Stratolaunch: General Company and Development Updates and Discussions

[Lee Jay]

Attitude.  Not altitude.

That makes no sense.  Maybe Jim meant "Latitude" which is about 40 degrees.

[Jim]

Also, Denver is a bad choice for its attitude and weather

Altitude, yes, but that's why the international runway at DIA is so long (a thousand feel longer than the SLF which is already enormous).

What's wrong with the weather?  While we have occasional problems with weather extremes, for the most part weather causes very few problems with air travel compared to other cities like Chicago and San Francisco.

And what US  launch vehicles have ground ops that operate in below freezing temp?

[go4mars]

And what US  launch vehicles have ground ops that operate in below freezing temp?

Why does it matter whether they are American launch vehicles?

[go4mars]

Attitude.  Not altitude.

That makes no sense.  Maybe Jim meant "Latitude" which is about 40 degrees.

That makes no sense in the context of sub-orbital transportation.  Lattitude only matters for orbital.  I think he meant that it's central location in the US is a negative because current rocket statistics don't allow you to overfly vast numbers of people.   The flip side is that Denver might be great initially in that it's a central hub that might be used for intercontinental transport by surrounding states as it's airport is already a very major hub with room to handle this growth (assuming the statistics about rocket failure change, allowing it's use).  Also, if it takes 2 hours to get up to operational altitude (rocket release altitude), you might be near the ocean already from Denver by then (mooting the overflight concern).     

[Lee Jay]

Also, Denver is a bad choice for its attitude and weather

Altitude, yes, but that's why the international runway at DIA is so long (a thousand feel longer than the SLF which is already enormous).

What's wrong with the weather?  While we have occasional problems with weather extremes, for the most part weather causes very few problems with air travel compared to other cities like Chicago and San Francisco.

And what US  launch vehicles have ground ops that operate in below freezing temp?

For how long does it have to be above freezing?  It's above freezing here far more than it's below.  It's 51F right now, and from the point of view of ice formation, the fact that the dew/frost points here are usually very low might be pretty beneficial.

[go4mars]

It (Denver area) isn't unique wrt wealthy or high tech or even above median

Having travelled hither and yon some in my time.  I disagree.  40% of people in Denver have a bachelor degree.  Ever spend time in Boulder? 

There has been a lot of money spent on high tech in the area (private sector and military).  Engineers and scientists usually teach their kids to be engineers and scientists.  High-tech has been a compounding there for decades.   

The reason Obama was ordered to his Denver bunker in Sept is because the rocks there are amenable to very deep tunnelling (from a geothermal gradient perspective and rock mechanics perspective).  Without spelling it out, I think that is one of the reasons so many engineers and scientist live in Denver.  It's distance from coastal attack was another historical reason so much $ goes there to be spent on high-tech. 

Here's a quote from the article on the subject:

"If and when that era begins, the Colorado spaceport would probably have an edge over Spaceport America in that it is close to more places that people would want to visit. The state also has a large population and is a major aerospace center."

From the Front range airport website:  "The state has the third largest space related economy, and ranks first in concentration of aerospace employees (Development Research Partners, 2010). Eight of the nation’s largest space-related contractors maintain a significant footprint in Colorado. In total, there are over 400 companies providing products and services. These companies employ over 163,000 personnel with a $2.8 billion annual payroll (Colorado Space Coalition, 2011). Colorado also ranks second in the nation for awarded Small Business Innovation Research Grants. The state has the second most educated workforce in the nation, and multiple universities offer graduate programs in space sciences. Finally, Colorado has an unequaled military presence with four commands in the state. These are Air Force Space Command, Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command, North American Aerospace Defense Command, and U.S. Northern Command. There are also three military bases exclusively conducting space activities; Buckley Air Force Base, Peterson Air Force Base, and Schriever Air Force Base."

"With the headquarters of the United States Air Force Space Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) already here and operational in Colorado, there are already established and functioning assets
that could be utilized to provide command and control, as well as space tracking and warning capabilities"

[Rocket Science]

I would have thought that a coastal location made more sense from a public safety perspective. I really have some pause about a fully fueled rocket attached to a massive one-off aircraft over flying populated areas. This is my opinion from a pilot’s perspective. I’m sure the FAA will have something to say about it…

[go4mars]

I’m sure the FAA will have something to say about it…

That's certain. 

"Colorado has applied to the FAA of spaceport certification of Front Range Airport, which is about 22 miles from Denver and six miles from Denver International Airport."

[go4mars]

Looks like Lockheed has a hand in this too:

"Key to an Aerospace Center is the designation of SpacePort and FTG is exploring the feasibility of such designation. An undertaking of this size requires a unified position and contributions from the full spectrum of aerospace participants.

One such participant and FTG friend is Allan Lockheed, whose father founded Lockheed Aircraft."

Also:  "Webster University and the EDC continue to promote the concept and garner industry support, potentially leveraging Lockheed Martin’s James H. Crocker’s support."

