Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

YAPSLP: Yet Another Private Space Launch Plan 83

Posted by michael from the junkyard-wars dept.
rleyton writes: "The BBC is reporting here that UK Rocket enthusiast Steve Bennett of Starchaser Industries is planning on launching himself into space soon. He's unveiling a rocket at a London exhibition. Other Rocket enthusiasts here in the UK are claiming it's "Suicide", but perhaps the momentum for a manned Private Space exploration is building?" First step: buy more D engines.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

YAPSLP: Yet Another Private Space Launch Plan More

YAPSLP: Yet Another Private Space Launch Plan

Comments Filter:

  • Luck shines upon those who risk it all.... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Its not about ego... Its about accomplishing something that people say you can't with less than is possible by most standards... I support him wholeheartedly... It is people like him that allow our society to leap forth from stagnation and become more than the some of our parts.... If I were in his place I would do the same... -daemon

  • Romantic Twaddle Re:Bon Voyage (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Yes, there's a huge difference between the two.

    Columbus was an experienced sea farer; he'd made some very long voyages in his youth. The Spanish and Portugese had the basic techniques of ocean travel down.

    Bennet, on the other hand, is either a starry-eyed fool or a con artist. He's fooling with high power rockets and calling it the next big thing in private space travel.

    If Columbus was considered looney, it was because of his genuinely asinine idea that the Earth was pear shaped, and thus had less of a circumference at northern latittudes, allowing the trip to China to be possible. (No one doubted that you could reach "the Indies" by traveling West; they just thought, quite logically given that they didn't know about the Americas, that crews would starve or die of thirst traveling the immense ocean they imagined stretching from the Azores to China.)

    The suggestion that all it takes to get into space is gumption and spunk and a thumb in the nose of authority is romantic twaddle.

    Stefan

  • So this is how my family feels when I talk to my friends in pure acronyms. I'm confused:

    ISP: I thought that meant Internet Service Provider. But it makes no sense in this context.
    SSME: Second Series [of Windows] Millenium Edition (ala Win98SE)?
    SRB: ...not even the slightest...

    -----
    If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...
  • This sounds like a great candidate for: DAR-WIN!

    Or do you mean Darwin [officialdarwinawards.com]?

  • Ahh... D Engines, that brings back memories. You know, I always wanted to strap like 50 of those to one poor rocket and see what happens. Anyone ever tried something like that? I sure would like to (and hey, i might even do it with out blowing myself to smitherenes!) Also, I'd like to just put 3 fins right on an engine and launch it, who ever wanted a rocket with a real body anyway?
  • Maybe you didn't know, but Aero-Tech now builds reloads for the Kosdon casings.

    FWIW, here's a picture of an Aero-Tech M1419 in a test stand: http://www.tripoli.org/Photos/TMT/TMT3.jpg

    Next high power launch in Massachusetts: July 7. Free and open to the public. See my club's website: http://www.cmass.org/
  • Sorry, here's links http://www.tripoli.org/Photos/TMT/TMT3.jpg [tripoli.org]

    Next high power launch in Massachusetts: July 7. Free and open to the public. See my club's website: http://www.cmass.org [cmass.org].

    Our field normally has an FAA waiver that goes to 7000' AGL; we can only launch up to 'K'-class motors.

  • YAFLA! (Score:1)

    by ergo98 ( 9391 )
    YAFLA! [yafla.com]
  • "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" more or less covers this situation. The topic is the first lunar revolution, and it's consequences. A classic read.
  • I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...

    There is absolutely no moreal responsibility to protect idiots from themselves, and in trying to do so you will end up trampling the rights, and dreams, of those who you misidentify as idiots and who would otherwise choose to take a big risk in order to achieve an even bigger payback.

    In addition, by protecting "idiots" from themselves you do a disservice to the entire human race, by preventing nature's own cure for stupidity ... the natural deselection of the idiots and corresponding gradual improvement of the breed.

