Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

New Pictures of White Knight Two and SpaceshipTwo

Posted by timothy on Sat Jul 05, 2008 08:58 PM
from the what-they-look-like dept.
soldeed writes "Over at the Virgin Galactic press site, there are new pictures of both White Knight Two and SpaceShip 2 during construction for media use. After seeing them, I can't help but wonder; Gee, what's in the box?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived.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.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • What new pictures? (Score:5, Informative)

    by DigitAl56K (805623) * on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:02PM (#24071667)

    I don't see any dated newer than February.

    • Not new? (Score:5, Informative)

      by CarpetShark (865376) on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:19PM (#24071793)

      Agreed. I thought maybe these were newly published photos that had been held back from the public for a few months, but I've seen at least some of them before.

      What's new here?

    • They're as exciting as looking at all the parts in a fresh-out of the box model --

      As in, not very exciting. At least you get a complete picture on the front of a model's box. Yawn.
  • OK, kinda cool, but heres the thing. 100 miles is high, but look at it compared to the globe. The radius is 4000 miles, so 100 miles is 2.5 percent of that. No air, sure. But space ? Come on. Apollo 11 went to space. This is just a good place to put satellites.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      It's ceiling is actually 110 km, not 100 miles. And 110 km is way lower than where you need to put satellites if you want them to be at all stable in orbit for any long term use (ie more than a couple months).
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        However, referencing that same link, all other countries with a space program consider space to start at 100km or 62 miles, while the US uses 50 miles. I thought that was interesting anyway.
  • Same old... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by B5_geek (638928) on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:07PM (#24071693)

    As long as we depend on cigars with wings and chemical based propellants we will only inch our way along this journey. I had higher hopes for this crew.

    • Re:Same old... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Free the Cowards (1280296) on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:14PM (#24071739)

      Such as what? The technology simply isn't there for anything else, especially not for the miniscule budget these guys have.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Launch loops can be built without any unobtainium. Though it is still in government-funded territory.

        Space elevators might have a higher cool factor than a launch loop, but I don't think it's going to be even theoretically cheaper by any significant amount compared to a launch loop. And a launch loop is still pretty cool.

        • Re:Same old... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Weaselmancer (533834) on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:36PM (#24071943)

          It's an interesting idea, but holy crap did you read the Wiki page on launch loops? [wikipedia.org]

          It would have to be 2000km long. That would be a little bit pricey. And it would have to be built over the ocean because the momentum of the thing if it breaks would be equivalent to a nuke going off. I hate to go all George Carlin, but Not In My Back Yard.

          • Re:Same old... (Score:4, Interesting)

            by hardburn (141468) <hardburn.wumpus-cave@net> on Saturday July 05 2008, @11:35PM (#24072511)

            A rough estimate [launchloop.com] (pdf link to presentation slides, estimates towards end) puts it around $10 billion for a small system, and $30 billion for a larger one. Add on an order of magnitude to the price for government waste, and it's still pretty good. Better than the most optimistic estimates for a space elevator, and way better than rockets.

            Building over an ocean (or rather, starting from an uninhabited island and extending over the ocean) isn't really a big deal. Baker Island [wikipedia.org] will do as long as we can deal with the pesky environmentalists trying to save its status as a wildlife refuge.

            • Cost estimates for things that have never been build are not reliable. Your $30 billion number seems . . . conservative. Seriously, this is a large, dynamic structure. They don't really know how they'd put it in place. They don't know how they would confine the ribbon, or how reliable that system would be. With so many unknowns, you're really just pulling numbers out of your ass. Moreover, the odds that it is actually build-able are not great. The odds of it staying up for any usable period of time are much worse.

    • As long as we depend on cigars with wings and chemical based propellants we will only inch our way along this journey. I had higher hopes for this crew.

      What new space-alien-derived here-to-unknown technology where you proposing they use? This thing isn't headed for Mars, you know.

    • Re:Same old... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Rocketman_Ryan (1276180) on Saturday July 05 2008, @11:06PM (#24072381)

      As long as we depend on cigars with wings and chemical based propellants we will only inch our way along this journey. I had higher hopes for this crew.

