that is $60 million in ticket revenue already.

I think you may get more than millionaires. People have been waiting so long for commercial space flight, I was thinking the other day that you may get a lot of retirees blowing a significant part of their retirement funds on this as the last entry on their bucket list.

[William Barton]

I'll certainly follow the test flights with interest, but I remain skeptical about the long term business viability.  Can they keep a steady stream of ultra-wealthy thrill seekers coming back at a sufficient rate for the world's most expensive amusement park ride to remain profitable?  What failure rate can they tolerate?  Given the high flight rate, as much as I hope otherwise, I have to think a catastrophic failure is a matter of when, not if. 

It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. It's hard for me to believe there are all that many thousands of people willing to pay $200K for what amounts to a high-altitude airplane ride, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong. $20K I would believe in easily. $200K, I don't know. The problem for me is not the availability of so many people with that much money to burn, there are millions of millionaires around, but the necessary intersection of millionaire + thrillseeker + spacenut. What percentage of millionaires own cigarette boats, for example?

Well, they've got 300 people already who have either paid the ticket in full or a significant fraction as a deposit and are contractually obligated. So that is $60 million in ticket revenue already.

I think you may get more than millionaires. People have been waiting so long for commercial space flight, I was thinking the other day that you may get a lot of retirees blowing a significant part of their retirement funds on this as the last entry on their bucket list.

300 is not a lot in the scheme of things. I'd be interested to know how much of that $60mln is above cost, since it will require something like 50 flights to carry that many passengers aloft. Cost per flight (ops, insurance, personnel, etc.)? And then the money above that goes to pay back the roughly $0.5bln development cost. That's why I have my doubts, but also, it's not impossible. And the most telling argument in the "not impossible" column is, Branson clearly thinks so.

[jabe]

my  two cents worth...
If all goes well for them, I think suborbital research will be where the money is.  I could see VSS Enterprise never being "glitzed up" for "tourists" but kept bare bones for research flights. 4 or so minutes of free fall sure beat 30 second spurts on the vomit comet particularly if the experiment takes "15 seconds" for the experiment to get up in running and stable.. not much time to see if it runs ok..
Going to be fun to watch..I hope they are successful and can do it quickly while the interest is high... time will tell...
jb