Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

Canadian Team To Launch X-Prize Attempt Oct. 2 211

Posted by timothy from the balloon-ascension dept.
FreeHeel writes "A second team of rocketeers competing for the $10 million Ansari X Prize, a contest for privately funded suborbital space flight, has officially announced the first launch date for its manned rocket. The da Vinci Project, led by Brian Feeney of Toronto, Ontario, said Thursday the group plans to loft its Wild Fire Mark VI spacecraft on Oct. 2, just days after the planned launch of another X Prize contender, the U.S-based SpaceShipOne. The balloon-launched Wild Fire event will be followed by a second launch within two weeks to snag the X Prize purse, according to the plan."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Team To Launch X-Prize Attempt Oct. 2 More

Canadian Team To Launch X-Prize Attempt Oct. 2

Comments Filter:

  • Days after huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cephyn ( 461066 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:21PM (#9894316) Homepage
    Is the SpaceShipOne team planning for a rapid turnaround (48hr? 72hr?) to try and grab the XPrize before DaVinci has a chance?

    • Re:Days after huh? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jfoust ( 9271 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:43PM (#9894499)

      Is the SpaceShipOne team planning for a rapid turnaround (48hr? 72hr?) to try and grab the XPrize before DaVinci has a chance?

      Burt Rutan has suggested that the second SS1 flight could be as early as October 4. (Note the historical significance of the date.) If so, then the only way da Vinci could win is if they have a very tight turnaround time: no more than about 48 hours. Given the October 2 Wild Fire flight will be its very first, that short of a turnaround time may be infeasible.

  • Yeah! Go Canada! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:21PM (#9894319)
    I'm Canadian....the only thing that seems to rocket upwards here are taxes, so this is good news.

    PS. First Post? Perhaps not.

  • Man, if they win (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Crowhead ( 577505 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:21PM (#9894327)
    They're going to be pretty unhappy when they get the check and it's 10 million Canadian.

    • Re:Man, if they win (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Checked the rates lately? Dubya's driving your fucking country into the ground. The Canadian dollar is still gaining ground on the greenback.

      It wasn't that long ago when the Canadian dollar was more than the US. If Dubya keeps running things it will be that way again.

      Fucking Americans.

  • Let's hope... (Score:5, Funny)

    by dangerousbeans ( 735507 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:23PM (#9894340) Homepage
    ...it doesnt become a wild fire.

  • Blackjack in Space (Score:5, Interesting)

    by scowling ( 215030 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:23PM (#9894343) Homepage
    The best part of the story is that the team got $500K in funding from Golden Palace.com, who is promoting the launch by saying that they'll enjoy playing casino games in suborbital flight.

    Ha.

    They've been showing pictures of the project on Space (the Canadian equivalent of Sc-Fi Channel) for months, and I've always gotten the impression that there's gonna be a lot of wreckage strewn over the Alberta countryside.

    I can't explain why. Maybe it's the hip, urban office they have, gambling site sponsorship, proprietary fuel source, overall secrecy and hot-air balloon assist that all merge together to fill me with confidence.

    "It's going to be one hell of a ride", Feeney said

    Yeah, I'll bet.

    • Re:Blackjack in Space (Score:4, Funny)

      by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:26PM (#9894367) Homepage Journal
      If it was me doing this flight, and I needed sponsorship, I would go for Viagra!

      I would want to go up and stay there all night!
    • They've been showing pictures of the project on Space (the Canadian equivalent of Sc-Fi Channel) for months, and I've always gotten the impression that there's gonna be a lot of wreckage strewn over the Alberta countryside.

      Considering that it's launcing from Saskatchewan, not Alberta I rather doubt it

      • Re:Blackjack in Space (Score:2, Informative)

        by jfoust ( 9271 )

        Considering that it's launcing from Saskatchewan, not Alberta I rather doubt it

        Well, Kindersley [kindersley.ca] is close to the border with Alberta...

