Stratolaunch Systems, A Paul G. Allen Project

[MrLewooz]

The first technological problem is to build the hangar...

[MrLewooz]

the first tecnological problem is building the hangar...



[malkovitch]

great

[0wlbones]

@TaosMtn3 Well this IS a simulation. These are just designs.

[AirBrandon12]

heavy bertasions! ;-)

[TaosMtn3]

unrealistic

[bana2s]

If they use it for manned rocket launches, the couple of seconds between the release and the main engine firing are going to be nerve-wracking.

[lifeiznuts]

Oh, wow! Oh, wow!  Oh, wow! This is just the starting point. It may end up being too expensive, but someone is going to build on this technology and make it work. I hope I'm alive to see it. This is incredible.

[tobigforyou]

Paul Allen you did it again!

phenomenal.

[jesusfields35]

I want this video on my H815 phone.

[theJNCsaga]

ya i think what most of you dont realize is that this will cost about 7 billion dollars to develop and about 1.8 billion dollars per flight, the schuttle program was far more effective, anyone know when their picking the new replacement?

[ThatAdelaideGuy]

@theJNCsaga They wouldn't go ahead with it if it cost that much

[moron6123]

@theJNCsaga This isn't a replacement for the shuttle, and it will burn less fuel, so it will actually be less costly in the long-run.

[wmjessemiller]

@moron6123 Think this more aimed at flexibility. Can fly above the storm or to where better conditions are.

[billybluesrock]

Excellent,Innovative,and Beautiful ***** *****

[jovari92]

stop throwing trash in space -____-

[fateman30]

flight simulator?

[blaircolon36]

This video is popular on Malawi

[solidpoint]

Burt Rutan is a god, but just back of the napkin, connecting the tail sections with a horizontal stabilizer and elevator capable of supporting the thrust of a centerline mounted 787 engine, and ditching the #2 and #5 engines on the wings seems like a superior design. Stronger, lighter, and easier to fly when engines fail. Centerline thrust is chronically undervalued by designers, but saves pilots.

[eggaweb]

I can see many benefits of such a system:

- Faster turnaround.

- The ability to launch near the equator (lower fuel cost).

- Air breathing engines for a large part of the atmosphere.

- Less weight required in the launch vehicle itself translates to greater payload and lower costs.

[karim3343]

Amazing

[erents1]

My son is a young pilot I really hope he gets to fly in one of these.

[HELLSACOOLTODD]

@erents1 No one cares

[kirkbutler12]

Strange responses for this video once more.



[cessna815]

@pseudotasuki sorry im not a rocket pilot im an airplane pilot, an the falcon9 cant be the only rocket that can be carryed

[cessna815]

@crabtrap first of all baby shuttles and satelite rockets are not cheap, and i beat you don't know the first thing about aviation just running it empty is expensive even sitting on the ground thers permits, licinces, faa fees, aircraft service, fuel & oil. then theres the rocket its not reuseable so you need to build another one every time its too risky for a compiny but it could be gov own

[rahimnfl]

umm I thought the spruce goose was retired to a museum? but in all seriousness hidden agenda or not for profit or the sole purpose that space exploration is necessary Paul Allen is headed in the right direction devoting money into space programs

[Driver599]

hideous design

[fooloof]

Vulcan is Paul Allen's company, so he's the one that put this video out.

[kristoffergil23]

 .this is a lot better idea..

[archolon]

Split in two? Get back to the drawing board.

[Wesnex1]

Nice idea. I just think it might be even more efficient to lower the rocket by a tether a few hundred feet, accelerate the airplane and slingshot the rocket up behind the plane before release and firing the rocket. This would transfer upward force from the airplane into upward velocity of the rocket.

[RocketTCoyote]

Reminds me of the Zero-X from Gerry Anderson's Thunderbirds.

[chocomalk]

Great idea!

[zenoman92]

holy shit

[Spungeur]

More waste arout the earth for tourism.... nice !

[UltimateZeroJesus]

This is how the giant space stations of the future will get built

[KyleJordanDrewitz]

Honestly this is very VERY smart. Why use an inefficient way of launching (vertical jet engine launch, the present way we launch) through the dense part of our atmosphere (lower = more dense) when we already have an efficient, green and low(er) cost way to reach roughly 30,000 ft. Wings.

something like 50% of jet fuel, possibly more, is used in the first 30 seconds of a space launch. The remainder is accountable for around 1:30 seconds of flight (the leg to orbit( as well as re-entry

[JiffiJiffJeff]

did someone actually build this?

