Topic: Surprisingly

[knightstorm]

I'm much more enthusiastic about this than I am about what NASA is doing.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/03/spaceshiptwo-makes-first-captive-flight/

[stoneyface]

yep i got my email from them today talking about this.

i hate to say it but, nasa is a dinosaur of a forgotten golden age of space...

[knightstorm]

I wouldn't call them a dinosaur, but they definitely went in the wrong direction during the last decade with regards to their manned program.  Canceling the Venturestar was a huge mistake.

[Nemesis]

On a similar topic SpaceX has had their Falcon 9 on the pad doing test burns.  Launch should come in the next few months (maybe April).

[Tulwar]

I wouldn't call them a dinosaur, but they definitely went in the wrong direction during the last decade with regards to their manned program.  Canceling the Venturestar was a huge mistake.

Lockeed was trying the most radical techniques to make the ship as efficient as possible.  Unfortunately, this meant many failures and cost overruns.  I always thought this was the reason that NASA, the government, was the only entity that could afford spaceflight:  it's expensive and unprofitable.  It is regrettable but understandable that the Bush Administration cancelled the project.  Boeing was working on a more conventional replacement for the shuttle, and that program was cancelled at the same time without much explanation.

I've always liked the concept of launching a spacecraft from an airplane.  The launch aircraft is a modern version of the WWII He-111z.  Only the government can the pay the bill on radical, new technologies, but private industry is there to figure out how to make a profit on whatever has already proven.  It's just a matter of putting the parts together.

[knightstorm]

Lockeed was trying the most radical techniques to make the ship as efficient as possible.

I find this perfectly understandable, considering the fact that the Space Shuttle had been envisioned as being substantially cheaper to operate than it turned out to be.

[Bonk]

Yeah, I got this eerie "the future is now" feeling reading the story on the bus the other day. Felt like I was at the beginning of an Asimov or Heinlein novel.  Felt a bit like a kid.

(In particular it was the name of the system that got me... lemme look it up... I forget already. Ah it was the designer's name: Rutan. The Rutan Design by Scaled Composites - has the ring of something the likes of Asimov, Clarke or Heinlein might come up with)

http://www.metronews.ca/ArticlePrint/484359?language=en

[Nemesis]

(In particular it was the name of the system that got me... lemme look it up... I forget already. Ah it was the designer's name: Rutan. The Rutan Design by Scaled Composites - has the ring of something the likes of Asimov, Clarke or Heinlein might come up with)

Virgin Galactics Spaceship Two.  As I recall Sigourney Weaver has signed up to be an early passenger but William Shatner won't go.  Suborbital hops only, virtually straight up and down. 

SpaceX is more interesting to me as they have already demonstrated the Falcon 1 having the abiity to put (small) payloads in orbit.  The Falcon 9 will do larger payloads and the Falcon 9 Heavy will be capable of delivering people to the space station. All while keeping the main stage reusable (in theory, not yet demonstrated).

[Tulwar]

I find this perfectly understandable, considering the fact that the Space Shuttle had been envisioned as being substantially cheaper to operate than it turned out to be.

When the space shuttle was concieved, the booster was going to be a suborbital spacecraft that landed on a runway as well.  It was too expensive, so they strapped that PoS to the bottom, instead.

Now, if you want NASA to develope wild, new technologies, the government is going to have to come up with some money.   The government is never going to cut back on anything else to give the space program more money, so the government is either going to have to raise taxes, or get out of the buisness of building rocket ships.  Back in the sixties, the government was raking in so much money, that Kennedy had to cut taxes and start a major space initiative to keep from running surpluses!

Today, the only government that has that type of money is the People's Republic of China.  People in our government, universities, industry, and media have been bending over backwards to pour all of our wealth into that nation.

[knightstorm]

When the space shuttle was concieved, the booster was going to be a suborbital spacecraft that landed on a runway as well.  It was too expensive, so they strapped that PoS to the bottom, instead.

The Space Shuttle had huge unforeseen maintenance requirements which jacked up the costs, and increased the amount of time needed to get it ready for relaunch.  Additionally, the Challenger accident soured them on the idea of building an orbiter which required external boosters.

