Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Cheap Launch Ends In The Drink 41

Baldrson writes: "Wired reports that the only scheduled rocket launch for the CATS Prize has failed. Since the CATS Prize has a deadline of November 8, the enormous hard work and enthusiasm that has gone into this competition will meet with a lot of disappointment. This is unfortunate, because in my original prize announcement, I specifically requested that many individuals put up small amounts of money for their own awards so that there would be no single point of failure. The bright side of all this is that others are now taking that meta-challenge seriously. See, for example the Stark Draper Open Source Rocketry Award."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cheap Launch Ends in the Drink

Comments Filter:
  • Cheap launch == low budget == lots of bugs. Common sense is not so common these days.
  • I think the lack of a winner in the CATS contest is disapointing, but the contest itself wasn't a failure. It promped a genuine interest in private space flight, and several teams made reasonable attempts. Those teams have now learned something. (assuming people learn from their mistakes). Now maybe we will see more corporate interest (translates to cash) in private space flight.

    Maybe we need a round 2 of CATS

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31, 2000 @03:56AM (#663111)
    Space is hard. I wanted to go for the CATS prize too, but the price of entering space is still too high... by my estimates, it would take atleast $15,000 to achieve the CATS primary objective.

    It's a stark contrast that the ISS launch occurred in the wee hours of the morning, to the amateur spirit of rocketry. You might find they are strongly related. The first rocketry program - the V1 and later the V2, by the Germans, witnessed an incredible failure rate. NASA too has lost many, many professionally built and engineered rockets. This is a field where failure happens alot in the early stages, and is still not uncommon even in well-established programs.

    I don't see this as a set-back. The fact that the CATS program managed to inspire people send something into orbit and to learn more about physics and the world is still a remarkable achievement. In America we still cling to a rather backwards convention that winning is everything... but in science the reverse is true - new discoveries are frequently ushered in with the words "That's odd", instead of "Eurika!" (I got it!).

    Best of luck to all who undertake the endeavor to reach space. ~ A well-known, but for now anonymous, slashdotter.

  • What like Linux, low budget. But not lots of bugs, at least not when compared to windoze. I think the lots of bugs has to do with the early stage of the project. No project (code or rocket) is perfect at the onset. We are in the early days of private space flight, there are bound to be failures.

  • He wanted it to go down in history. And down it went.
  • Unfortunate that they didn't manage to achieve their goal. Still, their failure cost alot less than Nasa's failures.
  • Linux isnt something that uses high explosives to put something into orbit. so when linux crashes, you reboot and fix the bug. When a rocket crashes, well, you cant exactly just pick up the pieces and relaunch it (unless its made of legos).
  • This reminded my of a bigger contest for launching something into orbit. I think it was a million $ prize. XContest, or XSpace, or X something. Does anybody know what I'm talking about and if so, the url for their site?
  • I forget, was the prize for launching a Cue:Cat Scanner into space, of for launching Jon Katz into space.

    I think you would raised more prize money and gotten more contestants if either of these was the purpose.

  • The apparent cause of the pinwheeling fizzle was that the plastic foam guides that were supposed to steer the rocket along the gondola's launch rails failed.
    "We don't know what happened to the foam guides," Lajoie said.
    -- from the Wired article.

    I'm not an engineer. And as much as I admire the initiative of these citizen-rocketeers, it seems odd to me that a relatively expensive, technically-sophisticated missile travelling at a high-velocity was placed at the mercy of "plastic foam."

    Sincerely,
    Vergil

  • The promised prize of one of the contests is 3 ounces of gold. 3 gold ounces is currently the equivilant to US$794.70 according to Yahoo [yahoo.com].

    Okay, so I was bored... `8rP

    --
    Gonzo Granzeau

  • Did anyone see that article in New Scientist a month or so back (sorry no link on their site [newscientist.com]) that talks about tiny satellites about the size of a shoebox that can go out and do all sorts of clever things like inspect other satellites for damage, you name it, they might eventually be used as mini comm satellites. A launch vehicle not much bigger than the ones for this prize would be perfect.

