/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2151436]

How does /sci/ feel about the mini space race that's happening right now around the country?

There are companies which are almost ready to launch a real commercial space flight industry.

SUCH AS

Burt Rutans Scaled Composites, based out of Mojave, builds and maintains SpaceshipTwo. With funding from RIchard Branson they ought to start launching sub orbital flights sometime next year.

XCOR Aerospace from Mojave is building its Lynx jet, which will be capable of making 4 flights per day.

>Pic related. XCORs Lynx engine undergoing some tests.

PlanetSpace Inc from Chicago is working on a small semi orbital rocket ship called 'Silver Dart'. It is a point to point system, which means it will be used to take people from one side of the planet to the other in just a few minutes.

SpaceDev from Nevada is working hard on its 'Dream Chaser' ship. This one is very promising because it is essentially a very agile version of the space shuttle. It can carry 7 people into space, and NASA has taken some interest in this system. It would launch off an Atlas rocket.

Armadillo Aerospace from Texas is designing it's own vertical lift system. It would carry 2 people up to 100km.

Bigelow Aerospace from Nevada is almost done working on its inflatable space station module system called the 'Sundancer'. They have already tested smaller versions of them in space, and already have several countries as potential clients. Bigelow claims it also plans on putting some of its stations on the moon.

[Anonymous No.2151441]

Blue Origin from Washington state is testing a space capsule which they would offer to foreign governments and private interests. Blue Origin is funded by Amazon.coms CEO and has received funding from NASA.

Orbital Sciences from Virginia is already an established space company. They have been launching military satellites for many years, but they will soon be rolling out a commercial space craft called the Cygnus. It can deliver cargo into orbit, and possibly space tourists at a later time.

SpaceX from California is on schedule to be the first company in the US to offer a fully orbital launch system, as well as reusable launch vehicles. They have designed their own rockets and space capsules. Their first test launch out of cape Canaveral was flawless, and their second launch of the Falcon 9 is set for this coming Tuesday, December 7th.
The most interesting thing about SpaceX is that they have managed to cut their operating costs so much that even the dependable Russian rockets will have trouble competing with it.

Elon Musk has guaranteed that he can build a super heavy lift vehicle and launch for $300 million a pop. This is in contrast to the Ares V Boeing was designing for NASA, which would have cost $1+ billion per flight. This thing would be quite capable of sending cargo to the moon or even mars.

Most of these will run out of Spaceport America in New Mexico, but for the moment they are conducting much of their testing at the Mojave Spaceport.

>pic also related. It is an inflatable space module from Bigelow, in space!.

[Anonymous No.2151447]

>SpaceshipTwo in New Mexico

>looks nice man.

[Anonymous No.2151456]

>Boeings Orion space capsule. should be ready for action by 2014.

[Anonymous No.2151466]

>Falcon 9 from SpaceX

[Anonymous No.2151478]

>what the insides of the Flacon 9 fuel tank look like at the SpaceX HQ in Hawthorne, CA.

[Anonymous No.2151483]

>PlanetSpace Incs SilverDart in development.

[Anonymous No.2151486]

>more SilverDart

[Anonymous No.2151491]

>dat SilverDart

[Anonymous No.2151498]

Here's the rocket science:

http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/rktpow.html

Basically, rocket performance is determined by the specific impulse of the propellant, and the mass ratio of the rocket. When you run the numbers, you're going to need a big rocket to launch any significant payload into orbit. If that payload includes humans, QA requirements are going to append another zero to the cost of the rocket.

The private space industry can probably make money launching small payloads into orbit, or humans into suborbital flight. Beyond this, it probably will never to be able to scale up and still make a profit. Only a government can spend that kind of money.

[Anonymous No.2151499]

>SpaceDevs 'Dream Chaser'

>look familiar?

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151501]

I have mixed feelings about it.

I am glad that to see that there will be a huge variety of different types of space vehicles vying for contracts.

The reason the costs are so low compared to vehicles that NASA has produced is due to red-tape. Every single time a tool is used to tighten a bolt, there is an assortment of paperwork filed on the exact tool used as well as when it was checked out as well as the employee doing the work to be accountable for the work. If something happened to a particular part or segment of the orbiter, they can trace back to the original of the cause. Lots of time wasted but necessary to ensure crew safety.

This is my major concern with new privatized companies. There is a lot of incentive to cut corners in order to compete with other companies.

It will take several years before privatized space companies will have the means and resources equivalent to that of what NASA is fully capable of right now. This will further delay human space exploration to it's full potential.

There are talks about the responsibility of these companies producing these vehicles. Will they offer these vehicles to be used sorta like a car rental company, or will they be treated to be used more like a taxi service? NASA and the FAA really dunno what jurisdiction or direction would be best.

As a college student, it is an exciting time however I would not be paid nearly as much as if I was working for a contractor with NASA if I were to work for any of these companies. Whereas ex-NASA engineers would easily get four times the amount of their current salary to work for them.

