Skip to comments.
t/Space Demonstrates New Air-Launch Technology
Business Wire ^
| 06/14/05
Posted on 06/14/2005 6:08:30 PM PDT by KevinDavis
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
Excellent...
To: RightWhale; Brett66; xrp; gdc314; anymouse; RadioAstronomer; NonZeroSum; jimkress; discostu; ...
2
posted on
06/14/2005 6:09:04 PM PDT
by
KevinDavis
(the space/future belongs to the eagles, the earth/past to the groundhogs)
To: KevinDavis
a four-person capsule into orbit Somehow it seems like getting into orbit is the easy part, not that it is all that easy. Getting back, though, seems to be a challenge unless they use something shaped like a rock without wings.
3
posted on
06/14/2005 6:11:22 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Some may think I am a methodist)
To: KevinDavis
Or perhaps a slightly rounded brick. A skipping stone shape would be dangerous if one of the control ropes breaks or gets twisted.
4
posted on
06/14/2005 6:16:11 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Some may think I am a methodist)
To: KevinDavis
I am unable to visual a parachute on the nozzle, assuming the nozzle would be on the bottom end and I can't think of anywhere else it would be.
5
posted on
06/14/2005 7:03:55 PM PDT
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
Comment #6 Removed by Moderator
To: Buster777
a special mechanism that holds on to the nose of the booster for about a half-second after the center of the rocket is released. This slight tug on the nose starts the booster rotating as it drops. A small parachute on the rocket's nozzle ensures the rotation happens slowly.I suppose it is deployed while the rocket is horizontal and somewhat controls the bottom, or nozzle end, as it drops and starts it to rotate. Heck, I don't know. I ain't no rocket scientist.
7
posted on
06/14/2005 7:26:51 PM PDT
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
To: Mind-numbed Robot
8
posted on
06/14/2005 7:36:16 PM PDT
by
Brett66
(Where government advances – and it advances relentlessly – freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
To: KevinDavis
About 15 years ago one the WINGS series at the discovery channel, they showed footage of the Air Force experimenting wihh this method for air launch of ICBM's.
A C-141 was used and a drogue chute dragged the whole assembly out of the airplane, then the support railing for the missile fell away, finally the rocket launched in mid-air.
I can't see it being used for civil transport application, JMO
To: Brett66
Looks like they borrowed the White Knight (Spaceship One's carrier plane) to do the testing. Or is that a different plane? It definitely looks like a Rutan design.
}:-)4
10
posted on
06/14/2005 8:06:51 PM PDT
by
Moose4
(Richmond, Virginia--commemorating 140 years of Yankee occupation.)
To: Moose4; All
Burt Rutan is part of tSpace..
11
posted on
06/14/2005 8:08:05 PM PDT
by
KevinDavis
(the space/future belongs to the eagles, the earth/past to the groundhogs)
To: Moose4
Yep, Burt's finding many uses for the White Knight, he's also going to build an Uber-White Knight to launch much larger payloads:
12
posted on
06/14/2005 8:11:28 PM PDT
by
Brett66
(Where government advances – and it advances relentlessly – freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
To: Moose4
This is the White Knight.
The aircraft below is the Proteus.
13
posted on
06/14/2005 8:22:48 PM PDT
by
Dr.Zoidberg
(Children's classic songs updated for Islam "If you're happy and you know it, Go Kaboom!")
To: Moose4
Just for clarification, the Proteus is the one doing the drop in post 8.
14
posted on
06/14/2005 8:24:57 PM PDT
by
Dr.Zoidberg
(Children's classic songs updated for Islam "If you're happy and you know it, Go Kaboom!")
To: Brett66
Thanks Brett. At first blush I could only see it trying to deploy back into the nozzle.
15
posted on
06/14/2005 8:57:26 PM PDT
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
To: Brett66
Maybe he can talk Boeing out of a 787.
16
posted on
06/14/2005 8:58:52 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Some may think I am a methodist)
To: KevinDavis
I am for civilians in space, and space exploration to the moon and beyond. But I disagree with this article.
1. Its not a breakthrough.
2. Its not innovation
3. Its not safe launch for future passenger-carrying rockets
To: chariotdriver
It is great for a payload though.
18
posted on
06/15/2005 7:00:10 AM PDT
by
Dominick
("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
To: chariotdriver
3. Its not safe launch for future passenger-carrying rockets Why not? Unless you think the only answer to passengers is single stage to orbit, this is just another form of staging. And it may even be safer than traditional staging.
To: hopespringseternal; Dominick
SSTT is not the issue I was attacking.
If a failure occurred, don't you see a problem with a lunch vehicle in an uncontrolled free-fall? Then explain how this method would be safer than traditional staging.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson