Community > Forum > Wirefly X Prize Cup > next xprize competion.

next xprize competion.

Posted by: space - Mon Nov 17, 2003 8:15 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 69 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
next xprize competion. 
Author Message
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:16 am
Posts: 322
Post    Posted on: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:03 am
idiom wrote:
NASA burnt 2 Billion on the NASP without getting beyond the drawing board. If that 2 Billion had been a prize for building the tech then the NASP would exist already.


It's not logical to assume that NASP could have been built for ANY amount of money.


Back to top
Profile YIM
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 4:01 am
Posts: 747
Location: New Zealand
Post    Posted on: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:09 am
Something nearing its design goals would exist.

The individual technologies may also exist. maybe not. But it wouldn't require an open window to get it to fly.

_________________
What goes up better doggone well stay up! - Morgan Gravitronics, Company Slogan.


Back to top
Profile ICQ YIM
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:16 am
Posts: 322
Post Prize Idea I read once   Posted on: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:16 am
Someone on a newsgroup once suggested a prize to the effect that the government sends a container with $1,000,000,000 in bearer bonds in it, and say "Whoever gets it back, keeps it" as a prize. I honestly think that's a prize that might be won.


Back to top
Profile YIM
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:15 am
Posts: 79
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Post    Posted on: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:24 am
I like the concept, but the government isn't going to front up with a billion dollars unless it has some very good reason (ie investment in technology for mining, getting to Mars etc etc etc).

I guess if you shot it to Mars it could be interesting, everyone and their dog developing returnable rovers (ahhh what a great pun).


Back to top
Profile WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post Agreement - but modifications needed   Posted on: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:55 am
I agree to your ideas.

But according to a press release by the XPRIZE Foundation today announcind Scaled Composites' next Launch on June the 21. this year much more ressources an additional kinds of ressources are required, if a manned space ship should stay for longer periods in a stable orbit.

Because of this I propose following modifications:

1. The space ship must be capable to stay in orbit DOCKED TO A SPACE STATION, but don't need to be capable to do that without a station.

2. Cooperation with hotel enterprises ist allowed, as far as such cooperations are restricted to provide the required environmental conditions as long-period-availability of atmosphere, food, bed etc.

3. The passenger cabine of the space ship is capable to remain in space without the ship - released, undocked, perhaps as a temporary module of a space station.

Such modifications may be a possible way to spread the costs of remaining a longer period in orbit and as a second step - after gaining the ability to suborbital flights - to set the focus upon the ability to reach a stable orbit.

Staying in orbit for a longer period should be a third step.

Last but not least remember the XPRIZE CUP competition which will increase the height reached by suborbital flights.

Diplom-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin

(Diplom-Volkswirt = Political Economist; bdvb = short name of Federation of German Economists)

[quote="Senior Von Braun"]I think an orbital prize is definately the next step from here, but it does have some drawbacks. The companies which got some hardware off of the X-Prize are going to have a clear advantage over newcomers, who will have to make their stuff up from scratch. I know that this is an oversimplification, but if you just slapped something like the Canadian Arrow onto a Delta core stage it would get you to orbit. Everyone would have to develop orbital manuvering systems, bigger life-supporte systems, and bettter heat shields, but when you already have a capsule built it makes everything much easier. So, I think this "X-Prize 2" should go all-out requiring serious redesigning for the regulars, leveling the playing field for newcomers. As an added bonus, it would yeild vehicles vey useful for extended space tourism and rendezvous with space stations, as well as a starting point for moon vehicles. Here would be the requirements:

-The vehicle must be capabile of carrying six people into an initial orbit of 200x200 miles
-The vehicle (Capsule, whatever) must be able to stay at least 10 days in orbit, and capible of changing its orbit up to a total of 800 miles in flight.
-The vehicle must be able to rendezvous and dock with a space station (ISS for starters) and allow autonomous EVA.
-The vehicle must be capible of two flights of which at least one must stay for the ten day requirement within 35 days. After that all of the above requriements must be met to win the prize of $25 million, while not repalcing more than 80% of the non-propellant mass in between flights.

Sound too harsh? This is actually about what the Geminis were capible of, so I think that's a logical next step after replicating the Mercury Redstone flights. What do you think?[/quote]


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 578
Location: Zurich
Post    Posted on: Thu Jun 03, 2004 2:36 pm
You want a realistic X2-prize? ... the next step should be modest ...

I would propose just upping the altitude to something like 150-200 km (still suborbital) ... and that's all ... it's something that would require somebody like Rutan to pay attention to dealing with higher temperatures on re-entry and other strains associated with higher-speed collision with an atmosphere. Re-entry from up there would be very tough for the current design of SS1.

This would also give other players like Armadillo a chance to catch up, I do NOT want to see any of these guys give up their work and walk away.

