First to space: Virgin G vs Copenhagen S

[xenomorph555]

The ultimate mini challenge, the underdog amateurs vs the giant corperates, WHO WILL GET THERE FIRST?

Note: technically when virgin launched ss1 VG hadnt been officially formed so yeah...

[Coldfinger008]

Copenhagen Suborbital,

because the ****ing Danes are absurd.

[Dkmdlb]

My vote is with Copenhagen Suborbitals.

EDIT: If for no other reason than because they have an account on these very forums and I don't want to have the awkward conversation explaining why I voted for Virgin.

[Moon Goddess]

Copenhagen Suborbitals.

If for no other reason than because they have an account on these very forums and I don't want to have the awkward conversation explaining why I voted for Virgin.

10characters

[Nibb31]

The ultimate mini challenge, the underdog amateurs vs the giant corperates, WHO WILL GET THERE FIRST?

Note: technically when virgin launched ss1 VG hadnt been officially formed so yeah...

Note: Virgin had nothing to do with SS1. SS1 was an XPrize entrant by Scaled Composites. Virgin got involved much later.

I don't have much interest in suborbital. It's really much closer to high-altitude ballooning or a parabolic Airbus ride than to orbital flight.

To qualify as a spacecraft in my book, you need at least RCS and a TPS. The X-15 was more of a spacecraft than these things are.

[xenomorph555]

Note: Virgin had nothing to do with SS1. SS1 was an XPrize entrant by Scaled Composites. Virgin got involved much later.

I don't have much interest in suborbital. It's really much closer to high-altitude ballooning or a parabolic Airbus ride than to orbital flight.

To qualify as a spacecraft in my book, you need at least RCS and a TPS. The X-15 was more of a spacecraft than these things are.

CS's craft is planned to have rcs and fly 150km.

Para airbus-32,000 feet, CS-nearly 500,000 feet, bit of a difference.

Highest X-15 flight-107.9 km. I believe they can beat it (CS not vg lol).

[Streetwind]

Considering Virgin Galactic claimed in 2007 to fly their first customers by late 2009, and we now have 2014 and they still haven't done so...

Yeah, might as well go with Copenhagen Suborbitals.

[Nibb31]

CS's craft is planned to have rcs and fly 150km.

Para airbus-32,000 feet, CS-nearly 500,000 feet, bit of a difference.

Highest X-15 flight-107.9 km. I believe they can beat it (CS not vg lol).

If all you're interested in is altitude, then yeah. But we all know here that space is about speed, not altitude.

Altitude is pointless if you're just going to fall down again. You might as well just get into a stratospheric balloon and pull off a Red Bull stunt.

If it's about experiencing weightlessness, then a Zero-G Airbus will get you more of it in one flight than VG and for much cheaper.

X-15 was closest to a spacecraft because in addition to the altitude, it was actually exploring hypersonic boundaries, which is something that neither VG nor CS are capable of doing.

[Dkmdlb]

If all you're interested in is altitude, then yeah. But we all know here that space is about speed, not altitude.

Altitude is pointless if you're just going to fall down again. You might as well just get into a stratospheric balloon and pull off a Red Bull stunt.

If it's about experiencing weightlessness, then a Zero-G Airbus will get you more of it in one flight than VG and for much cheaper.

It's about being "in space." But here's the real shocker: aren't we all in space already, like all the time, man? Like isn't the earth just one giant space ship floating through the galaxy, dude?

[R0cketC0der]

It's about being "in space." But here's the real shocker: aren't we all in space already, like all the time, man? Like isn't the earth just one giant space ship floating through the galaxy, dude?

Sure, but it takes us a lot of rocket fuel to get into any locations apart from our giant space ship.

[xenomorph555]

If all you're interested in is altitude, then yeah. But we all know here that space is about speed, not altitude.

Altitude is pointless if you're just going to fall down again. You might as well just get into a stratospheric balloon and pull off a Red Bull stunt.

If it's about experiencing weightlessness, then a Zero-G Airbus will get you more of it in one flight than VG and for much cheaper.

X-15 was closest to a spacecraft because in addition to the altitude, it was actually exploring hypersonic boundaries, which is something that neither VG nor CS are capable of doing.

In my opinion I only ever care about speeds when it comes to orbit, space in my opinion is well... space, 100km up, vacuum, freezing, weightlessness, view of the earth.

Of course you need great speed to get up there and I am pretty confident that CS could break the hypersonic barrier with the heat 1600 or 2x.

[NASAFanboy]

If all you're interested in is altitude, then yeah. But we all know here that space is about speed, not altitude.

Altitude is pointless if you're just going to fall down again. You might as well just get into a stratospheric balloon and pull off a Red Bull stunt.

If it's about experiencing weightlessness, then a Zero-G Airbus will get you more of it in one flight than VG and for much cheaper.

X-15 was closest to a spacecraft because in addition to the altitude, it was actually exploring hypersonic boundaries, which is something that neither VG nor CS are capable of doing.

Altitude doesn't matter for you, but it matters for others.

For me, I'd rather take a suborbital joyride than a Red Bull Jump.

Even though there is a more "logical" cheaper solution, we are humans, and sometimes we just say "pshhh" and toss the other solution out the window to go for more extravagant one.