      • Re:Blackjack in Space (Score:3, Interesting)

        by scowling ( 215030 )
        And something like 20 miles from the Alberta border.

        I rather doubt that much of the inevitable wreckage will end up in Saskatchewan, as summer winds in the area are most often from the south and east.
    • But will they get introuble for promoting online gambling, like Google? [informationweek.com]
      Suit Charges Search Companies With Aiding Online Gambling Aug. 5, 2004

      More Stories on:
      Industries

      The class-action suit filed in San Francisco names 13 companies, including Yahoo and Google.

    • Re:Blackjack in Space (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rei ( 128717 )
      What, exactly, is proprietary about LOX/Kerosene? As for openness, have you ever seen their website? They're certainly less secretive than Rutan (althouh not as open as Carmack). And what is wrong with balloon-launch, exactly?
      • And what is wrong with balloon-launch, exactly?

        Look at the sucess rate for super high altitude dirigible flights with respect to circumnavigation, not very impressive. Hell half the time they fail to even get off the ground due to winds exceeding a couple miles per hour. That's not the kind of thing that a commercial launch concern is going to want to use, and not something likely to win a fast turnaround race with scaled composites. Of course as far as safety is concerned I wouldn't be too worried since

        • Re:Blackjack in Space (Score:5, Informative)

          by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @07:05PM (#9895202) Homepage
          > Look at the sucess rate for super high altitude dirigible flights with respect to circumnavigation

          Oy, where to start!

          1) This is not a super high altitude dirigible
          2) It is not circumnavigating the earth

          I think that ends that right there...

          > winds exceeding a couple miles per hour

          That's only relevant for, as you put it, "super high altitude dirigibles", because they have to be built so thin. The atmosphere, where Wild Fire is released (24.4 km) is hundreds of times more dense than the atmosphere at the altitude that the record setters go up to (40+km).

          > since the big bomb strapped to the balloon is a much bigger concern

          Wild Fire is a LOX/Kerosene rocket designed with a pretty impressive "simulate the heck out of everything first!" methodology. SpaceShipOne is an N2O/Polybutadiene hybrid rocket. While both involve pressurization (since neither use a turbopump), the pressurized substance in SpaceShipOne is much larger, and is the oxidizer itself (as opposed to a relatively small helium tank in the case of Wild Fire). Furthermore, with a gaseous oxidizer, the explosion would be a lot more violent. So, if I have to call one a "big bomb", I'd call SpaceShipOne the "big bomb".

          In general, I really like Wild Fire a lot better. Higher starting altitude, a much higher ISP engine, and a very good design methodology.
          • Wild Fire is a LOX/Kerosene rocket designed with a pretty impressive "simulate the heck out of everything first!" methodology. SpaceShipOne is an N2O/Polybutadiene hybrid rocket. While both involve pressurization (since neither use a turbopump), the pressurized substance in SpaceShipOne is much larger, and is the oxidizer itself (as opposed to a relatively small helium tank in the case of Wild Fire). Furthermore, with a gaseous oxidizer, the explosion would be a lot more violent. So, if I have to call one

            • Re:Blackjack in Space (Score:5, Informative)

              by Rei ( 128717 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @12:31AM (#9896987) Homepage
              Polybutadiene is not "plastic". More accurately, it is rubber (one of the first synthetic elastomers; natural rubber is polyisoprene).

              Hybrid rocket motors are *simpler* than bipropellant rockets. That makes them less prone to *failure*, but it doesn't make their failures less catastrophic. The facts of the pressure in the tanks and the chemistry remain the same. N2O makes up the vast majority of the propellant mass in SpaceShipOne. I can't find exact stats on how much it's pressurized to, but it's not uncommon to find N2O rockets with pressures up to 50 atmospheres at launch (steadily decreasing thereafter). In short, the vast majority of the oxidizer is *incredibly pressurized*, and is *gasseous*. That's a perfect recipe for, should failure occur, *catastrophic failure*. If the nitrous tank were to rupture, it would easily slice open the polybutadiene. The notably increased surface area in the polybutadiene would dramatically increase the combustion rate (damaging it more), etc. In short, it would be a catastrophic failure.

