Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Space Tourism Industry Gains New Competitor

Posted by Zonk on Thu Mar 27, 2008 02:25 PM
from the going-on-up dept.
Space Businesses Transportation
mattnyc99 writes "There's a new entry in the race for the first space tourism jet: XCOR Aerospace, a California-based rocket builder. The company says its clean-burning, two-seat Lynx spacecraft will lift off by 2010. After we only saw a mockup of Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo a couple months back, you'd think this was serious competition in the 'New Space' race, but these photos show that Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites is well on its way with construction."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] SpaceShipTwo Design and Pics Released 245 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Designs and photos for Scaled Composites and Virgin Galactic's new suborbital spacecraft, SpaceShipTwo, and its carrier aircraft, WhiteKnightTwo, have been released." Lots of specs and numbers if you're interested in that sort of thing although nothing hugely detailed.
Submission: SpaceShipTwo Keeps Building With New Competition by mattnyc99 (1008511)
[+] TAAS Company Presents New Orbital Space Plane 80 comments
RobGoldsmith writes "The TAAS Company have released details on their new Orbital Space Plane. The new design has many attributes to set it apart from its rivals. One highlight is the integrated Safety System; this is where an escape vehicle can eject from the main body of the craft then fly home safely. They claim: 'With the system's performance capability, economical first stage tow and independence from ground launch facilities, it can offer the lowest price. It also offers the safest flight.' Could this spaceship rival Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo?" Reader wooferhound points out related news from XCOR Aerospace (which we've discussed previously), that they're beginning to take orders for seats on their own suborbital flights, with test runs planned for 2010. Seats will be going for around $95,000 each, less than half the cost of the first tickets for SpaceShipTwo.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Space Tourism Industry Gains New Competitor 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Two Notes (Score:4, Interesting)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Thursday March 27 2008, @02:26PM (#22885216) Homepage Journal
    As far as I know Virgin and Scaled Composites are the same endeavor, they are both signed to a two year deal to build SpaceShipTwo.

    Also, it should be noted that there was a an accident involving two deaths last year [slashdot.org] at Scaled Composites and prior to that their buyout by Northrup Grumman [slashdot.org].

    Honestly, I kind of expected that endeavor to fail as a result of those two news stories, I'm pleased to find out they are continuing on their contract although I question further contracts with Virgin.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ushering05401 (1086795)
      Somewhat O/T, but I just finished the book Strange Angel by George Pendle, which chronicles the origins of professional rocketry programs in the U.S. I have a whole new appreciation for how far we have come now that I know more about where things started.

      The book reveals some truly bizarre goings on with the founders of the rocketry movement and includes appearances by Alistair Crowley, cultists, famous sci-fi authors, communists, and a swindling L. Ron Hubbard prior to the founding of Scientology.

      I though

    • Honestly, I kind of expected that endeavor to fail as a result of those two news stories, I'm pleased to find out they are continuing on their contract although I question further contracts with Virgin.
      Sir Richard Branson has a big stake in this, both financially and in the reputation of his brand, and he's already collected $30 million in deposits from passengers. Unless there's some kind of disaster, I suspect Virgin will be in this for the long haul.

  • What's more... (Score:5, Funny)

    by an.echte.trilingue (1063180) on Thursday March 27 2008, @02:27PM (#22885234) Homepage

    its clean-burning, two-seat Lynx spacecraft will lift off by 2010
    What's more, it will include web browsing capabilities.
  • When they have more than "Artist's Conception" drawings.

    I want very badly to be excited about the private space race, but with only three serious "New Space" firms with hardware in the sky (Bigelow, SpaceX, and Scaled Composites), I'm still not sure I'll ride a spaceship before I'm dead, at least not at a price I can afford.
    • I'm sick of these companies with no real credentials claiming to build the next big rocket. Until you've got a prototype that can actually go into space, then STFU. Any jerkass can put together some drawings and animation.
      • While I commiserate with your sentiment, please note that XCOR is not a no-product company. They have built many engine designs, both internally and under contract - and more importantly, they have built and flown a rocket plane for the last few years. They have recently retired that plane, because they are working on two new designs.

        The first is the base design for the rocket racing league, and the second is the Lynx. The rocket racing league plane is what you would probably call "almost done", ie it lo
    • This Will Be Newsworthy... When they have more than "Artist's Conception" drawings.

      I want very badly to be excited about the private space race, but with only three serious "New Space" firms with hardware in the sky (Bigelow, SpaceX, and Scaled Composites), I'm still not sure I'll ride a spaceship before I'm dead, at least not at a price I can afford.

