Virgin SpaceShip Two crash

pidgeoneyes

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29857182

Dardania

and a fatality too - horrible stuff. Wasn't there fatalities a few years ago at the motor supply company too?

Burt Rutan wasn't joking when he said the safety isn't developed enough to be on a par with modern aviation...such is the path of progress...

pidgeoneyes

Space flight will be treacherous for some time to come.

Jack1985

Listening to the idiot that is Tom Bower on Sky News, delighted it seems he has been proven right about Virgin Galactic when there's a fatality ffs.

pidgeoneyes

Hoping Virgin get to the bottom of it quickly. I would imagine they would have some great engineers working there.

mickdw

pidgeoneyes wrote: »

Hoping Virgin get to the bottom of it quickly. I would imagine they would have some great engineers working there.

This will surely set them back 10 years, maybe not in terms of engineering but in terms of faith in the project among the general public.

PukkaStukka

An quote from the BBC article linked to above

BBC News wrote:

Ken Brown, a photographer who witnessed the crash, said the craft exploded after it was released from a plane that carries it to a high altitude.

I'm just speculating based on this quote, but if true, does it suggest that rocket motor failed? Irrespective, what's happened is just awful. RIP to the copilot and a speedy recovery to the other injured pilot.

Turbulent Bill

pidgeoneyes wrote: »

Hoping Virgin get to the bottom of it quickly. I would imagine they would have some great engineers working there.

I saw a documentary about the project recently (maybe on Discovery?), and I was surprised by how amateur it looked. The chief aerodynamicist was ex-Boeing but looked out of his depth. Could have just been edited for drama, but I'm not certain...

Scaled Composites have a great history of innovation, and I hope they pull it off, but it's not looking good.

fr336

Jack1985 wrote: »

Listening to the idiot that is Tom Bower on Sky News, delighted it seems he has been proven right about Virgin Galactic when there's a fatality ffs.

Yes he did seem a bit over the top and especially about Branson. He also mentioned his book!

durandal01

Here's a pretty harrowing eye witness report from Mojave.

And pics of the break up, http://gizmodo.com/virgin-galactic-experiences-first-major-accident-possi-1653360863/+mattnovak?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow .
It's starting to look to look like a problem with the motor alright.
The motor is a new fangled hybrid rocket thing that uses a solid fuel (usually some sort of polyamide ie nylon) and a liquid oxidiser (O2 or N2O) squirted over it.
This set up offers many advantages over plain solid and binary liquid motors.
A couple of engineers were killed in Mojave a few years ago in an explosion during a ground test of one of these rocket types although I don't think it had anything to do with the actual firing of the motor.
I don't know about this space tourism thing, who in their right mind is going to sell you travel insurance.
This could be the end, Scaled Composites and their backers have only so much money, not the resources of nation states, and SpaceShip 2 was their shot at glory.
My deepest condolences to the family of the lost pilot and my best wishes to the surviving crew member.

Citizen2011

is this the same spaceship that bill cullen had prepaid to travel on?

Tzardine

Citizen2011 wrote: »

is this the same spaceship that bill cullen had prepaid to travel on?

I think so.

Although I would say he cant afford to make the final payment these days.

cml387

It seems the NTSB will be investigating the accident.

I quite admire Richard Branson, and his dream of spaceflight is admirable.

The NTSB will apply their rigorous and unpitying gaze on the whole setup and I fear for the whole project.

That being said, the NTSB would never have passed any of the Apollo capsules as fit for flight either.

folbotcar

Yes indeed cml387 but Apollo wasn't about to carry fare paying passengers just test pilots who by the nature of their profession knew the risks. As did the two crew on board Spaceship two.

Accidents like this have to expected. This is new technology and the state of the art is similar to that of aviation back the in mid twentieth century. Test flying is inherently dangerous, test flying rockets is just dangerous.

In fact let's nail the myth once and for all. Most flying other than as a fare paying passenger in an airliner has a high risk factor. Even the lowly C150, more friends and acquaintances have been killed flying that harmless looking aeroplane than any other aircraft.

My own view is that the whole passenger rocket idea is too ambitious for a private venture right now. In fact probably too ambitious for governments. The long period of development and associated problems seem to point to that. Time will tell and the NTSB report informative.

I also have come to believe that the whole space travel thing has no future anyway. It's largely fantasy. The whole thing is being kept going by grown up space age kids like Branson who watched the moon landings and expected we'd all be holidaying on Mars by now!

So forget all your Star Wars or Star Trek. We haven't even gone back to the moon after over forty years. Even if the technology is perfected. The sheer cost makes is unviable.

AMKC

mickdw wrote: »

This will surely set them back 10 years, maybe not in terms of engineering but in terms of faith in the project among the general public.

I hope not maybe a year but hopefuly not 10 as that would be a big setback. I admire Richard Branson and his vision to get passangers into space and eventually make it affordable and safe for all of us.
It is very sad that one pilot died but he knew the risks and hopefully the other pilot does make a full recovery.
This might delay them a bit but hopefully they will also learn from this crash and it will help to make it safer as well.