      You know, this is precisely the reason there are so few private companies doing this. People expect miracles, and when the miracles don't happen the public loses interest.

      Yes, we need to invest more heavily in advanced propulsion concepts. However, we don't currently have any private manned platforms based on *conventional* propulsion, so how could you possibly expect this? You could never raise enough venture capital to do anything other than conventional craft, because the risks are huge enough as-is. That will hopefully change in the future, but people need to prove that this is even feasible first. The Virgin Galactic team is going a long way to demonstrating this, and they should be commended for it. And this is all you have to say? Seriously?

      I shouldn't drink and post; it makes me care too much :D

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      There's a famous quote attributed to Richard Branson. On the question from an interviewer about how to become a millionaire, he supposedly answered "you begin as a billionaire, and then you start an airline" in reference to Virgin Atlantic. Somehow I have the feeling he'd prefer to be more cautious this time around - Branson lost a whole lot of money before they managed to turn Virgin Atlantic around.
  • After seeing them, I can't help but wonder; Gee, what's in the box?

    It's the bomb that someone is senting up. After all, AYBABTU.

  • Seriously - the box (Score:5, Informative)

    by Wapiti-eater (759089) on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:15PM (#24071757)
    Is just a clamping weight. Used to hold pieces together while adhesives cure or to prevent warping. Normal technique used in composite construction.

    See the other one at the other end of the wing box?

    See all the other, smaller weights?

    Now tell me - you really couldn't figure this out for yourself?

    You need to get out more.
  • A little messy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland.yahoo@com> on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:20PM (#24071803) Homepage Journal

    I've been lucky enough to see Military aircraft being put together, space ships, and big commercial craft.
    By comparison, that place looks like a freaking disaster area.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You've no doubt seen metal production aircraft and over-paperworked metal and unobtanium space ships being assembled. White Knight Two and SpaceShip Two are both pre-production prototypes being built from composites, with totally different materials and techniques. You don't need a billion parts and fasteners, nor the cataloging system to track them when you build with composites. Also, trimming and fitting composites tends to be a messy business, when compared to punched and finished metal bits that onl

            • The space shuttle, for all its faults, was a far more sophisticated machine than anything that 'alt.space' has produced so far

              Thanks, you've just summarized the whole freaking point of their efforts.

              Musk has so far launched nothing that hasn't blown up in mid air.

              I suspect that these companies could afford to blow up dozens of vehicles and still come in under a NASA budget. Meanwhile, they've learned volumes from each real-world test, instead of hinging the whole program on years of theory and simulation.

  • The box (Score:4, Funny)

    by D-Cypell (446534) * on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:30PM (#24071901)

    "I can't help but wonder; Gee, what's in the box?"

    Well it is a box being delivered to a team of physicists, I guess they wont know for certain until they open it :)

  • by gparent (1242548) on Saturday July 05 2008, @09:31PM (#24071907)
    A cat. We don't know if it's dead or alive.
  • by sjs132 (631745) on Saturday July 05 2008, @10:34PM (#24072265) Journal

    A space port with a box laying around? Sounds like someone lost their parallel dimension. Quick, turn it inside out before they invade!

  • Those boxes are weight... About 15 years back I helped build a very ez [wikipedia.org] (Rutan's design too, btw). Construction was 'composite' materials - a bit of a radical chance from the way folks traditional built aircraft. You cut a lot of foam and put fiberglass and resin on it. The real work was making the jigs to get the right camber on the wings. You had to put weight on stuff to make sure it warped at the correct angle. With some parts, you had to do large chunks in one laying (is that even the right word?) of resin since it makes a stronger bond.

  • by CrazyJim1 (809850) on Saturday July 05 2008, @10:59PM (#24072355) Journal
    Do you want to keep your space vacation or trade it for what is in the box?
    • What could be in the box? Boy, it could be anything! It could even be a space vacation!

  • VSS Enterprise (Score:3, Interesting)

    by okoskimi (878708) on Sunday July 06 2008, @12:38AM (#24072787)

    You know what this means: Next Star Trek movie will have a new ship [wikipedia.org] in the historical Enterprises display...

