If I was a millionaire and could afford space tourism I would do it.

But I would want at least one lap of the earth, this doesn't really seem like proper space travel but I guess you have to start somewhere.

ap08, you're correct. I looked up the right figure at work today and vmax is around mach 4 at altitude (1150m/s).
Still faster than anything else we can fly, though.:ok:

.
The VGal publicity says: "Then the countdown to release, a brief moment of quiet before a wave of unimaginable but controlled power surges through the craft. You are instantly pinned back into your seat, overwhelmed but enthralled by the howl of the rocket motor and the eye-watering acceleration which, as you watch the read-out, has you traveling in a matter of seconds at almost 2500mph, over 3 times the speed of sound."

My sentiments entirely.
.

Wait a minute. How is Virgin getting away with this, isn't this a domestic flt seeing as it takes off and returns to New Mexico. And does this Capt Dave have a Green Card......LOL:rolleyes:

Rumor has it that the Americans were a bit "too casual" in on "the radio" for Sir Richard's liking. :}

Fascinating that this 100-percent Burt Rutan (Scaled Composites) project, which apparently many people who read this forum weren't even aware of, is suddenly "Sir Richard Branson's spaceship." Like an investment bank buying logo space on a Formula One car, Branson has had no more to do with Rutan's air/spacecraft than Red Bull had to do with building the Vought Corsair.

A good PR campaign, though.

Branson and Rutan have a longstanding association which became prominent when Richard formalised the funding behind the record-breaking Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer.

Rutan doesn't strike me as the media-hungry type and Branson doesn't appear to want to stand in a shop loading an autoclave with panels of composite material. To me it seems like the ideal partnership!

lemonchiffon

Actually...the Green Card statement is closer to the truth than might be imagined! The one guy no one has mentioned here who was picked to fly this little rocket long before your UK talent is a CANADIAN (with a Green Card) and flies for V USA...!!! Have a google for Virgin Galactic...there is a proud Canadian moment for you!:ok:

:rolleyes:

Congratulations Dave, at least one of us made it.

Reinhardt – nice, obviously your first assumption is that he wasn’t misquoted because that never happens. Or is English not your first language? If so please accept my apologies.

Max Angle – good question, they did advertise for them.

Montgolfier – fair point, but they have plans if this turns out to be profitable.

routemargo – is it lonely up on your pedestal? What system would you devise for deciding how private citizens are allowed to spend their hard earned money?

Otto Throttle – it was being talked about. Hopefully the VAA recruitment department has nothing to do with it.

Cacophonix – yep, its not going to be too glamorous in there.

SASKATOON9999 – it will have to last long enough for SRB to get bored with it and neglect his employees (again).

ReverseFlight – so are they.

Bus429 – who flies left seat of your aeroplanes?

Artificial Horizon – SS2 is a technological dead end in itself, but yes we can hope to get some good out of it. If profitable (and “safe”) private funding and innovation for “proper” space technology may be more forthcoming.

windytoo – not as far as I know unfortunately. Snookered by company and US Government BS.

BALLSOUT – Of course its not as safe as flying in a 747, thankfully there are braver souls around than you. I’m all for people being allowed to take risks rather than being nannied. Puts NASA to shame????? The CAA are not involved, they would have had to open a CAS department.

twochai – not even close to adding sufficient energy. Hence the technological dead end.

fmgc – I agree, but I’m not paying. From Dave’s point of view its got to beat flying “four engines for longhaul”.

filejw – don’t get me started.

stepwilk – indeed, Burt Rutan, one of the few remaining aerospace legends. SRB is no more just “buying logo space” than when British Airways buys a fleet of aeroplanes (mind you as long as it works the advertising for the empire must be a bonus). Obviously he is not an engineer – who claimed he was?

I really miss 411A, I wonder what his take on all this would have been?

Chocolate tray?
 

