SpaceShipOne Captures the X Prize 896
I got to Mojave yesterday evening (it's a long way from El Paso), slept in my car, and got to the airfield itself just before 4 a.m. Traffic on state highway 58 was brisk already, though not clogged (which it later became), and nearly every car was turning onto the two-lane entrance heading for acres of packed-dirt parking spaces near the runway from which SpaceShipOne would take off.
The crowd which built up in the following hours was surprisingly quiet on takeoff, which happened right at 7:45 local time. Not exactly hushed -- perhaps "hesitant" is a better word, or maybe just waking up. Only scattered clapping (guilty!) as the White Knight / SpaceShipOne piggyback duo lifted off, followed shortly by two chase planes, an AlphaJet and a Beechcraft Starship. The enthusiasm grew, though, as the flight progressed; a P.A. system kept the spectators informed of the trip's progress.
When SpaceShipOne finally separated and fired upward ("Good release, good release!" over the P.A, followed by enthusiastic cheering), it was after three separate two-minute warnings, then for one-minute and 30-second intervals. After an 84-second burn followed by a clean shutdown, SpaceShipOne coasted to its final altitude. At 90 seconds into the flight, the ship was well past 100,000 feet, and out of sight to the unaided eye. At 7:51, an altitude of 328,000 feet was reported, but the ship was still climbing for the next 40,000 feet under its own momentum. The reported peak altitude is enough to top the previous record, set by an X-15 at 354,200 ft. in 1963.
The descent was happily uneventful. At 60,000 feet, Binnie experienced "slight oscillations" -- consistent with previous flights, according to the announcer, who continued to count down the altitude. At approximately 45,000 feet, the conditions are right for contrails, and more cheering erupted when those popped into view. The crowd perked up and cheered even more with the first of two sonic booms audible on the ground (the booms that occur during ascent aren't), pointing and shading their eyes from the sun, following the ship as it traveled in wide arcs to bleed off the energy of the ascent, followed by a smooth 3-point landing.
(Special thanks to the members of the Foothill High School band who traveled the three hours from Orange County to watch the flight and play both before and after the flight. The launch itself was surprisingly low on ceremony, and their playing provided a bit of well-deserved pomp.)
Re:368,000 ft, not 328,000 (Score:5, Informative)
Besides, 368,000 feet is also higher than the X-15 altitude record (roughly 355,000 feet).
Re:A little disappointing (Score:2, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:2, Informative)
Video from first launch attempt (Score:2, Informative)
The music is from the very cool band ZIA. [ziaspace.com] The lead singer/songwriter was at the launch this morning. (Lucky woman!)
Re:368,000 ft, not 328,000 (Score:5, Informative)
SPACESHIPONE WINS THE $10 M ANSARI X PRIZE [xprize.com]
(apologies if slashcode mangles the above link)
Re:368,000 ft, not 328,000 (Score:3, Informative)
The first flight was 338,000 feet. This one was 30,000 feet (or ~10 km) higher.
They made this one far easier than the one before.
Re:Recalibrating prices (Score:5, Informative)
sub-orbital Mercury missions went nearly twice as high, and the rest
were all orbital. This is closer to the X-15 project: carried up by a
plane and dropped and then firing a rocket engine to just reach the edge
of space. There is a big difference.
This Space Available (Score:3, Informative)
And incidentally, it's been a long time since Paul Allen was "Microsoft's own" - as a major shareholder not employed at the company for decades, it's more like Microsoft is Paul Allen's own, to some degree. More appropriate is to say that the money invested in winning the X-Prize was "our own" before we paid the Microsoft tax.
Re:A little disappointing (Score:5, Informative)
The X-15 (Score:5, Informative)
If you assume that a 1960 dollar is worth 4x of what it is today, then SS1 cost 1/4 of the X-15.
Well done Scaled!
myke
Re:WTF!!?!! (Score:5, Informative)
Rutan uses an engine of a very different design than anything used by NASA (Nitrous Oxide and rubber), and the re-entry configuration (feathering the wings to maximize drag)is totally new AFAIK. Think about it - the skin of this spacecraft is constructed of fabric and glue!!!
I would love to learn more about how Scaled was able to be so succesfull on such a limited budget using a completely new and radical desgn. There is probably a lesson here applicable to just about any engineering endeavor.