    (Yeah, I know the name has been known for a long time, but just came across it now and couldn't resist.)

  • by Jon Abbott (723) on Sunday July 06 2008, @09:19AM (#24074603) Homepage

    Those MotherShip pics are scary. For one, the work areas are very cluttered which could lead to confusion, errors, rework and overall inefficiency. It appears there is no system in place to ensure that all tools and support equipment are properly accounted for and not left in the ship. This could lead to foreign object debris (FOD) destroying the ship while it is in operation. The other scary element is the apparent lack of work stands or platforms for the mechanics. When a plane gets built, it is important to build work stands or platforms first so that the mechanics have a place to stand wherever they need to be. As you can see from the pictures, they are doing their work standing on ladders. In addition to the inefficiency factor mentioned earlier, this also leads to ergonomic and safety issues. A mechanic standing on a ladder can't do the same quality job as when both feet are firmly on a platform, especially if any riveting is involved. Oddly, SpaceShipTwo has platforms for their mechanics but the MotherShip crew only has ladders. I was actually interested in taking a ride on this until I saw the pictures of their work areas!

    If anyone from Scaled wants me to come out and do a full-scale industrial engineering evaluation, feel free to contact me by replying.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "cluttered" was exactly what I was thinking when I saw that picture. They're packed in there like sardines. Stuff's everywhere. Looks like it's hard to turn around and walk 2 feet without running into something or someone. It must take a lot of planning trying to move anything around in there, imagine someone trying to get a ladder to the middle of that room!

      There's making good use of space and then there's overusing space. That room has long since crossed the line. Don't get me wrong, I wish them luc

    • Those MotherShip pics are scary.

      People said things like that about the Skunk Works back when Kelly Johnson was running the place, when they created the U-2 and SR-71. If we adhere strictly to your doctrine, those planes would be impossible. Yet they were built in those sorts of conditions, and remain incredible achievements to this day.

      Turns out that if the organization has a lot of people who are truly amazingly talented, a lot of that corporate wisdom doesn't apply so much. Scaled Composites has the right combination of small size, c

  • by florescent_beige (608235) on Sunday July 06 2008, @11:23PM (#24080251) Journal
    I tried to read the writing on the box and at first I thought I could read HL-33 9/24 which is a type of threaded fastener called a Hi-Lok, -33 is stainless which would make sense to use in carbon but I don't think that's what's in the box. 9/24 is a nonstandard size anyway I don't think it exists.

    The writing appears to be dimensions, the boxes are used for ergonomic tests to make sure the various black boxes inside the vehicle can go in and out the doors. This is typical Rutan construction with rounded cutouts to avoid stress concentrations, that works well in carbon construction because theres not much ductility in the material. Mockup fit tests like these are typical and sometimes work better than trying to simulate it in CAD.

    There's a QA label at the top, the QA department has measured and labelled the boxes.

    Admittedly the box looks like it's being used as a weight at the time the picture was taken. But not for bonding, I seriously doubt any bonding is being done in the assembly jig, or at room temp. On a craft like this the bonding must be done in an oven or autoclave and the bond prep must be done in a clean room which as has been pointed out this facility isn't.

    From the look of the structure I believe this may be a non-flying prototype, at least the fuse and wing pods. But for limited production vehicles like this and prototyping shops like Scaled things don't always look high-tech pretty so it my be flight hardware, R&D often looks like this.
    • I know the shuttle goes up about 100 miles, which is more than this thing. OK, kinda cool, this thing goes 110 km, but heres the thing. 110 km is high, but look at it compared to the globe. The radius is 4000 miles, so 110 km is 1 percent of that!!! No air, sure. But space ? Come on. Apollo 11 went to space. This is just publicity hogging, and maybe a way to get a boy band member to pay for a ride.
      • Re:Not really space (Score:5, Informative)

        by pushing-robot (1037830) on Sunday July 06 2008, @12:25AM (#24072723)

        The problem isn't altitude, it's speed. The SpaceShipTwo will peak at 2600mph, which is in the same ballpark as the SR-71 but only 1/6th the velocity required to reach any sort of orbit.

