Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Hot Rod Job For SpaceShipOne 132

Posted by timothy from the not-however-an-actual-lowrider dept.
rwven writes "MSNBC is reporting that the engine on SpaceShipOne has been modified to provide more thrust, for a longer amount of time. Mainly, the Nitrous Oxide tank has increased in size to lengthen the amount of time before the dropoff of thrust when it goes from a liquid to a gas. Also reporting is Space.com."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hot Rod Job For SpaceShipOne More

Hot Rod Job For SpaceShipOne

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:44PM (#10243414)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • In related news... (Score:5, Funny)

    by nkrumm ( 625879 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:46PM (#10243424)
    In related news the name of the project has been changed to RiceRocketOne.

  • Oooh (Score:5, Funny)

    by iamdrscience ( 541136 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:46PM (#10243427) Homepage
    Next up: Spoiler, racing stripes and a window decal that says "Outta Space!".

    The racing stripes alone decrease wind resistance by 17% you know.

  • Just say N2O (Score:5, Funny)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:46PM (#10243429) Homepage Journal
    Using just a nitrous oxide charger and a balloon, I was never higher than low Earth orbit. But with a 60L tank, a garbage bag, and a mattress to jump on, I achieved full astral projection, even interdimensional travel! I recommend a complete crew of 1 extra spotter breathing 21:78:1 O2:N2:Ar2, for a safe return voyage. YMMV.

    • Re:Just say N2O (Score:2, Informative)

      by nateb ( 59324 )
      Ar is noble, isn't it? So that'd be O2:N2:Ar?

      • Re:Just say N2O (Score:3, Informative)

        by syukton ( 256348 )
        The atmopshere is about 1% Argon. The distribution 21:78:1 is roughly that of an "ideal" human atmosphere. And just because it's noble doesn't mean it doesn't get involved with other atoms sometimes, which may make it a very necessary component to the workings of things.

        Wikipedia: Argon [wikipedia.org]

        • Re:Just say N2O (Score:3, Informative)

          by deimtee ( 762122 )
          And just because it's noble doesn't mean it doesn't get involved with other atoms sometimes,

          Actually that pretty much IS what noble means.
          Chemists have to work fairly hard and use some rather extreme conditions to get noble gases to react with anything.

          • Re:Just say N2O (Score:3, Insightful)

            by syukton ( 256348 )
            No, noble means that an element doesn't usually get involved with other elements. Sometimes, however, under unique and rare conditions (pulsed lasers, low/high temperatures, high voltages) you can coerce noble elements into forming compounds with other elements. Just because it's noble doesn't mean that it doesn't get involved with other atoms sometimes, on occasion, though not often.

            Wouldn't it be interesting if it's an esoteric reaction between Argon and Carbon inside your brain that makes you self-aware

            • Re:Just say N2O (Score:2, Informative)

              by deimtee ( 762122 )
              Yeah sure, my head is full of pulsed lasers and extreme temperatures : )
              Have you actually seen the conditions under which a compound involving a noble gas will even form, let alone hold together? Chemists get nobel prizes for that sort of thing.
              I don't think the conditions inside anyone's head are actually that extreme.

              • Re:Just say N2O (Score:3, Informative)

                by jackbird ( 721605 )
                It's not Nobel material. Actually there are a bunch of noble gas compunds [wikipedia.org]. When Neil Bartlett synthesized the first in 1962, his paper concluded:

                "It is surely not without interest that no essentially new type of bonding needs to be postulated, and that conventional theories are able to account in a semi-quantitative way for almost all known experimental facts in this interesting series of molecules. It is no exaggeration to say that in principle almost everything described in this survey could have been

      • Ah, Ar2 is (was) the secret ingredient in our safety project. It's why our launches cost $2.5B - it certainly wasn't the mattress.
    • Since when does Argon bind to anything?

      Or do you live in an alternate universe after your NO2 experience.

      Just say N2O drugs... Wait....
    • Using just a nitrous oxide charger and a balloon, I was never higher than low Earth orbit.

      Try 1,500 litres of medical grade nitrous, a regulator and a stack of balloons. We hit deep space time after time, taking quite a number of pax with us (we weren't called "Tank Sluts" for nothing :)

      Combine that with Amyl Nitrate (sp?) and whoops - there goes reality...