    The only reason that NASA has for not sponsoring this sort of event is that people in politics have a habit of only going for the options that mean profit for their companies.

    dnnrly

  • That and linux doesn't have a deadline other then an informal, self determined one. Given more time, they could make another attempt.
  • Modest by a lot of peoples standards in this business. I think we have to see this prize as an example for others. He's obviously someone that believes in open source and wants to let everyone have access to the technology.

    dnnrly

  • by Peter Millerchip ( 166655 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2000 @04:46AM (#663123)
    You mean the X Prize (at http://www.xprize.org [xprize.org]), a prize of ten million U.S. dollars for the first private launch of a three-person reusable spacecraft. Several teams have entries in advanced stages of development, including Dick Rutan, who built the first plane to travel all the way around the world non-stop.
  • You're thinking of the XPrize. The difference between this and the CATS prize is you have to put a small crew into space, not into orbit, and return them to earth, and be ready to fly again within two weeks. The URL is www.xprize.com.

  • I would agree that you shouldn't put something "experimental" in a production situation where people's lives are on the line. I also wouldn't put latest x.0 version of Red Hat, (choose your own distro or OS here) to operate a heart monitoring device in a hospital either.

    (As a side note: It makes me really cringe when I see monitoring equipment in a hospital running in MS-Windows.... but I digress here)

    This isn't to say that you could extensively test a system that would be very robust that you wouldn't mind putting your grandmother's life on the line, but that would take some strong testing before I would consider it ready.

    On the same level or viewpoint, I think it would be possible to put together a volunteer group that would be working with "open" designs on components, that when fully assembled could become a rocket capable of human spaceflight.

    What would this mean? Technology used to build something like this could also be transfered to other projects as well, and a unique opportunity to allow people to participate in "reaching the stars"

    One of the problems with putting together something like that would mean that people who are not normally used to working in an open development group (like mechanical, aeronautical, and chemical engineers) would also have to be involved in order to put something like this together. That and a standardizing process to allow different components to come together, so if one component doesn't quite work that another can be relativly easily put in its place. Plus you would have to have somebody with one huge ego and a lot of free time (like Linus with Linux or RMS with GNU) who could organize something like this.

    Impossible? No. Easy to accomplish? Far from it.

    Right now non-governmental rocketry is at about the stage of the Home-brew computer club/Altair/Apple ][/TRS-80/Atari stage of development (to use an analogy with the computer industry). The very first practical commercial launches are finally getting off of the ground, but there is a long way to go.
  • I remember something on TV about a contest that had Mier in the title. I wouldn't enter that contest for anything. I know that they are planning on crashing it in the spring, but if you win a contest like that to probably go up there when they plan on dropping the station to earth they'd probably give you a tour of the thing first. I eouldn't weant to go anywhere near that decreped old station for fear of the shuttle disengaging from the airlock and drifting away leaving me stuck on the damn thing.
  • by (deleted - SCI) ( 207889 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2000 @05:04AM (#663127)
    When the contest was first announced (not here) my old impromptu rocket group looked into the rules, and decided against even considering a run for it [okay, we were paranoid about getting credit-- but it's a serious investment of work in a field where the "milestone that didn't count" is as common as the "one that got away" in fishing]

    One of us was curious about the exact details of the CATS official payload, but could never seem to get a straight answer out of them. Obviously it is not a solid Aluminum cylinder, as one response seemed to imply (Al is 2.7 g/cc, or more than twice the density of the 100mm(r) x 200mm right cylinder specified) He joked that it was "a Semtex payload" designed to guarantee no one succeeded.

    I'm sure my friend's irreverence could easily have rubbed CATS the wrong way. I am curious if anyone "more busineslike" than my friend managed to get a detailed spec from CATS.
  • This sounds like something Fox would be interested in. I could see it now......we at The Fox Network are planning to send one luckey person to 'uranus'. Operators are standing by.....
  • by Svartalf ( 2997 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2000 @06:11AM (#663129) Homepage
    Extreme low-g conditions allow for the cheap manufacture of substances and devices that would be nigh impossible in the gravity well of the earth. Some processes could be managed on the much lower well of the moon, but some things will be done at one of the Lagrange points where it's essentially null-g conditions. The moon is a vast resource of metals that are actually somewhat rare on the Earth and are actually useful. The moon has enough Helium-3 trapped in the regolith to power the earth for hundreds of years.

    Sounds like the conditions of the New World expressed in modern times with modern needs.
  • I've had contact with a number of amateur rocketeers. Some just like rockets for their own sake (I'm one of them.) Some have larger agendas. Getting them to achieve a complex goal is like herding cats.