You will all have fun in this link too I imagine:
http://www.ftg-airport.com/spaceport.php

[go4mars]

Another reason to think that there might not be much of a second stage burn on the passenger stage until landing is that the front range airport says "more than quadrupling the speed of sound".  True that this doesn't exclude mach 10, but it implies lower speeds. 

Does limiting to mach 4 or 5 imply a non-ballistic trajectory for intercontinental travel?   I think it does.  What might this second stage look like assuming that constraint? 

For one, I think it means that the 1st stage is proportionally smaller than an orbital version.  (If in fact there is a 1st stage)

Anyone with knowledge or experience on things like SR-71, X-15 or other high altitude aircraft/rocket planes care to speculate aloud?     

Does 'mach 4+' and note of 'sonic booms' flip a skylon derivative back into the "more likely" category? 

[HMXHMX]

Let's get real: Stratolaunch very likely won't get FAA/AST permission to overfly CONUS from inland spaceports.  They certainly won't get permission to launch over land.  And they won't be flying people on point to point excursions.

[go4mars]

Let's get real: Stratolaunch very likely won't get FAA/AST permission to overfly CONUS from inland spaceports.  They certainly won't get permission to launch over land.  And they won't be flying people on point to point excursions.

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2011/12/08/look-out-spaceport-america-heres-comes-colorado/

If you have alternative theories as to what this is all about, please state them. 

[mrmandias]

Attitude.  Not altitude.

That makes no sense.  Maybe Jim meant "Latitude" which is about 40 degrees.

That makes no sense in the context of sub-orbital transportation.  Lattitude only matters for orbital.  I think he meant that it's central location in the US is a negative because current rocket statistics don't allow you to overfly vast numbers of people.   The flip side is that Denver might be great initially in that it's a central hub that might be used for intercontinental transport by surrounding states as it's airport is already a very major hub with room to handle this growth (assuming the statistics about rocket failure change, allowing it's use).  Also, if it takes 2 hours to get up to operational altitude (rocket release altitude), you might be near the ocean already from Denver by then (mooting the overflight concern).     

Don't overthink this.  The number one reason a company would consdier Denver, by far, would be tax credits and subsidies.  That might not be it, but that would be the way to bet.

[HMXHMX]

Let's get real: Stratolaunch very likely won't get FAA/AST permission to overfly CONUS from inland spaceports.  They certainly won't get permission to launch over land.  And they won't be flying people on point to point excursions.

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2011/12/08/look-out-spaceport-america-heres-comes-colorado/

If you have alternative theories as to what this is all about, please state them. 

It is the usual arguments made by various promoters to find state or federal funding for spaceports.  There have been many such "proposals" made over the past ten or twelve years, including the Oklahoma spaceport.  How did that work out?

[JohnFornaro]

Which is fine for the 0.1%, but has no practical applications for anyone else.

Just like airplanes and cars when they were new. 

Or travel on the first jets, which gave rise to the term "jet setters".

Nice try guys.  But what you're also saying is that if you're told that now, you need to ski in the AM and surf in the PM across the world in order to be cool and pertinant and everything else that matters, then you gotta have Stratolaunch.  It just ain't the truth.

I'm thinking that the concept will never fly.  We tried supersonics with Concorde.  It didn't work.  I do not know what purpose the announcement of this scheme serves, however.

And what US  launch vehicles have ground ops that operate in below freezing temp?

Why does it matter whether they are American launch vehicles?

Think about weather or not weather makes a difference in travel schedules in the US, rather than about the country of manufacture of the plane.

The reason Obama was ordered to his Denver bunker in Sept is because the rocks there are amenable to very deep tunnelling ...  Its distance from coastal attack was another historical reason so much $ goes there to be spent on high-tech.

That's fine, but if you're going to go all survivalist here, you need to think of a bigger picture, that of the rest of the US after the coastal areas are hit.  "Picnic" is not the word one would use.  I grew up in DC during the peak of the Cold War, and we used to plan on how to get out of town should WWIII start.  I was talking to a new friend of mine, and she related how at about the same time, her husband and her planned to go to the Washington Monument at the start of WWIII, so as to avoid dealing with the aftermath.  Point is, there's plenty of viewpoints on that matter, none of which pertain to Stratolaunch or Denver.

And this is borderline nonsense:

If and when that era begins, the Colorado spaceport would probably have an edge over Spaceport America in that it is close to more places that people would want to visit. The state also has a large population and is a major aerospace center.

People might want to visit the Moon.  Denver's got nuthin on pretty much any other launch location.  It's not really closer to Mars, either.

And that Parabolic article is an example of what's known as poopo del toro del mercado.

[go4mars]

Nice try guys.  But what you're also saying is that if you're told that now, you need to ski in the AM and surf in the PM across the world in order to be cool and pertinant and everything else that matters, then you gotta have Stratolaunch.  It just ain't the truth.