[magnemoe]

If all you're interested in is altitude, then yeah. But we all know here that space is about speed, not altitude.

Altitude is pointless if you're just going to fall down again. You might as well just get into a stratospheric balloon and pull off a Red Bull stunt.

If it's about experiencing weightlessness, then a Zero-G Airbus will get you more of it in one flight than VG and for much cheaper.

X-15 was closest to a spacecraft because in addition to the altitude, it was actually exploring hypersonic boundaries, which is something that neither VG nor CS are capable of doing.

Kerbal space program disagree with you, I have even done space far from Kerbin science on an suborbital flight.

[Nibb31]

Altitude doesn't matter for you, but it matters for others.

For me, I'd rather take a suborbital joyride than a Red Bull Jump.

Even though there is a more "logical" cheaper solution, we are humans, and sometimes we just say "pshhh" and toss the other solution out the window to go for more extravagant one.

The only thing a VG joyride gives you is 5 minutes of weightlessness for $200000 and the ability to brag about having been above 100km.

By comparison, a zero-G Airbus ride is $6000 for a similar duration (12x22 seconds).

Kerbal space program disagree with you, I have even done space far from Kerbin science on an suborbital flight.

KSP is not reality. If science is what you want, then a balloon or a sounding rocket are cheaper. Cubesats offer longer duration experiments.

[NASAFanboy]

The only thing a VG joyride gives you is 5 minutes of weightlessness for $200000 and the ability to brag about having been above 100km.

By comparison, a zero-G Airbus ride is $6000 for a similar duration (12x22 seconds).

Sometimes, people don't really care at all about the cheaper alternative.

@Magemoe.

Unfortunately, humans have been exploring space near Earth for more than fifty years. Sending a manned flight to suborbital to do science is not worth the money when you can just give the astronauts on the ISS some new directions for their next experiment and achieve the same results for less money spent (Probably)

Edited May 15, 2014 by NASAFanboy

[magnemoe]

@Magemoe.

Unfortunately, humans have been exploring space near Earth for more than fifty years. Sending a manned flight to suborbital to do science is not worth the money when you can just give the astronauts on the ISS some new directions for their next experiment and achieve the same results for less money spent (Probably)

I know, it was mostly an joke regarding who KSP define this and who fit well with the official definition of astronaut.

Nothing about real world science, or kerbal science for that part once you have done it once you are mostly done.

[Kryten]

The only thing a VG joyride gives you is 5 minutes of weightlessness for $200000 and the ability to brag about having been above 100km.

They recently admitted SS2 won't actually reach 100km, at least without very major changes to the design. Right now they're only aiming for 'at least 50 miles', the altitude in the actual contract signed by the ticket-holders.

[goldenpeach]

The only thing a VG joyride gives you is 5 minutes of weightlessness for $200000 and the ability to brag about having been above 100km.

By comparison, a zero-G Airbus ride is $6000 for a similar duration (12x22 seconds).

[...]

Or, if you want, you can try go 0 g.

You will have approximately 8 minutes of 0 g(in total).

It cost 4950$(taxes not included), it's located the US(if it's nearer more convenient for you that EU)

[Idobox]

I voted Virgin, because although what CS does is amazing, they simply don't have the financial backup and staff that VG has.

For CS to actually send someone on a suborbital flight would by itself be an amazing achievement for amateurs, while private companies putting stuff in orbit all by themselves has already been done.

[Aghanim]

The only thing a VG joyride gives you is 5 minutes of weightlessness for $200000 and the ability to brag about having been above 100km.

Never underestimate the power of bragging. Extremely rich peoples will ride that thing to be able to take selfies with Earth's curvature in the background.

[Herr Doktor Strangemember]

I'm going with VG, if for no other reason than nose art.

Seriously this is the beginning, as in the first passenger craft, as in the 1920 aviation type. Give it a few more years to mature, the first company to make the space version of the DC-3 hasn't happened yet. When that happens is when it'll matter.

[Winter Man]

I'm going with VG, if for no other reason than nose art.

Seriously this is the beginning, as in the first passenger craft, as in the 1920 aviation type. Give it a few more years to mature, the first company to make the space version of the DC-3 hasn't happened yet. When that happens is when it'll matter.

It'll be the Dream Chaser, probably.

[NASAFanboy]

first company to make the space version of the DC-3 hasn't happened yet. When that happens is when it'll matter.

NASA's space shuttle was supposed to be the space variant of the DC-3, but then again, it would like building the DC-3 in the middle of WW1 on a budget that's shrinking from budget cuts.

Hence, it wasn't.

[xenomorph555]

I do not think VG will make it to space in this decade, they would have to redesign and make a spaceship-3 because 2 cant make it.

[magnemoe]

I'm going with VG, if for no other reason than nose art.

Seriously this is the beginning, as in the first passenger craft, as in the 1920 aviation type. Give it a few more years to mature, the first company to make the space version of the DC-3 hasn't happened yet. When that happens is when it'll matter.

Problem is that costs is some magnitudes higher same with the complexity. Yes things improves, 50 years ago the idea of multiple private companies sending satellites to orbit would be insane, only superpowers could do that.