Swiss Space Systems - reusable air-launched vehicle

[Danderman]

It is not very clear from article whether these are new NK39 or refurbished ones from 70s. Can't find anything on web about them still being manufactured.

These would be old engines in practice. Perhaps there is some arm waving about building new ones in the future.

[MTom]

It is not very clear from article whether these are new NK39 or refurbished ones from 70s. Can't find anything on web about them still being manufactured.

These would be old engines in practice. Perhaps there is some arm waving about building new ones in the future.

It could have also a meaning that this engine (like NK33) has never flown since it has been developed.

[Moe Grills]

It is not very clear from article whether these are new NK39 or refurbished ones from 70s. Can't find anything on web about them still being manufactured.

These would be old engines in practice. Perhaps there is some arm waving about building new ones in the future.

It could have also a meaning that this engine (like NK33) has never flown since it has been developed.

You can be sure they'll be "static test fired" when the time comes. But you leave the impression that the integration into the airframe and operation are not satisfactory to you. You are entitled to that view, just don't buy any passenger tickets to fly onboard the thing if you feel uncomfortable with it.

[MTom]

It is not very clear from article whether these are new NK39 or refurbished ones from 70s. Can't find anything on web about them still being manufactured.

These would be old engines in practice. Perhaps there is some arm waving about building new ones in the future.

It could have also a meaning that this engine (like NK33) has never flown since it has been developed.

You can be sure they'll be "static test fired" when the time comes. But you leave the impression that the integration into the airframe and operation are not satisfactory to you. You are entitled to that view, just don't buy any passenger tickets to fly onboard the thing if you feel uncomfortable with it.

You read a little bit more from my wiriting what I said.
Whether this engine will be ok for this purpose or not, is out of my informations.

I was thinking about things:
- There should be some reason why NK39 was never used after it was developed. This decision was made because of "something", that's not only "happened".
- NK33 seems to have some conceptual problem, see here.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35950.msg1284177#msg1284177
- NK33 was never used after its development too.

Maybe there isn't any dependencies, maybe there is. Time will show it.

And why did you feel necessary to reply with arrogant words to my post, I don't know.

[Moe Grills]

It is not very clear from article whether these are new NK39 or refurbished ones from 70s. Can't find anything on web about them still being manufactured.

These would be old engines in practice. Perhaps there is some arm waving about building new ones in the future.

It could have also a meaning that this engine (like NK33) has never flown since it has been developed.

You can be sure they'll be "static test fired" when the time comes. But you leave the impression that the integration into the airframe and operation are not satisfactory to you. You are entitled to that view, just don't buy any passenger tickets to fly onboard the thing if you feel uncomfortable with it.

You read a little bit more from my wiriting what I said.
Whether this engine will be ok for this purpose or not, is out of my informations.

I was thinking about things:
- There should be some reason why NK39 was never used after it was developed. This decision was made because of "something", that's not only "happened".
- NK33 seems to have some conceptual problem, see here.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35950.msg1284177#msg1284177
- NK33 was never used after its development too.

Maybe there isn't any dependencies, maybe there is. Time will show it.

And why did you feel necessary to reply with arrogant words to my post, I don't know.

  Arrogance?? ...Maybe my fault was pointing out obvious things to dump and load on to this internet site. Maybe I have too much time on my hands. Oh well...O guess we are all armchair enthusiasts with no real chance to fly in space in our lives.
But I think this Swiss project is rather interesting and promising; more so than Virgin Galactic. For those in the future who can afford to pay for the privilege.

[MTom]

If you don't find appropriate people discussing more about VG as S3, please post it directly.
Maybe you get also an anwer.
Maybe you can achieve more interest for this company.

But "attack" me because I wrote 3 sentences, nothing offending :
1. A simpe question:
"Because of the NK-33-story of Antares or are there other reasons for this statement? Only a question."

2. I made my question more precise, given a fact around this theme:
"I read it: nearly the same situation as NK-33, isn't it?"

3. A simple opinion about an other fact:
"It could have also a meaning that this engine (like NK33) has never flown since it has been developed."

