SpaceShipTwo Crash

[crazyewok]

You don't honour somebody by putting more people in the same flawed deathtrap. This thing has taken enough lives, let BO or XCOR have their go.

If NASA had that attitude there the Apollo program would have been cancelled before it made its first orbital flight. Teh soyuz would have been canned in the 70's and not become the reliable taxi to the ISS we have now.

We dont even though the facts yet of what happened. The problem may very well have been fixable.

Giving up just because of one big failure is a waste!

[qwertyx2y]

Pardon the language but holy crap! I woke up and heard this straight away, it seemed like a bad dream at first. RIP to the pilot who was killed, I hope the other pilot recovers quickly.

[Kryten]

A waste of what? If this thing gets cancelled, it's not going to have any effect on Lynx or New Shepard so the industry will survive, the engine technology is a dead end, nobody else is interested in the shuttlecock system-the only major effect is Beardy Branson doesn't get to make even more money by putting other people in danger.

[NovaSilisko]

If NASA had that attitude there the Apollo program would have been cancelled before it made its first orbital flight. Teh soyuz would have been canned in the 70's and not become the reliable taxi to the ISS we have now.

They did have that attitude, because they didn't put more people in the same flawed vehicle. Apollo and Soyuz were heavily revised after their respective accidents. We will see if SS2 seems revisions significant enough to fix its flaws.

[crazyewok]

They did have that attitude, because they didn't put more people in the same flawed vehicle. Apollo and Soyuz were heavily revised after their respective accidents. We will see if SS2 seems revisions significant enough to fix its flaws.

They were revised not abandoned and that the point.

Instead of just giving up and abandoning the project, wait till all the facts about what happened come out and see if revisions CAN be made.

[Kryten]

Their new engine and/or the structural modifications necessary to support it caused the vehicle to fail, outside of a very unlikely coincidence, given those were the new factors on this flight. The new engine that they had to put in because the old would literally shake the ship to pieces during a full burn, connected to the replacement NOX tank they had to put in because the old one killed people if filled to the design pressure, and the methane and helium tanks needed to stop the engine destroying the vehicle just as quickly as the last one...

I could go on and on. The entire vehicle is a kludge of barely plastered over design issues, fundamentally built around a scaled-up engine that simply didn't scale up. They hit the practical limits of the basic SS1 design a long time ago: they need to admit that, and start over again, or sink without a trace.

Edited October 31, 2014 by Kryten

[Beowolf]

Damnit, that's TWICE this hybrid engine has killed people! Last time was in 2007 during a ground test. The engine manufacturer, Sierra Nevada, clearly has inadequate safety standards. Much as I love America's new "free enterprise" space program, someone has to set limits. IMO, it's time for the FAA to suspend their experimental flight certificate until their safety practices are completely revamped and reviewed/approved by NTSB.

Scaled Composites' escape system for the crew needs redesign from scratch as well. Rocket engines used to launch from Earth are the most energetic non-nuclear devices in existence. They're going to explode sometimes, and it happens with only a fraction of a second's warning. Manually-operated aircraft ejection seats are inadequate even for flight testing these vehicles. Even in the early 1960s the Saturn V designers recognized this and had an automated escape system.

I have to rethink my support of Sierra Nevada's Dreamchaser now. Given this new data, maybe NASA was right to dump them. They're sloppy.

[NovaSilisko]

I could go on and on. The entire vehicle is a kludge of barely plastered over design issues, fundamentally built around a scaled-up engine that simply didn't scale up. They hit the practical limits of the basic SS1 design a long time ago: they need to admit that, and start over again, or sink without a trace.

And, given it's built around a very specific engine (which didn't work)... it's not like you can just drop in a new replacement engine. So yes, they'd have to practically redesign it from scratch if they can't get this sorted. If it was the engine - we still don't know 100% for certain, though it does seem very likely anyway.

[Kryten]

SNC was dumped by VG in May, this was the first flight test of a new, in-house engine. I'm not sure they built the tank that caused the fatal accident, either.

[Frannington]

I'm going to have to agree with Kryten here.

UP YOURS, Virgin Galactic. I am very sorry you lost a crew member today. I'm genuinely upset that a very brave man is dead.

But the reason that man is dead is because of your half-arsed attempt to monetise space travel. Like you're anywhere near being able to make it a sport for the wealthy.

You're not. We as a species are not. Space is hard for us - even the suborbital bull you're selling - and every successful launch by a commercial concern is just another lesson in how difficult it is. It's not a game. It's not a toy. And if you want to know how to do things, look at Space-X.

This is incredibly important to us as a species. We need to do this right, and can't be squeamish about people dying. But when those people die, it should be because they were doing something amazing. Not because they were testing a white elephant that lets privileged dickheads get a few minutes of weightlesness.

[BlazingAngel665]

I'm going to have to agree with Kryten here.

But the reason that man is dead is because of your half-arsed attempt to monetise space travel. Like you're anywhere near being able to make it a sport for the wealthy.