    Seriously, though, anyone should have the right to follow their dream, no matter how foolish or stupid the rest of us think it to be. Had humans incorporated a "moral responsibility" to protect idiots from themselves any earlier than the second half of the 20th century, the Wright Brothers would have never flown, Columbus (and before him the Vikings) would have never sailed to America, and countless other risky inventions and undertakings would never have been permitted. The aversion to risk we have somehow incorporated into a misguided ethos of "big daddy protecting the small minded people from themselves" in the last century is second only to the Patent system in stifling the progress we could have otherwise made.

    It is past time we put and end to this nonsense once and for all. If RocketDude wishes to launch, let him launch. If he dies (the probable outcome) then the species is rid of one more fool. If he lives, he will have accomplished something remarkable, upon which he and others can build. It is by taking such risks, sometimes failing and sometimes succeeding, that enduring progress is truly made.
  • Man attempts suicide by strapping himself into a 'cylinder like' structure and placing a large amount of explosives underneath him. Local suicide experts call this 'A Rocket'.

    ---
  • Are you sure you're not thinking of this? [slashdot.org]

    Obviously he is thinking of the slashback here [slashdot.org]. Which is all of a few days old. Recent enough that the link in this article was coloured to indicate I had visited it already...

    Maybe if you read the post before mindlessly replying you wouldn't come across as a moron.
  • I saw a small shot about him on Discovery some time ago, and i noticed that there was a Microsoft banner next to the rocket.
    Let's not hope his craft is pushed to "release" as fast as Windows =)

  • Re:bye-bye rocketier guy (Score:5)

    by Captain Nitpick ( 16515 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @11:26PM (#118648)
    A long, long time ago

    I can still remember how the normal people got to space.
    They got together with a team,
    to fulfil a president's dream,
    And be the ones to win the greatest race.

    Yeah, the A-Team could build anything. Oh, wait "a team", not the "A-Team". Nevermind.

    (I pity the fool who can't spell "roketier" correctly!)



    --
  • Yet Another Redundant Front Page Slashdot Article.

    --
  • ... solid rockets are capable of vicious acceleration. I'm talking "supersonic by the time it's left the launch rail" vicious....

    Think "Darwin Award for the guy who strapped JATO units to an Impala and flew it into a cliff" ... or the longer, funnier, and even vaguely plausible Legend of the Rocket Car [geocities.com].
  • It'll happen. A goodly amount of wealthy individuals will throw in some cash on the promise of achieving orbit. The company will hem and haw about supplies of rocket fuel from sketchy eastern block countries, and inevitably fold. It'll be all nice and legal 'cause the pretty-boy fronting the operation had the smarts (or lawyer fees) to incorporate the boondogle.

    This doesn't mean that I don't believe that we will be achieving weightlessness on private carriers, just htat wit won't happen for a couple years.

    I can't wail 'till I see the charge on my Amex for "Fred's Orbital Launchers". It'll be like Bob's Discount Furniture...kinda...

  • bye-bye rocketier guy (Score:5)

    by inio ( 26835 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @11:03PM (#118652) Homepage
    A long, long time ago
    I can still remember how the normal people got to space.
    They got together with a team,
    to fulfil a president's dream,
    And be the ones to win the greatest race.

    But now this loony makes me worry.
    He seems to be in such a hurry.
    He have deep enough pockets,
    He's buying lots of rockets.

    But I agree that if he tries,
    To make his way into the sky,
    Hop in, light up, and let it fly,
    Then he will surely die.

    Sing'n bye, bye crazy roketier guy.
    Gonna fix a cement mixer to some rockets and fly.
    But those who know say 'bennett's gonna die,
    And if he does, nobody will cry',
    Yeah if he dies, nobody will cry.

    Thanks to Don McLean for one of the easiest to rewrite songs ever :).

  • Maybe we can get free food outta this (Score:3)

    by miracle69 ( 34841 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @04:19AM (#118653)
    Hopefully, Taco Bell will stick a target in the English Channel,and if the guy hits it, we all get a free Taco.