I'm thinking that the concept will never fly.  We tried supersonics with Concorde.  It didn't work.  I do not know what purpose the announcement of this scheme serves, however.

Besides the obvious difference in speed between concorde and stratolaunch, a significant advantage in going above the atmosphere is a lack of trailing sonic boom across the landscape. 

Besides, supposedly, the Lockheed Martin "Quiet Supersonic Transport" would have a sonic boom 1% as strong as concorde.  Concorde's relevence to this conversation is tenuous imo. 

I don't think we've see the end of supersonic civilian transportation, and it appears that we might get to see the dawn of hypersonic civilian transportation (whether via stratolaunch, A2, or something else). 

Of course it might be all a waste of money and bizzaire goal-less posturing, but I think it's fair to say there is a non-zero chance of a shift in aerospace methods waiting in the wings.   

 

[Jim]

It (Denver area) isn't unique wrt wealthy or high tech or even above median

Having travelled hither and yon some in my time.  I disagree.  40% of people in Denver have a bachelor degree.  Ever spend time in Boulder? 

There has been a lot of money spent on high tech in the area (private sector and military).  Engineers and scientists usually teach their kids to be engineers and scientists.  High-tech has been a compounding there for decades.   

The reason Obama was ordered to his Denver bunker in Sept is because the rocks there are amenable to very deep tunnelling (from a geothermal gradient perspective and rock mechanics perspective).  Without spelling it out, I think that is one of the reasons so many engineers and scientist live in Denver.  It's distance from coastal attack was another historical reason so much $ goes there to be spent on high-tech. 

Here's a quote from the article on the subject:

"If and when that era begins, the Colorado spaceport would probably have an edge over Spaceport America in that it is close to more places that people would want to visit. The state also has a large population and is a major aerospace center."

From the Front range airport website:  "The state has the third largest space related economy, and ranks first in concentration of aerospace employees (Development Research Partners, 2010). Eight of the nation’s largest space-related contractors maintain a significant footprint in Colorado. In total, there are over 400 companies providing products and services. These companies employ over 163,000 personnel with a $2.8 billion annual payroll (Colorado Space Coalition, 2011). Colorado also ranks second in the nation for awarded Small Business Innovation Research Grants. The state has the second most educated workforce in the nation, and multiple universities offer graduate programs in space sciences. Finally, Colorado has an unequaled military presence with four commands in the state. These are Air Force Space Command, Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command, North American Aerospace Defense Command, and U.S. Northern Command. There are also three military bases exclusively conducting space activities; Buckley Air Force Base, Peterson Air Force Base, and Schriever Air Force Base."

"With the headquarters of the United States Air Force Space Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) already here and operational in Colorado, there are already established and functioning assets
that could be utilized to provide command and control, as well as space tracking and warning capabilities"

All the USAF info is meaningless, NASA HQ is in DC, are they launching rockets there?  Those USAF bases are control centers, they don't procure or launch space systems.

Most of the save employment is related to ULA and LM.

[Jim]

And what US  launch vehicles have ground ops that operate in below freezing temp?

Why does it matter whether they are American launch vehicles?

Because it is a US spaceport.  It is no reason for foreign vehicles

[JohnFornaro]

Nice try guys.  But what you're also saying is that if you're told that now, you need to ski in the AM and surf in the PM across the world in order to be cool and pertinant and everything else that matters, then you gotta have Stratolaunch.  It just ain't the truth.

Besides the obvious difference in speed between concorde and stratolaunch, a significant advantage in going above the atmosphere is a lack of trailing sonic boom across the landscape.

And as long as we're handwaving away the "dangers" of a sonic boom, we can handwave away the slight inconveniences of a  statistically small, gamed chance of rocket failure over populated areas, such as SF, roughly on the great circle from Denver to Margaret River.  And I see that branding is important too:  Concorde is so two thousand and three, while Stratolaunch is so two thousand and Glee.  If you want to be in order to be cool and pertinant and everything else that matters, then you gotta have the right brand; never mind what it is that you're doing, or where you're supposed to be while doing it.

I see that you acknowledge: "Of course it might be all a waste of money and bizzaire goal-less posturing, but I think it's fair to say there is a non-zero chance of a shift in aerospace methods waiting in the wings."  Which also pertains to my non-zero chance of hitting the lottery.  Not to mention that "Bizzaire" might be a good name for their new airline.

Having said all that, I still think I'm fairly near the spot.  Mr. Rutan demonstrated that air launch has some utility.  Stratolaunch would be a logical scaling up of the capability, and evidence of some kind of emerging business plan.  To me, those billionaires have talked themselves into believing in its utility at least to the point of making a web site.

[go4mars]

A successor to the current stratospheric observatory (SOFIA) would be an interesting application for stratolaunch (when it isn't busy)!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_Observatory_for_Infrared_Astronomy