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Microsoft Money does something cool for a chang (Score:3, Informative)
cnn.com: "SpaceShipOne goes for orbit again" !!! (Score:2, Informative)
http://musicalgearbox.com/cnnorbit.jpg [musicalgearbox.com]
Oh how I hate news reporting of science. If people think SpaceShipOne goes into orbit just as does NASA's Space Shuttle, it's no wonder, with science reporting like this. "But it said it right there on CNN's website..." For some people it would be easier to explain that "a hacker [they wouldn't understand the 'cracker' distinction] put that headline on CNN's website" rather than a major news organization being wrong.
An I overly cynical, or have I just been spending too much time around stupid people?
Re:I wonder... (Score:3, Informative)
Also, everything's not lost, there still is a $50 million prize offered by Robert Bigelow, for building a spacecraft that can bring 5-7 astronauts in orbit.
Great view of the launch from 40 miles north (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Microsoft Money does something cool for a chang (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You are an idiot. (Score:3, Informative)
OK so a shuttle goes into orbit for how long and supports life and experiments for that duration. How long did SS1 stay up for? Not that long (just a couple mins). They didn't even do one orbit.
Not that I am trying to take away from what they did. I shed a tear as I watched this morning.
Re:368,000 ft, not 328,000 (Score:3, Informative)
I checked NASA TV first, which is where I watched last week's flight - and there was nothing.
In fact, I couldn't find any live feeds, although the 'News Multiscreen' thingy on BBC News 24 on Freeview was showing the launch. Yes, a tiny quarter-screen, silent view from a ground-based tracking camera, but it was better than nothing.
It looked a lot smoother flight than last week's, as while it wobbled a bit from side to side while the rocket was burning, it had none of the terrifying roll. Interestingly, it was a different pilot at the controls - Brian Binnie instead of Mike Melvill. Still, he seemed to do okay.
Probably been linked to already, but here's Spaceflight Now's coverage [spaceflightnow.com].
Re:The X-15 (Score:5, Informative)
The X-15 program cost a heck of a lot more than $25,000,000... though it did make nearly 200 flights, rather than three.
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4219/Chapter6.html:
'The program's total cost, including development and eight years of operations are usually estimated at $300 million in 1969 dollars. Each flight is estimated to have cost $600,000.'
So that would put X-15 development cost at about $180 million in 1969 dollars vs about $25 million in 2004 dollars for SS1. Whether it's a fair comparison is debatable, however, since the X-15 had to make high speed flights as well as high altitude flights.
Um no Re:WTF!!?!! (Score:4, Informative)
Let's see fundamental research:
- flying (see Wright brothers- not NASA)
- rockets in general (see Chinese/Goddard/Germans)
- reentry feather tail (Rutan- not NASA)
- jet engines (Whittle- not NASA)
- hybrid rocket motors (irc Bevin, not NASA)
- supersonic flight (X1-US Airforce- not NASA)
In fact, I can't think of any technology on SS1 or WhiteKnight where the fundamental research was by NASA. Anyone?
Re:Microsoft Money does something cool for a chang (Score:4, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceShipOne_flight_
http://scaled.com/projects/tierone/logs-WK-SS1.ht
It won. (Score:3, Informative)
Bigelow's inflatables and the next prize (Score:5, Informative)
Bigelow has recently announced the logical follow-up to the X-Prize: America's Space Prize [space.com], a $50 million prize to build a vehicle capable of taking 7 people to an orbiting space habitat and back before the end of the decade.
Bigelow actually denies any plans for an orbital hotel, but with his background everyone keeps assuming that's his intention anyway.
Re:Frustrated by the (lack) of coverage. (Score:3, Informative)
Documentary about it on the Discovery Channel (Score:3, Informative)
Re:extra weight (Score:4, Informative)
There's that US$50 million prize waiting.... (Score:3, Informative)
And guess who's in the lead to win that prize: you guess it, none other than Burt Rutan and his group at Scaled Composites. You're forgetting that Scaled Composites did development work for both the McDonnell-Douglas Delta Clipper and Lockheed Venture Star programs. Though these programs were not complete successes it has given Scaled Composites valuable learning experience in building real spacecraft, and that experience gives them a huge advantage in winning the US$50 million prize. Besides, given Paul Allen's financial resources, Allen could easily part with the US$150-US$200 million needed to develop the so-called TierTwo project that will lead to a privately-funded manned orbital spacecraft.
John Carmack's team... (Score:5, Informative)
They are continuing work, albeit at a slower pace.
Re:Great job scaled composites! (Score:2, Informative)
Care to clarify this one? I can agree with 12 men on the moon, but I only know of 9 manned missions to the moon, 6 of which landed on the moon.