      Technically speaking, XCOR has had "hardware in the sky" since 2001, when they first flew the XCOR EZ-Rocket [wikipedia.org] rocketplane. A couple years ago the EZ-Rocket set

  • Not really that great. (Score:3, Informative)

    by WindBourne (631190) on Thursday March 27 2008, @02:35PM (#22885330) Journal
    The xcor is designed to go with 2 ppl to 63 miles, will use rockets the entire way, and hits mach 2 at the top of the peak. OTH, SSII is designed to take 8 ppl to 120 Miles, will use jet to get up to 600 MPH, and hits mach 3. In addition, the SSII can be modified to carry small cargo and launch it. It is possible for SSII to launch small rockets akin to Orbital's, but carrying more payload.

    What I am waiting to see is Virgin to decide to talk to Bigelow. In fact, I would be surprised if he has not talked to both Spacex AND bigelow. The reason is that he will want to put up a hotel and get the traffic going. Once he has traffic to a hotel, then it will make pursuing the SSIII quite a bit easier.
    • What I am waiting to see is Virgin to decide to talk to Bigelow.

      A lot of people were hoping that yesterday's announcement would have been a deal between Virgin/Scaled and XCOR. Scaled has fantastic airframe experience but minimal rocket engine experience, and it would've been ideal for XCOR (which has minimal airframe experience but great reusable rocket engine experience) to partner with them. This would've been particularly ideal in light of Scaled's recent problems with hybrid rocket engines. Oh well...
      • Hmmm. Scaled is using Spacedev's engine, but the explosion was simply the Nitrous Oxide tank giving out. It was not really an engine problem. That will take Scaled a bit of time to learn about. Likewise, XCOR's issue is one of money. But the feds are now spending a bit of money on them. Hopefully, Spacedev is also able to get some money (from private or feds) to be able to build their dream chaser.

        Actually, I am glad that scaled and xcor did not get together. They are competitors. By remaining that way, t
        • I mostly agree. I am curious about who's going to build the airframe for XCOR's new suborbital craft, though. Unless they're going to massively increase the size of the company, I suspect they won't be building it themselves. (The EZ-Rocket apparently used a Rutan Long-EZ [wikipedia.org] as its frame)
          • Just guessing, they will probably approach one of the aircraft builders out there. I would not be surprised to see them busy grabbing some of the ppl from the recently chap 7 Adams Air. Another possibility is Eclipse Air is backed by several MS guys, including Paul Allen. I would not be surprised to see Allen finally jump back into this. Keep in mind that Scaled has been an airframe builder, not a "spaceframe" builder.
    • and hits mach 2 at the top of the peak.

      it may hit mach 2, but at the top of its peak it's travelling at mach 0. =P
      • Only 0 if it's launched straight away from Earth, else the horizontal component of its velocity is non-zero at all points in the flight. /nitpick>

    • What I am waiting to see is Virgin to decide to talk to Bigelow.

      Unlikely to happen - as the investment in an orbital craft will be an order of magnitude or larger than that required for the suborbital one. Not to mention the fact that Virgin tends to follow loudly (making you think they are leading) rather than actually leading.

      What I am waiting to see is Virgin to decide to talk to Bigelow. In fact, I would be surprised if he has not talked to both Spacex AND bigelow.

      Why? SpaceX has nei

      • Yeah, yeah - there's been low fidelity demo's of the first and the last on that list. But demos aren't operational. They're barely prototypes.

        Give him credit ... do you have multiple "barely prototypes" in LEO, and is NASA contracting with you for access to the technology you are developing? I didn't think so ...
      • NASA and Air force who have monitored BOTH spacex launches, say that minor changes were needed with the craft for the last launch. In fact, the Air Force is now jumping in with both feet. It has declared falcon I to be an operational system. NASA, Air Force, and others believe that Falcon I is a real launcher. Of course, Falcon 9 remains to be seen, but other than supporting parallel engines, it has the entire same system from falcon 1.

        In addition, Bigelow has 2 test systems floating up there. The real L
    • You realize that SSIII is complete vaporware and physically cannot be based on SS1 or SS2, right? And that SS1 and SS2 aren't encountering the challenges involved in orbital craft like extreme thermal management and high levels of delta-V, right?

