A jubilant Virgin Galactic founder Sir Richard Branson celebrated the “experience of a lifetime” as one of six people aboard what was officially the first passenger flight to the edge of space Sunday morning. All the other people on the Unity 22 spacecraft were Virgin employees but it was the first flight after the FAA granted approval for commercial service to the lower edge of space. “Space is Virgin territory” said one of several commentators on the live video feed as the spacecraft reached about 85 kilometers in altitude and performed its “feather” maneuver, rolling inverted to maximize the view of the earth below for the occupants. After about 3.5 minutes of weightlessness, in which Branson and his fellow passengers unstrapped to float freely in the spacious cabin, the spacecraft headed home.
This is a noteworthy private enterprise, aeronautical, aerodynamic, engineering, aviation and PR accomplishment, interesting and entertaining to watch, but a bit of a stretch to consider it a space accomplishment. I expected release to occur higher than 46,000+ a few feet but maybe temperatures aloft were too high for that. Mach .5 at those altitudes surprised me and seemed frighteningly slow to this ignoramus who used to worry about any speed much below Mach. 75. But I know nothing of those vehicles’ aerodynamic properties except that the launch vehicle appears to have a straight wing perhaps accounting for slow speed capability.
And now for me it’s back to rag wing, VFR nap of the earth, 100 mph, negative RVSM, negative RNP, negative ADS-B flight while I await the next SpaceX event.
So, this is basically a very expensive ride on a roller coaster for that tiny cohort of folks who have an excess amount of disposable cash and a deficit of thrill opportunities. Doesn’t take much skill to sit in a chair and be taken for a ride.
The mothership is designed to carry a heavy load (Spaceship) to that altitude and drop it. It is not designed for speed, nor would it be helpful to go much faster. It is not a jetliner.
I understand that the mothership is not a jetliner and is single purpose built, but I noticed that even the rocket plane was gliding at Mach .5 through the normal jet flight levels on the way down. The slower speeds of the mothership did not surprise me so much as the slow glide speed of the rocket plane.
I had to smile. We old guys are too spoiled by the developments of the 50’s and 60’s which we were privileged to live but tell me what real advancements we have seen since that time period - 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, 00’s up until now?
Mother Nature sets certain obstacles that exist. No number of attorney’s or accounts can change those obstacles. Until mankind meets these aliens who we are told live on the other side of the moon (smile) and mankind discovers a new form of propulsion and new forms of creating a machine to stay together Space Mastery is only for special effects out of Hollywood. Better to return for us old guys to the days of our Pipe Cubs and Tiger Moths. (smile)
Oh yes, is it true there are no inspection ports under neat a 787 plastic wing?
Or why didn’t the 737Max get a bigger tail and better computerization system?
And why can’t Boeing get an honest engineering team to run their organization?
I have never seen an accountant or attorney who can be a good leader of a large highly technical organization, can you?
Firstly limiting speed is not in Mach but IAS. Any aircraft that relies on aerodynamic lift reaches a point where it can’t go any faster, because of loading concerns and can’t go any slower because it woud stall. It is called coffin corner! Ask any U-2 pilot!
There have been annual improvements in materials and electronics.
The spacecraft from the era you’re talking about were handcrafted - we can do better with modern CAD and machining.
But the reality is there’s nowhere to go that we haven’t already been that’s near enough to us.
The Space Shuttle was a very, very badly managed project that was supposed to be 1/10 the cost, but ended up costing 10x more. It sponged up a lot of funding and focus for very little benefit. You could say the same for the ISS, whose only claim to fame was funding Russian scientists so they wouldn’t emigrate to N. Korea.
Several experiments, including the Hubble, were mismanaged, with either technical problems or massive budget overruns. (The Shuttle started losing tiles on the very first flight. Atlantis was nearly lost from that, besides Challenger and Columbia.)These failure modes continue.
Mgmt. incompetence is tolerated for space and infrastructure projects, and is the root of the problems you mentioned.
As Russ Niles points out, there will be a bit of a fuss (totally pointless) about the fact that the VSS rockets don’t quite get to the so-called Karman Line.
The demarcation of the edge of space is pretty arbitrary. The US uses 50 miles altitude, and the rest of the world uses 100 km. Both are just conveniently round numbers with no other significance. At 50 miles, aerodynamic controls are useless, and there’s really nothing to breathe. And at 100 km, a satellite would quickly be brought down by atmospheric drag. So both altitudes are really in a transition zone, depending on your purpose.
It makes sense to have the rocket generate enough weight to support itself under the belly of the carrier aircraft, to ease the strain on the carrier. So both are designed and configured to glide at about the same speed. If the rocket’s airfoils provided either significantly less or more lift at the carrier’s cruising speed, either condition would put more stress on the carrier’s airframe.
282,000 feet is only 86 Kilometers. The Von Karmen line standard is 100,000 Kilometers. Sorry Sir Richard, try again. Also . . . go orbital or don’t go. Elon can explain.
Exactly! At the least achieve orbit at some 18,000 mph, then do a true heat blasting re-entry. Otherwise, it is all smoke and mirrors, like this very expensive stunt.
Like a motorcycle jumping a line of 20 cars(without a Datsun or VW in the line) it’s a real accomplishment. Take a bow and today the world goes on as usual.
Fun to watch, but an awfully expensive way to experience weightlessness. Skydiving may not be quite the same, but it is a whole lot cheaper. Branson is, after all, a showman. A modern PT Barnum.