[cptomes]

Current planes wings already stick out past the sides of runways. Just the gear needs to be on the runway. If anyone wants to figure out why this is a good idea, hit Spacex site. Their update from Nov 18 says they are looking for another launch site. Vandenberg, Florida, are all booked up for years. This thing is going to let Musk sell lots more boosters. Forget efficiency or safety reasons, the bottleneck in commercial launch is the launch pads.

[ikbenjy]

fail



[singedrac]

@rgb2234 Not to mention that atmosphere or not, just getting that far out of the well before having to turn on your rocket saves a ton on fuel. Even on the moon if you're trying to escape, it's far less expensive to do it from somewhere above the moon than on its surface. :)

[singedrac]

@solidpoint So wait, you're worried about a yaw moment produced by engine failure in a multi-engine aircraft, but you're not worried about engine failure in a single-engine aircraft?

[solidpoint]

@singedrac, yes, and I doubt the rocket "engine" is a single engine. Von Braun's last fight was to convince NASA to use liquid fuel instead of solid fuel, as a very long history of solid fuel failures informed him that they were a bad idea. The Saturn V never failed, Not once, but had clusters of engines, not one. Losing an engine and yawing at high altitudes will throw the plane into a stall, snap roll, and flat spin. It will come apart in a few turns and disintegrate.

[DaBamBamMan]

@solidpoint Very technical :D

[singedrac]

@manofsan Though it could take several packages to LEO and then assemble them into something that could go to the moon or mars. It's a step in the right direction. :)

[singedrac]

@mg86ta1 Because that's not what they're being paid to do.

[singedrac]

@OddFacade

Except the rocket isn't falling before ignition. It's falling relative to the carrier, sure, but it's still moving upwards at a pretty good clip.

[NYGiantsRobert]

...Branson Needs Re-evaluate His Plans ...Orbital (Not Sub-Orbital) Is The Way To Go ...

[singedrac]

@lxiaomil It's not a rip-off. The same engineer designed both vehicles.

[singedrac]

@Tyrannobeast

It's probably supplied the same way we do it with out current generation of LOX/H2 rockets. Why would anything different need to be done?

[Tyrannobeast]

@singedrac Well, my question came about because it would need to be fueled in the air, so the plane would have to carry the rocket and its payload, all its own fuel, the rocket's fuel, and a lot of oxygen. It seems too tall an order to air-launch a liquid rocket.

That said, I can imagine large solid-fuel rockets or even hypergolic rockets launching from such a platform (sort of like a scaled-up Pegasus).

[fizzguts]

@Tyrannobeast A liquid fueled rocket is lighter than a solid fuel rocket with the same thrust profile

[singedrac]

@TheDarkestSixx 'Things we don't need'?? Ever look at a weather forecast? Ever use a GPS nav? Ever called someone overseas? Ever watch satellite cable? All these things and more are possible due to the launching of satellites in orbit, and this plane would make it CHEAPER to do so. Ultimately it helps 'our economy' to design things like this.

[singedrac]

@mikegtu2005

1. They're both designed by the same guy.

2. Branson's can't get anything into orbit, so this is superior.

[singedrac]

@FatBoySlim696 Gravity?

[TheLiberalPacifist]

amzing this will save them so much money, its fatser and simpler

[singedrac]

@MrUnvcandy Bush cancelled the shuttles by the way, not Obama.

[brockfitz]

They should use 4 GE 90 engines instead. More power and less fuel.

[singedrac]

@TheTubePortal Actually, three people were killed at Scaled Composites in an accident in 2007, so they don't have quite a flawless record. But these things happen to pioneers.

[singedrac]

@MrJm323 I think Dragon will take people into orbit before this bird, but I hope they both eventually manage.

[1995Buick]

@twinrotormotor Couldn't have said it better.

[FLY172M]

@TheFakeComment That's not fake, look at the all the other things he's built.

[camposantoo]

Well, mister Allen, or others, are intend to launch my cosmic technical ideas after my facebook account where I wrote that ideas, was erased. So, let's see what can you do with others ideas.

[jmorris6758]

We need a space elevator, then we wont have to worry about cheaper ways to get to space, because then it would cost less than $500 a pound to go to space......