I hope he insists on having a chocolate tray on each flight. Otherwise old beardy will use it as an excuse to remove this indispensable crew perk from all other Virgin flights.

Branson most certainly didn't buy that air/spacecraft.

Case , 411A would have wished Captain Dave a good flt as do all of us I think. Yes the space ship thing is a bit of a put off to some with all the problems and troubles in the world. But in the end its an advancement for aviation and thats always a good thing. JW

Please do not take this as a narky reply but with the above attitude we may still think the Earth is round and not have the technology that we have today. Considering what it costs (opps, past tense cost) to launch the Space Shuttle or maybe better, a Mercury capsule) this is one small step for civilian space travel, one giant leap for commercial space travel.

My second biggest regret in life is that I will not get a chance to be a passenger in this primitive space machine. This reminds me of what flying may have been like when aeroplanes first started taking passengers. First the it was the mega rich, then the wealthy, then save all year (or more) and now half a days pay for a 3½ hour flight.

To butcher a famous quote: It is not even the beginning of the commercial space travel. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

The problem is that you can't compare SS2 to the Space Shuttle, they're totally different machines for totally different jobs. It's like comparing a C172 to Concorde.

Hopefully this will be sucessful, and if it is then SS2 will be a massive boost to commercial (human) spaceflight - but we're still a very, very, long way from orbital spaceflight.

No disrespect for Rutan´s achievements (like the first unrefueled fligth around the earth) but IMHO this is hardly a 'Spaceship'. It´s not even close to reach orbit. Basically just scratching the upper atmosphere. Imagine this 'yoghurt pot' reentering the atmosphere from a real space flight. Now that would be interesting to watch :p

At first glance, I wondered how this thread could possibly generate enough controversy to reach 3 pages. But after reading some of the responses I have my answer. :cool:

I'll add that I recently saw the Virgin Galactic "astronaut" job ad on one of those online aviation employment sites and had a good laugh imagining how many Walter Mitty CVs would appear in Sir Richard's inbox. :)

All humor aside, the job description and qualifications were better written than most I typically see. Those hired to do this job will be highly qualified. And being a pilot assigned to fly paying passengers above 100km must be an honor indeed. If I were a graduate of one of the recognized test pilot schools, I'd definitely apply.

I don't see any way to make such a venture profitable in the classic business sense, but perhaps that's not always the only goal behind Branson's actions.The man uses his money as he pleases. Profitability aside, I think there will be plenty of customers willing to pay the price for the thrill ride. Perhaps enough to fill hundreds of flights.

Virgin charters in the US likely has a client list sufficient to fill the seats for quite a while. Just looking at all the other members of the the target market for individual private jet ownership and charter world wide yields a respectable qualified customer base. One charter and management company where I worked considered this to be about the top 50,000 in individual net worth plus corporate entities. That's just the USA. All told, the world wide market has enough rich folks to fill the seats even if only one in a hundred of these highly elite would buy a ticket to ride. Many of them have kids and relatives too. As long as there are no disasters, they'll sell tickets.

I agree that from the standpoint of someone with an acute awareness of aviation and aerospace history, these flights aren't really very impressive in terms of pushing back the frontiers. And Rutan's rhetoric about NASA inefficiency aside, going to high altitude and gliding home on the cheap doesn't really capture the imagination like the accomplishments of yore. Personally, I'd much rather fly the X-15, 50-60 year old technology and all.

But even having said all that, I admire Burt Rutan's minimalist and cost effective yet innovative approach to design. Avoiding the thermal thicket by keeping the velocities down allows a plastic airplane to achieve altitudes normally attainable only by aircraft built with very expensive exotic materials and equipped with propulsion systems of much greater capacity. Emulating the air launch methodology of the 1940's X-plane seems anachronistic, but appears to address the limitations of the propulsion system and fuel capacity effectively enough to get the job done.