        It's still a neat craft, but it would need to fifty times as powerful to become a true spacecraft, capable or doing more than popping above the "space barrier" for a few minutes.

      • by Mr2001 (90979) on Sunday July 06 2008, @12:34AM (#24072769) Homepage Journal

        As a 49 yo grandmother, c programmer and feminist, I find this offensive.

        Oh, do you really? Just a few months ago, you told someone else [slashdot.org] to chill out when they were offended by a similar statement:

        I am a grandmother too, and sorry but you are wrong. The truth is, that most grandmothers are not technically literate. I just happen to have a career as a programmer, but I think your being too pc if you think there isn't a grain of truth in the original statement.

      • Thanks for watching today's troll, "Feminist-Mom." A classic but under appreciated troll, recognizable by the fact that she's been 49, a grandmother, c programmer, and feminist for the last five years.

        On the next edition of 'This Old Troll' we'll be revisiting other classic trolls such as "Mare Sex" and "Consider Your Breathing." Thanks for watching!

        • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

          Well... I *am* a pilot (well ok, student pilot, but I am about 95% of the way through the course).

          My first ever flying lesson was giving to me by a women who was certainly older than 49 and quite possibly a grandmother (I didn't ask). When you are about to take to the skies for a first flying lesson, and shortly before take off, you instructor finishes the final briefing with the phrase, "Ohh.. and here is what you do if anything happens to me up there...". You tend to notice stuff like age! :)

    • Doesn't anyone else see the irony in a company named "virgin" naming its first two ships after ships from the Star Trek series? ;-)
      • Re:Cool names? (Score:4, Informative)

        by SvnLyrBrto (62138) on Saturday July 05 2008, @11:20PM (#24072427)

        I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm not familiar with the naval traditions of every country out there. But the US and UK, at least, (And those two have about the strongest naval triditions out there.) have no particular problem naming new ships after ones that sank.

        After the first aircraft carrier iteration of the USS Yorktown (CV-5) sank after the battle of Midway, we named a new one after her just five carriers later (CV-10), and we have a guided missile cruiser in commission by the name right now. Also, the USS Indianapolis was sunk quite famously and horrifically. But we have a 688 class submarine with the name now.

        Sometimes, the best way to honor a fallen vessel, is to continue its tradition.

        cya,
        john

      • Re:Death Tube (Score:4, Insightful)

        by putaro (235078) on Saturday July 05 2008, @11:43PM (#24072545) Journal

        Well, given that Scaled Composites is one of the most experience builders of aircraft with composite materials I would expect that they know what they're doing.

        It is kind of fun that it looks like they're building a spaceship in a big garage. Factories are not always what you think they will be. I used to work for a company that built mini-supercomputers. Our factory was surprisingly modest. I used to love that we would make the official stickers (you know, don't stick your fingers in here or you'll get electrocuted) with the laser printer and cut them out with scissors.

        • Re:Death Tube (Score:4, Informative)

          by mosb1000 (710161) <mosb1000@mac.com> on Sunday July 06 2008, @03:22AM (#24073331) Homepage

          I've seen a lot of molded plastic manufacturing facilities (mostly spa manufacturers or boat manufactures. . . or custom car parts). They all look just like this because they all do the same thing. They build plugs, then molds, then finished pieces. I don't know why anyone would expect this factory to be clean. They are always grinding and cutting and spraying. It's just not a clean process.

          The important thing is they clean each piece before each step. It doesn't matter if some dust gets into the finished product, because it will be encapsulated in resin. As long as it's not too much, it won't have an appreciable effect. I know it's nice to think that it can be perfect and dust free, but it's just not possible.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        For a start, SpaceShipTwo is simple a bigger version of an already tested craft, which was in development for longer than Ares I has. Second, Ares I is a much, much bigger vehicle. It will be able to heft 25t into orbit (not a pissy little suborbital trajectory) Hate to point this out, but Ares I is also just a bigger version of a current booster combined with a slightly improved old engine (all had been fully tested in LOADS of production). IOW, spacex AND NASA are doing the same thing.

        The real differenc