Community > Forum > Wirefly X Prize Cup > DaVinci: 40,000ft, 280,000 more to go

DaVinci: 40,000ft, 280,000 more to go

Posted by: bad_astra - Thu Sep 16, 2004 8:54 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 34 posts ] 
DaVinci: 40,000ft, 280,000 more to go 
Author Message
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 9:37 pm
Posts: 44
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:30 pm
Yeah it seems a match...

http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/Gallery/gallery_sectiondisplay.cfm?imgsrc=/english/multimedia/engine_testing/image/inflight.jpg&section=11

http://www.design.caltech.edu/micropropulsion/SR-XM/


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Enthusiast
Spaceflight Enthusiast
avatar
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 8:45 pm
Posts: 3
Location: UK earth
Post Interesting that the nitrogen made the monoprop run smooth   Posted on: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:31 pm
Q: I was googling recently to see if there was any effect that resulted from changing the cross-section along the length of a catalyst pack but couldn't find anything. Would putting a constriction in the pack act similarly to a venturi? Would it create a pressure drop and what effect would this have on the decomposition process?

Normally, does the flow only become compressible once a few bubbles have formed and would conveging and diverging cross-sections have any effects? The latest post to the AA site mentioned that someone had suggested adding nitrogen delibrately to cause the flow to become compressible.

Has anyone read up on this?

Could carbonating the mixture have a similar effect to adding nitrogen or could ethane be used instead of nitrogen?

_________________
----------------------------------


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:37 pm
Posts: 39
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:13 pm


Oh ya
its a perfect match.
As I indicated in my previous posting.
And that’s just the start. Just look thought some of their quotes in news articles, their story changes all the time,

mrmoris had it exactly right, there are way to many holes in their story. :oops:


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:37 pm
Posts: 39
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:42 pm
virgair wrote:
In reply to Number2

"So how much have you accomplished in the field of rocketry, Number2?
Have you accomplished more than Brian Feeney?"

One other thing I thought this might be appropriate to point out.
http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/About/AboutMain.html
http://www.kindersley.ca/

Note Brian's Bio that states "Brian has a strong background in large project
management" :P
Also note on Kindersley's page about non refundable registration packages at
$ 50.00. :cry:
Any comments Virgair.


Back to top
Profile
Launch Director
Launch Director
avatar
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:24 pm
Posts: 16
Location: WA, USA
Post    Posted on: Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:46 pm
from an outsiders point of view It seems many people do not respect the premise of the davinci project because of a change of dates, how many times have you seen a shuttle launch delayed due to weather or some other reason? for all we know some part they needed was damaged in shipping and needed replaced. some question if a balloon can carry the weight, well balloons have travelled to 36,000 km 24,400 seems fairly standard. as to the weight, well just how heavy were the rigid airships of the past with the steel frames, and the hundred or more people? and as to a balloon being too large? well I have read about balloons being created larger then the empire state building for NASA testing that were launched in Alaska. balloon launches of rockets have gone on for many years with weather balloons and to scientific payloads studying the atmosphere. most teams are not using balloons as a paltform not because of performance, but due to the in ability to control the drift of the balloon so as it will not enter restricted airspace. they supposedly have tested their engines, and re-entry system, and have progressed far enough along that goverments and insurance have given the go ahead to try and launch their rocket. So what if they have a 2 week delay, they are using fairly basic ideas, that have been proven over the years by others, and have done some component testing. I personally would have been more worried had they launched on schedule then to have a delay. I hope they will be lauching soon and wish them success in their endeavor. besides most companies that I have worked for would rather keep working on the project then to worry about keeping the general public knowing every single item they are working on. especially for a commercially viable project.

_________________
the sooner private entrerprise invests in space technologies the sooner man will conquor space to the advancement of all mankind


Back to top
Profile YIM
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:37 pm
Posts: 39
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 12:31 am
I am not debating the feasibility of a balloon launch, or a time delay.
You are right. Balloon launches have been done in the past with success and delays are a reality of space flight.

I do have a problem with misrepresentations and being led along.

As for components missing, these guys have claimed that they have had finished working hardware for years, just recently on this board one individual claimed that he heard from his Da Vinci info hotline that their engine test went great,
I think that If they had done an engine test that they would have jumped at the chance to show themselves actually building something, doing or testing something. This would be a logical way to prove to the public your are for real.