              In case you're not familiar, surface area is everything with solid fuels. You can select your thrust over time by the pattern that you cut into the center of the solid rocket booster (circle, star, etc). The reason that solid rocket boosters tend to fail catastrophicly is because when they're ruptured, their surface area increases, and the explosion takes off exponentially (as described above). While hybrid rocket motors don't have the oxidizer mixed in, the situation we're describing is a rupture of the oxidizer tank - and since the oxidizer is a pressurized gas, it will be all over the solid fuel and ready to combust.

              On the other hand, getting a fast conflagration from LOX and kerosene isn't that simple. Have you ever tried to get a conflagration from gasoline? It's not that simple. You need proper mixing ratios and fine particle size of the gasoline. The same holds true here. The LOX won't vaporize instantly (unlike the N2O, which is already gaseous). The kerosene will vaporize even more slowly. It's not that likely to form a major conflagration before the capsule was ejected and out of range; and, unlike using a solid fuel, the explosion of a liquid/liquid biprop rocket tends to *disperse* the fuel and oxidizer, *slowing* the reaction.
          • Uh, the world manned balloon record altitude is 34,668 m, not ... record setters go up to (40+km)., and most circumavigation attempts are at MUCH lower altitudes, the first sucessfull one the Breitling Orbiter hit a max altitude of 11,737 m, or aprox half the altitude that Wild Fire is shooting for. Stats are here [fai.org], and here [fai.org]. So yes, I do think that wind will be a significant impediment to the sucessfull launch, relaunch, and commercial success of the Wild Fire approach. As to the bomb thing, I was trying to
            • My apolgies about the balloon record; checking again, the RE/MAX mission was supposed to set the record at over 40 km feet, but they had to cancel due to budget cuts. The QinetiQ mission also was supposed to break 40km, but failed on its first attempt. So the record still is from the 1960s at 34,668 by M.D. Ross and V.C. Prather.

              Once again, I'll state: This balloon isn't attempting to do anything even remotely like circumnavigation, so the analogy is pretty pointless. ;)

  • Their new name. (Score:4, Informative)

    by DAldredge ( 2353 ) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:25PM (#9894350) Journal
    "Since then, the effort has found a new title sponsor, the online casino firm Golden Palace.com, which has pushed the effort forward. In honor of that, the da Vinci Project has been renamed the Golden Palace.com Space Program powered by the da Vinci Project."

    That is about the worst name for a space mission that I have every head.

  • Much Cheaper, I hope they win. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by njcoder ( 657816 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:26PM (#9894369)
    While the SpaceShipOne people have spent $20 Million on their attempt, DaVinci has spent considerably less.

    If they win, they'll make a profit and be able to throw one kick ass party.

    If this is based on the feasibility of commercial space flights, my vote is for the one that does it first and makes money. :)

    • Oooh.. just saw they're homepage [davinciproject.com]... long time since I last visisted.

      Imagine, gambling and strippers in space!

    • While the SpaceShipOne people have spent $20 Million on their attempt, DaVinci has spent considerably less.

      True, but if one assigns a fair market value to tens of thousands of hours of volunteer labor reportedly spent on the project, the difference between the two becomes much smaller.

      If they win, they'll make a profit and be able to throw one kick ass party.

      Hopefully the project has its eyes on longer-term goals than the short-term profit realized by winning a prize.

      If this is based on the fea

      • "True, but if one assigns a fair market value to tens of thousands of hours of volunteer labor reportedly spent on the project, the difference between the two becomes much smaller."

        C'mon, on here, one of the biggest open source forums, do you really think people factor in "volunteer labor"?

      • Re:Much Cheaper, I hope they win. (Score:5, Informative)

        by Idarubicin ( 579475 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @10:56PM (#9896589) Journal
        True, but if one assigns a fair market value to tens of thousands of hours of volunteer labor reportedly spent on the project, the difference between the two becomes much smaller.