Apollo 8 - Circumlunar (10 orbits) no moon landing
Apollo 10 - "Dress Rehearsal" no moon landing
Apollo 11 - 2 men walk on the moon
Apollo 12 - 2 men walk on the moon
Apollo 13 - "Successful Failure" no moon landing
Apollo 14 - 2 men walk on the moon
Apollo 15 - 2 men walk on the moon
Apollo 16 - 2 men walk on the moon
Apollo 17 - 2 men walk on the moon
Re:368,000 ft, not 328,000 (Score:3, Informative)
NASA only seemed to cover it from just before seperation, which is why you may have thought that they didn't have a webcast for it.
Re:Shuttlecock re-entry ? (Score:2, Informative)
IIRC, the old X-15 rocket plane had to align its fuselage on a perfect ballistic trajectory to reenter the atmosphere, or it would tumble and break apart. It had little attitude jets on it so that the pilot could position it while outside of significant atmosphere (making it, for those moments, a real spacecraft).
SS1, on the other hand, simply bends itself into a V shape, so that most or all of its wing area is significantly above its center of mass. Thus as it hits atmosphere the fuselage automatically hangs downward, preventing the kind of tumbling that would have killed the X-15. Once drag on the wings slows it far enough, SS1 flattens out again and becomes a glider.
Does that help?Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:1, Informative)
Your comment is simply wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Recalibrating prices (Score:5, Informative)
No, no it doesn't. It doesn't encounter any heat whatsoever. It's quite cold in the upper atmosphere. The Shuttle generates a lot of heat upon re-entry, though. That heat is created by the friction of doing an atmospheric entry at a low angle and with high speed.
The genius of SpaceShipOne is that it essentially tumbles back into the atmosphere at a high angle of attack, with a high drag configuration, and very low speed. The low speed entry generates very little friction and therefore negligable heat.
SpaceShipOne and "reaching space" (Score:3, Informative)
By increasing the power, something like SpaceShipOne could reach orbit, but that's the easy part. Returning without burning up is the hard part, and it's a problem on a whole different scale. When SpaceShipOne reached the top of its arc, its speed was zero; the problem is just to control the acceleration on the descent. A craft in orbit is going at 18000 mph, and all that kinetic energy has to be dumped. You can use atmospheric friction (as the space shuttle does, but then you generate enormous heat if you do it right, and if you enter at the wrong angle you either burn up or bounce off the atmosphere like a skipping stone. I don't think other approaches (like using onboard rockets to get rid of most of the kinetic energy) are feasible.
That's not to say that these problems can't be solved. But acting like we're going to have space tourism tomorrow because some guys won the X-prize is mistakenly optimistic.
I think, though, that private companies offering satellite launching services with non-reusable vehicles is a much easier objective to achieve. For that, you don't have to worry about the problem of re-entry.
Re:Frustrated by the (lack) of coverage. (Score:4, Informative)
Fox News actually had quite a bit of coverage. They only cut away during the (fairly) boring hour when the White Knight was still ferrying SpaceShipOne to 50,000 feet. Once it got close to separation, Fox stayed with it until well after landing, interviewing Walter Cunningham (Apollo 7 astronaut), Peter Diamandis (X-Prize founder), Eric Anderson (President of Space Adventures), and George Whitesides (National Space Society Executive Director). Their footage of the flight was not first-hand (it had another logo in the corner, so it was being rebroadcast), but it was quite good.
Remember, MSNBC (and Newsweek, owned by them) were the ones who saw China become only the world's third spacefaring nation and say, "so what?" Even if we end up with "The World's Craziest Rocket Explosion Videos", at least Fox is looking spaceward, while the rest of the (national) media has their heads in the proverbial sand.
On a related note, local coverage was really good. I was at the first launch last Wednesday morning, volunteering in the parking lot. Approximately 3 hours after the local Tuesday evening news coverage in L.A., traffic got really heavy. Seems the news coverage was compelling enough to make people drive through the night to get to Mojave. Even if the talking heads don't care, America apparently does.
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:4, Informative)
It only takes 15 hours of instruction until you can solo under the new Sport Pilot rules, full license can be obtained in as little as 20 total hours (minimum).
Private pilot certificate is 20hrs to solo and 40hrs total (minimum).
It takes absolutely no permits or instruction for you to legally climb into your very own (single-seat) ultralight... though you'd be very silly to do it that way. Even if you wanted to get training, you're only looking at 10-15 hours of work before you're on your own.
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:3, Informative)
For anyone interested in the new Sport Pilot rules, visit the EAA's Sport Pilot website [sportpilot.org]. If your more interested in a private pilots license, I've found Cessna's Learn to Fly [learntofly.com] site and the AOPA [aopa.org] to be very valuable.
