An extensive guide. He clearly put a lot of work into it.
[Via (who else?) Geek Press]
An extensive guide. He clearly put a lot of work into it.
[Via (who else?) Geek Press]
Over at Tea Party in Space, there is a lengthy analysis of the fraudulent and misleading numbers from Congressional staff for yesterday’s hearing.
Doug Mohney over at Satellite Spotlight has noticed how much hardware that we rely on needs Russian engines.
Thoughts from Howie Carr.
Based on the Twitter feed, it looks like the committee continue to be (as Michael Mealling tweets) asshats, but at least it was an opportunity for Gwynne to explain costs to them. There are lies, damned lies, and Congressional cost estimates (note in comments at the link “Edgar”‘s analysis — I wonder if that’s Edgar Zapata?). I’ll be curious to see Jeff Foust’s report later, though we probably won’t see it until Monday, at The Space Review.
[Update a few minutes later]
More on the cooked books from Keith Cowing. I’m guessing the culprit is Ken Monroe, head staffer.
Some potentially exciting breakthroughs, using nanotech. This will be a very important technology for space as well.
Remember the Bob Zubrin who cast scorn on the idea of propellant depots?
Well, now he has a new proposal:
Zubrin’s concept is, at its core, a space access subsidy program. Rather than spend billions on new launch vehicles, he envisions NASA instead spending a modest amount of money—he suggested $1.2 billion a year, about six percent of its current $18.5-billion annual budget—buying the most “cost-effective” launch vehicles available. That cost effectiveness would be some function of its price and payload capacity; Zubrin has a particular preference for SpaceX’s proposed Falcon Heavy, which could launch up to 53 metric tons into low Earth orbit (LEO) for as little as $80 million a launch.
NASA would then, in turn, resell that launch capacity to itself, other government agencies, and the private sector, at the artificially low price of $50 per kilogram, or about $2.65 million per fully-loaded Falcon Heavy. Those launches, he said, would take place on a regular schedule, regardless if the capacity on each vehicle is fully subscribed. “You don’t hold the train in the station until it fills up,” he explained. Any excess capacity would be filled with consumables like water, oxygen, and propellant, which could be stored on orbit for use by any interested parties.
Emphasis mine.
In what does he propose to store the propellants, if not depots?
I should note, though, to be fair, that he wrote the PJM stuff a few weeks ago, so it’s possible he’s changed his mind.
Obama administration policies are responsible for high gas prices.
If they really wanted to wreck the economy, what would they be doing differently?
…why the relatively silence from a media savvy Virgin Group that understands the PR value of showing a rocket engine firing?
Nobody knows for sure. However, people familiar with such things thought the engine firings in the initial video looked rough. (At least from what they could see of it through the enormous cloud of dirt and dust the engine threw up.) Soon after the video was released, stories circulated that engineers at Sierra Nevada Corporation were having a hard time scaling up the hybrid engine system from the small, X-1 sized SpaceShipOne prototype to its business jet sized successor. Oscillations sufficiently severe that nobody would want to ride the vehicle.
The stories have persisted and, if anything, have grown stronger. The latest one circulating in Mojave is that the test in March didn’t go well, and that the propulsion team has decided to abandon the hybrid rocket for a liquid system. There is also a confirmed report that Virgin Galactic has formed its own propulsion team and hired the former director of SpaceX’s Texas engine testing facility — and an expert in liquid propulsion — as a member of it.
On Saturday, I asked Whitesides whether they were considering dumping the hybrid system entirely. He reaffirmed that the company are focused on hybrids for now; liquid propulsion is something that would be consider down the road.
I’ve always thought that the hybrid was a mistake. The late Jim Benson sold Burt on it for SpaceShipOne, though, and the success of the X-Prize apparently gave him the confidence to stick with it for SpaceShipTwo, despite its operational disadvantages. After the explosion in Mojave, I suggested to Alex Tai that it was a good opportunity to change course, but he said that it would cost too much in vehicle redesign, due to the different mass distribution. I’ll bet that they’re now really regretting that decision, if they have to do so anyway, because it has cost them years in schedule. Also, I wonder (assuming the rumors are true) why they’re developing their own, instead of just buying from XCOR? That was the mistake they made with the hybrid.
Some unfortunate examples. May not be safe for work–they’re laugh out loud.
[Update a few minutes later]
Also, awesomely inappropriate test answers from kids.
[Both via Geek Press]