        From the article:

        The all-volunteer da Vinci team spent about $350,000 of cash, $4 million of in-kind donations and they've put in 150,000 man-hours in pursuit of the X Prize, Feeney said.
        If they paid a hypothetical $30 per hour for the volunteer labour, the total cost would still be only $8.5 million. Further, the article doesn't mention whether or not those are Canadian dollars--if they are, then you can cut another 25% or so off the cited prices. Even paying a fair price for labour, the da Vinci effort would seem to cost a third to a half the amount of SpaceShipOne.

        To be fair, we are all still waiting to see if it flies.

    • I'm skeptical. I admit it. Have these guys done test flights? Have they flown the balloon to 80K feet yet? Have they test launched the rocket enough, or at all? Do they HAVE a rocket that isn't a prototype?

      Also, what is up with needing 500K to go ahead and finish up and launch? I really think perhaps this is all about publicity and not going into space, but I hope I'm wrong. Because Scaled seems to be all about going into space and only doing publicity when they feel like they are obligated to.
      • I think these guys have a good chance of doing it because they are clearly focused on only one thing - winning the x-prize and walking away with cash and a launch vehicle that could have commercial applications. Scaled is very obviously more concerned about general space access, the scalability of their concept beyond the x-prize, and various other long term goals. While I commend them for their foresight, I really to wonder wtf they've being doing since that last flight? Why wasn't the x-prize won last mon
        • I really to wonder wtf they've being doing since that last flight? Why wasn't the x-prize won last month? do they really have that many issues? These guys are clearly a one-shot deal. They're not gonna bother dicking around with test flights to 80K ft, or anything else for that matter.

          Scaled has a mildy successful flight that had a few issues that could have been serious, and they've promptly addressed them. Compare this to NASA who has been grounded for how long now? When it comes to spaceflight and h
          • "Compare this to NASA who has been grounded for how long now?"

            The last Space Shuttle also disintigrated mid-flight, killing all seven occupants of the vehicle. And you're complaining that they've grounded the fleet for what will amount to a couple years? Sorry, but you can't compare the two.

  • Weather (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stoolpigeon ( 454276 ) <bittercode@gmail> on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:28PM (#9894386) Homepage Journal
    would make or break their timing w/the baloon thing. It is 1000 feet- baloon top to rocket at bottom. I've got to think you need a calm day to get it going. No?

  • No previous testing...? (Score:5, Funny)

    by flying_monkies ( 749570 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:30PM (#9894396)
    I haven't been keeping up on the Canadian team, have they even attempted a live fire testing of this launch platform? For some reason, I keep hearing the looney tunes theme and picturing Wiley Coyote whenever I think about this. Whoever the person/people are they plan on sending, your families have my condolences.

    • Re:No previous testing...? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @06:42PM (#9895019) Homepage
      They're sending their team leader as pilot. And his family is apprehensive, but supportive.
    • I think the announcement is just a publicity stunt that appears to be working. When it's time to launch the rocket, there'll be some reason to put it off. Nobody in their right mind would fly in a rocket that has zero flight testing.
      • umm.. their aproach doesn't quite warrant for much other flight testing than what they're planning to do now, their craft being quite different from spaceshipone for example which wasn't just planned to fall back to earth basically(with a 'chute).

        it's not like they can fly test it without going up there(well, they could run it unmanned I guess but then again it might not be suitable for that either). maybe their 'worst case' scenario is that the rocket is a dud and the craft gets an _easier_ way down.

        • Redstone History (Score:3, Insightful)

          by jmichaelg ( 148257 )
          When I was a kid, I remember seeing films of rockets blowing up for a variety of reasons. One of the reasons Alan Shepherd (first American Astronaut) was feted was he had the balls to get on top of a rocket that was just as likely to blow up as to fly. Browse through John Camack's blog [armadilloaerospace.com] to see how many times he has had something go wrong.