AMKC

folbotcar wrote: »

Yes indeed cml387 but Apollo wasn't about to carry fare paying passengers just test pilots who by the nature of their profession knew the risks. As did the two crew on board Spaceship two.

Accidents like this have to expected. This is new technology and the state of the art is similar to that of aviation back the in mid twentieth century. Test flying is inherently dangerous, test flying rockets is just dangerous.

In fact let's nail the myth once and for all. Most flying other than as a fare paying passenger in an airliner has a high risk factor. Even the lowly C150, more friends and acquaintances have been killed flying that harmless looking aeroplane than any other aircraft.

My own view is that the whole passenger rocket idea is too ambitious for a private venture right now. In fact probably too ambitious for governments. The long period of development and associated problems seem to point to that. Time will tell and the NTSB report informative.

I also have come to believe that the whole space travel thing has no future anyway. It's largely fantasy. The whole thing is being kept going by grown up space age kids like Branson who watched the moon landings and expected we'd all be holidaying on Mars by now!

And we should have been the technolagy is there for getting us to Mars and for terraforming. Its just the cost is huge and goverments can,t afford to do it like they could in the 60s and 70s.

So forget all your Star Wars or Star Trek. We haven't even gone back to the moon after over forty years. Even if the technology is perfected. The sheer cost makes is unviable.

Yes we have just humans have not but other probes,ships whatever you want to call them have been to the moon again including some by India and China.
If we like it or not humans are going to have to eventually leave this planet and find other ones by either wormholes or warping space or folding it.

folbotcar

AMKC wrote: »

Yes we have just humans have not but other probes,ships whatever you want to call them have been to the moon again including some by India and China.
If we like it or not humans are going to have to eventually leave this planet and find other ones by either wormholes or warping space or folding it.

I love Science fiction too but I understand that it is fiction not fact. Right now the technology we use to get into space is just an advanced version of rockets we see fired into the air on Halloween. Unless there is a significant breakthrough in propulsion we're staying on or near this planet until we die out.

I've nothing against going into space. It's exciting but it's not commercially viable and the long term benefits for mankind are hard to see.

cml387

Remember that the limit of Brenson's ambitions was a sub-orbital flight.
That was done by Alan Shepard in 1961.

W1ll1s

folbotcar wrote: »

I love Science fiction too but I understand that it is fiction not fact. Right now the technology we use to get into space is just an advanced version of rockets we see fired into the air on Halloween. Unless there is a significant breakthrough in propulsion we're staying on or near this planet until we die out.

I've nothing against going into space. It's exciting but it's not commercially viable and the long term benefits for mankind are hard to see.

Yep, have to agree with that, were going nowhere fast...

Earl Turner

W1ll1s wrote: »

Yep, have to agree with that, were going nowhere fast...

It's a stark thought alright. Unless we can develop faster than light technology, no man will ever leave the solar system.

Tow

Latest update :
http://youtu.be/vjYVhGvUSNc

Feathers were unlocked too early by the co pilot and moved uncommanded up the up position.

amen

It's a stark thought alright. Unless we can develop faster than light technology, no man will ever leave the solar system.

all you need is some engine with a constant acceleration. If we could get a constant 1 g acceleration we could go to the money and back in a few hours,

nearest start approx 5 years(to those on the space craft!)

folbotcar

amen wrote: »

all you need is some engine with a constant acceleration. If we could get a constant 1 g acceleration we could go to the money and back in a few hours,

nearest start approx 5 years(to those on the space craft!)

Strange things happen at the speed of light. You might get there but not back. Plus you need a nearly infinite fuel source. Di-Lithium crystal anyone?

durandal01

Well this is a turn up for the books, they're well into the build of a second Virgin Galactic Spaceship.
I never thought they would get the cash together.
The crash report from the first craft is due out later this year. It wasn't the motor as was initially thought but the feathering of the craft (for whatever reason) at high speed.
PS did anyone notice the Beechcraft (Rutan) Starship in EIKY last week, I had no time to get a close look.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33001768

de biz

I think it was a Piaggio P-180, M-PIRE that you saw in Kerry....

Tzardine

durandal01 wrote: »

I never thought they would get the cash together.

Branson is not exactly short of a few bob. $4.8 Billion in the bank according to Mr Google.

homerjay2005

durandal01 wrote: »

Well this is a turn up for the books, they're well into the build of a second Virgin Galactic Spaceship.
I never thought they would get the cash together.

surely in a programme that costs billion, building an extra spaceship wouldnt take up as much of the costs as you are assuming i.e. a project costing 2billion doesnt necessarily mean the build costs 2 billion every time, it would be more along the lines of 200m and no more surely?

you'd also imagine the original plan meant more than one also.

durandal01

de biz wrote: »

I think it was a Piaggio P-180, M-PIRE that you saw in Kerry....

OK then, thanks.
It was parked on the old runway over by the clubhouse.
I was on FR842 in an F seat on RWY26 and didn't have my specs on and had no time to run over to see after landing.