    Hey, they tried it with Mir...
    HI Mom!
  • No, actually this isn't the single biggest reason for switching from liquid fuel. In fact, most sources list liqued fuel rockets as generally being safer to operate for manned flights due to the ability to stop the rocket's burn mid-flight. The single biggest reason to use solid fuel over liquid is the ratio of available power to weight. Solid rocket fuel simply packs more punch per pound that liquid propellants...
  • Hopefully, Taco Bell will stick a target in the English Channel,and if the guy hits it, we all get a free Taco.
    Taco Hell is nasty...Del Taco is much better. :-)
  • even if you crash and burn.. you tried..

    Should be the offical slogan for Sourceforge :) If you cant laugh at yourself [nettroopers.org] who can you laugh at? :)
  • > The first thing that I noticed when I looked at the story, though, was that his rocket looks like an enormous dildo.

    Now we know what happened to the guy who designed the :Cue:Cat for Digital :Convergence!

    > Good luck to him, and I hope that his gigantic phallus works as designed. *snicker*

    You hope he gets screwed by a 100-foot dong? Or do you mean "When I die, I wanna be going up like a rocket into ten thousand feet of pussy..."

    (Although I suppose depending on your sex and orientation, either interpretation could be a fun way to go... :-)

  • Re:Missing some of his marbles (Score:5)

    by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @06:44AM (#118658)
    > the project, as I understand it to be, in its current form, is extremely unlikely to result in a safe launch and re-entry.

    Well-put.

    I hope the guy makes it too, but I think he's toast.

    You kiddies out there who've only watched "nice and slow barely-haul-yourself-off-the-pad" shuttle launches - solid rockets are capable of vicious acceleration.

    I'm talking "supersonic by the time it's left the launch rail" vicious. Those of you who have ever seen a surface-to-air missile launch, you've got the right idea. (Those of you into model rocketry, scale up 36 or 72 times - as in, a full-size rocket clearing the launch pad in the same time as your model does! ;)

    I don't know what kind of boosters he's using, but I'd sure like to. If someone this crazy is worried about the G forces on launch, I'm putting $5.00 on "The test vehicle launches, but turns him into a puddle of goo in the first second." (I've got another $5.00 on "The test vehicle crash-lands, but it didn't matter because the occupant was already goo before impact.")

    On the off chance (maybe 25%) he survives the test flight, I've got $10.00 on "suffocates because he didn't think he had to test the pressure vessel", which I think is a 90%+ probability.

    I think it's incredibly cool that he's got the brass ones to build a rocket and fly in it, and I definitely don't think the government should stop him from trying it (as long as he points the damn thing away from populated areas).

    But I still don't think he's gonna make it.

  • This sounds like a great candidate for: DAR-WIN! [darwinawards.com]
    DAR-WIN! [darwinawards.com]
    DAR-WIN! [darwinawards.com]

  • IIRC, the main advantage to SRBs (for ICBM's at least) is that they are always fueled. Liquid fueled missiles had to be fueled before launch. In a MAD scenario, the quick launch time was a major advantage.

    SRBs have this advantage ANYWHERE that fueling may be a problem, such as wing mounted or ship mounted missiles.
  • I'll just take a single LOX/Kerosene F-1 motor.

  • Steve Bennett IS the test (Score:5)

    by Louis Savain ( 65843 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:49PM (#118662) Homepage
    Look at it this way, a lot of other private rocketeers are keeping an eye on Bennett and his launch efforts. Whatever happens, success or failure, they will gain from his experience. Bennet is a voluntary guinea pig. It sounds crazy but come to think of it, Christopher Columbus and his crew were willing guinea pigs too. They sure did not have the technology to send a self-piloted ship across the atlantic and back.
  • not D engines .... M engines .... [aerotech-rocketry.com]
  • This came up a little while ago at metafilter.com and I couldn't ignore how the paltry sum of the X-prize drives nearly suicidal space launches like this. 10 million to a company that can *safely* deliver the precious and fragile cargo of two human beings to space and back is peanuts, its what they pay for the first 10 seconds of the 4th test flight.