I wonder if Rutan and his merry band of innovators can find a way to overcome the thermodynamic and other challenges associated with orbital ops and re-entries less expensively than NASA. If so, perhaps the Virgin Galactic low Earth orbit hotel may one day be a possibility.

I wish them all the success in (and beyond) the world.

Russians promise 'Space Hotel' within 5 years

Perhaps not wishing to be left behind in the development of private space travel a Russian company has promised to deliver a 'space hotel' by 2016.

http://i.cdn.cnngo.com/sites/default...main_image.jpg
Russia's space hotel, or Commercial Space Station, will be aimed at wealthy space tourists as well as corporate and industrial researchers

More

lemonchiffon

...and, back at Virgin Galactic...

I just noticed a TV ad down here in Aus for the first time tonight. Virgin Finance is now running a contest whereby, if you buy insurance from them before the end of September, you can enter a contest where the first prize is a free trip on Virgin Galactic.

Doesn't mean a great deal...except this is the first time I've noticed promotion for the flights getting into the main stream. I suspect it must mean they're feeling close to having a product.

Wonder if it will actually make anyone buy a policy!

Here is the SS2s intended flight profile:

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-imag...n.galactic.gif

Hang on... it says crew of 2. Who is the other crew member?

And "pulling 6G on re-entry"? That sounds like fun! :E

I don't get that "feather" mode though

case One, well you do seem to be very self opinionated for someone aged only five! I don't think risk taking just for the fun of it can be classed as bravery. Bravery is something our boys and girls out in Afganistan are demonstrating every day, It's not something being demonstrated by a bunch of rich kids booking flights on Galactica!

This guy must be crazy. It's one thing to take risks and suffer discomfort, but here we are talking about a MASSIVE radiation exposure. It's not going to happen.

ap08, we're not talking about "massive" radiation exposure. The highest exposure on an apollo mission was just under 3 Rem - about the same as a pilot will experience in ten years.
So it's a relatively high dose of radiation, but not massive. If my memory is correct then the risk of getting cancer would be increased by no more than 0.4% as a result of that amount of radiation.

There are some problems with this 3 Rem number:
1. Rem is not the best unit to measure the effects of radiation exposure. The effect on the human body depends not just on the dose, but also on the type of radiation absorbed. During lunar missions, the astronaut is exposed to an unusual type of radiation - extremely energetic particles from outside the solar system, whose biological effect is not well known, because the only way to get exposed to such radiation on earth is to put your head in a particle accelerator. There are reports of flashes seen by astronauts with their eyes closed, the cause of such flashes is unknown but the most probable cause are those high energy cosmic rays. Radiation that is able to create flashes in your eyes, can't be good for your health...
2. The exact exposure is not predictable. An unexpected spike in solar activity can increase the exposure many times. If there were just a few Apollo missions and they reached 3 Rem - it is reasonable to assume that during hundreds or thousands of missions, the maximum exposure will be several times higher.
3. The effect of "small" radiation doses is the subject of debate. No one can say for certain that a certain dose is "safe".

EDIT: here is some evidence that the Apollo missions were not harmless for the astronauts health...
"At least 39 former astronauts have suffered some form of cataracts after flying in space, according to a 2001 study by Francis Cucinotta of NASA's Johnson Space Center (see journal references below). Of those 39 astronauts, 36 had flown on high-radiation missions such as the Apollo Moon landings. Some cataracts appeared as soon as 4 or 5 years after the mission, but others took 10 or more years to manifest."
Blinding Flashes - NASA Science

The entire tail assembly--horizontal and dual vertical stabilizers--rotates up and forward into a very high-drag position, then relaxes into its normal position when the aircraft had "re-entered" and is at a safe airspeed. This negates the need for high-temp skins to survive atmospheric friction, since the aircraft never reaches high airspeeds.

The tail "feathering" has been a standard feature of free-flight model airplanes for decades, usually set off by a fused hold-down that burns through after a certain amount of time, to prevent the model from flying beyond a recoverable distance.

