Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

We Have Liftoff...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
How does one become one of the lucky few who get to go along for the ride? Is prior involvement in the military the only way?
 
They are not hiring anymore as of now. It's the one of the most competitive programs on the face of the earth.
 
God Bless America

I thought Steven Lindsey's words pre-launch were eloquent and patriotic. I only wish I could have been there to witness the "rocket's red glare" with my own eyes, which had tears in them anyway watching on Fox News Channel and Nasa TV / internet simultaneously. Even with the 40 second delay, it was fantastic. Made my 4th of July.

15,000 mph in a very short time...that is some kick in the pants.

Every American should be very proud today of our great country...Land of the Free and Home of The Brave!
 
I still luv what Rutan and Scaled Composites did with the X Prize. I cant believe they havent flown again since. Wonder whats up with that.
 
Horizon said:
How does one become one of the lucky few who get to go along for the ride? Is prior involvement in the military the only way?

Hey Horizon,

I've gotta question about your tag-line: "Thrust=weight/drag."

Is that to mean "Thrust equals weight divided by drag?" In the case of a vertically launched vehicle like the shuttle shouldn't it be "Thrust=weight+drag," or more precisely "Thrust > weight + drag?"

Something just isn't adding up in the aerodynamic corners of my mind...
 
More bucks, more Buck Rogers

IFollowRoads said:
I still luv what Rutan and Scaled Composites did with the X Prize. I cant believe they havent flown again since. Wonder whats up with that.

Funding. The mission cost far more than the X Prize paid, but was possible due to bankrolling by Microsoft tycoon Paul Allen.
 
tomgoodman said:
Funding. The mission cost far more than the X Prize paid, but was possible due to bankrolling by Microsoft tycoon Paul Allen.

Yeah, I knew the background. I just figured that nut Branson would've insisted they take him up by now :)
 
Rogue5 said:
Hey Horizon,

I've gotta question about your tag-line: "Thrust=weight/drag."

Is that to mean "Thrust equals weight divided by drag?" In the case of a vertically launched vehicle like the shuttle shouldn't it be "Thrust=weight+drag," or more precisely "Thrust > weight + drag?"

Something just isn't adding up in the aerodynamic corners of my mind...

Haha, it's not an equation as much as it is a joke. For airplanes to fly, we're typically taught Thrust = Drag. Well, for the shuttle to launch, it would appear that thrust not only equals drag, but also weight, hence the Thrust = Weight/drag.
 
Horizon said:
Haha, it's not an equation as much as it is a joke. For airplanes to fly, we're typically taught Thrust = Drag. Well, for the shuttle to launch, it would appear that thrust not only equals drag, but also weight, hence the Thrust = Weight/drag.

So, again...

My point is it should be weight+drag, not weight/drag, right?
 
Rogue5 said:
So, again...

My point is it should be weight+drag, not weight/drag, right?

I guess you're right. But I didn't type it as an equation, and therefore the slash does not represent a division factor. It was meant to group both weight and drag together. Like if your airplane is red and white you might write that as "red/white". You could be right though, the slash is misleading if you interpret the line as an equation.

Hell, I'll edit it...:)
 
Last edited:
IFollowRoads said:
I still luv what Rutan and Scaled Composites did with the X Prize. I cant believe they havent flown again since. Wonder whats up with that.

That's fine and all, but the little ballistic trip that Rutan & Co made and putting usable payload on station in orbit are different by several orders of magnitude.

The more I look at the math and engineering involved, the more I honor our pioneers during Apollo. What a trip THAT must have been.

Nu
 
Horizon said:
I guess you're right. But I didn't type it as an equation, and therefore the slash does not represent a division factor. It was meant to group both weight and drag together. Like if your airplane is red and white you might write that as "red/white". You could be right though, the slash is misleading if you interpret the line as an equation.

Hell, I'll edit it...:)

No worries man.

By the way, I watched the launch today on the NASA channel from T-60 minutes all the way through the cargo bay door opening and I must say I have never been so impressed and amazed by the things we are able to achieve.

I can honestly say I have never grown tired of hearing the countdown, seeing main engine start, and watching that beautiful machine clear the tower.

Best Fourth of July fireworks ever...
 
IFollowRoads said:
Wonder whats up with that.

White Knight and Spaceship One completed their design goals. There was no reason to lauch Spaceship One again. Rutan is now working on the larger, commercial version based on what was learned winning the X-Prize.
 
LJ-ABX said:
White Knight and Spaceship One completed their design goals. There was no reason to lauch Spaceship One again. Rutan is now working on the larger, commercial version based on what was learned winning the X-Prize.

And there was a logical reason to launch it in the first place?? :)

I'm not sure regular logic applies in this case. A man with a great idea met a couple men that had a crap pot of money, and they launched a little spacecraft out there for no other reason than to be able to say they did it.

They didn't advance science for beans, it was a Mercury Program, "Freedom 7" style mission. Shoot the bastage straight up and bring it straight down. The only new thing proven was the feather recovery system.

Why need a "reason" to launch Spaceship 1 again?? I'd just like to see them fly again because they CAN, because its fun to watch people like Mike Melville and Brian Binnie earn a pair of these:

FAAAstrobadge.jpg


But hey, if you need a reason... Spaceship 1 had two passenger seats behind the pilot, and thats reason enough in my book to fly her again. There has to be someone somewhere who can pay for a mission and ride in one of those two extra seats. Greg Olsen paid $20M for the Russians to take him to the ISS on a Soyuz, there has to be alot of other rich people out there who'd take a Spaceship 1 ride. BASE jumping and swimming with sharks gets old after awhile ;)
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top