I also wish that these companies continue to build their spaceports and this industry within Florida and to use the launch equipment that is already out there, instead of letting it go to waste by building in the Mojave.

[Anonymous No.2151506]

>The Dream Chaser undergoing autonomous flight tests

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151514]

>>2151499
yes it does

[Anonymous No.2151511]

>>2151441
yeah, exciting times!

>Most of these will run out of Spaceport America in New Mexico

well, no. Only Virgin plans to operate there. Also a sounding rocket company called UP Aerospace.

XCOR, Matsen, and Scaled use the Mojave airfield (also New Mexico). SpaceDev (owned by Sierra Nevada) is in Colorado. Armadillo and Blue Origin launch in Texas. Bigelow is in Las Vegas, and would only launch from established spaceports like Cape Canaveral, same as SpaceX and Orbital. Orbital does its test flights from Wallops, VA, but also uses Vandenberg and Kodiak.

[Anonymous No.2151527]

>XCORs Lynx model

[Anonymous No.2151533]

>>2151506
that is not a dream chaser, that is the X-38. Not the same.
>>2151456
first crewed flight at 2016 at earliest. unclear if it would be commercial.


also, dont be so fast in screaming their praise. Spaceshipone * look at that name * basucally is a suborbital hop. But you'll be in space! herp!

SpaceX just had their static test fire done on their 2nd falcon for COTS1. a 2 second holddown fire of the first stage. worked nicely. it was the 3rd try, but meh.

search real sources with nasa / ULA people and you'll learn that while it certainly is an interesting change, it in no way is game changing or revolutionary - it'll still cost lots of money, and there is no silver bullet. NASA is screwed though due to its bureacracy.

[Anonymous No.2151534]

>Blue Origin's vehicle test.

>This should also look familiar to you.

[Anonymous No.2151539]

>more from Blue Origin

[Anonymous No.2151548]

>Armadillo Aerospace

>testan - launchan - rockatan

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151559]

>>2151514
>>2151499
Yes it does

[Anonymous No.2151560]

>>2151498

>The private space industry can probably make money launching small payloads into orbit, or humans into suborbital flight. Beyond this, it probably will never to be able to scale up and still make a profit. Only a government can spend that kind of money.

SpaceX will take money from anyone. private interests or governments. If they say they can build a rocket that can take cargo to Mars, then its because they will be happy to receive that sweet sweet government money. And it is in their interests to do it reliably and cost efficiently.

Unlike NASA Boeing, which is so entrenched in the government that they could sit on their asses all day long and not worry about getting fired.

[Anonymous No.2151566]

>>2151559
now here is someone that knows stuff not commonly known.
That is the X-37 which returned yesterday / day before after some months in space. There was some interesting discussion on the case of the yellow streaks. If you look at other photos, they are originating from single tiles.

also, the design is simply a lifting body. an apollo/dragon/orion/cst like capsule might just be chaper, by the way. more efficient with weight, for sure.

[Anonymous No.2151582]

>>2151560

>russian failure

>russian failure everywhere

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151588]

>>2151566
I believe the yellow streaks come from the hypergolic propellant system. It is likely left over residue from the combination of Monomethylhydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (aka highly toxic stuff which is why they approach the vehicle with bio-hazard suits)

[Anonymous No.2151594]

>>2151566
>yellow streaks. If you look at other photos, they are originating from single tiles.
CHEMTRAILS!!!1!

[Anonymous No.2151595]

>>2151501

When money is involved, there are big incentives to control costs and cut corners. When large amounts of money are involved, the finance guys eventually take over, and the corner cutting starts. This seems to happen to a lot of engineering companies.

A rocket is basically a balloon filled with fuel and oxidizer. Without rigid QA standards, it turns into a bomb.

NASA has a lot of bitter experience with small mistakes turning into large explosions. Their QA standards are written in fire and blood. The red tape has evolved over the years to prevent disaster. However, even with all of their precautions, even NASA occasionally screws up.

[Anonymous No.2151605]

hows it feel to know the millennial generation will become the space pioneers of our time?

[Anonymous No.2151606]

>>2151588
what strange is however the fact the position of the streaks - streaks on top, on the payload doors- could only be caused by thrusters in front of that firing during the reentry, but during the reentry these only cause turbulence and hence arent used as soon as there is some atmosphere.
The suits are for trace elements of hydrazine for sure, but im not sure over the streaks. perhaps they are just a localized burn pattern made due to specific turbulence during reentry, but the patterns are strange for that.
did you see the tiles just below the nose? a very strange pattern.

[Anonymous No.2151615]

>>2151595
When money is involved, there are big incentives to control costs and cut corners. When large amounts of money are involved, the finance guys eventually take over, and the corner cutting starts. This seems to happen to a lot of engineering companies.

cutting cost =! simply looking at the graphic of return from ever increasing safety measures - an asymptote.