          A worst case scenario would entail the rocket blowing up at 80,000 feet because a valve got stuck or the fuel didn't flow quite the same way at 80,000 that it does at sea

          • Re:Redstone History (Score:2, Interesting)

            by mhollis ( 727905 )

            I was around back then and the rocket that couldn't fly was the Atlas, not the Redstone, which was (slightly more) proven. Specifically, the Atlas I "Big Joe" had a number of mishaps, many of which took place in full view of the 7 original astronauts.

            The Mercury-Redstone launches did have their problems. Mercury-Redstone 1 had a very short liftoff, rising 4 or 5 inches (10 to 13 centimeters) before settling back on its fins, while the escape tower launched-without its attached capsule. On a manned mission,

            • Re:Redstone History (Score:5, Interesting)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 05, 2004 @09:26PM (#9896072)
              I happen to both work for the company that makes the Canadarm and also volunteer for the da Vinci project. I'll admit the philosophies of my day job and night job are very different. Both are viable modes of operation in the space industry.

              The -only- problem with da Vinci over the year that I've been involved has been money. Now that we have some money, hopefully enough, the problem has suddenly become 'time'. Burt's team has set a tough schedule for us, but it's certainly not a foregone conclusion. We've done -tonnes- of design on this rocket, and now we have to take on a sort of skunkworks mentality to get it done. Contrary to what I've been reading today, we will be doing lots of component/subsystem level testing. The amount of integrated end-to-end testing will likely be limited simply due to time. This does NOT mean that the rocket will be fundamentally unsafe. There will be no launch unless it's determined that the pilot has a very high chance of survival.

              With our design, there are very few inescapable scenarios. Our engine technology change was made long ago in part due to the added safety (I don't know why it hasn't been added to the website). Failure and loss of the vehicle may be likely (makes it more exciting to tune in on launch day), but there will only be an outside chance of anything morbid.

              It's dangerous for this new industry to become obcessed with doing things like the rest of the space industry. Space projects cost a billion dollars because of paperwork and analysis, not because of hardware and software. At my day job, nothing is done unless there is essentially -no- credible chance of failure (loss of crew or loss of vehicle). Anything which could become a hazard to that extent has triply (or more) redundant systems (4 ways to drive the arm joints, etc.)

              If my night job (da Vinci) took on that mentality, nothing would get done, and all we'd have is a pile of paper and empty toner cartridges. Take away some of the requirement for -complete- safety, and all of a sudden more gets done.

              Anyway, I'm optimistic that we'll get things together pretty soon. We've got some high-profile tests on the books in the coming months. Should be exciting.

  • Oh, no room for Canadians in space, huh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:48PM (#9894536)
    Oh, no room for Canadians in space, huh? Fine! [qsl.net] I'll go build my own spaceship! With blackjack and hookers! In fact, forget the spaceship and the blackjack! Ah, screw the whole thing!

    (Bite my maple-sugared ass?)

    • +1 Obscure Futurama Reference. (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      No one knows who the first commercial spaceship pilots will be, but /.ers believe it went something like this:

      "We're whalers on the moon
      We carry big harpoons
      But there ain't no whales
      So we spin tall tales
      We're whalers on the moon"

  • Newsflash... Newsflash... (Score:5, Funny)

    by hadesan ( 664029 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:49PM (#9894548)
    October 2nd, 2004 - Wild Fire Mark VI spacecraft reached a new speed record for descent...

    For descent as the balloon it was suspended from popped. The crewmen, Doug and Bob, were unharmed. However, they have been relieved from duty after the true cause of the incident was determined.

    Here is the transcript of the incident from our on the scene reporter, Troy:

    Troy: Close call out there today, ay?
    Bob: {sip from beer} belch
    Doug: Ay

    Troy: What happened?
    Doug: We had just opened some beers for our ascent when I remembered we did not sew our Wild Fire patch on our jackets.
    Bob: {another sip from beer}

    Troy: and?
    Bob: Hoser {pointing to Dough} knocked over the beers while I was sewing on my patch. Luckily, some guy named Bert gave us some cool sewing kits. [shows off his Scaled Composites travel sewing kit]
    Doug: Ay, swell, ay.