      SpaceX has a booster (Falcon 1) that, but for *either* a baffle or bump suppression, would have orbitted a payload (it now has both), and nonetheless reached 2/3 of the needed delta-V (the payload even separated normally at the end of the burn). SpaceX has also be

  • cover some ground (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Thelasko (1196535) on Thursday March 27 2008, @02:41PM (#22885412) Journal
    As I understand it, these companies both plan on sending people straight up and returning them to the same place they took off from. This is wonderful, but impractical for anything but a joy ride. How about creating something that lands you at some other place on the earth's surface? I don't even care if it can only travel from East to West.
    • While I also believe the usefulness of suborbital space flight is limited, please note that the announcement includes the intention of the Air Force to use flights to test new space systems in an environment that is very hard to properly simulate down here...
    • Sure - that'll be $200K for you, and $200K for your suitcase. Still want to go?
    • This is wonderful, but impractical for anything but a joy ride. How about creating something that lands you at some other place on the earth's surface?

      I'd bet this is in XCOR's eventual plans, perhaps with a future craft. In fact, in 2005 their EZ-Rocket made the first delivery of US mail [wikipedia.org] by a manned rocketplane, albeit over a relatively small distance.
  • Virgin Galactic may bet he first one to fulltime commerical spaceflight, but this industry has not even begun to bloom. It will be one of the biggest lucrative business secters in the coming decades, and I wholeheartedly look forward to the first commerical space IPO.
  • I guess it will be kind of difficult to join the mile high club with only one passenger on board at a time...then again it would be over quicker.
  • It's the ugliest spaceship I ever saw.

    Not to say it won't fly - I am sure it will - but there is some relationship between beauty and function that seems to prevent flying machines from being ugly. This is a level of ugliness I think no flying machine ever reached. And yes, that includes the LEM.

    There is something wrong with this design. I can feel it.

  • .. to making more email space available on their servers. 30mb isn't really much these days.

  • Better article; more points worth noting (Score:5, Informative)

    by FleaPlus (6935) on Thursday March 27 2008, @03:50PM (#22886260) Homepage Journal
    The linked article is a little sparse on info, so here's XCOR's press release [xcor.com] and a more informative article: XCOR Unveils New Suborbital Rocketship [space.com]

    Also, some additional points worth noting:

    • XCOR [wikipedia.org] isn't just some random wannabe company which recently hopped onto the "space tourism" bandwagon. They're a small (30-person) but well-respected private company noted for their expertise in building reusable liquid-fueled rocket engines.
    • In 2001 they first flew their XCOR EZ-Rocket [wikipedia.org], which made regular demonstration flights at air shows for a few years and in 2005 set the distance record [space.com] for a point-to-point rocket powered takeoff and landing.
    • XCOR has a reputation for not tooting its own horn, instead working quietly and being rather conservative about its announcements.
    • Their first version will go up to 61km, and they're planning on making incremental improvements to produce a second version that goes to 110km.
    • Estimated total project cost is $10 million, with a passenger ticket price of ~$100K (half of Virgin Galactic). XCOR isn't planning on selling tickets directly to customers though, instead selling to ride operators who will deal with customer themselves.
    • They already have a deal with a private research lab to fly multiple research flights for them each year.
    • This quote from XCOR chief Jeff Greason explains their philosophy quite nicely: Lynx is seen by XCOR Aerospace as one piece of a larger roadmap of vehicles -- a start small and then add performance approach -- eventually culminating in a piloted orbital system, Greason said. "We've selected the basket of technologies ... technologies that we believe position us very well for the suborbital market, but also put us on the road for later, higher-performance systems," he explained.

  • image of Earth's curvature from Lynx's cockpit (Score:4, Funny)

    by bobdotorg (598873) on Thursday March 27 2008, @03:53PM (#22886306)
    http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/7373/celestal.htm#earth [geocities.com]

    And here's the shot of Mars:
                      .
  • It looks very similar to the X-20 DynaSoar, a re-usable spaceplane that Boeing was building for the Air Force in the 1960s that was canceled as part of the Vietnam budget crunch.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-20_Dyna-Soar [wikipedia.org]

    Sub-orbital planes have very, very different needs from orbital ones, it's interesting that the design of this happens to (at least superficially) mirror the aerodynamics of the orbital X-20. Perhaps XCOR plans to collect data from the Lynx that could be applied to a followup craft with som
  • Slashdotters in general aren't familiar with the ins-and-outs of the alt.space industry, so they can be forgiven for having missed the biggest part of this story...
     