>NASA has a lot of bitter experience with small mistakes turning into large explosions.
Every rocket company has.
>Their QA standards are written in fire and blood.
as is every rocket developing country, and new ones learn from old ones.
>The red tape has evolved over the years to prevent disaster.
it now causes disaster, just of the financial kind. It has become a jungle of thousands of pages that serve only to hinder a lot for a very small safety increase.
You can be just as safe without the hassle.

>However, even with all of their precautions, even NASA occasionally screws up.
people still die in cars. terrorists will always slip through. the same holds for rockets. cant be 100% safe. At some point you have to look and take a decision how much closer you want to get at that 100% ( without ever reaching it, mind you ) and importantly, at what cost.

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151619]

>>2151595
There is no guarantee when it comes to engineering design especially within space exploration. With proper safety procedures in place, it can mitigate the chances for loss, but even then, it is never absolute.

You will see companies take big risks in the near future. My concern is who will keep them accountable for their risks/mistakes? I sense that it will be laissez-faire. Lawsuits would reign king and there will be seldom growth.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.2151629]

FUCKING FINALLY A PRIVATE SPACEFLIGHT THREAD!!!!!

I am... Home >:3~~

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151639]

>>2151606
See the red circle? That is the opening for the maneuvering system. Reentry is done belly first (black tiles). Makes sense of the pattern of streaks around the nose.

As for the payload bay doors, it is likely that some residue propellant was localized around the dooring during it's extended mission. Going through the atmosphere along with the heat may caused the "browning" of the tiles.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.2151643]

>>2151534

Why does it look like the... DC-X?

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151649]

>>2151639
>>2151606
Look at the orbiter for comparison. There is discoloration along the front end of the payload bay doors. The wings during entry shield the back end of the payload bay doors which is why it tends to stay whiter than the front. It also helps to know that the main OMS pod is on the nose of the orbiter. The discoloration is consistent to the angle of descent during reentry.

[Anonymous No.2151661]

>>2151639
I meant the football-like round part in the middle, just under the nose.

I lean more toward all reentry scorch marks now - fuel shouldnt cling near the doors in a vacuum, and i doubt that what little particles did that it would not be enough for a streak like that.

[Anonymous No.2151671]

>>2151661
also nicely visible is one part of the craft that we had seen nothing about so far, the air break ( part between two "tails" ) as well as the engine bell - which, frankly, looks way too high-isp for such a small vehicle, even if it is supposed to change orbits.

[Anonymous No.2151682]

another picture, of the front - just like the shuttle, with maneuvring holes in the thermal protection.

[Anonymous No.2151691]

but hey, this was commercial spaceflight, right?

here is the picture from the 2nd falcon 9 static test, just a few hours ago. Notice the first Dragon capsule on top - you can just make out a yellow line where the TPS heatshield is a bit wider then the rocket body.

engines where fired for a few seconds at full power - the rocket was being held down by the pad.

[nerdtacular !!x0w1JIxS7hB No.2151694]

>>2151661
The orbiter doesn't have tiles on the very tip part of the nose. They use Reinforced Carbon-Carbon (RCC). It is able to withstand the most amount of heat on the orbiter, can be created to fit a smooth molded shape, and has the same properties as a diamond. However it is very expensive.

I guess with the X-37B there isn't enough surface area to justify using RCC, and that the tiles would work just fine. Thus the funky configuration.

Fuel shouldn't cling along the orbiter but there can always be a minor leak. When mixed with the air in the atmosphere (specifically bonded with oxygen) it becomes quite hazardous (imagine it being bonded with the oxygen in one's lungs - NOT GOOD).

[Anonymous No.2151700]

>>2151661
that picture shows nicely how thick the TPS is, at the front wheel where it opened. it might be a bit thicker there due to it being directly on rubber and the like, but it still is impressively thick.

attached; 2nd falcon 9 with dragon attached being rolled out towards the pad.

[Anonymous No.2151748]

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid51731099001?bctid=697840872001

video from the static test today

[Anonymous No.2151921]

Space drone

Attele Bracely

[Anonymous No.2152225]

bump for sssssppPPPPPPAAAAAAAAACCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEE

[Scia No.2152676]

SSSSSSPPPPPAAAAAACCCCCEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.2152889]

Secret spaceplane set to land next weekend.

The US Air Force's top-secret X-37B spacecraft is set to land sometime in the next few days at the Vandenberg Air Force Base. It will be the US' first ever autonomous re-entry and runway landing. While the exact landing date and time will depend on technical and weather considerations, it is expected to occur between Friday, December 3, and Monday, December 6, 2010. The landing date was to be expected, given that the craft has been aloft since April and one of the few known facts about it is that it has a 270-day maximum flight time.

www.tgdaily.com/space-features/52800-secret-spaceplane-set-to-land-next-weekend

itouses simply

[Anonymous No.2153671]

>>2152889