This airplane or aerospaceplane, whichever, was quite impressive - they were only two thousand feet below the official edge of aerospace, way up there. Interesting how there is still enough aerodynamic influence that high for some drag, otherwise that feather configuration wouldn't have worked as planned.
How does the spaceship fall when feathered? It was supposed to be "gravitating" like a satellite, at Zero G... Even braking all the lift, making all that drag with the tail boom, it should keep on "floating", or not? Wasn't it in outer space? Any answers, please?!
the X prize was a prize given to the first private company, or group that could launch a single stage spacecraft twice into Orbit within 2 weeks. this one made by burt Rutan won, this was the video compiled of the 2nd flight into space, which took much longer than 3 minutes, but they compiled clips of it
@therubicon Actually it wasn't about actually getting a spacecraft into orbit, but rather to launch it above a given altitude threshold. Private manned orbital flight still has a long way to go...
@epichorns That's not because of technical reasons. NASA is the governmental overseer of Orbital fligth, and they have protected their baileywick by not giving any permits or licences for Manned Orbital flights.
Virgin can do only sub orbital parabolas, they can't do orbits, but I dare say they could make an orbital space plane, and a lot cheaper than that Old Truck NASA uses
@therubicon It is actually technical reasons. It requires a *LOT* more energy to reach orbit than to just pop up to 100 km. Plus you then have the technical requirement of surviving the much hotter re-entry. (Going basically straight up and down, you don't go fast enough to generate that much heat. SS1 only went about 1 km/s, orbit is about 8 km/s.)
NASA does not issue space flight permits, the FAA does in the U.S. (Transport Canada in Canada.)
The "shuttlecock" re-entry configuration was the heart of Rutan's genius, as I understand it. Massively increasing the atmospheric drag slowed down the craft fast enough to prevent the atmospheric heating that made the X-15 glow.
Otherwise, watching the original sequence start to finish scared the beejeebers out of me. I don't think they had any good explanation as to why the damn thing spun like a top on the way up. The rattling and banging of that flimsy contraption!
@pinz2022 X-15 also was an "either/or" craft. It could either go to the edge of space, like SpaceShipOne, at about the same speed as SS1; or it could go really, really fast. It was in this "really really fast" configuration that it got insanely hot.
Yeah, the 'dart back down' on altitude missions did cause more heat than SS1 saw, but not significantly.
@francsois The official "mission length" was 30 minutes; from separation from mothership to landing. The rocket motor was firing for 83 seconds. "Weightlessness" lasted for about 3.5 minutes.
I can't find any hard number on how long the craft was "in space" (above 100 km altitude,) and sorry, I'm too lazy to do the math. It would be less than 3.5 minutes, though, as burnout was at less than 100 km, and "weightlessness" would last until after the craft dropped below 100 km.
Fabulous! Quite economical to lauch a fairly light vessel from 50,000 ft or so in the stratosphere with 100stimes less air resistance!
Was this totally privately funded, as we see the Virgin logo on the launching "plane"? Could they achieve actual orbit speed in order not to simply fall back down?
@francsois The entire "Tier 1" program (creation and flight of SpaceShipOne) was funded by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen. Immediately prior to the first X-Prize launch, Virgin owner Richard Branson made an agreement to license the technology to create "Virgin Galactic", but his money had no part in the creation or operation of the X-Prize winning SpaceShipOne.
It is estimated that the SpaceShipOne program cost $25 million. The X-Prize paid $10 million, so Branson's deal made it profitable.
So nice that his wife was the first one to welcome him back :-).
TheGrumpstein 2 days ago
I can hear all the conspircy theorists already...."omg, chemtrails!" = fail
Semicon07 5 months ago
@Semicon07 It is a chem trail, it's burnt fuel. ;-)
dragonamt 4 months ago
And even had a paper SpaceShipOne with him!!
:-D
sablatnic 5 months ago
It's hard to find adjectives to even describe how awesome this is.
AmericanAviator 11 months ago 2
i would do this if it were $2000-$3000 price range...
drtjrzdrummer 11 months ago
@weirdguy7 Yes I know about that, a few of the test flights did not go over 328,000 feet, that's all.
VIR092 1 year ago
This airplane or aerospaceplane, whichever, was quite impressive - they were only two thousand feet below the official edge of aerospace, way up there. Interesting how there is still enough aerodynamic influence that high for some drag, otherwise that feather configuration wouldn't have worked as planned.
One amazing accomplishment.
VIR092 1 year ago
i'd very much like to be up there... this is so fantastic...
susspuss 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How does the spaceship fall when feathered? It was supposed to be "gravitating" like a satellite, at Zero G... Even braking all the lift, making all that drag with the tail boom, it should keep on "floating", or not? Wasn't it in outer space? Any answers, please?!