    Troy: How did this cause the problem?
    Doug: Well, Bob let one and I needed to get some air. I opened the door and a bird flew in. I swatted it out but knocked over the beers, ay.
    Bob: Hoser. Burp!

    Troy: But what caused the accident?
    Bob: Hoser, dropped his needle and it popped the balloon.
    Doug: Ay, but I was able to recove my beer.

    End Story

  • "...as well as an eight-track tape..." (Score:4, Funny)

    by tlambert ( 566799 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @05:54PM (#9894598)
    "...as well as an eight-track tape..."

    Let me guess... Steppenwolf's "Magic Carpet Ride".

    Sorry, but "Brian Feeney" just doesn't have the same ring as "Zefram Cochrane"...

    -- Terry
  • It's pretty amazing how competition drives people. When Scaled put its craft into space they were the only team that anyone thought would have a chance to win the prize. Now with a deadline set another team comes out of the woodwork and has a craft ready for an attempt.

    Of course, it's probably not really ready to go, they just don't want to miss a chance at the prize. I'd hate to be the pilot picked to fly that one...

  • Racketeers! (Score:3, Funny)

    by dgmckay ( 757282 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @06:08PM (#9894697)
    There's a link to images on the announcement. Follow that, and look for a pic of the da Vinci team. The caption describes them as "racketeers". Ok. :)

  • If it isn't tested (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zebra_X ( 13249 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @06:21PM (#9894817)
    It doesn't work. Scaled has been so meticulous about testing, and it's paid off. I don't see the same level of testing in the the competing team. Component level testing only works to a point... Then you need to test the whole shebang.

    Someone is going to get hurt. It's not all about that.
  • http://www.canadianarrow.com/

    (I saw their spacecraft during the Hamilton airshow - resembled a V-2 with windows.

  • Well.... (Score:2, Funny)

    by desmogod ( 792414 )
    Personally, I would love to see a bunch of Canadians jump into a machine built with hot glue and bean cans, with no prior testing, and blast the yanks away. Troll me, mod me down, whatever you want, but there is something oh so nice about the underdog winning is there not? Slap on a CD, buckle yourselfs into the bucket seats you robbed from your mums plymouth, and do yourselves proud boys! P.S. I am neither canadian or yank, so my only bias is caused by politics:P

  • Something smells fishy, unfortunately. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Thagg ( 9904 ) <thadbeier@gmail.com> on Thursday August 05, 2004 @06:42PM (#9895017) Journal
    TFA says that the DaVinci group is planning on using a hybrid rocket engine, using nitrous oxide as the oxidizer (as Rutan's SpaceShipOne does) but using something other than synthetic rubber as the fuel. That does make a little bit of sense, as after Rutan's group settled on their rocket engine design, there has been some spectacular research out of Stanford using paraffin (in the American sense of the word) as hybrid rocket fuel. Paraffin has the nice property that it as it gets hot it turns from a solid into a very free-flowing liquid -- which lets it burn very quickly (something that rubber-burning hybrid motors have a hard time with -- the Rutan engine has four separate channels through the fuel to allow it to burn quickly, this leads to the possibility of blowing chunks of propellant.)

    Unfortunately, though, the DaVinci website says that their ship will use Kerosene/LOX as the propellant and oxidizer. They have pictures of the engines, including some test firings, on the web site.

    You just don't change engine technology at this point in the project.

    The only possibilities are that these people are 1) insane or 2) scam artists. It's too bad, it would be spectacularly great if they were on the up-and-up...but...it doesn't appear that they are.

