Whom do you think will win the X-Prize and why?

[LURCH]

Whom do you think will win the "X-Prize" and why?

OK, place your bets people! Whom do you think will win the "X-Prize" and why?

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by LURCH
OK, place your bets people! Whom do you
think will win the "X-Prize" and why?

I posted an identical thread in this forum
a month or more ago and even included a link
to the official site(http://www.xprize.com/).
I think I just got one response. People here
are just interested in PCs...

Anyway, I don't know about the progress of the
teams so it's difficult to place bets.
I keep hearing about the UK StarChaser that's
supposed to be launched by the end of this year.
Personally, I'll be dissapointed if they win
because the idea seems to lack any orginality
or significant economical potential.
I liked the Mir Corp.'s project about launching
a 2 tonn craft from an An. 124 (or was it the
single 225 ?). I also liked, I believe it was
a UK project, the launching craft attached to
a baloon and launched from an altitude of
several miles (I thought of this too before I
even saw their idea). Burt Rutan has a new idea
just uncovered a month ago - it's called
SpaceShipOne and you can find a discription
on the official website of Scaled Composites
(www.Scaled.com). There are many other great
ideas, but like I said - most people here only
seem to be interested in PCs.

Live long and prosper.

 

[J-Man]

I don't think people here are only interested in P.C.s.
It's just that we don't know much about the X-Prize other than it exists. I'll read up on it every now-and-then, but I usually forget who's doing what.

I would place a bet that whoever can launch this year will win, even if they don't accomplish the requirements this year. However, I'm not optimistic that anyone will win. They only have 1 year left, don't they? That's not much time to get it done without increasing the risks.

 

[LURCH]

Although I like whaty I see coming out of Armadillo Aerospace, I think Rutan's got the the design to beat. The piggy-back idea is very usefull, but it is still a 2-stage. But the need for air-breathing engines within the atmosphere is clear. The amount of oxydizer needed for such an engine is much less.

A couple of things that seem rather conspicuous by there absence; a Hypersoar (X-42) with a rocket engine onboard, and catapults. Is it just me, or did you guys expect to see some steam powered catapults?

 

[J-Man]

Does anybody recall or have a web-link about the design that is using H2O2 for fuel? I'm curious what benefits and drawbacks the fuel has and what lead them to believe it is the best for their rocket.

 

[FZ+]

Hmm... I don't know if that is a good idea. Accidentally introduce a little Cu catalyst, and BOOM.

 

[Shadow]

I read about the X prize a few months ago drag and SpaceShipOne (by burt rutan) was in there so it was uncovered aat least 3 months ago...but anyways I like that idea and think that the airborne launch from white knight would be great. However I am not up to date on all of the teams ideas and spacecraft so I will look at the link that has been posted.

 

[J-Man]

Originally posted by J-Man
Does anybody recall or have a web-link about the design that is using H2O2 for fuel? I'm curious what benefits and drawbacks the fuel has and what lead them to believe it is the best for their rocket.

To partially answer my own question...
Apparently, there are several teams using H2O2, but it is used as an oxidizer, not a fuel per se.

(from: http://www.xprize.com/pdfs/xprize_teampropellants.pdf )

Team Stage # Propulsion Oxidizer Fuel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARCA 1-Rocket Hydrogen Peroxide Kerosene
Armadillo Aerospace 1-Rocket Hydrogen Peroxide -
Flight Exploration 1-Rocket Hydrogen Peroxide Kerosene
Fundamental Technology Systems 1-Plane Hydrogen Peroxide Kerosene
Micro-Space, Inc. 1-Rocket Hydrogen Peroxide Methyl Alcohol

 

[LURCH]

Rutan appears to be in the lead. They test-flew a manned, full-sized prototype last week.

 

[LURCH]

Here's an interesting artical from http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/xprize_030611.html that says the number of people volunteering for positions on X-craft actually increased following the latest Shuttle disaster.

Can't say I blame them; I'd go !

 

[LURCH]

In case you missed the article at space.com, one of the Canadian teams has chosen their launch site.

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/davinci_launchsite_030630.html

 

[The Grimmus]

I have just read another theread wher the government is holding a contest for technolgy...lazy sobs can't do it their selves

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030627.html

 

[LURCH]

And the Brits have just http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/starchaser_test_030424.html their re-entry capsule. And their pilot!

 

[J-Man]

The competition appears to be heating up.
Scaled Composites' SpaceShipOne Flies
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/spaceshipone_tested_030809.html

 

[LURCH]

Yea, it sure looks like Rutans' Scaled Composits is going to take it. But I still wouldn't count Pan Aero out of the running. They may be behind, but their design is simpler and could leap forward very quickly.