As for unavailable 'key components'

"a four-axis filament winder -- a device used in fabricating fiberglass and carbon-fiber parts -- to complete work on a key spaceship component."
Wired magazine article.

This sort of equipment is most likely used to either to make the rocket engine, propelant tank, both or to finish their 'completed' vehical. :?


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: Tue Sep 28, 2004 8:00 am
Number2 wrote:
Oh yes in reply to Dr.Keith here is just one of the links you were looking for.
www.design.caltech.edu/micropropulsion/SR-XM/ photo of the Microcosm rocket. This is the pic that was altered and presented on the Da Vinci website as them having already tested there engine. In fact I think it is still there, in their gallery, but you better hurry before they take it off there site when they see this. :shock:

Interesting, but da Vinci doesn't appear to claim that this photo represents a test they carried out ... if pressed they might profess surprise that anyone would make the inference, however clear that inference is to us. The fact is that while there is no overt link drawn between this image and whatever tests they have done, as long as it gives proper credit for the image it may as well be a photo of a baboon's rump. Does anyone know if Lorne Bradt (who is given credit for the photo) worked for Microcosm?

And there da Vinci may have a problem ... was Lorne Bradt the official photographer for Microcosm in 2001 when the launch of the vehicle in the image was carried out (i.e. did Bradt actually take the photo)? Or did Lorne Bradt steal the image from the internet and illegally claim credit for it?

Can anyone find an official link between Bradt and Microcosm? If the image has been stolen then da Vinci would be well advised to at minimum give the actual photographer proper credit and reference (and perhaps reparation).

Keep in mind that the image we are talking about is one of the most spectacular test images that da Vinci provides on their site. Is da Vinci a paper tiger after all?

DKH

_________________
Per aspera ad astra


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:40 pm
Posts: 78
Location: Birmingham, UK
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 9:11 am
terryk wrote:
...have progressed far enough along that goverments and insurance have given the go ahead to try and launch their rocket.


I think despite the fairly convincing evidence that's been posted here, what terryk has said about the fact that they've got government go-ahead says to me that they're more than a paper-tiger. Why have they not posted more information about what they've achieved? Well, one possible example is Scaled, in that they didn't post much information either, but no-one doubted what they could achieve, even if we prefer the openness of Armadillo.

Would the Canadian government give a go-ahead to this if it was only a bluff? I don't think so, and it seems that DaVinci need to work on their PR - no-one likes someone a load of hot air (no pun intended! :lol: ) without evidence to back up their claims. But just because there's been no evidence offered, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

~Dan


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
avatar
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:52 pm
Posts: 62
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 12:58 pm
Dr_Keith_H wrote:
Interesting, but da Vinci doesn't appear to claim that this photo represents a test they carried out ...


On Microcosm's site -- you can get more photos of the SR-XM-1 (which is where I found the link -- not the caltech site)

http://www.smad.com/scorpius/press6.html
http://www.smad.com/scorpius/lowcost/testing.html

In the news archives of Davinci -- they have an arcticle claiming the Micocosm launch on May 9, 2001 as a successful test of their engines:

http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/News/NewsArchivesEngineTest2.html


Dr_Keith_H wrote:
if pressed they might profess surprise that anyone would make the inference, however clear that inference is to us.


I think that's fairly clear to anyone.


Dr_Keith_H wrote:
The fact is that while there is no overt link drawn between this image and whatever tests they have done, as long as it gives proper credit for the image it may as well be a photo of a baboon's rump.


Except that there is an overt link, no credit was given, and Davinci actually *altered* the photos to remove Microcosm's name from the rocket.


Dr_Keith_H wrote:
Keep in mind that the image we are talking about is one of the most spectacular test images that da Vinci provides on their site. Is da Vinci a paper tiger after all?


Yes -- it is, and yes -- they are (in my opinion).

They at least gave Nuytco Research credit for their 'spacesuit' photo. Even though it's a deep-sea diving suit that's never been built:

http://www.nuytco.com/exosuit.html

Davinci's PDF from March 2003 shows photos of eAc's engines and tests as I indicated earlier (page 5).

http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/Documents/EADSpaper_n39_2.pdf

They mention 'our engine supplier', but never give an actual name. The photos shown are from eAc's site -- specifically, the Hyperion II project:

http://www.hybrids.com/hyperion.html

However -- the engine for the Hyperion II is **much** too small to be of use to Davinci. In fact -- even the engine eAc developed for SS1 has a considerably lower thrust than what DaVinci claimed in their PDF (15,000 lbs).