Lemev 2 years ago
The 328K was for 328,000 feet AGL, the projected altitude goal at apogee, to qualify for being in space. I suspect this was a good luck measure.
kirkmach32 2 years ago
oh cool that's a really simple solution for the door seal.
bfayer 2 years ago
looks pretty uncomfortable at 0:40 but I'd still be goin if i had the chance.
bfayer 2 years ago
I am doing a awesome project about space tourism...
what's the meaning of XPrize Flight #2?
Thanks for your time
markoalmeidapereira 3 years ago
the X prize was a prize given to the first private company, or group that could launch a single stage spacecraft twice into Orbit within 2 weeks. this one made by burt Rutan won, this was the video compiled of the 2nd flight into space, which took much longer than 3 minutes, but they compiled clips of it
therubicon 3 years ago
@therubicon Actually it wasn't about actually getting a spacecraft into orbit, but rather to launch it above a given altitude threshold. Private manned orbital flight still has a long way to go...
epichorns 2 years ago
@epichorns That's not because of technical reasons. NASA is the governmental overseer of Orbital fligth, and they have protected their baileywick by not giving any permits or licences for Manned Orbital flights.
Virgin can do only sub orbital parabolas, they can't do orbits, but I dare say they could make an orbital space plane, and a lot cheaper than that Old Truck NASA uses
therubicon 2 years ago
@therubicon It is actually technical reasons. It requires a *LOT* more energy to reach orbit than to just pop up to 100 km. Plus you then have the technical requirement of surviving the much hotter re-entry. (Going basically straight up and down, you don't go fast enough to generate that much heat. SS1 only went about 1 km/s, orbit is about 8 km/s.)
NASA does not issue space flight permits, the FAA does in the U.S. (Transport Canada in Canada.)
ehurtley 1 year ago
@ehurtley
The "shuttlecock" re-entry configuration was the heart of Rutan's genius, as I understand it. Massively increasing the atmospheric drag slowed down the craft fast enough to prevent the atmospheric heating that made the X-15 glow.
Otherwise, watching the original sequence start to finish scared the beejeebers out of me. I don't think they had any good explanation as to why the damn thing spun like a top on the way up. The rattling and banging of that flimsy contraption!
pinz2022 1 year ago
@pinz2022 X-15 also was an "either/or" craft. It could either go to the edge of space, like SpaceShipOne, at about the same speed as SS1; or it could go really, really fast. It was in this "really really fast" configuration that it got insanely hot.
Yeah, the 'dart back down' on altitude missions did cause more heat than SS1 saw, but not significantly.
ehurtley 1 year ago
How many minutes did this flight last in all? 20, 30, or more?
This is starting to look like Star Wars' spaceships!
francsois 4 years ago
i dunno, but it only stays in space for about 5 minuets
rapidrory 4 years ago
@francsois The official "mission length" was 30 minutes; from separation from mothership to landing. The rocket motor was firing for 83 seconds. "Weightlessness" lasted for about 3.5 minutes.
I can't find any hard number on how long the craft was "in space" (above 100 km altitude,) and sorry, I'm too lazy to do the math. It would be less than 3.5 minutes, though, as burnout was at less than 100 km, and "weightlessness" would last until after the craft dropped below 100 km.
ehurtley 1 year ago
Fabulous! Quite economical to lauch a fairly light vessel from 50,000 ft or so in the stratosphere with 100stimes less air resistance!
Was this totally privately funded, as we see the Virgin logo on the launching "plane"? Could they achieve actual orbit speed in order not to simply fall back down?
francsois 4 years ago
They didn't hit orbit velocity, and on purpose. SpaceShipTwo won't either, though SpaceShipThree might.
And since when is Virgin a government? Of course the thing had sponsors, but yeah, it was funded entirely from the private sector.
Eyedunno 4 years ago
@francsois The entire "Tier 1" program (creation and flight of SpaceShipOne) was funded by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen. Immediately prior to the first X-Prize launch, Virgin owner Richard Branson made an agreement to license the technology to create "Virgin Galactic", but his money had no part in the creation or operation of the X-Prize winning SpaceShipOne.
It is estimated that the SpaceShipOne program cost $25 million. The X-Prize paid $10 million, so Branson's deal made it profitable.
ehurtley 1 year ago
When Is my Turn?? Burt I'm a good Pilot, I would do it for free, I want to fly her
What is Her name November 328 Kilo Foxtrot seems a bit Dry
therubicon 4 years ago
Comment removed
kirkmach32 2 years ago
muy buen proto, este video debe inspirar a varios diseñadores
alukardgt 5 years ago
awesome
sellafal81 5 years ago