[KD0IDB]

@jmorris6758 That would be nice, but unfortunately orbital velocity is 17,500 mph, that creates some major issues... :-S

[elverspresceli]

Hi men & ladies ! Its those big hanger doors opening , awsome ! How long does a low earth orbit take to decay without assistance & will it be affordable without russian help ? Reason for peace ? man !

[pjt]

@elverspresceli Depends on the eccentrically of the orbit and the altitude. Space weather also plays a huge factor in decaying orbits. Their is no reliable way to calculate when and where an unassisted sattilite with come in. Hence why they give 72 hour warnings and millions of square miles of notice along orbital tracks.

[CommentInvalid]

­­­­­­­­­­

[afr126]

@CommentInvalid best comment EVER! 

[iBeahm]

@CommentInvalid

[pr9nkaholic]

@iBeahm  !!!!!!

[McLarenLewisHamilton]

how much fuel it will spend before deliver load to the orbit?

[SteveOTheMan16]

if they turn it into a spacecraft that it

[SteveOTheMan16]

that thing would be very difficult to meneavure through debris in space. with a size like that the tiniest of floating rocks etc. would easily hit it. and damage the outside of the craft.

[AnarchyAlleyCat]

@SteveOTheMan16

did you see it fly in space? it's called "stratosphere launch systems" not space

[rageofwar1978]

obviously all the research money went to render artists lol. seriously it might work but the whole air frame at that size seems way too fragile especially for a payload that size

[folk20310]

great idea.... I like it :)

[jjreal613]

I'll take 5

[TheBlueHeroes]

Can I haz?

[TF2Shows]

Wow nice animation. I loved it :)

[linjason8]

they can get back by jumping off it in spaceeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[lloyd12et]

How the hell do they get back?

[TheDynamic88]

It is, Possibly, the more efficient launch vehicle that people have talked about for years. I recall an early sub orbital space vehicle, that flew succesfully, in the nineteen sixties, It was launched from one of the largest aircraft of that time, after space flight it landed succesfully on a runway at an AF base. People said it had advantages over the, pillar of fire, rocket launch we have used for decades. After Initial investments it is less expensesive because it is a more efficent.

[sheldonholy]

@TheDynamic88 Good idea this.

However, to justify the cost now, you really do need a re usable capsule.

[Noipion]

@PanoramaBeats Just fall down, and you're back x).

[afr126]

@PanoramaBeats Forever alone :',D

[toddlerpunter]

I can now say w

[DynamicoS21]

I have to say wow, it's a great idea, I hope it can be achieved.

[TheM3csl]

Minecraft project? Lol

[GeorgeFlossington]

Oooo a fucking cartoon about a spaceship big woop

[boss123456701]

3:09 AND COST ONLY 12000000000 DOLERS

[SkyyCaptainn]

Is it really worth the cost? Few dumb solid rocket boosters could do the same thing for a fraction of what would cost to build and maintain that plane and associated facilities.

[Originadmin]

oh god does this mean its going to get the red ring of death and have a 66% failure rate.

[qhoa1385]

Microsoft Flight Simulator cross promo! LOL!

[MonacoBlast]

Why do we still have commercials on youtube?

[04ray25number2]

@MonacoBlast That is the thing that keeps YouTube free so don't cry about it. Also there's a thing called ad blocker which you can install on any browser. I have it but I kinda like the commercials so I allow YouTube Ads on it.

[MsRifs]

close ur mouth



[MattRockin]

I bet a light bulb just appeared over a terrorists head

[Ypanesa]

You still leave your garbage out there?

[smile21277]

Why the fuck is it taking so long to make a flying fucking car, it's so simple to make, NASA fucking build it or some car company

[ozzywolf84]

@smile21277 actually several have been made. they won't go into mass production until we have cars that drive themselves. think about all the car crashes we have every year caused by human error. only about 10% are fatal. now imagine all those crashes from a thousand feet in the air. your 10% just became 100%

[roflman87]

nice a plane with a penis nice idea...

[XenoAcolyte93]

This will be called, the Cosmic Runner. Catchy eh???

[Animaltrout]

Name it Hercules II. . . fly it 70ft off the ground then send it to McMinnville, Oregon and invite the tourist. . .

[dug2991]

I get the 2 fuselages connected on one plane, or else it just wouldn't have the stability to launch a rocket mid-flight, but wouldn't the better solution actually be a rocket that could leave and comeback with at least it's inner workings still functioning?

[ponchooncho]

Stress test?

[iVitaliy1]

Pretty much two separate planes connected by a long wing? Safety?