    So the X-Prize now drives people like Steve to build an unusually phallic looking rocket [bbc.co.uk] out of a cement mixer. If the lottery is for people who can't do math than the X-Prize is for people who can't do physics. To the company that does pull this trick off, the 10 mil will be more like the cheesy gold-plated trophies they passed out in high school.

  • a) your already reported this in Slashback

    So is this why michael is disliked around /.???
    ---

  • I saw this a couple of days ago, but didn't submit it. The first thing that I noticed when I looked at the story, though, was that his rocket looks like an enormous dildo.

    Good luck to him, and I hope that his gigantic phallus works as designed. *snicker*

  • The man sounds passionate about whats he doing. even if all his peers think hes nuts(since the artlcle really did'nt have anyone sayin he has a shot in hell) he has the dedication to try... Good Luck man! even if you crash and burn.. you tried..

  • You are correct, I misread his original post. The only thing I will stick to is my assertion that he was mistaken about suggesting solid fueled rockets are more efficient, but you (and he) is indeed correct about the density/thrust ratio.

    ..and yes, manned flight should at best be supplemented by SRBs (like the ullage rockets on the Saturn V), not commanded by them (like the SRBs on the shuttle).
  • You are absolutely incorrect. Most liquid fueled rockets have a much higher ISP then their solid equivalents. The SRBs on the shuttle have an ISP of 260 something, if I recall correctly, while the SSMEs onboard the shuttle (liquid) have an ISP of over 400.

    ISP is, basically, a measure of how much a pound of propellent goes towards propelling something.

    The SRBs are cheap heavy thrust rockets, but nowhere near as efficient as liquid fuel.
  • Columbus may have been a guinea pig, but a guy trying to replicate his voyage 20 years later in a homemade kayak is just an idiot.
  • Aluminum comes from bauxite. Might be useful, since it's a light, alloyable, machineable, weldable, corrosion-resistant building material. :)
  • The whole reason the army switched from liquid propelled rockets to solid fuel was because of the accidental explosions (and of course casualties) during the handling and transportation of these dangerous time-bombs. There is no way this guy, whith his hit and miss track record, should be playing with liquid-fueled rockets.
  • Starchaser has had a bery successfull line of launches, and is actually sponsored by Microsoft.

    This is not "yeat another" in the sence that is is some rich freak that has way to much time, and builds him/herself a rocket...

    Steve Bennett is also very dedicated, and is one of the few I actually think can make it into space...the only question is if these rockets are powerfull enough to ship large amounts of material.

    I'm still holding my money on laster boosted lightcraft technology!


    Mvh:
    - Knut S.

  • I just started reading Stephen Baxter's Manifold: time [amazon.com], which is about... um... well, it's kind of complicated. But the main character is a failed-astronaut space nut who launches his own spaceships (one manned by a squid, one manned by him) for his own exploration. The year is 2010, and most governmental space programs have fallen into disrepair.

    It just reminded me a lot of these private launch types.

    And it's a very good book.


    -J

  • Re:Liquid-fueld rockets are no child's plaything (Score:3)

    by John Carmack ( 101025 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @11:58AM (#118675)
    He is sort of correct.

    It is easier to get a high thrust to weight ratio out of solids, even though they have a lower Isp and generally a lower total dV per stage.

    To get more thrust out of a solid, you basically just need a bigger nozzle, while to get more out of a conventional liquid engine, you need a bigger nozzle, and bigger turbopumps, plumbing, and combustion chamber.

    Not that I think solids on a manned vehicle are very sensible...

    John Carmack

  • Re:...the way poorly-built rockets work... (Score:3)

    by PaxTech ( 103481 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @09:12AM (#118676) Homepage
    And if he comes back from space in one piece, I would be the first to pat him on the back.

    And if he comes back in more than one piece, we'll ALL be able to pat him on the back.. in several different countries simultaneously! It's win-win!
    --
    PaxTech

  • Yea, but here in the US, to buy anything past a "G", you have to have a NAR cert, and the BATF has been getting really picky about the "magazine" bunker requirements for storage. :-)

    Wouldn't want to slap too many limitations on potential darwin-award^U^U^U^U^U errr... space pioneers!

