Media Casualties Mount
Administration Split On Europe Invasion
Administration In Crisis Over Burgeoning Quagmire
Congress Concerned About Diversion From War On Japan
Pot, Kettle On Line Two...
Allies Seize Paris
Gore Book Sales Tank, Supporters Claim Unfair Tactics
Satan Files Lack Of Defamation Suit
Why This Blog Bores People With Space Stuff
A New Beginning
My Hit Parade
Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds)
James Lileks Bleats
Winds Of Change (Joe Katzman)
Little Green Footballs (Charles Johnson)
Eject Eject Eject (Bill Whittle)
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Space Flight
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)
Nanobot (Howard Lovy)
Lagniappe (Derek Lowe)
Geek Press (Paul Hsieh)
Redwood Dragon (Dave Trowbridge)
Turned Up To Eleven (Paul Orwin)
Cowlix (Wes Cowley)
Quark Soup (Dave Appell)
Assymetrical Information (Jane Galt and Mindles H. Dreck)
Marginal Revolution (Tyler Cowen et al)
Man Without Qualities (Robert Musil)
Knowledge Problem (Lynne Kiesling)
Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett)
The Funny Pages
Cox & Forkum
Day By Day
Happy Fun Pundit
Amish Tech Support (Lawrence Simon)
Scrapple Face (Scott Ott)
Quasipundit (Adragna & Vehrs)
England's Sword (Iain Murray)
Daily Pundit (Bill Quick)
Daimnation! (Damian Penny)
Z+ Blog (Andrew Zolli)
The Kolkata Libertarian
Midwest Conservative Journal
Protein Wisdom (Jeff Goldstein et al)
Dean's World (Dean Esmay)
Yippee-Ki-Yay (Kevin McGehee)
Spleenville (Andrea Harris)
Random Jottings (John Weidner)
On the Third Hand (Kathy Kinsley, Bellicose Woman)
Inappropriate Response (Moira Breen)
Inadvertent Comic Relief
Warblogger Watcher (Cowardly Anonymous Idiotarians)
Other Worthy Weblogs
Ain't No Bad Dude (Brian Linse)
A libertarian reads the papers
Anna Franco Review
Ben Kepple's Daily Rant
Dropscan (Shiloh Bucher)
End the War on Freedom
Insolvent Republic of Blogistan
James Reuben Haney
Mind over what matters
Page Fault Interrupt
Sand In The Gears(Anthony Woodlief)
The Blogs of War
The Fly Bottle
The Illuminated Donkey
What she really thinks
Where HipHop & Libertarianism Meet
Zem : blog
Space Policy Links
The Space Review
The Space Show
Space Frontier Foundation
Space Policy Digest BBS
USS Clueless (Steven Den Beste)
Unremitting Verse (Will Warren)
World View (Brink Lindsay)
The Last Page
More Than Zero (Andrew Hofer)
Pathetic Earthlings (Andrew Lloyd)
Spaceship Summer (Derek Lyons)
The New Space Age (Rob Wilson)
Rocketman (Mark Oakley)
Site designed by
"You Can't Oversell It"
While reading Michael Belfiore's new book this weekend, I was struck by Brian Binnie's description of his X-Prize winning flight. Well, Jeff Foust has a report on a speech that Brian gave this past weekend, on what an amazing experience it will be. And if you can't oversell it, it makes it a double shame that Rocketplane may not be able to sell it at all.Posted by Rand Simberg at July 09, 2007 07:22 AM
I wonder how Richard Branson's parents (91 and 88) will handle 7 G's, not to mention Stephan Hawkings...
Thomas from the link:
I wouldn't be surprised if they could handle 3-4 g for 20 seconds, Stephen Hawkin as well (didn't he go through repeated 3+ g periods during his parabolic flights or was it less?). I hope all of them can.
Some reference points. Max G's during a Shuttle flight to orbit and return are about 3-4 with the astronauts lying on their backs during launch.