The only thing that Davinci has shown they can build are fiberglass shells. They're working on donations. Therefore every evidence that they can provide which increases confidence in the project is to their benefit. Since they have not supplied any, I can only assume they can not.


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:40 pm
Posts: 78
Location: Birmingham, UK
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 2:57 pm
mrmorris, what you say sounds convincing, but it doesn't fit for me with the fact that the Canadian government have given them the go-ahead. Why would they do this if DaVinci are spouting codswallop?

~Dan


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
avatar
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:52 pm
Posts: 62
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:03 pm
Dr_Keith_H wrote:
Keep in mind that the image we are talking about is one of the most spectacular test images that da Vinci provides on their site. Is da Vinci a paper tiger after all?
DKH


Oh yes -- I forgot the other images: Pull up the following two images from DaVinci's site:

http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/Gallery/gallery_sectiondisplay.cfm?imgsrc=/english/multimedia/engine_testing/image/ignite.jpg&section=11

http://www.davinciproject.com/beta/Gallery/gallery_sectiondisplay.cfm?imgsrc=/english/multimedia/engine_testing/image/ready.jpg&section=11

These are front and side views of their engine tests (AKA Scorpius launch). If you look at the side view (first link), you'll see towards the bottom of the rocket (from the gantry down) -- the letters R (partly obscured), P, I, and U (partly obscured) -- i.e. SCORPIUS. Looking above the gantry -- anyone familiar with image editing will see that someone has done so (i.e. they 'erased' 'SCO' from the picture). In that same image, you can just make out at what would be the 'front' of the rocket that there are letters at 90 degrees to the 'RPI'. These should be clearly visible in the 'front' photo (second link).

However -- when you look at that photo -- there are no letters. However -- copy that photo, paste it into MS Paint and Zoom-Large. In that -- it's very obvious that where letters used to be, there are circular blotches of off-white. Somebody edited it -- and very poorly.

This is just shady.


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:37 pm
Posts: 39
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:13 pm
"Would the Canadian government give a go-ahead to this if it was only a bluff? I don't think so, and it seems that DaVinci need to work on their PR - no one likes someone a load of hot air (no pun intended! :lol: ) without evidence to back up their claims. But just because there's been no evidence offered, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist."

~Dan[/quote]
They don't need to work on their PR. They need to start telling the truth!
What makes you think the Canadian Gov. has given the go-ahead?
They don’t have a launch license. Sure they are working on it and Transport Canada might be working on it but at this point they don’t have it.
Yes it looks like they have made launch arrangements in Kindersley. But that’s it.
Brian said that they were acquiring their insurance.
Always too much is read into what these guys say.
They just said they were going to launch Oct.2


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:40 pm
Posts: 78
Location: Birmingham, UK
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:17 pm
I agree with you mrmorris that those images are dodgy by the way.

~Dan


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
avatar
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:52 pm
Posts: 62
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:17 pm
dolby_uk wrote:
mrmorris, what you say sounds convincing, but it doesn't fit for me with the fact that the Canadian government have given them the go-ahead. Why would they do this if DaVinci are spouting codswallop?


Well there's several things here.

1. That's a pretty fine thread to be hanging your hopes on.

2. Everything I've read about the Canadian government application is that Feeney had had to produce paperwork, not that he's lugged WF6 into Canada's version of the FAA. They're interesed in his insurance, not his hardware. He's not carrying passengers, so 'safety inspections' are a non-issue.

3. I've never seen anything about the government approving it anyway. Last I've seen, the paperwork has been submitted, but not approved.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6090348/

From that link: "The Canadian government has not yet officially cleared the da Vinci Project for takeoff, although project organizers say the government should have all the required documents for approval."

Please note the word 'documents'. Nowhere has there been any indication that any government official has actually seen the hardware.

So -- on many levels -- the government of Canada has done nothing to add legitimacy to the Davinci Project.


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 3:40 pm
Posts: 78
Location: Birmingham, UK
Post    Posted on: Tue Sep 28, 2004 3:24 pm
Number2 good point - I just assumed that they had the launch license by the way they were talking...now I have no reason to believe that they are anything but hot air. Pity really. :cry:


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


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