A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

spaceship one



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old June 23rd 04, 02:35 PM
pacplyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Richard Lamb wrote
NOW (finally) we might get a better story that the
silly superficial questions asked by the news media.


How about this Richard: America has returned to manned space
launches... and it's not NASA!

We rocked around in an RV all night in 40 kt winds the night before
and were worried that the launch was going to be scrubbed. But
luckily high pressure was over the area and wind died down right
before taxi out. My friend Bubba flew Richard Branson in to Mojave in
a high dollar three blade helo and then landed him back on the top of
the theme restaurant at LAX (he just can't seem to make a low profile
entry anywhere!) William Shantner was supposedly there as well as Buzz
Aldrin. Most of the event was covered by a local FM station but they
screwed it up pretty bad so we just listened to the scanner. The wind
was still blowing stiff after t/o on top of our RV so I missed a lot
of the air to air conversation, but if anybody wants, I'll try to
narrate what I saw in detail. The test pilot community let me in on a
little secret: a major control failure occurred during launch and the
gyro Rutan used for attitude control tumbled (lost alignment.) This
caused an unplanned departure from the vertical profile. Mike M. took
over manually and saved the son of a bitch just in time! However,
this S-turn maneuver put them over 20 miles off course on the re-entry
window! They still made the downwind gear-down position no sweat. I'm
surprised they didn't relate this drama to the media (did they?) since
it kind of parallels John Glenn's re-entry problems (except this was
on launch.) Rutan plans to go into orbit next. Maybe if the media
isn't smart enough to know about this it's better; I just don't know.

I worried that the shuttle cock had to work perfectly twice in a row
and felt like this was a 50/50 operation. Burt had told an engineer
who works for him when the project began: "The problem with NASA is
that they're not killing enough astronauts." Burt is a genius in my
mind because he is willing to hang it way out there and try things no
one else would dare. For example: the attitude control system when
the vehicle is out of the atmosphere is just compressed air! What
would happen if a little moisture froze up the attitude air valves?
The whole thing was a complete cliff hanger! It is equivalent in my
mind to watching the Mayflower disappear over the horizon bound for
the new world. I'll never forget it.

pacplyer
  #32  
Old June 23rd 04, 03:06 PM
Harry K
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Felger Carbon" wrote in message hlink.net...
"B2431" wrote in message
...

I think one of the tidiest actions was when the pilot left the

aircraft just a
few minutes after landing unlike 20 minutes or so while the space

shuttle is
purged of poisonous gasses.


Uh, waiting for the hull temperature to cool down so the crew doesn't
get burned while egressing? ;-)


I don't see where jeers at the space program have anything to do with
this performance.

Not trying to take anything away from the crew but this is a long way
from being able to do the same thing as the shuttle. For one, they
have a long way to go if the goal is to achieve orbit (I don't think
it is). For two, their method of re-entry will never work if
returning from orbit. An admirable achievement nonetheless.

Harry K
  #33  
Old June 23rd 04, 03:12 PM
ChuckSlusarczyk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , FlyGuy says...

Chuck! You are just not being fair to Zoom. After all, he is probably
the most qualified person to be in the chase plane. Remember, he *is*
a graduate of the Test Pilot School! This could come in handy, should
there be any re-entry problems, where they need Jim to "talk the pilot
back to earth". Besides, this is a risky flight, and if there were any
medical problems, Jim's extensive medical background could come in
handy too.

Thank God he was there to let mission control know they suffered some
damage on the fuselage.


ROFL!! good thing I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that. I guess your right
I wasn't thinking :-) They probably read his bio on one of his book covers and
wondered "where has this guy been hiding for so long?" I bet they got him for a
song. Actually I bet he was such a pest and nag the let him do it just to get
some peace and quiet. Yup ,engineer,designer,skilled parachutist, medical
Doctor,writer ,author, publisher, test pilot,savior of Bob Hoover ,Savior of
aviation, savior of the Etheopians, flight instructor,air show performer,
critic and self proclaimed conscience of homebuilt aviation. WOW what a guy and
no wonder he got to go.LOL!!! He's still a phony , now he's a phony who got a
ride in a Beech Star ship and took some pictures. He'll be bragging about this
for a long time. I'd sure like to know the rest of the story.


Wonder if he'll be on th next one or if he wore out his welcome when he started
to tell his tall tails???

Sheesh of all the photographers they got zoom.

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it about credibility and he still has none" chuck s

  #34  
Old June 23rd 04, 03:58 PM
Richard Lamb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

pacplyer wrote:

The whole thing was a complete cliff hanger! It is equivalent in my
mind to watching the Mayflower disappear over the horizon bound for
the new world. I'll never forget it.

pacplyer


Amen, Pacman.

I only got to watch on CNN, but I was on the edge of my seat,
even during the commercials.