      Basically, take a big ol' hit of Nitrous and, when the "nang nangs" hit, do a real big hit of Amyl. What happens next is just awesome - the hand of

  • Only one thing to do... (Score:4, Funny)

    by hookedup ( 630460 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:47PM (#10243437)
    *Insert Tim Allen grunts*
  • SpaceShipOne has been modified to provide more thrust, for a longer amount of time.

    -Need engineer 24/7 willing to travel to repair the engine.

    -Pay rate $14 an hour US dollars. Contract to perm.

    -Will be reporting to 6 managers globally.

    -Time and a half pay on holidays.

    -No visas excepted.

  • a scotsman and a blind man with a hair clip hurredly fleeing from the scene.

  • Wasting precious resources (Score:5, Funny)

    by WillWare ( 11935 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:50PM (#10243451) Homepage Journal
    They've got a big tank of nitrous oxide and they're using it as rocket fuel? Priorities here, people!

    • Re:Wasting precious resources (Score:5, Informative)

      by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @12:00AM (#10243504) Homepage
      The nitrous oxide is the oxidizer, they use rubber for fuel.
      SpaceShipOne uses a hybrid rocket engine that uses both liquid and solid propellant to propel it into space. The complete system consists of a liquid nitrous oxide (or laughing gas) oxidizer and a solid form of rubber fuel, which are burned together for about 76 seconds during an average flight, Benson said.
      They really are burning rubber into space.

      • Re:Wasting precious resources (Score:5, Informative)

        by interiot ( 50685 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @01:19AM (#10243774) Homepage
        More here [space.com].
        • SpaceShipOne burns ... HTPB, a common ingredient in tire rubber.

        • In conventional rockets, propellant can be pre-mixed -- as in the solid rocket boosters (SRBs) used NASA space shuttle -- or sit in tanks that are filled just prior to launch, like liquid oxygen and hydrogen rockets. In both engine configurations, the are highly volatile and can be toxic to handle.

          "The fact that the oxidizer and fuel are not molecularly mixed in these [hybrid] engines, makes them non-explosive," explained Greg Zilliac, a hybrid engine researcher at NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. "We've actually shipped fuel grains by UPS in the past."

        • Re:Wasting precious resources (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Rei ( 128717 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @02:12AM (#10243904) Homepage
          Yeah. It's an easy fuel/oxidizer combo, but not very scalable. The specific impulse is just too low, and the nitrous tank too heavy. I do find it funny that they described hybrid rocket engines as not being "conventional rockets" ;)

          And before some of the posters here start going off on a "Specific impulse isn't everything!" line, I'll add: It's not everything, but it is *incredibly* important. And if you can't have lightweight tanks to compensate for your loss of specific impulse (which you can't with nitrous), you're not going to scale. Plus, using a carrier launch, you're not going to handle the spiralling mass increase very well.

          In short, this type of design, while great for getting the X-prize (it's very simple - self pressurizing, no liquid/liquid combustion, etc), would never scale to orbit. I'd like to see a good tow-launch LOX/subcooled propane rocket; that should be scalable and yet still take advantage of air breathing power to get to altitude, and wouldn't have to deal with LH.

          What everyone hopes for are some of the things that are on the horizon, that have high ISP without the various tank mass or cryogenic limitations. For example, alane (stabilized aluminum hydride) hybrid boosters, which have an ISP that even with a weaker oxidizer like H2O2, nears LOX/LH's isp, and a very high density. Everyone in rocketry would like such a panacea; however, for now, everyone has different opinions on what is the best way to go.
          • What do they usually make the tanks out of?
            • Generally aluminum alloys or fiber. But that's largely irrelevant for this discussion; the key issue with nitrous tanks is that they need to be able to withstand *pressure*.

              You can pressurize the oxidizer tank in liquid/liquid biprop rockets, too, but people don't usually do it for large rockets (only small ones). Why? It means that you have to have thick (read: heavy) tank walls, and if you cut corners, you risk a catastrophic explosion.
          • And if you can't have lightweight tanks to compensate for your loss of specific impulse (which you can't with nitrous), you're not going to scale.

            That doesn't matter though. The company we're talking about here already is Scaled.

          • And if you can't have lightweight tanks to compensate for your loss of specific impulse (which you can't with nitrous), you're not going to scale.

            Could you elaborate on that?