An X2-prize for getting into orbit and back twice in two weeks? You guys are talking about the X3- or X4-prize. Consider what it takes to de-orbit, go and read up about it ... really, go check it out. I aint yo momma.

_________________
Per aspera ad astra


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Fri Jun 04, 2004 7:08 am
Hello, Dr_Keith_H,

you're right - but remember the rules of the XPRIZE CUP described in a part of XPRIZE's homepage. The CUP includes a separate competition in reached altitudes. Everytime the XPRIZE CUP is taking place, that team will win a specific cash-prize, that has constructed that spacecraft, that reached the maximum altitude of all teams.

The CUP will take place every year. So the maximum altitude will increase every year. As a consequence higher temperatures on re-entry are to be managed during the XPRIZE CUP and the preparations to compete.

May be the XPRIZE2 should wait for results of the XPRIZE CUP but then follow the rules proposed and perhaps more modified.

Like you I dont want to see any of the teams to give up too.

Many Greetings,

Diplom-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)



[quote="Dr_Keith_H"]You want a realistic X2-prize? ... the next step should be modest ...

I would propose just upping the altitude to something like 150-200 km (still suborbital) ... and that's all ... it's something that would require somebody like Rutan to pay attention to dealing with higher temperatures on re-entry and other strains associated with higher-speed collision with an atmosphere. Re-entry from up there would be very tough for the current design of SS1.

This would also give other players like Armadillo a chance to catch up, I do NOT want to see any of these guys give up their work and walk away.

An X2-prize for getting into orbit and back twice in two weeks? You guys are talking about the X3- or X4-prize. Consider what it takes to de-orbit, go and read up about it ... really, go check it out. I aint yo momma.[/quote]


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 578
Location: Zurich
Post    Posted on: Fri Jun 04, 2004 7:51 am
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
... the rules of the XPRIZE CUP described in a part of XPRIZE's homepage. The CUP includes a separate competition in reached altitudes. Everytime the XPRIZE CUP is taking place, that team will win a specific cash-prize, that has constructed that spacecraft, that reached the maximum altitude of all teams ...


That is so cool ... but I have had trouble confirming this ... I was looking for it in the rules & guidelines section ... (more searching takes place) ...

Ah ha ... I found it ...

http://www.xprize.com/imagefacts/q14.html

I wonder how much of a cash prize they will be offering? Anybody think that there will be another horse in this race next year?

_________________
Per aspera ad astra


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 4:25 pm
Posts: 122
Post    Posted on: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:26 am
really hard to judge :?

maybe, but i think the "shipping costs" might be prohibitively expensive as it seems the next closest (starchaser imo) walk on a knifeedge fiscally

arrow, armadillo, da vinci... i think they all need more time than one year (guessing of course). i'm not sure armadillo will be an x-prize vehicle by that time (they've talked about going back to a 1-person vehicle if they don't win the x-prize) and i'm really suspicious about da vinci (in general really)

the romanians, russians and israelis are even harder to imagine taking part next year. but maybe we're in for a positive surprise, could be some dark horses out there (several contenders have gotten flight permissions it seems)

but i'm not sure if the x-cup is a workable idea really, at least it might be way too early and i'm worried it's too ambitious

maybe the next goal shouldn't be pure altitude but also lenght? the ansari x-prize is nice but it wouldn't have worked without the temptation of a lucrative market in sub-orbital tourist hops. my recommendation would be to scrap the x-cup or put it on hold while launching an x-prize II (expiring in five years) focusing on let's say the first suborbital hop from europe to the states or similar. the lure for this would be a new and lucrative transportation market

or maybe things will move on their own from here on, if there are other teams than scaled with a truly viable technology i doubt they'll quit at this point in time unless forced to economically. i realize the cup idea is meant to increase the cash flow but since the time needed for improving and modifying these vehicles is more substancial than it was for aeroplanes a hundred years ago i'm just not convinced it will work.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:19 am
Think about the investments in research and development and in the vehicles done right now by each team.

They all are entrepreneurs and enterprises, they all have to satisfy investors by return on investments and at least some have sponsors who don't want to see them giving up.

Because of this they all will continue development efforts and compete in the CUP. They will sell flights to tourists because that's a way to get back financial ressources invetsed in the spacecrafts.

And for the first time no team has more than one single spacecraft. Space Ship One can't take more than three passengers and one of them ist the pilot. So there may be sufficient interested people to be carried to suborbital flights by twelve teams together.

Suborbital flights from one spaceport to another are mentioned in the document describing the rules of the CUP.

Besides - the shape of the trajectories also can be shaped wider instead of higher. That opens up the possibility for intercontinental flights by small crafts longest time outside the atmosphere and thereby minimizing atmospheric contamination. It might be interesting for people like Tito or Shuttleworth to by a space ship of their own and use it like a privte plane...

