I still just find it astounding that so many think we should just "go commercial" as if it exists (partially based on the perpetuated internet myth and ill-formed bloggers) but government should pay for it all and then when something truly commercial happens, it met with skepticism and arm-chair quaterbacking, when none of those questions were asked (either out of ignorance, a reluctance to want to know the truth or both) for government-funded "commercial".
Yeah, Dynetics is doing the SE&I of the overall system.
Wonder if the Stratolaunch carrier aircraft is capable of ferrying something like a empty 10m diameter FXX core stage? If it does, than SpaceX will probably pay for the service. Guess the 6m diameter FX core shouldn't be a problem as a ferry payload.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 12/14/2011 12:36 amQuote from: GncDude on 12/14/2011 12:27 amExcellent. The more companies working on space launch with NASA out of equation the better!Except what are they going to launch? We have Delta IV (possibly also remnants of Delta II), Atlas V, Falcon 9, Taurus II Antares, and now Stratalaunch plus other people seriously vying for a medium-to-heavy launch service including Blue Origin and ATK (not just Liberty). Those are just the domestic folks. You also have Soyuz, Proton, Ariane 5, Indian, and Chinese launch vehicles. It's getting pretty crowded, here!I think it's a really cool concept, but what the heck are these going to all launch? The EELVs were already having a hard time finding payloads just by themselves...Everyone loves to make a big sexy rocket, and wings are icing on the cake! They are clearly pushing for new or greatly expanded markets with this. I'm not going to bet against them.Not only are there not enough payloads- there are not enough tourists. The only proof you need is that the Russians are not flying any. And don't be fooled into thinking that NASA and RSA need all the seats - I can guarantee that if a paying customer showed up who wasn't a nutcase the Russians would find a way to take their money and launch them. The problem is that they have run out of people with sufficient funds who can invest the amount of training time that is required. Think about what this means for the "tourist" launch companies - they will have to SIGNIFICANTLY reduce below Soyuz and/or not train them as much as a spaceflight participant.
Quote from: GncDude on 12/14/2011 12:27 amExcellent. The more companies working on space launch with NASA out of equation the better!Except what are they going to launch? We have Delta IV (possibly also remnants of Delta II), Atlas V, Falcon 9, Taurus II Antares, and now Stratalaunch plus other people seriously vying for a medium-to-heavy launch service including Blue Origin and ATK (not just Liberty). Those are just the domestic folks. You also have Soyuz, Proton, Ariane 5, Indian, and Chinese launch vehicles. It's getting pretty crowded, here!I think it's a really cool concept, but what the heck are these going to all launch? The EELVs were already having a hard time finding payloads just by themselves...Everyone loves to make a big sexy rocket, and wings are icing on the cake! They are clearly pushing for new or greatly expanded markets with this. I'm not going to bet against them.
Excellent. The more companies working on space launch with NASA out of equation the better!
I applaud Mr Allen's willingness to invest (yet again) in space flight. We can't get enough people like him.It may not be the architecture I'd choose, but it's still interesting and workable. Plus it's his money. I wonder: is Gary Hudson involved at all? His company AirLaunch LLC were until recently experimenting with air-dropped liquid fuel launchers, and also involved in T/Space, (with Scaled Composites), looking at a very similar concept. If it was up to me, I'd at least hire him as a consultant on this project.
Like some others here, I am skeptical about the cost effectiveness of air launched rockets. Pegasus has been doing this for twenty years, and it is still expensive per pound. If air launch has potential, why hasn't Orbital Sciences put more effort into Pegasus' costs, instead of going after conventional liquid fuel rockets?
Quote from: kkattula on 12/14/2011 01:35 amI wonder: is Gary Hudson involved at all? His company AirLaunch LLC were until recently experimenting with air-dropped liquid fuel launchers, and also involved in T/Space, (with Scaled Composites), looking at a very similar concept. If it was up to me, I'd at least hire him as a consultant on this project.I was going to say, I wonder what the t/Space folks think of this?
I wonder: is Gary Hudson involved at all? His company AirLaunch LLC were until recently experimenting with air-dropped liquid fuel launchers, and also involved in T/Space, (with Scaled Composites), looking at a very similar concept. If it was up to me, I'd at least hire him as a consultant on this project.
Quote from: quanthasaquality on 12/14/2011 04:34 amLike some others here, I am skeptical about the cost effectiveness of air launched rockets. Pegasus has been doing this for twenty years, and it is still expensive per pound. If air launch has potential, why hasn't Orbital Sciences put more effort into Pegasus' costs, instead of going after conventional liquid fuel rockets?Space launch is such an interesting field. I wonder where computers or even airplanes would be if people in those fields were as used to drawing hasty generalizations from single data points."Sam Langley's Aerodrome didn't work out, so that obviously shows that heavier than air flight can't work"...~Jon
Quote from: jongoff on 12/14/2011 04:43 amQuote from: quanthasaquality on 12/14/2011 04:34 amLike some others here, I am skeptical about the cost effectiveness of air launched rockets. Pegasus has been doing this for twenty years, and it is still expensive per pound. If air launch has potential, why hasn't Orbital Sciences put more effort into Pegasus' costs, instead of going after conventional liquid fuel rockets?Space launch is such an interesting field. I wonder where computers or even airplanes would be if people in those fields were as used to drawing hasty generalizations from single data points."Sam Langley's Aerodrome didn't work out, so that obviously shows that heavier than air flight can't work"...~JonLOL.Pegasus has a pretty small payload, about 10% of this new vehicle's. I expect many of the operational costs of air launch won't scale up with payload size.
Honestly this concept seems so crazy that it simply must work. Or at least be tried so that humanity can have the dignity to say that we attempted to make it fly.
