Can Branson Charge For Flights In An Experimental Aircraft?

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:tHonj.10$9g.9@trndny07...

Did the Soviets check with the FAA when they launched Sputnik?


Doubtful. Why do you ask?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:tHonj.10$9g.9@trndny07...

Did the Soviets check with the FAA when they launched Sputnik?


Doubtful. Why do you ask?



You stated the FAA has been involved 'since the start'.

The Start was in 1957.

In article tHonj.10$9g.9@trndny07,
"Steve Foley" wrote:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"cavalamb himself" wrote in message
...

When has FAA ever been involved space craft systems?


From the start.



Did the Soviets check with the FAA when they launched Sputnik?

Wasn't manned, was it?

On Jan 28, 9:04*am, Larry Dighera wrote:
Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?

I didn't see anything in the article that suggested the vehicle would
be certified as experimental when passengers were riding. I would
assume he would have the certificate before the paying pax arrived.

-Robert

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:57:53 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"
wrote in
:

On Jan 28, 9:04*am, Larry Dighera wrote:
Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?

I didn't see anything in the article that suggested the vehicle would
be certified as experimental when passengers were riding.

That was a presumably erroneous assumption on my part.

I would assume he would have the certificate before the paying pax arrived.


It would appear that Part 91 may not apply in the case of space
flight, as the FAA seems to have implemented new Parts for that:


http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...t/regulations/
Commercial Space Transportation Regulations

Regulations
Part 400 — Bases and Scope
Part 401 — Organization and Definitions
Part 404 — Regulations and Licensing Requirements
Part 405 — Investigations and Enforcement
Part 406 — Investigations, Enforcement, and Administrative Review
Part 413 — License Application Procedures
Part 414 — Safety Approvals
Part 415 — Launch License
Part 417 — Launch Safety
Part 420 — License to Operate a Launch Site
Part 431 — Launch and Reentry of a Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV)
Part 433 — License to Operate a Reentry Site
Part 435 — Reentry of a Reentry Vehicle Other than a Reusable
Launch Vehicle (RLV)
Part 437 — Experimental Permits
Part 440 — Financial Responsibility
Part 460 — Human Space Flight Requirements
Complete FAA/AST Regulations, 14 CFR Chapter III (PDF, 4.4 MB)
Miscellaneous Changes to Commercial Space Transportation
Regulations; Final Rule (PDF) (8/31/2006)



http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...2.9.24&idno=14
Title 14: Aeronautics and Space

PART 460—HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS

Subpart A—Launch and Reentry with Crew

§ 460.1 Scope.
§ 460.3 Applicability.
§ 460.5 Crew qualifications and training.
§ 460.7 Operator training of crew.
§ 460.9 Informing crew of risk.
§ 460.11 Environmental control and life support systems.
§ 460.13 Smoke detection and fire suppression.
§ 460.15 Human factors.
§ 460.17 Verification program.
§ 460.19 Crew waiver of claims against U.S. Government.
§§ 460.20-460.40 [Reserved]


Subpart B—Launch and Reentry with a Space Flight participant

§ 460.41 Scope.
§ 460.43 Applicability.
§ 460.45 Operator informing space flight participant of risk.
§ 460.47 [Reserved]
§ 460.49 Space flight participant waiver of claims against U.S.
Government.
§ 460.51 Space flight participant training.
§ 460.53 Security.


Without having digested all the new regulations, I presume it is the
"§ 460.49 Space flight participant waiver of claims against U.S.
Government" that permits commercial operations. It's probably clearly
buried somewhere in he
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...2.9.22&idno=14

Larry Dighera wrote in
:


Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?


You are dead inside, Larry.


Dead

Bertie

On 28 Jan, 18:25, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote :



Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?

You are dead inside, Larry.

Dead

Bertie

Pure class!

You are of course a right Royal Pain in the Ass.

But worth it:-)

wrote in
:

On 28 Jan, 18:25, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote
:



Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?

You are dead inside, Larry.

Dead

Bertie

Pure class!

You are of course a right Royal Pain in the Ass.

But worth it:-)




I wouldn't have it any other way.


Bertie

On Jan 28, 12:04 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?

I believe the FAA has issued rules allowing private suborbital
spacecraft to carry paying passengers using a launch license rules
rather than aircraft certification. Essentially, launch licenses only
require the operator to certify that the uninvolved public will not be
unduly put in danger by the flight- they do *not* require the operator
to prove that the passengers will not be endangered. I believe
there's a requirement that the pax sign releases saying that they
understand the terms under which the flight is being conducted, but I
could be wrong.

There was actually a fairly big argument in the nascent suborbital
passenger community a few years ago as to whether suborbital
operations should be covered under certification or launch licenses.
Burt Rutan (designer of the WK/SS1 system) actually wanted to
implement something akin to certification, arguing that the new
industry had to be safe for passengers or it would never get off the
ground. Most other would-be suborbital operators disagreed, arguing
that there was not enough data currently available on suborbital ops
to even define what certification standards should be in that regime,
let alone determine whether or not their vehicles met those standards,
and that if they were required to certify their vehicles it would
effectively strange the industry in its cradle by delaying revenue-
producing flights for too long. The launch license guys have won out
for the moment, although I believe there's a Congressman who keeps
trying to legislatively change the rules.

-JTD

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:22:05 -0800 (PST), Jeff Dougherty
wrote in
:

On Jan 28, 12:04 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
Is Branson going to certify White Knight Two and SpaceShipTwo?

I believe the FAA has issued rules allowing private suborbital
spacecraft to carry paying passengers using a launch license rules
rather than aircraft certification. Essentially, launch licenses only
require the operator to certify that the uninvolved public will not be
unduly put in danger by the flight- they do *not* require the operator
to prove that the passengers will not be endangered. I believe
there's a requirement that the pax sign releases saying that they
understand the terms under which the flight is being conducted, but I
could be wrong.

There was actually a fairly big argument in the nascent suborbital
passenger community a few years ago as to whether suborbital
operations should be covered under certification or launch licenses.
Burt Rutan (designer of the WK/SS1 system) actually wanted to
implement something akin to certification, arguing that the new
industry had to be safe for passengers or it would never get off the
ground. Most other would-be suborbital operators disagreed, arguing
that there was not enough data currently available on suborbital ops
to even define what certification standards should be in that regime,
let alone determine whether or not their vehicles met those standards,
and that if they were required to certify their vehicles it would
effectively strange the industry in its cradle by delaying revenue-
producing flights for too long. The launch license guys have won out
for the moment, although I believe there's a Congressman who keeps
trying to legislatively change the rules.

-JTD


This is interesting information. Thank you for your input.

It would seem that Sir Branson has found a way to generate revenue
with suborbital flights despite Mr. Rutan's admonition. It will be
interesting to see how commercialized suborbital recreational
operations progress.