    Temkin

  • Read your own site, damnit (Score:5)

    by Gorobei ( 127755 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:16PM (#118678)
    a) your already reported this in Slashback

    b) Steve Bennett is a self-aggrandizing loon.

  • This bloke will probably either never launch the bloody thing, or at best blow himself to bits if he does.

  • I've never heard of Steve Bennett. Now I have. Loony or not loony. Bad or good. Press is still press. Money is still money. And in a world where effective (IOW not spam), cheap mass marketing is hard to come buy, he certainly has his name recognition campaign off the ground. HOMER: Stupid cement mixer! Doh!
  • Ever hear about what this guy [markbarry.com] did in a lawn chair?

    There's pictures, audio clips, the whole nine yards - and he got farther than "rocket boy" prolly will....

  • My in-depth analysis (Score:4)

    by Glowing Fish ( 155236 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:42PM (#118682) Homepage

    If website design skills have anything to do with building space craft, these people aren't going to get further then Wales.

  • I'd give a lot for mod points to give you right now.

  • How far underground do you think they'll get. Can you quantify your in-depth analysis.

  • "Is setting off across an unknown sea in a small sailing ship any different to blasting off into space in a homemade rocket?"

    Yes. Untested ship designs generally don't explode on launch. Untested rockets regularly do.

  • Is it just me, or does this sound like an old TV movie Salvage [imdb.com], with Andy Griffith playing the role of Bennett?

  • ...the way poorly-built rockets work... (Score:3)

    by jeko ( 179919 ) on Saturday June 30, 2001 @04:22AM (#118688)
    The people who compare this to early efforts in seafaring or aviation need to keep something in mind:

    A poorly-built wooden ship works like a raft.

    A poorly-built airplane, provided you're not thick enough to push it off a cliff, works like a wagon.

    A poorly-built rocket works like a bomb.

    I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...

  • me too! put it on a cd and sell it!

    --

  • I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...

    That is a very interesting and very difficult question. I was thinking about the same thing.

    The critical issue is whether he understands the risks he are taking. There are many people going to different kinds of terapeuts every day, that are little more than swindlers. Many are of course unaware that they are being lifted of their money, and we do have a responsibility to educate them. What if they don't want to be educated? I've met people who are very sick, and that I can see are being taken advantage of, who will not listen to reason. Then, it gets very, very difficult.

    In this case, I don't think it is very difficult. Crazy as he may be, he still seems to be aware of the risks he are taking.

    If he blows himself up, well, at least he died while doing what he loved the most. Not many people do that... And, he seems like the kind of guy who would cheerfully accept a Darwin Award, at least as far as it is possible to accept a Darwin Award... :-)

    And if he comes back from space in one piece, I would be the first to pat him on the back.

    So, I'd say, let him have fun!

  • You laugh at them now.. (Score:3)

    by flikx ( 191915 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @10:45PM (#118691) Homepage Journal

    But it looks like all the smart ones are leaving first.


    --
  • That's a great question, and one I've thought about quite a bit myself.

    There are a couple of issues: Unlike the colonization of North America, there is, as far as we know, no indiginous life that exists in space. Suprisingly, this makes things a bit more complicated, because we are not going to be bound by any humainly directed decisions based on the atrocities of past conquests.

    Which means we can grab real estate in space with impunity. If history guides us here, chances are who is first, who claims it first will mean nothing (heck, there are people on Earth now selling land on the moon!).

    My guess is, when we figure out a reason to make space valuable (weather it be minerals, military.. who knows), the people who will end up with it will be the people who can win in the courts and ultimatly, on the battlefield.

    And chances are, yes, we will end up governments on other bodies (the moon, for example) who will want their independance. It's going to be exciting.