 

[LURCH]

I just read that Rutan's team has tested their rocket engine with a full-duration burn. He's already flown the carrier aircraft with and without the rocket, and drop-tested the rocket which was flown to a glider landing. Doesn't sound like he has far to go.

So the question becomes,"whom do you see as the most likely second-place team?". I'm thinking PanAero, just because most of their hardware already exists and is tested. Adapting old tech to new jobs is often quicker than creating new designs from scratch.

 

[LURCH]

According to this artical at space.com, someone (either Scaled Composiets or Armadillo Aerospace) should be launching within the next year.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

from the article:

There are 23 other registered groups from seven countries competing for the $10 million cash prize. There are teams from Russia, United Kingdom, Romania, Israel, Argentina and two from Canada. The rest are headquartered in the U.S.

that makes me proud...

anyway I hope I get to see this on TV. It should be the beginning of "afordable space travel"

 

[notal33t]

ummmmmm homey like Cavorite! Seriously the prize should be for the FIRST team to develop a truly new launch system! anything else is a waste of resources!

 

[dink]

Seriously the prize should be for the FIRST team to develop a truly new launch system! anything else is a waste of resources!

Scaled Composite's design is seemingly new in make though perhaps not in theory. Economics and reusability seems to be the focus of this X-Prize contest more so then just being original. SC's design is highly reusable, and very fuel efficient.

 

[Banjo]

If any of you read "Aviation Week and Space Technology" DARPA has a concept called RASCAL, I think. It is like burt rutan's design, but the neat part is it uses an old F100 engine. To make this engine work at extreme altitudes they inject oxygen and water when they reach those altitude(to add mass/density as well as enough oxygen for the kerosene to burn).

Here's a link

http://www.darpa.mil/tto/rascal/RASCAL_ID_Brief.PDF

pg 44 starts to talk about the propulsion system.

 

[LURCH]

Nice way to celebrate the 100^th anniversery fo the Wright Brothers. Scaled Composites http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/rutan_update_031217.html on Wednesday. Too bad about the landing, but nothing major.

It's looking like this will not only happen within the year, but within the next couple of months.

 

[meteor]

Scaled Composites wins chances
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994870
The World's No.1 Science & Technology News Service



Commercial space flight takes big step up


17:19 08 April 04

NewScientist.com news service

The dream of commercial space flight has taken an important step towards reality with the granting of the first license to a private company to launch people to a height of 100 kilometres.

The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) awarded the license to Scaled Composites, a California-based company run by aviation pioneer Burt Rutan, for a one-year period.

The company is vying for the $10 million X Prize, to be awarded to the first private group to send three people to the sub-orbital height of 100 kilometres twice in two weeks.

 

[LURCH]

And on April 8^th, Spaceship 1 made its 2nd powered flight. The engine burned for 40 seconds, and craft reach an altitude of slightly over 100,000 feet, about one-third of the altitude necessary. Engine burned went as predicted, and flight control instability were good all the way down.

 

[meteor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3549552.stm
"X-prize contender rocket explodes


The rocket exploded less than 1,000 feet into the air
A rocket belonging to a team taking a low-budget stab at the $10m (£5.7m) Ansari X-prize has exploded less than 1,000 feet into the air.
Nobody was hurt in the test which took place on Sunday just south of Olympic National Park in Washington State, US"

This is what happens whe your budget is low

 

[enigma]

Wasn't that design the one which uses 2x4's as the primary loadbearing structures?

If so, I'm not surprised...

 

[Marijn]

I haven't really followed the X-prize.
But wasn't there one of the temas that managed to get a ship with only the pilot in space several weeks ago (think it was SS1 with burt Rutan).
My bet would be on him, he just has to do it again, with two more ppl.

 

[meteor]

A rocket of Armadillo had crashed the 7nth August
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996258
"A 1.2-metre-wide rocket designed by John Carmack, creator of the hugely successful Doom video games, crashed about 20 seconds after launch in Texas on 7 August"

My bet would be on him, he just has to do it again, with two more ppl

No. They have to do the 2 flights in a margin of 2 weeks

 

[cronxeh]

I think any design that uses a ROCKET to launch anything into space is essentially a highly inefficient, idiotic idea.

If you want to launch stuff into space - the best way is to EM-accelerate them like a bullet, with a spin, and send off flying into outer space at a ZOOMing speed.