I believe the Disney Mission Space ride has a max. G force around 2 or so. And they have lost a couple kids on it from heart problems since it opened.
So actually a force of 7 G's, even for a few seconds is very significant and far more then John Glenn endured on his Shuttle mission to orbit.
Also it appears from the article that Burt Rutan has abandoned the feathered tail approach used in SpaceShipOne. I wonder why given its was supposed to be the biggest break through of SpaceshipOne...Posted by at July 9, 2007 04:38 PM
Also it appears from the article that Burt Rutan has abandoned the feathered tail approach used in SpaceShipOne.
Assuming the unnamed commenter is referring to the TSR article, I can't understand how such a conclusion could be drawn. Binnie never said that the feathering approach was being abandoned, and said that feathering was simpler than other approached, like BSC's variable ballistic coefficient concept announced last week.Posted by Jeff Foust at July 10, 2007 03:07 PM
In reply to anonymous (Thomas?),
It will not be experienced as 7 g, please read up on the difference between horizontal and vertical (as experienced) g-force and also "eyes out"/"eyes in" (a seperate issue). The differences in position in regard to the g force has to be accounted for in all your examples, none of which have people lying down flat "on the floor" and some of which make a point out of applying g forces in just about all directions (rollercoasters etc.).
SS2 will be using feathering, the SS2 is a scaled up and refined/improved SS1. That's official and has been for a long time. Perhaps anonymous (Thomas?) is confusing speculation about Tier III or Rutan's/SC's involvement with t/Space and their launch system for the orbital CXV (which looks nothing like SS1/SS2) with the completely seperate issue of the suborbital WK2/SS2?
Armadillo, MSS, TGV, and Blue Origin, are all going for a HTHL design where they fire the rockets on descent to slow the vehicle down. The small (1-person) ARCA Stabilo uses parachutes on the seperated engine and payload modules. SS1/SS2 uses feathering and then gliding.
Feathering is/was a novel method for increasing drag to bleed off return speed that has additional advantages (self-stabilizing, easy passenger positioning in relation to g force, dual use of surfaces, relatively low "re-entry" heating issues, simplicity*). The big fuss: feathering was a new approach and it worked.
* the simplicity makes for easier redundancy if deemed necessary, in this case multiple independent hydraulic systems all working on the shared axis for shifting between feathered and glide mode. It wouldn't surprise me if the bigger SS2 has this.Posted by Habitat Hermit at July 11, 2007 12:43 AM
Yes, it seems names are not automatically saved on this blog as with Space Politics or Personal Spaceflight and I saw no way to fix it without reposting.
In regards to the examples, the Shuttle astronauts are on their backs in relation to the G forces from the Shuttle’s engines, so by your statement the 2-3 G’s they take are not really 2-3 G’s. Or the 3-4 G’s on a Soyuz re-entry with the Cosmonauts in acceleration couches with their backs to the g-forces of re-entry is less then they seem.
Now as noted in this NASA article the G-forces on a Soyuz may go up to 9 G’s if there is a problem as on Expedition 6 with a shorten re-entry profile. Something that will also have to be kept in mind if the normal G-force on re-entry is already 7 G’s for Spaceshiptwo.
Which brings us to the question, wasn’t the purpose of feathering the wing to reduce G’s on re-entry to make it easier? Or was it to just to reduce overall stress on the system?
I invoke Carmack's defense. You can continue this conversation on your own Thomas as you obviously don't read what I write.Posted by Habitat Hermit at July 11, 2007 10:30 PM
You didn't read what I wrote. A 7 G re-entry is higher then the Shuttle or Soyuz normally experiences. And higher then the 5 G Spaceshipone experienced.
So what is the advantage of the feathered wing if the passengers will still have to undergo more stress then existing orbital systems?
Vehicles may be designed to take more stress and be redundant. Human redesign is not an option and given the aging of the baby boomers, which seem to be the prime market for space tourism, makes you wonder if a 7 G design is wise.Posted by Thomas Matula at July 11, 2007 10:45 PM
Post a comment