You're not. We as a species are not. Space is hard for us - even the suborbital bull you're selling - and every successful launch by a commercial concern is just another lesson in how difficult it is. It's not a game. It's not a toy. And if you want to know how to do things, look at Space-X.

This is incredibly important to us as a species. We need to do this right, and can't be squeamish about people dying. But when those people die, it should be because they were doing something amazing. Not because they were testing a white elephant that lets privileged dickheads get a few minutes of weightlesness.

Suborbital access to space is still a very important part of the puzzle. I'm not sure what you have against Virgin Galactic. They have put a lot of work into this trying to make it work. SpaceX works well, not harder, to some extent they have chosen routes that seem to have worked with fewer hiccups. Furthermore the white elephants for rich dickheads have to come before the rest of us. e.g. Flight, it was a rich man's hobby until it brought about globalization.

My sympathies to the families affected by this. I hope Virgin Galactic learns from this incident and succeeds.

[Beowolf]

SNC was dumped by VG in May, this was the first flight test of a new, in-house engine. I'm not sure they built the tank that caused the fatal accident, either.

Hadn't heard about that. A quick Googling couldn't confirm it though. Do you have a supporting link handy? It'd be nice to feel less angry at SNC right now.

[Frybert]

One fatality in 10 years of manned flight. Have to say I expected a lot worse when they first started flying.

[Ignath]

Hadn't heard about that. A quick Googling couldn't confirm it though. Do you have a supporting link handy? It'd be nice to feel less angry at SNC right now.

Directly from the horses mouth:

http://www.sncorp.com/AboutUs/NewsDetails/643

[Kryten]

There's little public information on the engine change, as VG didn't want to rattle customers/investors, but SNC's official statement today is pretty unambiguous;

SNC was in the past involved as a subcontractor to Scaled Composites, the prime contractor of this program for Virgin Galactic and was previously involved with the three successful powered flight tests of SS2. However, SNC’s technical and program involvement ended in May of 2014 with Virgin Galactic’s announcement to use its own internally developed technology for the SS2 rocket motor.

SNC had no involvement in the build or qualification testing of the motor used in this flight, nor in the integration of this motor to SS2. SNC was not engaged in any manner in the pre-flight safety or technical approvals or in the flight operations of the mission conducted today. We were not aware of the test today, nor present on site or remotely monitoring the testing in Mojave, Calif. At this time, SNC does not have any knowledge of what occurred beyond what has been reported publically.

Edit: er, so basically what Ignath said.

Edited November 1, 2014 by Kryten

[sp1989]

Suborbital access to space is still a very important part of the puzzle. I'm not sure what you have against Virgin Galactic. They have put a lot of work into this trying to make it work. SpaceX works well, not harder, to some extent they have chosen routes that seem to have worked with fewer hiccups. Furthermore the white elephants for rich dickheads have to come before the rest of us. e.g. Flight, it was a rich man's hobby until it brought about globalization.

My sympathies to the families affected by this. I hope Virgin Galactic learns from this incident and succeeds.

Im afraid I have to agree with Kryten. I am of course for space flight of all sorts but purporting that Virgin Galactic's intention is anything more than Multi Millionaires getting a thrill and cocktail party stories is a stretch. Access to space of course will be expensive in the beginning but the design of Spaceship Two is just not feasible for anything more than sub orbital jumps. I also find solid rocket motors inherently unsafe. I honestly don't know what the future of Virgin is beyond space ship two. I know they have plans for for point to point travel but Burt Rutans design would never work for that. Point to point travel would require traveling much faster and higher and that would require conventional heat shields and reentry profiles. So as of now the goal of Virgin is to give multi millionaires a thrill, and it is a shame brave pilots needed to die and get severely injured for Richard Bransons cash cow. The only good thing I see coming out of Virgin is that it has the potential of inspiring interest in space flight, which to me is the only thing Virgin Galactic will be good for if it survives this accident.

[AbhChallenger]

Why are we playing finger pointing games when we have ZERO info on what happened yet?

[DuoDex]

I will be pissed if the government uses this as an excuse to shut down Virgin Galactic and throttle SpaceX with safety regs.

Everyone screws up at least once.

[Camacha]

So as of now the goal of Virgin is to give multi millionaires a thrill, and it is a shame brave pilots needed to die and get severely injured for Richard Bransons cash cow.

Just like it was a shame that those rich bastards flew around the world with the first airliners, costing the lives of countless brave pilots and crew in the process? No, it is a vital step from the near laboratory type space flights NASA did in its early years, towards a much more casual and, more importantly, affordable, way of going to space. Sure, it all seems trivial now, but those first sticks-and-canvas aircraft and a little later the first airliners were nothing more than an expensive novelty either. Today those aircraft now form part of our communication network that encompasses information, technology, human resources and every other vital resource our society thrives on.

It's also a bit silly to think Virgin Galactic is a cash cow. Until now, the risks and investments have been huge and the returns very, very minimal. It is not a sound and safe investment, it is an ideal.

I will be pissed if the government uses this as an excuse to shut down Virgin Galactic and throttle SpaceX with safety regs.