            • Re:Scaling? (Score:3, Informative)

              by Rei ( 128717 )
              Nitrous oxide suffers from the same problems that a rocket without a turbopump (using instead gas pressurized tanks) suffers from: the tanks need to be built with thicker walls to withstand the pressure, which makes the rocket a lot heavier. While small, simple rockets will sometimes pressurize their tanks, few big rockets ever do - it just plain adds too much weight, and increases the risk of catastrophic explosion if you cut corners.
          • You are right about one thing, they seem to have chosen the lowest-possible performance design on all counts:

            1. Solid fuel = makes the whole fuel tank a propulsion chamber = large thick heavy wall -- compared to liquid fuel, where the pressure wall is just the little combustion chamber in the engine.

            2. Pressure fed oxidizer = thick walled heavy tank - compared to pump-fed design.

            3. There are fuels with much higher energy contents than HTPB/NOX.

            But then, you don't know what they did to the HTPB, but they
            • > Whatever they did, maybe it had an effect on Isp as well.

              http://www.astronautix.com/stages/spaipone.htm

              Nope. Besides, the N2O is as much of a problem as the fuel. It's a worse oxidizer than nitric acid and peroxide, which are both worse oxidizers than LOX (which is a worse oxidizer than FLOX, and especially than LF2, but few use the former and noone uses the latter)

              > Secondly, you don't know what that N2O tank is made of.

              Irrelevant. Because whatever it's made of, you could make a non-press
          • Alane: I work with LiAlH4 frequently. This solid has to be kept very dry - or sparks will fly. This is definitely unsafe fuel in a manned flight. And it is a very expensive material to burn.
            As a rule, custom synthesis chemical companies do not like to work with LiAlH4 on kilo scale - they prefer safer alternatives for large-scale reductions. If they use it, they charge hefty premium because of the safety risks involved.(Unstabilized alane does not even need moisture - it self-ignites on air).

            Wall thickness
    • I bet Laughing Liquid just isn't the same.

  • Engine tweaking.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by iamdrscience ( 541136 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:51PM (#10243455) Homepage
    Nitrous, eh? I give it 15 years, tops, before all the ricers start to get their hands on these and put ground effects and body kits on all of them.

    On the plus side, if they crash them while driving like idiots they'll be even more likely to kill themselves.

    I love evolution.

    • Re:Engine tweaking.. (Score:4, Funny)

      by Usquebaugh ( 230216 ) on Monday September 13, 2004 @11:58PM (#10243489)
      "I love evolution"

      What's it look like from the side lines?

    • Re:Engine tweaking.. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by onepoint ( 301486 )
      Well, the fact ( from personal usage ) is that Nitrous injection via a plate between the fuel injection and the manifold has been around 1983. I also saw a mazda with a rotary motor having water injection and was told that it had No2. Seen Honda's that are pulling clean 13's (seconds) with No2 since late 80's. Had a Cosworth motor that could redline at 11K, that I ran No2 ( very light system due to fears ) to help me out of curves.

      I can not recall the exact engine ( air ), but the year is 1944, the p-38 li
      • Mid to late models of the Luftwaffe's BF-109 (G and onward I believe) had No2 and water injections as well. I believe some of their FW-190s did as well, and those used radial engines, aside from the D9 variant.

  • Green monster in space (Score:4, Interesting)

    by poptones ( 653660 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @12:03AM (#10243520) Journal
    Look at the cutaway - it really is a "hot rod." It appears the n2o tank is, like, six feet in diameter and right behind the crew with the engine right behind that. Yeesh, it's almost like one of those jet powered dragsters with wings - and some brave soul is gonna take it into space? I guess the next evolution will be nothing more than a good flight suit, an engine, and some carbon fiber bungee cords...
  • MSNBC is reporting that the engine on SpaceShipOne has been modified to provide more thrust, for a longer amount of time.
    Cool! Now it'll be able to do the quarter mile in 0.4 seconds!

  • American Spaceship (Score:5, Funny)

    by ktakki ( 64573 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @12:18AM (#10243569) Homepage Journal
    I hope the Discovery Channel picks this up next season...


    MONDAY

    VINNY
    Senior says that we have to have this spaceship ready for the X-Prize in November, but I just don't see it happening. We're just halfway through the mock-up and the combustion chamber has to be at the chromers by tomorrow.

    TUESDAY

    MIKEY
    (Takes out the trash)

    WEDNESDAY

    PAUL, JR.
    Whenever we do a theme spaceship, we always run into some problem. Like with this one, the attitude control thrusters were too close to the sissy bar. But Cody came through when he reversed the polarity of the positronic matrix and reconfigured the EPS conduits to emit tachyons through the deflector shields.

