Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Space Race 2.0 has Begun 96

An anonymous reader writes "MSNBC has a story about a second company starting up to compete with Virgin Galactic. Both are planning on operating passenger sub-orbital flights. Will this new Space Race usher in more new technologies into our daily lives, like the previous one? Will the competition to go higher/faster lead to orbital tourism?" From the article: "The company that helped put three millionaires into orbit has teamed up with Russia's Federal Space Agency and the financial backers of the $10 million Ansari X Prize to develop a new breed of suborbital passenger spaceship. Thursday's announcement by Virginia-based Space Adventures herald the entry of new international players in the commercial space race -- a race that is expected to enter a critical phase in the next year or two."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Space Race 2.0 has Begun

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18, 2006 @04:45AM (#14748339)
  • by Soft ( 266615 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @05:05AM (#14748384)
    Would it be possible to use suborbital craft such as this as a means to provide rapid transportation between distant terrestrial locations?

    Yes and no. It is quite possible, but you'd need quite a lot bigger vehicles, more like current rockets.

    To see this, you have to understand that the biggest obstacle is speed: to just reach 100 km altitude, as these spacecraft do, you need to launch at a speed of about 1 km/s. Orbital speed (low Earth orbit) is 8 km/s. Unfortunately, it's not a question of eight times more fuel, it's exponential; if your propulsion system is such that for each ton of payload you must expend another ton of propellant, total mass 2 tons, then you need 2^8-1=255 tons of propellant to go to orbit.

    Now, an intercontinental journey is easier than going to orbit, but according to calculations I had made some time ago, it's not that easy, maybe 3-4 km/s to cross several thousand kilometers. SpaceShipOne definitely couldn't make it.

    So, yes, this is possible and perhaps interesting--if you don't mind the acceleration, as another poster said--but it is significantly harder than what is currently being done by private spaceflight companies. Which does not mean it's forever impossible, of course, nor that private companies won't make orbit or beyond eventually...

  • by Wyatt Earp ( 1029 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @06:06AM (#14748492)
    They go up about 800-1200 km, then come back down on the other side of the planet or within 6,000-plus miles of thier launch site. An ICBM is going approximately 15,000 mph (Mach 23 or 24,000 kph) at burnout.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/lgm-30_3 -specs.htm [globalsecurity.org]

    Since we're on suborbitals, Sprint was a pretty cool system for missile interception. Sprint was a marvel of aeronautics and space technology reaching a speed of Mach 10 in 5 seconds. Built by Martin Marietta, it was designed to operate at hypersonic speeds in the earth's atmosphere; at its top speed, the missile's skin became hotter than the interior of its rocket motor and glowed incandescently. To make the launch as quick as possible, the cover was blown off the silo by explosive charges; Then the missile was ejected by an explosive-driven piston. As the missile cleared the silo, the first stage fired and the missile was tilted toward its target. The first stage was of very short, almost explosive, duration. The second stage fired within 1 - 2 seconds of launch. Interception at an altitude of 1500m to 30000m took at most 15 seconds. The electronic components of the Sprint were designed to withstand accelerations of 100 times gravity. The missile was 27 feet long, consisted of two stages, and used solid fuel. Sprint carried an ER nuclear warhead of a few KT.
  • by SirBruce ( 679714 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @06:59AM (#14748594) Homepage
    Space Adventures isn't a "new" start-up to compete with Virgin Galactic. Space Adventures has been around since 1998, and was one of the first companies (in the modern era, anyway; not talking about old space sweepstakes from decades ago) to actually plan on sending tourists into space. It is Virgin Galactic that is the "new" start-up, competeing with the likes of Space Adventures.

    That having been said, right now Space Adventures is little more than a middle man. They've been working with various other private companies (like Scaled Composites, SpaceX, Armadillo, etc.) to essentially use whatever suborbital rocket THEY build, to ferry passangers who reserve flights now with Space Adventures. Right now there are a few hundred people who've plunked down $100,000 or so for a reservation; I assume Space Adventures is just making money off of investments while waiting for a private company to finally actually produce a sub-orbital ship.

    I should also point out the Space Adventures has been "anticipating" this first flight to take place as early as 2000, and have delayed it every year since then. Who knows if any spacecraft maker will ever actually complete a project such that Space Adventures reservations get filled. Virgin Galactic, on the other hand, has already locked up a deal with Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites, so it would seem unlikely that SpaceShipTwo would be available to take Space Adventures' reservations, unless Virgin Galactic buys out the contracts. And since Burt Rutan is currently the only guy who has demosntrated any success in this field so far, things don't look good for SA.

    But that's just my opinion.

    Bruce

    PS - SA has managed to get a "finder's fee" for hooking up three private space tourists for trips to the ISS via the Russians, for $20M a pop. Frankly, I don't know HOW they managed that; seems to me I can phone up Rosaviacosmos directly. But maybe Russia prefers dealing exclusively through SA for potential private clients.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18, 2006 @08:44AM (#14748824)
    the average ICBMs built between the 60s and present would take (my guess) around 2 hours to make that trip

    Your guess sucks.

    ICBMS travel at near-orbital velocities (17,000mph). A complete circuit of the earth in low orbit takes roughly 90 minutes. NY-Tokyo would take an ICBM less than 45 minutes. In the Cold War era, UK citizens would have had roughly FOUR MINUTES [wikipedia.org] warning of Soviet ICBM attack.

  • Re:Suborbital? (Score:3, Informative)

    by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @09:12AM (#14748901)
    Whats cool about all this is not that its new (fights like this were first carried out by the North American Aviation X-15 rocket plane launched from a B-52 Bomber) but that its been done by a private company in a way thats easily reproducable and promises to get cheaper over time.
  • by Angstroem ( 692547 ) on Saturday February 18, 2006 @04:13PM (#14751034)
    Teflon was invented by Dupont Chemical *way* before the space race. It's one of those never-dying myths that it was a byproduct of the space race.

    Tell you something: spinach is *not* a good iron supplier. (The other unkillable myth...)

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...