SpaceX has been doing remarkably well until now, so let's just wait and see what happens.

[sp1989]

Just like it was a shame that those rich bastards flew around the world with the first airliners, costing the lives of countless brave pilots and crew in the process? No, it is a vital step from the near laboratory type space flights NASA did in its early years, towards a much more casual and, more importantly, affordable, way of going to space. Sure, it all seems trivial now, but those first sticks-and-canvas aircraft and a little later the first airliners were nothing more than an expensive novelty either. Today those aircraft now form part of our communication network that encompasses information, technology, human resources and every other vital resource our society thrives on.

It's also a bit silly to think Virgin Galactic is a cash cow. Until now, the risks and investments have been huge and the returns very, very minimal. It is not a sound and safe investment, it is an ideal.

SpaceX has been doing remarkably well until now, so let's just wait and see what happens.

I don't disagree with you. Thats why I prefaced my post and concluded my post with very similar sentiments. However I don't trust Richard Branson's intentions. Why is he pursuing such a risqué foray into space when there are tried and true methods of getting into space. Yes people need to buck trends and get things going, and yes we def need the rich to lead the way. I think that all space flight is important and like I said I think the only thing Virgin will be good at is inspiring interest in space flight. However I don't trust Richard Branson because he has chosen a highly experimental and unproven way of getting into space. Now I am not a Space X fanboy by any means. However Space X is doing nearly everything right regardless of if you like their style or not. FYI I am not talking about you in specific I am talking about the anti Space X trolls. Space X has a goal of making spaceflight safe and affordable whilst being on the cutting edge. Branson seems only interested in attracting rich thrill seekers and being on the cutting edge. I say this because Space Ship Two, no way in its current configuration can be a point to point way of travel, forget about orbital flights. So yes Virgin is appealing for its suborbital flights where you experience zero gravity for 2 minutes for a price tag of $250,000. I will say it again, yes yes yes yes Virgin has a purpose, and if it inspires people to be interested in space flight then yes yes yes! I just don't like the way they are doing things, as I said I find solid motors inherently unsafe, even though SS2 uses a hybrid rocket motor, its still an untested powerplant. My issue is not with the cutting edge way of doing things. My issue is with the timeline, this rocket needs to be tested extensively over and over again because no one has ever done it like this. Not launching civilians into space next year. Which brings me back to Branson who I feel is more interested in just launching rich thrill seekers for cash into space rather than adding to the progress of mankind.

[GoSlash27]

Condolences to the crew and their families.

While this is a setback to private venture spaceflight, I don't believe it's the end. So long as people are willing to take the risk, these sorts of endeavors will continue.

I hope they get to the bottom of the failure quickly and resolve it.

-Slashy

[GoSlash27]

*snip*

Which brings me back to Branson who I feel is more interested in just launching rich thrill seekers for cash into space rather than adding to the progress of mankind.

I don't believe that the two are mutually exclusive.

Even when the government is heading up efforts, the progress of mankind is a by-product of the effort rather than the altruistic goal. Branson's motivation may be profit, but that's not a bad thing. The end result is they learn how to put people in space without killing them or losing money. Or at the very least, how to *not* do it.

Living in space is ultimately going to come down to a profit motive in and of itself. People will move out there because it's better for their personal interests than staying here. They're never going to migrate merely for "progress of mankind" and nobody's going to put them up there for that either.

My $0.02

-Slashy

[Lohan2008]

A Virgin Galactic spacecraft crashed after an explosion during a test flight over the Mojave desert on Friday, killing one of the pilots, seriously injuring another and leaving debris scattered over a wide area. Witnesses reported the spacecraft broke apart soon after it was detached from the launch plane that carries it to 45,000ft.

The plane, SpaceShipTwo, was undertaking a test flight as part of Sir Richard Branson’s plans for commercial space travel when a “serious anomaly†occurred, the company said.

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/one-person-dead-as-virgin-galactics-spaceshiptwo-rocket-plane-crashes-on-test-flight/ar-BBceNoM?ocid=mailsignout

[Camacha]

While this is a setback to private venture spaceflight, I don't believe it's the end.

If you're going to throw in the towel at the first death you will never get to space. Sad as it is, everyone going to space knows this is an inherent risk of the endeavour and accepted it gladly.

[sp1989]

The source of SS2's crash: http://spaceflightnow.com/2014/10/31/virgin-galactics-spaceshiptwo-suffers-anomaly-during-test-flight/

However, it doesn't speak of injuries/deaths yet.

I don't believe that the two are mutually exclusive.

Even when the government is heading up efforts, the progress of mankind is a by-product of the effort rather than the altruistic goal. Branson's motivation may be profit, but that's not a bad thing. The end result is they learn how to put people in space without killing them or losing money. Or at the very least, how to *not* do it.

Living in space is ultimately going to come down to a profit motive in and of itself. People will move out there because it's better for their personal interests than staying here. They're never going to migrate merely for "progress of mankind" and nobody's going to put them up there for that either.

My $0.02

-Slashy

Then why not use the Space X model?