    The current situation is difficult. Part of the CATS prize was that the participants could not use any government assistance. That pretty much means any already sucessful space initiative is out. Max Hunter told me he didn't see why it is so hard - when he was involved with the start of the space program, his company worked well. He may just be remembering the good times and forgetting the bad.

    I used to think that a problem was the amateur volunteer nature of the groups. They just don't have the time to devote to such an undertaking. With the recent failures of Rotary Rocket and Beale, that seems not to be the case. Even new start programs are having a tough go. I'm not sure quite what the problem is, beyond a lack of patience.

    As for failure, my favorite is a quote I got from one of these rocketeers:

    Failure is not an option - it's a requirement.

    Keep the pointy end of the rocket up, and learn when it doesn't.
    SatelliteBoy
  • Post no inflammatory or inslting words about Jon Katz and have a free dinner with him at some local hotspot. Though you wouldn't want to see his eating habits up close. Okay I'm out.
  • http://www.xprize.org/
  • They've raised $5million so far.
  • This is a perfect application for Ronnie Horesh's idea of social policy bonds [geocities.com]. Here is how they work.

    I place $1000 in escrow with some widely-trusted escrow agent. I create a certificate and instruct the escrow agent to pay the $1000 to the bearer of the certificate as soon as it can be verified that an amateur rocket launch has reached a height of 200 kilometers. Next I sell the certificate on EBay. To make things interesting, let's assume that hundreds or thousands of certficates have been issued by people who want to see cheap spaceflight become real.

    The price of the certificates will fluctuate, just as stock prices do, based on the prevailing estimation of when and if the launch will actually occur. As with the stock market, there will be some people who buy and sell bonds purely on the basis of price momentum, but over the long term, the biggest winners will be those people who actually keep track of progress toward cheap spaceflight. Those people will have an incentive to help advance the state of the art.

    The difference between this and a prize is that a prize has only one winner. With a prize, runners-up come home empty-handed. Knowing this, people who aren't sure they'll win may simply drop out of the race. Escrow certificates make it possible to reward everybody who contributes to the achievement of the goal.

    Ronnie Horesh is an economist in New Zealand. He invented social policy bonds with the idea that they would be issued by the government, as a means to allow the government to specify and fund social agendas, while leaving the details of implementation to the free market. The government can certainly afford to post much larger bonds than I can as an individual, but one nice thing about this idea is that it can be completely privatized, assuming any trusted escrow agent is willing to issue and honor certificates.

  • Hey, where's that sig from? It tickled a memory hidden somewhere in the deep dark recesses that I pass off for a mind.
    On a slightly less off-topic note, who do they plan to recruit to fly these things? I'd demand a pretty large chunk of change to fly one things.
  • Why a launch rail at all? If a rocket has a good guidance system why on earth does it even need a launch rail? If it had a good guidance system it would have even recovered. Nothing special about a guidance system, guess the just could not figure out how to code a 16f84 pic "more than enough to do the job"!
  • CATS: Crazy Aquatic Test System It makes sense that they'd fire a rocket into the ocean. They're trying to be the first to reach greater than 120 km depths.
  • The only reason that NASA has for not sponsoring this sort of event is that people in politics have a habit of only going for the options that mean profit for their companies.

    That sets them apart from the virtuous private sector how, exactly?

  • by John Carmack ( 101025 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2000 @10:22AM (#663139)
    I have been meaning to write an article about my involvement with, and impressions of the space community over the past year. Slashdot's space coverage started getting me interested in the field last year, and I wound up putting $34k into funding two of the CATS prize entries (JPA and SORAC). If one of them had won, they would have returned the funding money, but it was basically done as philanthropy.

    From the outside, or with cursory knowledge, it seems so damn simple, and all the problems sound like they could have been prevented with a little thought. It's harder than it sounds. Feel free to help.

    A lot of efforts came together in the last couple months, and none of them have been successful. After the fact, it's easy to toss off what should have been done.

    Ky Michaelson's space shot got off better than most. It launched well, and went through it's full burn before losing a fin at mach 4+. If it had held together, it might have made it into space. Hindsight says he should have welded the fins.

    The Wickman AN space booster static test CATO'd. Hindsight says he should have hydrotested the casing.