 

P.S: (deleted as unnecessary)

[Lar]

Not deleteing, (yet)  but... increase excellence to each other, please.

[ChrisWilson68]

I think this Swiss project is rather interesting and promising; more so than Virgin Galactic. For those in the future who can afford to pay for the privilege.

Personally, I find Virgin Galactic more interesting and promising for the simple reason that they have a demonstrated source of funding and Swiss Space Systems does not.  Unfortunately, in the commercial space sector there are dozens of small companies that have popped up, failed to get anywhere close to the funding they needed, and disappeared.

Swiss Space Systems seems to be in the phase where they have some seed capital but they're looking for the big bucks it would take to actually fly to space.  Good luck to them, but I won't get very excited until they succeed in raising the money they need to actually put a person into suborbital space.

Virgin Galactic's funding is not unlimited and all their delays and the recent tragedy have made it unclear whether they'll be able to continue to commercial service; still, they're far closer to being able to do so than a company like Swiss Space Systems.

[Danderman]

Since the Nk series of engines has a track record of rapid disassembly during operation, using an NK-43 with passengers aboard could be problematic.

[ChrisWilson68]

Since the Nk series of engines has a track record of rapid disassembly during operation, using an NK-43 with passengers aboard could be problematic.

I doubt Swiss Space Systems has much invested in their engine choice at this point.  Recent events might cause them to change that decision.

[Danderman]

Since the Nk series of engines has a track record of rapid disassembly during operation, using an NK-43 with passengers aboard could be problematic.

I doubt Swiss Space Systems has much invested in their engine choice at this point.  Recent events might cause them to change that decision.

Any ideas on a replacement engine for NK-43 in the same class?

[simonbp]

2x Vikings? Sure, they would have to restart the production line, but that's effectively true for NK-43 too...

[Kryten]

2x Vikings? Sure, they would have to restart the production line, but that's effectively true for NK-43 too...

Isn't that basically Vikas? They're still in full-scale production.

[Vultur]

Apparently Swiss Space Systems will start offering 'vomit comet' zero-g flights in 2015:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/11/25/s3-gravity-flights-switzerland/

[nimbostratus]

Since the Nk series of engines has a track record of rapid disassembly during operation, using an NK-43 with passengers aboard could be problematic.

Any ideas on a replacement engine for NK-43 in the same class?

You mistook NK-43 for NK-39, and started to question on that basis.

[Danderman]

Since the Nk series of engines has a track record of rapid disassembly during operation, using an NK-43 with passengers aboard could be problematic.

Any ideas on a replacement engine for NK-43 in the same class?

You mistook NK-43 for NK-39, and started to question on that basis.

Correct, I meant the 40 ton NK-39 vacuum engine. Is there some other similar engine that could be used in its place?

[fatjohn1408]

The company will IPO soon.
In addition you will be able to purchase zero g flights on their Airbus 300. Selling 4000 for about 1500$ for the early birds, later prices will rise to 2500$. Off course there are also first class tickets selling for more 

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/S3_offers_general_public_chance_to_be_part_of_the_Swiss_space_adventure_999.html

Edit: All packages (worth 11 M CHF) appear to have been sold out.

[Danderman]

In addition you will be able to purchase zero g flights on their Airbus 300.

Does Swiss Space Systems actually have an Airbus 300?

[SwissCheese]

In addition you will be able to purchase zero g flights on their Airbus 300.

Does Swiss Space Systems actually have an Airbus 300?

From what I heard, they are still negotiating, and they might actually need something bigger, such as an A340.

Also heard that one should not take every detail of the promotional video as a fact set-in-stone. In the video, they showed on purpose some differences from the actual design.

[SwissCheese]

Actually on S-3 zero G flights website, the french version of the "Medical and general Informaton for microgravity fights" specifies "Airbus A340":

https://zerog.s-3.ch/javax.faces.resource/docs/fr/s3-medical-info.pdf.htm?ln=default&v=2_4

The English version only states "Airbus"

https://zerog.s-3.ch/javax.faces.resource/docs/en/s3-medical-info.pdf.htm?ln=default&v=2_4