Also, regarding the venturestar's technologies being risky.  The only component that I would apply that term to would be the carbon composite fuel tank which is part of what did it in.  After the one made for the X-33 failed its test, a new fuel tank was made out of the same aluminum lithium alloy used in the shuttle's fuel tanks.  It turns out that the conventional material worked better.  Although the tank itself was heavier, it didn't require the fittings needed for the composite tank resulting in a net weight loss, and the tank could be shaped to make better use of available space allowing for more fuel to be carried.  The problem was that NASA never intended to build a full scale venturestar themselves, but rather to entice private aerospace companies to build and operate them.  A venturestar built with the new fuel tank was too expensive to be commercially viable.

[Nemesis]

The shuttle was designed with a number of options that were never used.

For example:

1/ Mount the main engines on the bottom of the fuel tank.  Put a cargo on top of the tank and either 2 or 4 solid boosters mounted like the existing shuttle.  The main engines parachute back. 

2/ Take the fuel tank to orbit.  A cluster of them become a space station.  Remaining fuel is drained into one tank and set aside for use in an interplanetary vehicle.

Option 1/ could have a manned capsule in place of the cargo module (or as well as a reduced module). 

There were other options as I recall as well.

[Tulwar]

The Space Shuttle had huge unforeseen maintenance requirements which jacked up the costs, and increased the amount of time needed to get it ready for relaunch.  Additionally, the Challenger accident soured them on the idea of building an orbiter which required external boosters.

Also, regarding the venturestar's technologies being risky.  The only component that I would apply that term to would be the carbon composite fuel tank which is part of what did it in.  After the one made for the X-33 failed its test, a new fuel tank was made out of the same aluminum lithium alloy used in the shuttle's fuel tanks.  It turns out that the conventional material worked better.  Although the tank itself was heavier, it didn't require the fittings needed for the composite tank resulting in a net weight loss, and the tank could be shaped to make better use of available space allowing for more fuel to be carried.  The problem was that NASA never intended to build a full scale venturestar themselves, but rather to entice private aerospace companies to build and operate them.  A venturestar built with the new fuel tank was too expensive to be commercially viable.

I'm a big fan of the Venturestar.  It would have been exactly what a space shuttle should be.  If it had not been made cost effective enough for private industry, NASA and the military should have been able to make it happen.  Unfortunately, the money is not there, anymore.

[Sirgod]

I think we all know the shuttle was going to be having Financial problems , when they stopped Painting the Fuel tank, in like what, two years into there mission?

But I agree with Tulwar and others. Seeing Private industry go ahead, is great. I wish them all the best of luck.

Stephen

[Riskyllama]

I think we all know the shuttle was going to be having Financial problems , when they stopped Painting the Fuel tank, in like what, two years into there mission?

pretty sure that was because of the weight, not the cost of paint

[Sirgod]

You might be right. I was still kinda young at the time. I could have sworn though , it was a cost cutting measure.

Stephen

[knightstorm]

I'm a big fan of the Venturestar.  It would have been exactly what a space shuttle should be.  If it had not been made cost effective enough for private industry, NASA and the military should have been able to make it happen.  Unfortunately, the money is not there, anymore.

The airforce did want to take over the program after NASA pulled out, but was blocked by the whitehouse.  I think it might have been for political reasons, considering that by that point development of the X-33 was starting to make progress again, and it was 85% complete.  Although there are some conspiracy websites which will claim that the airforce succeeded and currently operates its own secret fleet of venturestars.

[Tulwar]

Now, the Air Force did have a shuttle facility built, back in the 1980's.  I'm not sure how complete it was, but construction ended after it was revealed that the concrete was of an inferior grade, and would not withstand the stress of moving heavy machinery and close proximity to a launchpad.  It was amazing how quietly that was done, as well as the massive waste of tax dollars.

[knightstorm]

Technically they didn't build it from scratch, they converted it from a launch site that was originally intended for their manned spy satellite program.  It turned out that the using the existing ducts  would entrap hydrogen causing the risk of an explosion during launch.  Add to that, the rapidly erected structures showed signs of shoddy construction, and there were problems with the site that hadn't been previously anticipated.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/facility/vafb-slc-6.htm

[Tus-XC]

Now, the Air Force did have a shuttle facility built, back in the 1980's.  I'm not sure how complete it was, but construction ended after it was revealed that the concrete was of an inferior grade, and would not withstand the stress of moving heavy machinery and close proximity to a launchpad.  It was amazing how quietly that was done, as well as the massive waste of tax dollars.

That would be at vandenberg AFB.  That is why it has a freaken huge runway yet no flyin squadron.  If i'm not mistaken the facilities are mostly there.  Though i don't think it was concrete that was the problem but the challenger shuttle going boom that caused the funds to be yanked.