SpaceShipOne Makes it!

[redd]

But why does NASA continue to demand such huge velocities to launch a/c into orbit, which require the decelerating re-entry tactics? Why are they still utilizing the same rocket/missile technology as they did in the 1960's?

 

[Nova]

But why does NASA continue to demand such huge velocities to launch a/c into orbit, which require the decelerating re-entry tactics?

Um, because it's required to achieve orbit. If NASA was all about shooting stuff up into near space and let it fall back to Earth than such speeds wouldn't be requried.

 

[jarhead]

Redd,

It is not NASA that requires such huge velocities to get into orbit. It is Sir Issac Newton who demands it. Simply put, the laws of physics will have the orbit decay and re-enter at anything under 18,000 miles per hour. The further out from the planet the the space craft is orbiting at, the faster it must travel. To close to the earth, and atmospere will bring you down.

 

[414Flyer]

But why does NASA continue to demand such huge velocities to launch a/c into orbit, which require the decelerating re-entry tactics? Why are they still utilizing the same rocket/missile technology as they did in the 1960's?

Its not NASA that requires it, its physics and gravity that do

 

[CDVdriver]

The coolest stuff.....the landing pic shows some damage to the underside of this beast, maybe from reentry?

 

[redd]

Okay, point taken, but what I mean is why not refine the methods to acheive all this? We've had two shuttle break ups, the riskiness of the methods to slow the a/c down, and the way in which decelerization occurs, could use revision. Doing things the same way they have always been done may lead to other shuttle accidents, what can NASA do to be flexible and innovative enough to acheive better results here? Rutan seems to be unhindered in developing cutting edge new technology.

 

[jarhead]

The pilot of SS1 stated that when he was at max altitude, he heard a loud noise.
He looked back and saw a section near the back that had buckled like a coke can.

 

[jarhead]

Okay, point taken, but what I mean is why not refine the methods to acheive all this? We've had two shuttle break ups, the riskiness of the methods to slow the a/c down, and the way in which decelerization occurs, could use revision. Doing things the same way they have always been done may lead to other shuttle accidents, what can NASA do to be flexible and innovative enough to acheive better results here? Rutan seems to be unhindered in developing cutting edge new technology.

Actually, NASA did what Rutan did today, way back in around 1960. They shot Alan Sheperd up into space and straight back down again into the ocean. The difference in these feats really, was that the U.S. government and NASA had a blank check to underwrite the effort on the 60's. Today's success was done as a private venture, and that's what's remarkable, IMO

 

[redd]

The pilot of SS1 stated that when he was at max altitude, he heard a loud noise.
He looked back and saw a section near the back that had buckled like a coke can.

Didn't rain down in peices over Texas, though.

 

[jarhead]

Nope.....he was not moving fast enough for that, like he would
have been had he been at orbital velocity.