Rutan hits 200k feet! Almost there!

In article ,
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

The problem is that merely reaching the altitude is only a
part of the problem. The real issue is achieving orbital velocity

No, it's not.

http://www.xprize.org/teams/guidelines.html

"3. The flight vehicle must be flown twice within a 14-day period. Each
flight must carry at least one person, to minimum altitude of 100 km
(62 miles). The flight vehicle must be built with the capacity (weight
and volume) to carry a minimum of 3 adults of height 188 cm (6 feet 2
inches) and weight 90 kg (198 pounds) each. Three people of this size
or larger must be able to enter, occupy, and be fastened into the
flight vehicle on Earth's surface prior to take-off, and equivalent
ballast must be carried in-flight if the number of persons on-board
during flight is less than 3 persons."

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
.com...
In article ,
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

The problem is that merely reaching the altitude is only a
part of the problem. The real issue is achieving orbital velocity

No, it's not.

http://www.xprize.org/teams/guidelines.html


I'm aware of the rules of the X prize. Lots of posters in this thread have
made
comparisons with NASA and alluded to civilian space flight.
You need to achieve orbital velocity to do that.


Keith

From: "Keith Willshaw"
Date: 5/14/2004 3:26 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Steve Hix" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

The earlier flights were not done in a re-usable spacecraft.

So what?

So that is a large part of what makes it different from the single-shot
suborbital flights of the past.

Not to mention the thousands of man-hours and cast of thousands needed
to turn around the shuttle.

One step on the road to non-government, gold-plated, decades-long
development projects type spaceflight.

The problem is that merely reaching the altitude is only a
part of the problem. The real issue is achieving orbital velocity
and the Rutan aircraft doesnt achive much more than 15%
of the velocity required to put something in orbit.

Keith

The X-prize doesn't require orbital flight. Only that it reach a certain hight
with 3 persons aboard and is repeated with the same craft within a specified
period.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

In article ,
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

"Steve Hix" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

The earlier flights were not done in a re-usable spacecraft.

So what?

So that is a large part of what makes it different from the single-shot
suborbital flights of the past.

Not to mention the thousands of man-hours and cast of thousands needed
to turn around the shuttle.

One step on the road to non-government, gold-plated, decades-long
development projects type spaceflight.

The problem is that merely reaching the altitude is only a
part of the problem. The real issue is achieving orbital velocity
and the Rutan aircraft doesnt achive much more than 15%
of the velocity required to put something in orbit.

That's not the point of this particular exercise.

Lindbergh didn't take any passengers, or significant cargo, either.

In article ,
"C J Campbell" writes:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...
Where's the similarity? The Wrights were the first to achieve powered,
sustained, controlled heavier-than-air flight. Nobody had accomplished
that

before the Wrights on December 17, 1903. But manned suborbital flight HAS
been accomplished before, four times before, and it was last done over
forty
years ago. If manned suborbital spaceflight had any real usefulness why
did
it stop?


The earlier flights were not done in a re-usable spacecraft.

Most definitely _not_ the case (Or to quote Mary Shafer, "Wrong,
wrong, wrongitty wrong!")
The two suborbital Mercury flights were not my re-usable spacecraft,
But they weren't the only spacecraft used.

On July 19, 1963, Joe Walker, flying X-15 66672, reached an altitude
of 347,800'. (Flight 3-21-3, Mission # 90 in the X-15 program.

On August 22, 1963, Walker, again flying 66672, reached an altitude of
354,200'. (Flight 3-22-36, Mission # 91 in the X-15 program.

Are you trying to say that the X-15 wasn't reusable? That'll come as
a big surprise to the people who got 199 flights out of 3 aircraft.

Note that the August 22 flight was originally scheduled to be flown on
Aug 6, 1963, but was aborted before launch due to a systems problem
(Computer overheat). There was an attempt to refly on Aug 13, 1963
that was aborted after an APU wouldn't start. Another reply attempt
of Aug 15 was aborted due to weather. So the second flight could very
easily have occurred on Aug 6.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster