Author Topic: Stratolaunch: General Company and Development Updates and Discussions (Read 1052273 times)

savuporo · « **Reply #80 on:** 12/13/2011 06:37 pm »

Quote from: Space Junkie on 12/13/2011 06:30 pm

If nothing else, Burt gets to build a huge airplane...

Didnt he retire ??

Space Junkie · « **Reply #81 on:** 12/13/2011 06:39 pm »

Quote from: savuporo on 12/13/2011 06:37 pm

Quote from: Space Junkie on 12/13/2011 06:30 pm
If nothing else, Burt gets to build a huge airplane...
Didnt he retire ??

He's doing this one for fun in his home hobby shop.

jongoff · « **Reply #82 on:** 12/13/2011 06:40 pm »

It's good to see that Paul understands the order of magnitude of investment he's going to need to put into this to make it work.

~Jon

Namechange User · « **Reply #83 on:** 12/13/2011 06:40 pm »

LOL, I bet some peoples heads are exploding at this moment because all their assumptions about everything have been turned on their head to some degree....

Jason1701 · « **Reply #84 on:** 12/13/2011 06:41 pm »

I'd love to hear OV's prediction as well. Will they get customers and turn a profit?

rcoppola · « **Reply #85 on:** 12/13/2011 06:43 pm »

Interesting but a bit perplexing and a bit disappointing. (not that I have a right to be, it's their show)

As for Space X, do they really need another effort? Crewed dragon (including propulsive landing variant), M1D, F9H, possibly Red Dragon and a 3rd alternate launch port seems like quite a bit over the next few years.

Jason1701 · « **Reply #86 on:** 12/13/2011 06:44 pm »

Allen noting that the partner companies are not investing any of their own money.

Confusador · « **Reply #87 on:** 12/13/2011 06:45 pm »

Good to see Griffith honest about the drawbacks of the airplane . Advantages are on the operational side.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #88 on:** 12/13/2011 06:45 pm »

Interesting that SpaceX (and Scaled and Dynetics) will be subcontractors, not investors... Helps with revenue streams. (SpaceX already has a lot on their plate, so another investment would be difficult for them.)

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #89 on:** 12/13/2011 06:48 pm »

A fair amount of shuttle references and ex shuttle involvement - which is refreshing compared to the snubs by Branson's crews.

Some questions.

Still in discussions on actual launch site.

Not going to give numbers on the business model.

Mike doesn't know if this is a "better" way to launch humans. Notes some advantages/limitations. (+Weather -Growth).

Burt - air launch is big for suborbit. For orbital it's 5-10 percent better than ground launch.

Paul Allen is head, rest are all subcontractors. They think they have a lot of customers potentially. Notes the Russians are charging $63m a seat.

Don't want to give competition any numbers or technical information.

reesekw · « **Reply #90 on:** 12/13/2011 06:50 pm »

This was a great idea when it was called Pegasus.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #91 on:** 12/13/2011 06:51 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 12/13/2011 06:00 pm

Not only that, but how do you load the crew into the dragon?

Not sure, but I'm sure a broom-stick will be involved.

jongoff · « **Reply #92 on:** 12/13/2011 06:54 pm »

Looks like they're trading 4 or 5 Merlin engines, trading various methods to do the turn into the right flight path angle, and currently not baselining first stage reusability (though open to the possibility if it looks good in the trades).

~Jon

jongoff · « **Reply #93 on:** 12/13/2011 06:56 pm »

I like the reference to payloads made with unskilled labor at home...

~Jon

Robotbeat · « **Reply #94 on:** 12/13/2011 06:56 pm »

Burt: "There's a number of payloads that are easily built with unskilled labor at home."

jongoff · « **Reply #95 on:** 12/13/2011 06:58 pm »

It's also interesting to see that they're using this to go after the Delta II market that OSC's Antares vehicle was also going after...

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #96 on:** 12/13/2011 07:01 pm »

Mike: It's well known I've been critical of some aspects of commercial space, where funding is given ahead of achievements (or close to that - was standard Mr Griffin

Thinks Paul Allen has demostrated the quality of being able to continue through the failures they will have.

--

Booster will be a Falcon 4 or 5.

Not yet at the PDR stage.

It exists in 100s of detailed drawings. Need a building big enough to build it. Have acquired two 747s.

Initial test flights for aircraft 2015. Initial launch 2016.

Not sure of main customer yet. Mike notes comm sats. Thinks they compare to Delta II performance as a gap in the market (what about Antares??). Burt says home made sats?

Initially this will be unmanned cargo, not to the ISS. NASA have strict Visiting Vehicle requirements.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #97 on:** 12/13/2011 07:03 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 12/13/2011 06:15 pm

Quote from: mr. mark on 12/13/2011 06:11 pm
I'm hoping that this takes off from Spaceport America. What a great idea that would be and would get them into hosting orbital operations. If this can be modified for a manned Dragon then I see Virgin Galactic jumping aboard SpaceX Dragon operations. Too soon to tell.

I hope KSC and VAFB. no need add more duplicate facilities.

Do you think Vandenburg's runway is wide enough for this thing? The wingspan is over twice the runway width.

corrodedNut · « **Reply #98 on:** 12/13/2011 07:04 pm »

I vote for Burt Rutan and Mike Griffin as the new "Odd Couple".

mr. mark · « **Reply #99 on:** 12/13/2011 07:04 pm »

Interesting, I'm assuming they will be using a Dragon spacecraft to ISS. What would be the difference? Not sure what Mike is on about?