  • Come on! Read a little man, liquid-fueled engines are transported DRY - NO FUEL! Solid fuel engines carry their fuel from the day of manufacture. They have FAR greater potential for disaster in transit than liquid. A liquid-fueled rocket engine in transit is no more dangerous than a hedge trimmer.

    Also, solid fuel engines can't be turned off or throttled. Once they've been lit, it's 100% until they either explode or run out of fuel. The reason solid fuel engines are more popular in military applications is that they're more reliable in starting and require less support equipment. The primary danger with liquid fuel engines is once they've been started. If the fellow ends up dieing, I personally he would have gone the best way I can think of. Think about, name in the papers for weeks, quick, thrilling, painless, and it destroys the body therefore minimizing funeral costs. Far better than withering away with alzheimers and arthtritis, IMHO.

  • Wording change: (Score:3)

    by JohnTheFisherman ( 225485 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:42PM (#118695)
    "...perhaps the momentum for a manned Private Space explosion is building?"
  • I've noticed reccently that there are several members of society trying to launch there way into space. They are just trying to achieve low earth orbit for the most part, but has anyone considered how space will be ruled? Think about it. North America and South America (though already inhabited by the Native Americans) were 'discovered' by Europeans according to your average elementary school textbook. Companies sponsored explorers to colonize this 'new world'. Eventually, after a couple hundred years, these continents revolted and put their own governments in place. One must wonder how space will be ruled. The moon and Mars are both out their waiting to be colonized. The question is, will the settlers allow themselves to be controlled by an opressive earth based government? With companies sponsoring to get into space. Space habitation will be a quicky realized dream. Before we know it, we could have a moon-based government. It's kinda weird.... Of course, besides tourism. What is the moon going to manufacture. Bauxite? What is Bauxite used for anyway? By the way, I know everybody else has mentioned this already. But this has already been covered /.

    [Something witty and intelligent should have appeared here.]
  • Wimpy AeroTech? Naw... try a REAL [kosdon.com] motor.
  • Tripoli [tripoli.org] cert works well to :-)
  • Aerotech reloads are a peice of (&^@$#@. That is why Frank made them change how they were making them. Now, some of Franks original reloads are great, but if you have any better fly them soon. God Bless Men and their Rockets. [tripoliatlanta.org]
  • It's on HBO all the time. His "Undressed" talks about the UK & space. It'll sum it all up.
  • Are you sure you're not thinking of this? [slashdot.org]

  • Well..... (Score:3)

    by Sarcasmooo! ( 267601 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:20PM (#118702)
    At this rate there's no need to worry about a "Nike solar system" or a "Microsoft galaxy". Just let'em all launch themselves into deep space on rockets fueled by egotism.

    "I'm rich! I can do anyth---*crash*"

  • I've met Steve Bennett and I have to say he seems like a nice guy. I've also met some of the other people mentioned in the BBC News article [bbc.co.uk] and they know what they are talking about too.

    I wish Steve all the luck in the world but, from what I've read and heard, he's setting himself up for a very big fall. At best, his rocket won't get off the ground (and perhaps not even off the drawing board). At worst, he's going to end up as a human firework.

    Test, test, test is the mantra of every respectable physicist, especially so in the fields of aero- and astronautics. Anyone who would put his life on the line in an initial test flight of this nature has to be missing some of his marbles.

  • Re-read my original post.

    I am not saying that it can't be done, that Steve Bennett can't do it, that I can or that only a government can.

    What I am saying is that the project, as I understand it to be, in its current form, is extremely unlikely to result in a safe launch and re-entry.

    Unlike most people here, I can honestly say that I've done more than read the BBC story and browse a few related web sites. I've actually spoken to some of the players involved, as well as other prominent figures in the British amateur rocketry scene.

    The concensus of opinions (theirs and mine) seems to be:

    • The project is little more than a concept right now.
    • The person heading the project doesn't have a very good record of successful launches.
    • Testing launch vehicles, especially manned ones, is a good thing.
    • Testing launch vehicles, especially manned ones, again and again is a very good thing.
    • Risking your life unnecessarily on the first launch of any space vehicle is a bad thing.