6 g on re-entry ? that immediately made irrelevant the applications of hundreds of button-pushers and SOP callers...

Does anyone seriously think that the risk of cancer is even close to the risk of getting killed by the flight itself?

I very much doubt whether typical personal life insurance policies (which exclude "hazardous activities") would count this as anything but "hazardous".

I can also imagine, in the event of loss of the aircraft, some shareholders of the companies run by the wealthy individuals who will be on board, asking some questions about the company's risk policy.

What surprises me is the velocities projected on that flight profile diagram posted above. Running mach 4 at various altitudes between 20 and 50 kilometers through an online atmospheric properties calculator, it appears that some parts of the vehicle skin may be exposed to total air temperatures exceeding 700 degrees C. Not your typical Long-EZ!

Edited to add that: Even if the ship is accelerated to mach 4 while level at 50,000' then zoom climbed to apogee, total air temp still exceeds 600 C.

Does the craft have any form of reacrion controls, oris the whole thing ballistic once the conventional controls don't work?

ap08, the radiation discussion is tangential - if you want to continue it then jetblast is probably the place to do so.

For the original spaceshipone the max velocity (about 960m/s) was at burnout, altitude about 55km. Peak heating was a little lower and the max temperature was just over 600C.

Because it doesn't go much out of the atmosphere the conventional controls should be functional for most of the flight. It wil lhave a reaction control system fitted, though.

Virgin's passenger spaceship completes first rocket test flight

Virgin's passenger spaceship completes first rocket test flight | Reuters

Hate to divert the thread on a slight tangent however I have a question regarding the operation of a commercial flight within the US? Which I think this is.

If so will US DOT procedures apply?

Thinking back to the Virgin America debacle it doesn't appear that Virgin Galactic qualifies to operate commerical flights in the US because its ownership is not by "US citizens":

VG appears to be a wholly owned subsiderary of Virgin Group.

David Mackay does indeed seem to be highly qualified for this job. However, I have never heard his name in gliding circles.

I'm sure some gliding would be useful. He will need to get the landing right first time in SS2! My old gliding clubs at Tibenham or Cambridge might oblige. You never know, they might give him a free course - that would be wonderful publicity for the club concerned.

Rocket Science is easy, its just Newton's 3rd law.

Rocket engineering on the other hand.... that can be tricky.

You won't find many space shuttle, X-15 or lifting body pilots well known in gliding circles either (granted there are a few).

Not really, the "standard" high energy approach technique for landing low L/D aircraft has nothing in common with that for landing sailplanes. Practice flame-outs in fast jets (or PFLs in an Extra 300) are alot more useful.

Dave has plenty of the above, I'm sure he'll cope.

:rolleyes:

Sorry Jack.

Sorry if it upsets any gliding fans but what SS2 requires at the end of each flight is nothing that is even vaguely related to the sport of gliding.

Many moons ago I did some low L/D operations as well as enjoyed a Discus (for example). The Discus needed some thought, aptitude and currency to be operated well (and what a delight it was). But low L/D is a totally different kettle of fish. It is actually easier to land from a glide angle of some 45deg and with a speed of 250kts that the Discus ever will be.

Why so? Because when you are pointing down at the ground at 45deg and a stabilised 250kt your impact point becomes pretty clear. So all you have to do is adjust the impact point to the beginning of the lead in lights, pull out of the dive at low level and drift down the lead in lights while the speed bleeds back and land on the numbers at 150-170 kt. No skill. Don’t worry about the wind either.

To the onlookers the pilot who keeps doing this spot landing day after day appears to be some sort of flying god. He is nothing of the sort because it is so easy.

To practice this sort of approach using a Hunter I liked 10,000 ft in the vicinity of the downwind leg, then with gear down and full flap dive at the flap limit of 250ft as described above. Absolute doddle.

Mind you getting the SS2 to the start of such a circuit is something else again – and also has nothing to do with the sport of gliding.