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:4, Informative)
According to the Research and Special Programs Administration Office of Hazardous Materials Safety (who said our government is bloated?) here are the stats:
Motor Vehicle
-General population risk for accidental death: 1 in 6,300 per year
-1.7 deaths per 100 million veh. miles
Commercial Air Carriers (Includes large and commuter airlines)
- General population risk for accidental death: 1 in 1,568,000 per year
- 0.19 deaths per million aircraft departures
To compare trip by trip risk, I'll estimate an average car trip at 20 miles. That yields 1.7 deaths per 5 million car trips, compared to about 1 death per 5 million airline departures. So using this estimate of car trip length, taking a car ride is almost twice as risky as taking a flight.
For some more perspective, I took a class on health care two years ago that spent a lot of time on an Institute of Medicine report [nap.edu]. The report is famous for showing that preventable medical errors in hospitals are responsible for more deaths every year than motor vehicle accidents.
And the industry that health care experts often use as a model for improvement? The airline industry.
So you're healthiest in a plane...if you can't afford to fly all day, then a car will do. But don't go to a hospital!
Re:Your comment is simply wrong (Score:3, Informative)
That may be true, but it's not really relevant, since most people aren't. And even if you personally are lucky enough to be "good, skilled, highly-responsive and attentive", many of the people driving alongside you are not, and any one of them could make a stupid mistake that ends up being fatal for you, with no chance of recovery.
The bottom line is: airplanes are maintained and piloted by highly trained professionals, and cars are driven (and generally not maintained) by anyone who can multiple-guess their way through a trivial 30 minute DMV test. That's why planes are safer in practice than cars.
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:2, Informative)
Original reference [realultimatepower.net] for the kids who don't get it. [wikipedia.org] Though not commonly mentioned in lists of slashdot trolls, many variants have appeared here. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to locate.
Re:Food for thought (Score:3, Informative)
Discovery Channel - Black Sky (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:3, Informative)
CLASSY: NASA CONGRATULATES SPACE SHIP ONE TEAM (Score:3, Informative)
Headquarters, Washington
Oct. 4, 2004
(Phone: 202/XXX-1898/1600)
RELEASE: 04-329
NASA CONGRATULATES SPACESHIPONE'S X PRIZE WIN
NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe today congratulated the
SpaceShipOne team on the third successful flight of a private
human spacecraft. The team also wins the $10 million X Prize
competition.
"Burt Rutan, Paul Allen and the rest of the SpaceShipOne team
are to be congratulated for this important achievement. They
successfully demonstrated a new human spacecraft, a new
propulsion system and a new high-altitude airborne launch
platform," said Administrator O'Keefe. "The spirit of
determination and innovation demonstrated today show that
America is excited about a new century of exploration and
discovery. We wish the SpaceShipOne team continued success
and many more safe flights," he added.
Aboard the International Space Station 230 miles up, the
Expedition 9 crew, made up of NASA astronaut Mike Fincke and
Russian Cosmonaut Gennady Padalka, noted that for a few
minutes this morning, they were joined in space by
SpaceShipOne pilot Brian Binnie. "From Gennady and myself and
the International Space Station team, congratulations on a
job well done, and we're really glad SpaceShipOne returned
safely," said Fincke.
The X Prize Foundation created a $10 million prize designed
to encourage space tourism through competition among
entrepreneurs, engineers and other rocketry experts. The
Ansari X Prize was conceived to reward the team, which
designed the first private spaceship to successfully fly to a
sub-orbital altitude of just over 62 miles (100 kilometers)
on two consecutive flights within two weeks.
The competition was modeled after the Orteig Prize, won in
1927 by Charles Lindberg for the first non-stop flight
between New York and Paris. All teams had to be privately
financed.
For information about SpaceShipOne and the White Knight
carrier aircraft on the Internet, visit:
http://www.scaled.com/
For information about NASA's exploration initiatives on the
Internet, visit:
http://www.exploration.nasa.gov/
-end-
* * *
NASA press releases and other information are available automatically
by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo@hq.nasa.gov.
In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type
the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes). The system will
reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription. A second
automatic message will include additional information on the service.
NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command
GO NASA. To unsubscribe from this mailing list, address an E-mail
message to domo@hq.nasa.gov, leave the subject blank, and type only
"unsubscribe press-release" (no quotes) in the body of the message.
Re:Summer Vacation In Outer Space (Score:5, Informative)
Pilot bios: http://scaled.com/projects/tierone/info.htm [scaled.com]