A few weeks ago, bored outta what's left of my mind, I picked up
a few library books on the early space program. I had read all
the hero stuff years back. "The Right Stuff" and "Apollo 13"
tended to emphasize the glory with precious little hard technical
details.

But "Lost Moon", Lovell's side of the Apollo 13 story, and most
especially Gene Krantz's "Failure is Not an Option" gets right
into the nuts and bolts of those early days. They better describe
not just what happened, but why and how it happened.

It's down right scary how critical the most minor details are when
entering a new environment that is as hostile as space.

Your comment about a how a little moisture in an air tank could freeze
up a valve, potentially causing the complete loss of the vehicle was
very much to the point.

Remember the old adage?
"Aviation is not, of itself, inherently dangerous. But to a greater
extent than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness,
incapacity, or neglect".

For space flight, I'd bump that up an order of magnitude (or two?).

Gus Grissom is quoted saying, "If we die we want people to accept it.
We hope that if anything happens to us it will not delay the program.
The conquest of space is worth the risk of life".

And he did.

In the aftermath of the Apollo 1 fire, NASA took a year (and $75 mil)
to redesign the space craft, mature their mental attitudes, and yes,
did come back with a much safer vehicle.

Quite obviously, this was the beginning of the "failure is not an
option"
mentality that took us to the moon and back successfully. I doubt that
public attitude (as shaped by the press) would have allowed for another
disaster of that magnitude during the moon race.

But if Burt were to be lost (Heaven forbid, Please!), end of story.


Richard
  #35  
Old June 23rd 04, 04:05 PM
Barnyard BOb -
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Sheesh of all the photographers they got zoom.

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it about credibility and he still has none" chuck s

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You would have preferred Juan, the jet jock itch?


Barnyard BOb -

  #36  
Old June 23rd 04, 04:06 PM
Richard Lamb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:

In article , FlyGuy says...

Chuck! You are just not being fair to Zoom. After all, he is probably
the most qualified person to be in the chase plane. Remember, he *is*
a graduate of the Test Pilot School! This could come in handy, should
there be any re-entry problems, where they need Jim to "talk the pilot
back to earth". Besides, this is a risky flight, and if there were any
medical problems, Jim's extensive medical background could come in
handy too.

Thank God he was there to let mission control know they suffered some
damage on the fuselage.


ROFL!! good thing I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that. I guess your right
I wasn't thinking :-) They probably read his bio on one of his book covers and
wondered "where has this guy been hiding for so long?" I bet they got him for a
song. Actually I bet he was such a pest and nag the let him do it just to get
some peace and quiet. Yup ,engineer,designer,skilled parachutist, medical
Doctor,writer ,author, publisher, test pilot,savior of Bob Hoover ,Savior of
aviation, savior of the Etheopians, flight instructor,air show performer,
critic and self proclaimed conscience of homebuilt aviation. WOW what a guy and
no wonder he got to go.LOL!!! He's still a phony , now he's a phony who got a
ride in a Beech Star ship and took some pictures. He'll be bragging about this
for a long time. I'd sure like to know the rest of the story.

Wonder if he'll be on th next one or if he wore out his welcome when he started
to tell his tall tails???

Sheesh of all the photographers they got zoom.

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it about credibility and he still has none" chuck s



After many years of reading here, I've learned to put the coffee
down before reading the next post. 'Cause you just never know...

Richard
  #37  
Old June 23rd 04, 04:12 PM
BllFs6
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Did Dennis Fetters take any shots of SS1?

Sorry, couldnt resist

take care

Blll
  #38  
Old June 23rd 04, 04:52 PM
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



BllFs6 wrote:
Did Dennis Fetters take any shots of SS1?

Sorry, couldnt resist

take care

Blll



What's the matter with you?

  #39  
Old June 23rd 04, 05:26 PM
G EddieA95
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

atmosphere and glided down to a safe landing
in the California desert [40 years] to the successful flight of the first

private one.
If the same timescale was used for conventional airplanes, the first
privately-owned aircraft would have flown in 1943.


The first private aircraft flew in 1903. The first *government8 a/c flew iirc
10 years after that.

  #40  
Old June 23rd 04, 05:59 PM
Corrie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ron Wanttaja wrote in message . ..
It took about forty years from the date the first government-sponsored
manned aerospacecraft left the atmosphere and glided down to a safe landing
in the California desert to the successful flight of the first private one.
If the same timescale was used for conventional airplanes, the first
privately-owned aircraft would have flown in 1943.


As opposed to 1903? The first airplane WAS privately-owned. Not to
mention amateur-built. The government-funded program wound up in the
Potomac. ;-)

Re preflight envy, keep in mind that a lot of those military and
commerical pilots also fly Cessnas, Kitfoxes, ULs...
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Spaceship 1 hits 212,000 feet!!!!!! BlakeleyTB Home Built 10 May 20th 04 10:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.