    XCOR in the past has publicly and repeatedly maintained that they had no desire whatsoever to be in the vehicle business. They wanted to be in the systems and components business. This announcement is a major change in strategic direction - and hints that possibly all is not well inside the alt.space industry.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by evanbd (210358)

      Where do you arrive at that conclusion? Having interned at XCOR, that's not at all my understanding. They are building the Rocket Racer, they built and flew the EZ-Rocket, and they've been publicly discussing Xerus in vague terms for years. (Xerus is the former public name for Lynx.) I interpret this announcement as a good thing, both for XCOR and the industry as a whole.

  • 200,000 feet (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ceoyoyo (59147) on Thursday March 27 2008, @04:26PM (#22886684)
    I guess 200,000 feet could be defined as "space." It's certainly suborbital. The X-prize required 80 km though, didn't it? That's about 262,000 feet.
  • So they are saying it won't litter debris across several Southern states when it burns?

    • Re:Pretty Impressive (Score:5, Funny)

      by garett_spencley (193892) on Thursday March 27 2008, @02:32PM (#22885294) Journal
      "Right now...unless you have more money than God, you are pretty much out of luck."

      Bad analogy.

      Linus has certainly made some coin via free stock options from Linux companies, various donations, trademark royalties etc. but he's not THAT rich.

    • Re:Pretty Impressive (Score:5, Funny)

      by moderatorrater (1095745) on Thursday March 27 2008, @02:40PM (#22885394)
      Which raises the question: can God create a vacation so expensive that He Himself cannot afford it?

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by gammygator (820041)
        If he's using the accounting system of the American government, he can borrow endlessly and get Hell to pay.
      • God doesn't need a spaceship. Keeps costs down.

      • Which raises the question: can God create a vacation so expensive that He Himself cannot afford it?
        Could God create a religion so crazy, even He couldn't believe in it?
    • You aren't getting much a space vacation with the ventures so far. A few minutes of microgravity in sub-orbit, is it really worth even a few thousand dollars?

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by wattrlz (1162603)
        These guys (and whoever's keeping them in business) seem to think so:
        • www.gozerog.com/
        • www.spaceadventures.com/
        • www.incredible-adventures.com/zerog.html

      • For most people, no. But for some people it certainly is. It's abundantly clear that there is at least a moderate size market for these flights -- enough to make the operation profitable.

        If you want a better ride, wait a bit -- but the right way to get there, especially for a small company, is to start with a smaller, lower performance vehicle. Orbital tourism will come, but trying to do it now would be akin to trying to fly across the Atlantic in about 1905 -- the industry has barely come into existen

        • You say that it's "abundantly clear". And how do you arrive at this conclusion? I've heard a bunch of people make that claim, and nobody backs it up.

          Yes, there are some millionaires who've paid several million to go to orbit. But they get to *stay there for days*. It's a whole different ballpark. You're asking people to pay an order of magnitude or two less but get five orders of magnitude less time at 1/4th the altitude and 1/10th the delta-V. How many people ride MiGs to see the curvature of the Ear
          • Now, I'm not asserting that there is no market for these launches. I just question the size of the market.

            If I recall correctly the market for suborbital sounding rocket research flights is something like $400 million a year, and even besides space tourism I imagine the emerging suborbital vehicles could take a decent bite of that market.

          • It's abundantly clear if you have access to the market research. I don't right now, but I've (some of) it. No, I won't back it up more than that. If you were in a position where that research mattered to you directly (ie an investor / employee / business partner of a relevant company), you'd have access to it to.

            Accidents are no more a given in this industry than any other transportation industry. At least in XCOR's case, the vehicle has more in common with a small private plane than historical rocket

      • Hopefully the ticket price also includes some training time.

        You'd need quite a few cycles on the vomit comet before you get the bonking-in-zero-G thing down well enough to perform under pressure in your 2 min window.

    • Re:Space tourism will be banned (Score:4, Insightful)

      by evanbd (210358) on Thursday March 27 2008, @03:08PM (#22885740)

      Why? Climbing Mt. Everest isn't banned -- and I believe there has been 1 climbing season since it was first climbed that there *hasn't* been a death. Adventure tourism regularly claims lives, and hasn't been banned. Now, I doubt the company that had a fatal accident would survive, but there are a lot of dedicated engineers working very hard to make accidents both unlikely and survivable.

      Disclaimer: I've interned at XCOR. Assuming I go back, I'll be getting a ride on this vehicle -- not as an option, but as a job requirement. It's part of the way they do safety. Anyone who works on the vehicle rides on it. That way everyone is directly motivated to work on making it safer.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.