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



[quote="n54"]really hard to judge :?

maybe, but i think the "shipping costs" might be prohibitively expensive as it seems the next closest (starchaser imo) walk on a knifeedge fiscally

arrow, armadillo, da vinci... i think they all need more time than one year (guessing of course). i'm not sure armadillo will be an x-prize vehicle by that time (they've talked about going back to a 1-person vehicle if they don't win the x-prize) and i'm really suspicious about da vinci (in general really)

the romanians, russians and israelis are even harder to imagine taking part next year. but maybe we're in for a positive surprise, could be some dark horses out there (several contenders have gotten flight permissions it seems)

but i'm not sure if the x-cup is a workable idea really, at least it might be way too early and i'm worried it's too ambitious

maybe the next goal shouldn't be pure altitude but also lenght? the ansari x-prize is nice but it wouldn't have worked without the temptation of a lucrative market in sub-orbital tourist hops. my recommendation would be to scrap the x-cup or put it on hold while launching an x-prize II (expiring in five years) focusing on let's say the first suborbital hop from europe to the states or similar. the lure for this would be a new and lucrative transportation market

or maybe things will move on their own from here on, if there are other teams than scaled with a truly viable technology i doubt they'll quit at this point in time unless forced to economically. i realize the cup idea is meant to increase the cash flow but since the time needed for improving and modifying these vehicles is more substancial than it was for aeroplanes a hundred years ago i'm just not convinced it will work.[/quote]


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 4:25 pm
Posts: 122
Post    Posted on: Fri Jun 04, 2004 3:17 pm
that's all well and good, but why should the teams have to travel to new mexico to do any of this? that's my point mainly as i'm a bit unsure about the benefits of such an event in a single location as opposed to keeping it more global (as the ansari x-prize was/is)

i'm not sure what the costs would be but remember than many of the teams have designs that require a lot of specialized infrastructure (and i'm willing to bet that for example canadian arrow and starchaser require different launch towers)

ok, so starchaser is already planning on moving big stuff to australia for their launch (and they'll probably stay there - does anyone know their future launch planning?), but i'll continue to be a bit sceptical even though it's nice to hear that intercontinental sub-orbital flight is at least mentioned in the x-cup

back to the question on the number of teams ready for an x-cup event next year: i just realized that the number probably would be zero!

after all scaled and rutan has said they're planning on using a year for indepth testing (overall cost analysis for operating the vehicles with weekly launches for a year) and i'm not sure if participating in a x-cup arrangement fits that


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:22 pm
Posts: 843
Location: New York, NY
Post    Posted on: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:51 pm
next year is just going to be an exhibition for the cup, first is for 2006. i think they'll get scaled and all the other flying teams that are willing to do so to go set up for a couple weeks and do some flights and showcase their vehicles, then start competition next year.

_________________
Cornell 2010- Applied and Engineering Physics

Software Developer

Also, check out my fractals


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
avatar
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 4:25 pm
Posts: 122
Post    Posted on: Sat Jun 05, 2004 7:04 am
ok then the outlook is fairly good, by 2006 i think at least the following will be ready (reasons in parantheses behind each team):
- scaled composites (almost ready as it is)
- starchaser (preparing final launches in testing)
- ARCA (recently did a full burn which was a worlds first for a composite material, reusable monopropellant rocket engine)
- canadian arrow (seems to be very comitted)
- armadillo (big if: if they still go for an x-prize type vehicle)

i'd like for others to share their assesments in a similar manner (i'm hoping i've missed something :wink:)


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 9:08 pm
Posts: 242
Post    Posted on: Sat Jun 05, 2004 3:11 pm
Quote:
i'd like for others to share their assesments in a similar manner


Several other credible teams will show up, I think:
-Da Vinci's vehicle is almost done, although I think any design that involves a balloon will be unable to fly often enough to win the X PRIZE CUP
-XCOR, which is not competing in the X PRIZE but is very competent technically.

And don't forget the wildcard: Jeff Bezos. His Blue Origin rocket company has been very secretive, but they seem to be developing a manned suborbital vehicle.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:44 pm
Posts: 227
Location: Alexander, North Carolina, Planet Earth, the Milky Way Galaxy
Post the floodgates are opening   Posted on: Sat Jun 05, 2004 3:19 pm
I believe many visionary engineers and business people now see private space travel as possible, affordable, and even potentially profitable! The floodgates are opening. Competitions like the current X Prize, X2, X3, et al, encourage the trend.

--Ralph

_________________
--Ralph Roberts
CEO, Creativity, Inc.
author of THE HUNDRED ACRE SPACESHIP
http://1vid.com


Back to top
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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