    The HARC launch reached the full altitude for balloon launch (an achievement by itself), and the electronics all seemed to work, but the launch failed due to interference with the launch rail. Hindsight says they should have done a test launch from the ground with the launcher hung from scaffolding.

    The SORAC team ran into some political and personal issues with the Bureau of Land Management, resulting in them being banned from black rock for a while, scrubbing their planned CATS launch. Being honest, it would have been a rush job if they had launched in the scheduled slot, but they still would have had a chance. Hindsight says they should have started cultivating the BLM bureaucrats at the start of the year.

    JP Aerospace got fucked by the FAA. They have had licenses to try for 100km a couple times in the past, and they always turn everything in more than six months in advance and check up on the process constantly. Four days before they were heading to black rock, the FAA informed them that there were problems with their application. Hindsight doesn't say anything. There was still a pretty good chance JPA would have had problems with their new launch structure because they missed their last AWAY test run schedule, but they probably had the best shot.

    Interorbital has a sea launch slot next week, but pushing for the last week of the prize sounds like things probably aren't quite ready to go.

    The SORAC and JPA CATS rockets will still be launched when the proper permits are all in line again (the government agencies have turned around), so there is a decent chance that there will be an amateur rocket getting into space come spring, but unfortunately there won't be a payoff for them now that the prize is expiring.

    John Carmack

  • We should have expected this - after all, there ain't no such thing as a free launch.

    (/me ducks)
    --
    Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
  • Does anyone know of a list of Science, Maths and possibly other prizes available today? I've found CATS, X-Prize and even the Y-Prize, but I know there were some maths ones reportedly won recently. I'd be interested in info about any progressive, non-peer-review, non-luck prizes around...
  • Would someone please raise the score on Carmack's message?

    It's actually quite informative and interesting, so it is worthy of a wider audience. We will ignore, for the sake of propriety, that for many Slashdotters, its author is the equivalent of The Pope or His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

  • The odds of the cats prize being obtained were never all that high according to the odds on the claim Rocket on Ideosphere [ideosphere.com].

    I think the real question here: What would it take to improve the odds of private space development happening in a significant way? What are the kind of events that could lead up to creation of a real frontier in space? I would sincerely appreciate if some folks would participate in creating some more space claims on Ideosphere [ideosphere.com]. This tool isn't perfect, but it is a reasonable pass at giving folks a realistic idea of the odds of uncertain events. I'd be happy to help judge these claims and help write them if necessary(my e-mail is randall_burns@hotmail.com).

  • Hell, someone toss some funding my way. I can fail for HALF that much!
  • It's Eomer's battle cry from the Lord of the Rings.

    The people who build them are supposed to fly them. Dick Rutan, the guy who built the plane that flew around the world non-stop a few years ago, is one of the major contenders.
    However, I'm with you! There's no way I would fly in one of those things! My major hobby is building and flying high power rockets and their failure rate is bad enough.

  • Triple damn! If I forgot that, it's time for an immediate re-read. Thanks for reminding me.
  • For shame! You must be punished! I want a full book report on all three books by Monday. Be sure to read the Silmarilian too!

    That's not the full quote, by the way, I had to edit it to fit in my sig.

    Happy Reading.
  • Hmm...I think I've seen a .sig like that before...

    Anyway, it is unfortionate that the prize didn't materialize. Rocket hacking isn't quite as cheap as kernal hacking, I'm sure people invested nicely in the equipment for this contest. However, the rewards of being the first private citizen to launch a rocket into space is the real payoff anyway, and will continue to be the motivation for most in the future as it has in the past.

  • "...we haven't gotten a whole lot out of space. Space is not like the New World -- there is no tobacco, fur, or gold to keep the less adventurous people happy."

    Actually, space has had one of the biggest payoffs for modern civilization. Communications satalites, GPS, space telescopes, better understanding of the origins of the world and physics in general, and, for all we know, information from spy satelites may very well have kept much of the free world safe during the Cold War. Outer space is a big place, and we are only now beginning to see how we can reap the benefits it has to offer. While "space industry" (meaning in space, not making things for space) is probably a long, long way off, it is the ultimate long term investment. For some, like telecomunications providers, their space investments have already paid off. Ok, except Iridium, but that's another story...

Let's organize this thing and take all the fun out of it.

Working...