Once in space, use booster rockets (some compressed gas - any gas will do) to maneuver around

 

[drag]

If you want to launch stuff into space - the best way is to EM-accelerate them like a bullet, with a spin, and send off flying into outer space at a ZOOMing speed.

There's only one real problem with that idea - who's going to pay for it ?

 

[cronxeh]

it only requires electricity [very cheap] and if u want to include humans - some form of a liquid gel to keep em alive thru the 50-100+ Gs they'll pull off on take off

I haven't done any calculations with this thing (other than visualizing the whole process and result in my head)

but here are some additional snips that even a HS physics student can build, given the resources:

http://www.oz.net/~coilgun/theory/electroguns.htm


I mean really.. how hard can it be?

 

[russ_watters]

There's only one real problem with that idea - who's going to pay for it ?

That's not a problem, that's a benefit. A rail-gun satellite launcher would be much cheaper than chemical rockets for launching satellites. But there are limitations such as payload size, durability, and orbital inclination.

 

[cronxeh]

not to mention you won't be dumping any garbage into our oceans, or polluting the air.. the costs would be cut tenfold and time to takeoff and landing minimized to hours


Edit: got to love having ideas pop in hours after you post something.
Gravity as you all know is the weakest force, almost negligible

But really.. we have the technology to build super strong structures that would be light-weight and heat-resistant and whatnot.. why hasnt this been tried? The design was on the board in 40's all the way through 70's.

 

[Tom McCurdy]

I don't care who wins as long as the final project is reasonable and innovative. The whole point was to get a cheap ride into space and if we take old plans that we knwo work just to win then there is no point.

 

[LURCH]

I think any design that uses a ROCKET to launch anything into space is essentially a highly inefficient, idiotic idea.

If you want to launch stuff into space - the best way is to EM-accelerate them like a bullet, with a spin, and send off flying into outer space at a ZOOMing speed.

Once in space, use booster rockets (some compressed gas - any gas will do) to maneuver around

I had a similar idea, but with an old-fashioned steam catapult like they use on aircraft carriers, only much bigger, of course. This would employed tried-and-true old technology, and would accelerate the vehicle slowly enough for passengers to survive. Just build the launch facility on the western slope of a tall mountain range (to shoot upward and to the east), as close to the Equator as possible, and near an existing power plant (for the steam). Requires no new technology at all.

Rutan has announced his first launchdate as Sept. 29^th.

 

[LURCH]

WE HAVE A WINNER !

Watched the first flight live! Just saw the video of flight #2, now I'm saving up to buy my ticket!

See you guys up there.

 

[neutroncount]

I was there to watch the last launch leading to the win. Hell I only live two hours from there so how could I NOT go? Man was it a great time!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Creative research is having confidence in nonsense

- Burt Rutan;
From the documentary about his efforts:
Black Sky
The Race for Space.
Science Channel. 10/12/04

[its on right now if you're reading this in time]

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This is great! Make sure that you watch this.

Black Sky: The Race for Space

What does it take to build a space ship? Go behind-the-scenes as Burt Rutan designs and builds SpaceShipOne for entry in the X Prize competition. The competition was created to inspire the race for space tourism.
tv :: g
cc :: unavailable

On Air (ET):

Oct 13 2004
@ 07:00 AM

Oct 13 2004
@ 12:00 PM

Oct 13 2004
@ 03:00 PM

http://science.discovery.com/schedule/episode.jsp?episode=0&cpi=24963&gid=0&channel=SCI

 

[Ivan Seeking]

My opinion is completely changed.

Burt Rutan is my new hero! He is truly inspirational. He is the man.

 

[cronxeh]

it only requires electricity [very cheap] and if u want to include humans - some form of a liquid gel to keep em alive thru the 50-100+ Gs they'll pull off on take off

I haven't done any calculations with this thing (other than visualizing the whole process and result in my head)

but here are some additional snips that even a HS physics student can build, given the resources:

http://www.oz.net/~coilgun/theory/electroguns.htm


I mean really.. how hard can it be?

Ohh boy is this old or what? I bet in a year nothing changed - we still rely on chemical propulsion and waste money and environment

 

[notal33t]

Just say no to E M Mass driver.

Ohh boy is this old or what? I bet in a year nothing changed - we still rely on chemical propulsion and waste money and environment

----
Why some 50-100 G gelpacks needed electromagnetic mass driver system? Let's concentrate on carbon nanofiber research, and go for a Earth to GEO tether space elevator :!) system, from what I've seen it holds out the greatest promise for a mass space transportation system.