    Thad
    • I'm confused: unless I'm mistaken paraffin=kerosene so the problem with Kerosene/LOX is the LOX part, which is liquid oxigen? As opposed to the nitrous oxide you being your post with. Your post reads as if their choice of propellant is wrong when really all you're saying is that TFA says they're using a different oxidizer than they actually are?
      • Sorry, I said paraffin in the American sense of the word. We use the word paraffin to mean "candle wax". I understand that it means something different in the rest of the world.

        Hybrid engines have a solid fuel and a liquid oxidizer. The article says that the DaVinci rocket uses Nitrous Oxide (a liquid if kept under moderate pressure) as the oxidizer, and something other than rubber (I'm guessing candle wax) as the fuel.

        Here is the article [stanford.edu] that describes the Stanford research. It's great work.

        Tha

    • 2) scam artists

      The press are dumb asses for falling for it. Shit, I might as well get my 15 minutes of fame. I'm registering for the X-Prize and announcing my winning flight tomorrow. You see, I've had the good fortune of securing temp access to the word's largest rubberband....
  • Since they've done very little testing. This is all hype. They are trying to get a little publicity before Rutan sweeps it in a few months..

    -- Greg

  • HA HA HA!!

    You've got to be kidding me. Am I just crazy, or er... what does this

    http://www.space.com/images/h_wildfire_02.jpg

    look like to _you_?!?

    Wasn't this a bit in one of those Austin Powers movies??

  • I went to their rollout (Score:3, Informative)

    by MarkLR ( 236125 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @09:06PM (#9895967)
    During lunch time I took the subway and bus to their worksite in the former Downviews AFB in Toronto. The craft itself is now black with GoldenPalace.com logos but they say once a few more layers of thermal shielding are put on they will repaint it will all of their sponsor's logos and the Canadian flag. So its going to look like a NASCAR racer.

    They still need to join two pieces of the body and it appeared that the interior where the rocket engine and fuel tanks and pipes would be mounted is completely empty. Also I'm pretty sure that some interior parts of the craft beneath the thermal shielding are made out of wood.

    However they seemed confident so I wish them all the best.

  • Your mission, should you choose to accept it... (Score:4, Funny)

    by zeath ( 624023 ) on Thursday August 05, 2004 @10:56PM (#9896594) Homepage
    This message comes to you from far into the future. We have recently discovered ancient texts that indicate a horrible timeline of events is about to transpire:

    1. Canadian team launches X-Prize entry due southeast.
    2. US sees incoming Canadian ballistics; President orders retalliation strikes. Canada's government is overthrown by the US in the name of the War on Terror and replaces it with a "better" democratic government.
    3. Canadian militias revolt and succed in a coup, overthrowing the new government and militia leaders take over governmental responsibilities. Quebec, on the other hand, grasps opportunity in the chaos and officially secedes.
    4. US locks down its northern borders. Canadian military immediately and successfully invades the poorly defended state of Alaska.
    5. Russia seizes opportunity to get foothold on the North American continent and invades Alaska; Canadian forces resist, and Russia deploys its nuclear arsenal.
    6. US sees ICBMs launched by Russia toward the North American continent; fearing they have allied with Canada, US retaliates, firing its arsenal at Russia as well as all other Russian-allied or communist nuclear powers.
    7. Global nuclear war sends civilization back 500 years of development. The upright macaque [slashdot.org] manages to survive and begins propogation.
    8. The international space station is caught in a space-time fissure created by nuclear resonance and the astronauts are sent into the future.
    9. Planet of the Apes [imdb.com]

    What do we learn from all of this? You must make every possible effort to stop this launch!

    This message will self destruct in 7.5 seconds. Have a nice day.
  • Rutan's X-Prize attempt would the 5th and 6th manned flight of their vehicle, with the potential for many more. There is no evidence that SS1 has the organization to make 2nd flight or any there after.
  • Reminds me of something that Wile E Coyote might have purchased from Acme to try to catch the Road Runner. For some reason I see a splat against a large flat rock in their future.

Slashdot Top Deals

news: gotcha

Close