Community > Forum > All other competitions > why are we flying?

why are we flying?

Posted by: Rob Goldsmith - Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:08 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 7 posts ] 
why are we flying? 
Author Message
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:52 am
Posts: 1368
Location: Exeter, Devon, England
Post why are we flying?   Posted on: Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:08 pm
just a quicky if ya can be bothered to answer.
I seme to remember seeing quite a few unvailings last year of ships though the companies names i forget. If these people such as canadian arrow etc have rockets to use even at half power how come they arent doing unmanned flights here and there or is this a question answered by ortharisation? surely we should be having more tests going on?

Also will any teams actually fly this year or will they slow down the pace, to save costs etc?

_________________
> http://www.fullmoonclothing.com
> http://www.facebook.com/robsastrophotography
> robgoldsmith@hotmail.co.uk


Back to top
Profile WWW
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:43 pm
Posts: 97
Location: Canada
Post    Posted on: Thu Jan 06, 2005 10:59 pm
Canadian Arrow, for one, as been known to have it's own schedule. They seem to be too far along to stop without first flying something. Who knows, though, when the next slow step will happen. Will it be anything noticeable? At least they cannot be faulted for claiming adherence to some impossible timeline (note: any CA people reading this may need to consult www.dictionary.com for the word timeline). The pace for all contenders seems to have slowed considerably since Scaled was known to have the prize cornered. Armadillo, Canadian Arrow (their last engine test and, of course, their museum ... oh, I mean training center.... that is being built) and Davinci (hey, they have a new picture of some plastic they claim to be the full-size parachute with flyin' Brian in front of it) all have continued to make some steps. It seems, though, that many are re-thinking their direction and are more prone to either developing unmanned craft for launch of satellites and nanosats or re-focusing towards orbital flight. In the case of the latter, we won't really be hearing anything from those American teams for quite some time.

psst.... spell check next time ... and what is 'ortharisation'?

Hey, Canadian Aarow has more than one helmut (unless that is the same one in all the pictures..... :? ) - though I'm not sure of their magical powers.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:22 am
Hello, robiwan,

there are three teams at least that have done unmanned flights in 2004 - Space Transport Corporation whose Rubicon 1 had a crash, ARCA and Armadillo whose vehicle had a crash too.

Alright - these "flights" have been launches only and they were test-launches for a manned vehicle - but such testing launches are required for unmanned vehicles too.

All the work STC, ARCA and Armadillo have done up to now is of use and value for unmanned flights by them too. So they haven't wasted work anyway I think.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Ecxonomist)


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:52 am
Posts: 1368
Location: Exeter, Devon, England
Post    Posted on: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:42 am
i remember hearing of a non xprize team sending a rocket to orbit last year, un manned kinda tiny thing but still got to space. It was so small but if they can do it with a tiny little rocket, how come these boys arent doing anything similar?

_________________
> http://www.fullmoonclothing.com
> http://www.facebook.com/robsastrophotography
> robgoldsmith@hotmail.co.uk


Back to top
Profile WWW
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:52 am
Posts: 1368
Location: Exeter, Devon, England
Post    Posted on: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:43 am
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3724841.stm

_________________
> http://www.fullmoonclothing.com
> http://www.facebook.com/robsastrophotography
> robgoldsmith@hotmail.co.uk


Back to top
Profile WWW
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:43 pm
Posts: 97
Location: Canada
Post    Posted on: Sat Jan 08, 2005 3:32 am
The rocket made it sub-orbital, not orbital. Orbital is now the main goal which is several steps beyond the present private competition.

From BBC site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3724841.stm
"
A 14-second burn allowed the rocket to reach an altitude of more than 100km - the official boundary of space - in about three minutes. It reportedly spent several minutes in space before beginning its descent. \
"

I must admit, I had been pulling for Space Transport Corporation for some time. Alas, they seem to have lost critical momentum. The "Steve Austin" video clip will always be a classic, though.


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:35 am
Posts: 207
Location: New Zealand/Europe
Post    Posted on: Sun Jan 09, 2005 12:54 am
check out there website at www.spacex.com

Quite interesting, with them starting payload launche's this year and all.

Iain


Back to top
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


cron
© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use