    I, and 99.9 percent of the people out there want to see Steve succeed. However, we don't want to see him throw his life needlessly away. Hence the note of caution.

  • No I prefer just one J Motor actually .....


    Rockets with big motors [rocketclub.org]
  • Do the math ... E=2*D F=4*D g=8*D H=16*D I=32*D so J=64*D
  • Seriously Estes has E Engines [estesrockets.com] back in production :-)

    Or check out my web site [rocketclub.org] for a whole bunch of people who have forgotten more about rockets than Steve Bennett Knows.
  • The difference is, Columbus, certain members of the Vikings, and so on were venturing out into the unknown. That's different from taking risks to do something you'd like to try, without there really being any unknown element except the risk itself.

    This is more like gambling than exploration.
  • Reading the article
    • But other rocket experts are worried, not least because the Thunderbird capsule is actually a converted cement mixer, containing sheets of hardboard and a few computer joysticks.
    ...it occurrs to me that maybe he should be putting the hardboard on the outside, the way the Chinese [irisz.hu] do it (No. 96).
    Or perhaps he intends for the mixer to break up, so he can float down a la Lawn Chair Larry [darwinawards.com], no doubt frantically gripping his SideWinder 3D.

    On that note (I am far, far from being a rocket scientist): does anyone know what the reentry problems are? AFAIK, the atmosphere reaches up to 40km (well, just gets thinner and thinner, but 40km is a nice number), so crashing down from 100km gives 60km of free fall, giving him a reentry speed of mach 2.7 - so not exactly the MIR, but still perhaps an LD50. Or are my numbers completely screwed?
  • From the article, it sounds like this guy has lied at every public appearance he makes. He's probably got some healthy dreams, but claiming centrefuge experience at a non-existant centrefuge isn't going to get my support!
  • I hardly think Microsoft would want to sponser a mere galaxy. Don't you think they'd rather have the exclusive rights to the "Microsoft universe"? It would be a land where 90% of all computers ran some version of Windows and Bill Gates had more money than we mere mortals could comprehend... Oh wait, that's not the future at all.
  • You kids have too easy these days...

    Back in my day, we had no money. When we wanted to go into space we couldn't buy ourselves a ticket aboard some "spaceship". We had to build our own rocket (made from wicker of course, until they levied that tax on wicker goods) and then we pushed it uphill both ways in the snow. And we liked it! Bah!
  • It's not like gambling at all. When I'm playing blackjack in Vegas, I know that the odds are slightly against me.

    This is more like playing the lottery, I think.

  • And the award goes to .... (Score:3)

    by nicodaemos ( 454358 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:59PM (#118714) Homepage Journal
    "I've come from nothing to being the leading contender in the X-Prize," counters Bennett.

    Sounds like he went from nothing to a leading contender for a Darwin Award.

    "I wish I were a real boy, because then my mommy would love me." Really? I think I see a dead movie.

  • Hopefully his launch will occur before he has a chance to pass on his genes....

  • I guess Columbus, certain members of the Vikings and so on were placed in a similar loony category by their peers. Is setting off across an unknow sea in a small sailing ship any different to blasting off into space in a homemade rocket?

    He'll probably kill himself in the attempt, but good luck to him!

  • Re:Missing some of his marbles (Score:3)

    by f_thegreenbear ( 463748 ) on Friday June 29, 2001 @09:34PM (#118717)
    In any interesting area of research, you get:
    • the people who say it can't be done
    • the people who say you can't do it
    • the people who say only an organisation coincidentally like theirs can do it
    • the people who say only an organisation run by a government can do it
    Usually, most of these people are wrong.

    But they do serve to put people off doing it.

    Space travel is too important to leave to chance. The more of us try it, the more likely it is that some of us will succeed at it.

    So it might be dangerous? Big f'ing deal. In the country I live in, 10 people are killed by cars every day. Three guys in a rocket looks much more useful than that.

    Go on, try doing something interesting today!

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close