    THURSDAY

    PAUL, SR.
    I really had my doubts about this spaceship, but Justin came through in the end. He did a killer job on the tins and the flames and pinstripes on the body really make the design work.

    k.
  • I can't help but think of the movie Black Sheep:

    [Spade and Farley are stoned on n2o, randomly laughing at nothing]
    [Moment of lucidity for Farley] Farley: I'm stoned. So are you!
    Both: [Random spastic giggling]

  • Still doesn't beat the DaVinci project (Score:3, Interesting)

    by markomarko ( 665913 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @12:41AM (#10243659)
    Once fueled by Canadian ingenuity (and an old german rocket design), Canada's entry in the space race is now powered by faded dreams, bankruptcy, and lucky number seven!

    That's right, we're powered by the online casino goldenpalace.com. One particularly enthusiastic Canadian space race supporter jumped off a diving board at the Olympics wearing a pink tutu to draw further support for the program. If only we could get goldenpalace.com to support our olympic athletes. 12 medals total. blech.

  • One word:

    "Speed Holes"

  • OB Simpsons (Score:4, Funny)

    by laejoh ( 648921 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @06:32AM (#10244502)
    Buzz: Homer, you broke the handle.
    Race: With that hatch open, we'll burn up on re-entry! That's it: if I
    go, I'm taking you to hell with me.
    Homer: Wait a minute, Race. Wait a minute...wait!
    [breaks off a support rod]
    Aha! Now I'll bust that pretty face of yours!
    [tries to swing it, but it catches in the door]
    Aw, stupid bar.
    Buzz: Wait, Homer. If that bar holds, we just might make it back to
    earth.
    Homer: Oh. [voice rising] I'll bash you good!
    -- One-track minds, "Deep Space Homer"

  • Changes made to improve flight profile (Score:5, Informative)

    by hpulley ( 587866 ) <hpulley4.yahoo@com> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @07:18AM (#10244663) Homepage

    What has not yet been mentioned in this /. discussion is briefly, though not directly, mentioned in the aforementioned space.com [space.com] article. The changes to the engine were made at least partly to offset the previous glitch [space.com] encountered during the previous flight. "...the increased liquid nitrous oxide should delay that drop off and provide more thrust earlier in the flight, when SpaceShipOne's control surfaces can still bite into the Earth's atmosphere for steering." They hope this will allow them to reach their target altitude this time (almost missed the space altitude last time) without having to resort to secondary guidance systems.

  • did they test it? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bwy ( 726112 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @07:31AM (#10244733)
    I wonder how much testing this new engine config has received? I don't believe it has gotten any flight time- it would have to be all ground tests.

    Seems kind of concerning to me. When I finish working on my car, it sure as hell might crank up and idle okay in the garage but it is usually hit or miss the first time I take it on a road test. Obviously, these guys are better rocket scientists than I am a car mechanic, but you get the point...

  • When I read this, one of the first rules of project management popped into my head:

    Never just the engineer when he says, "The change is trivial; nothing else will be effected."

  • What isn't said... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RayBender ( 525745 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @07:54AM (#10244874) Homepage
    is why they are hot-rodding the vehicle. I saw mention that the increased burn time would allow SpaceShipOne to achieve higher speed at lower altitude "where the control surfaces can bite into the air"; this tells me they are working to fix the near-disaster they had on the last flight. It sounds like they have no control authority outside the atmosphere - i.e. that whatever reaction-jet system they have isn't working well, and they are having to jury-rig a fix. Increasing the impulse of a rocket by 20% (which is what they are doing) is a significant, and risky, change. They wouldn't be doing it unless they had to.

  • Course Now.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bigattichouse ( 527527 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:18AM (#10245082) Homepage
    Modifications in design invalidate the hardware test, and put it up there in the "risky" category again... esp. with the modification being an increase in the amount of fuel hangin' around. I hope they had this intent in the first phase (we start with this size tank, and move up to this one later)...

  • New Version Number? (Score:4, Funny)

    by permaculture ( 567540 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:26AM (#10245155) Homepage Journal
    So it's not yet SpaceShipTwo.

    SpaceShip1.2, perhaps?
  • John Carmack caught Burt Rutan dating Betty Rizo and challenged him to a drag race around the ISS.

Slashdot Top Deals

In practice, failures in system development, like unemployment in Russia, happens a lot despite official propaganda to the contrary. -- Paul Licker

Close