[evanandodd]

How do they get back?

[THEABSENT]

@evanandodd same way with the spaceship

[Ewseph]

@evanandodd HAHAHAHA that's what I just said to myself!

[file83]

Isn't this what Virgin Galactic is doing?

[WatchMeBeFree]

2:27 The American flag is backwards.

[MrEM4N]

@WatchMeBeFree It's simulating blowing in the wind. Similar to how the US ARMY has a backwards flag on their uniform that represents them charging into battle.

[BENKYism]

DUBS T F IS THAT THING?

[Dogrunningwild]

how much?

[THEABSENT]

@Dogrunningwild not much

[00shadowLord]

This concept doesn't look very safe to me.

[falco830]

That thing looks stupid, but it's pretty clever.

I could design something better!

[THEABSENT]

@falco830 me too

[skippy1WA]

I have a penny that was in his pocket when he went into space and won tge anarxi x prize

[THEABSENT]

@skippy1WA what ?

[langr126]

I would like a round trip ticket please

[Trentcharlyc45]

I would have made this but I took a arrow to the knee

[superstar4567]

get your ticket now! only 600 million dollars for a coach seat!

[MrY2011t]

تعرفون عايض

[heartless2219]

i guess the next thing to do is have the actual space craft not have stages that just fall into the atmosphere and be reusable.

though i here the way the space shuttle has been, it would be cheaper to make new spacecraft than reuse it

[PurpleCateen]

I dont like these design at all. they look stupid.

[GershomMontana2006]

Finally! Now they can start working on a real space plane. Here is my idea: 2 wings, 4 closeable engines on both wings, middle section is a reuseable rocket, cap is for pilot, etc. Passenger section would be attached to the top of the rocket section. The rocket itself would be a proton rocket. It would take off and land like a plane and she would have enough power to get to the moon and back. Interested in my idea? Please write me at GershomMontana2006@yahoo.com. Thank you.

[KoTMedia]

YOU MAD NASA?

[NostradamusInVegas]

this is a total rip off of richard branson's virgin galactic's designe of the WhiteKnightTwo and SpaceShipTwo (type) virgin gelactic dot com you will be suprised. he allready allready building the first space-port in new mexico right now as i typing ten years ahead of this guy but good idea>

[singedrac]

@NostradamusInVegas It's not a "rip-off". Both were designed by the same engineer, Burt Rutan.

[MeganFoxIsMyLover]

Hey everyone, get the app, App Trailers on the AppStore. Enter the bonus code "ilikefreepoints" for a $10 iTunes gift card!

[daidai2355559]

好节能啊

[Usuckth]

This is already made by virgin galactic.

[singedrac]

@Usuckth Virgin Galactic's vehicle can't reach orbit. It's sub-orbital. This is orbital.

[PixelPigz]

First they put shuttles on planes, now rockets in the middle if them. The design reminds me of something I would think of.

[forgertheepic28]

I think I saw something about this on the science channel once. It seems... Familiar

[TheSomedude123]

Fuck that! That middle piece thingy (im a plane expert) is just hanging there! Im not scared of flying normally but im not going anywhere near that thing!!

[Cwilson598]

@leebog31 thats the spirit asshole! Now sit down on the couch and bitch like everyone else

[mrnightowl]

Build a fleet of these!

[spawnkiller25]

Planes cant go into space. Without the oxygen to allow the jet fuel to be burned, the engines are useless. That is why spacecraft are filled with liquid hydrogen and oxygen. Btw, sick ass plane, could b usefull in the near future

[cuddlehead1]

@spawnkiller25 they can deliver the payoad in the upper atmosphere, saving a fortune in rocket fuel and mitigating a lot of other problems that limit conventinal rockets.

[GnarKillClan]

WHY DOES THIS HAVE SO MANY VIEWS IN 2 DAYS?!?!?!?!

[eldechocolate]

@GnarKillClan yeeaah 

[stevo423]

@GnarKillClan Cause 946,396 people and counting like star wars, star trek , and space in general.........why else :)

[cuddlehead1]

@GnarKillClan because not everyone likes Jersey Shore and Oprah...

[bitzofdataz]

@GnarKillClan Because we want to go out there. Wait 2 more days...

[THEABSENT]

@GnarKillClan do you know what this will bring us ? cheap travel to the outer space ? because everybody is smarter than you

[buiskruid1]

Its big news. The guy from microsoft designed it.