Rutan hates CEV!

[j05h]

>.unless NASA upon retiring the shuttle has to turn to Rutan for solutions to LEO. Given Rutans disdain of NASA, this would be a rocky relationship I would think.<br /><br />Mr. Rutan is part of 3 efforts, I believe: Scaled Composites, The Space Ship Company/Virgin and t/space. He has said he wants to build space vehicles as commercial craft, then sell them to customers. This doesn't preclude government purchases in any way, Uncle Sam buys a lot of boats, cars and aircraft. It just won't be a monolithic One Launcher to Rule Them ALL that Mr. Rutan rises as the new Von Braun upon. He wants to make lines of spacecraft in the way he has made lines of aircraft. He seems to be a fairly shy, humble guy who is truly gifted at aeronautics. His goal seems to be to offer an array of vehicle capabilities, from suborbital to ballistic transport to orbital craft. <br /><br />He at least loathes the CEV, it is bad practices in his opinion. <br /><br /> />I think a lot of it has to do with this being an informal forum and some folks not taking the time to educate themeselves before commenting.<br /><br />There is no concise enough FAQ to cover the range of subjects. None that I've found. Forums see a constant influx of new users asking the same questions that spring from their cultural gestalt. RBCC, X-33asVenturestar, Shuttle/ISS-to-the-Moon and others have been recurring themes on different boards for years. Informality makes for a wonderful medium, good mental filters (or tech ones) help with the noise.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[qso1]

Correct, Rutan started Scaled Composites in 1982, here are some links:<br />http://www.scaled.com/<br />http://www.scaled.com/news/2005-07-27_branson_rutan_spaceship_company.htm<br /><br />I'm not up on "T" space and googling it produced a link to Toronto University. And also correct that government purchases would not be precluded. There is however, a difference in government simply purchasing already existing products and specifying products to meet their requirements. The government funding answer I was referring to is government funding private enterprise which already happens AKA examples such as NASA contracting with Boeing. No doubt, Rutan is truly gifted which is why I often use him as an example as in being the only private person/company to actually achieve space flight. In fact, I sometimes point out four entities got someone into space. Three are government entities (U.S. USSR China) and one entitie, a private individual and his company employees.<br /><br />The informal forum comment I made reflects IMO pretty much what you stated which was why I also said I didn't mind negative comments because they hone my poor debating skills which I will never need in a formal setting. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[mattblack]

The most useful places to visit are the NEAs and Mars, yet I've heard and seen comments on talk shows and blogs saying; "Asteroids, the Moon & Mars are just useless lumps of rock. There's NOTHING there!!"<br /><br />How can one effectively fight that ignorance, which ALWAYS gets superior airtime to those who struggle to justify spaceflight?? As I've said in the past, if these ventures cost $50 bucks per mission, let alone $500 million, the negatives and flat-earth know-nothings will STILL claim it costs too much!!<br /><br />The billions of dollars yet to be spent on space exploration will be buying PLANETS for mankind. In the sixties the USA, as a present to itself, bought an entire world for $25 billion dollars. But America sent it back 3 years later with the packaging barely touched.......... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[qso1]

mattblack:<br />How can one effectively fight that ignorance, which ALWAYS gets equal airtime with those who struggle to justify spaceflight??<br /><br />Me:<br />I'm not even so sure they negatives get equal air time. I hear more negative than positive and I almost never hear anyone say "We may spend quite a bit on NASA, but look what we spent on Iraq...or what we lost to the deficit".<br /><br />mattblack:<br />The billions of dollars yet to be spent on space exploration will be buying PLANETS for mankind. In the sixties $25 billion dollars bought the USA a world. But America sent it back 3 years later with the packaging barely touched.......... <br /><br />Me:<br />An excellent press style soundbite that will never be mentioned in the press because its not as sellable as saying "NASA wasting taxpayer dollars to collect rocks again". <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[mattblack]

Thank you. And you're right; I changed my above post to reflect the fact that Anti-Space nonsense gets superior airtime. I was just too chicken to admit the truth to myself!!<br /><br />And even amongst "Space fans" the same old, long-settled fights about EELVs vs SDLV is STILL going on. The EELV people who HATE anything remotely resembling Shuttle just wont listen to the data, no matter how many times it's re-phrased to them. The same old parochial, damaging bickering that will allow the Anti-Spacers to divide and conquer us, until there are no space ventures left.<br /><br />The anti Shuttle-derived people have curiously short memories: prior to Columbia, those Shuttle components roared into space just FINE with near-routine monotony, safety and PERFORMANCE. And the key here is monotony -- there is true potential here to convert and ameliorate the most powerful rocketry in the world into equipment to break that monotony and GO SOMEWHERE. Anywhere but here.......<br /><br />And for the lack of just a 'few' billion more bucks, it's in danger of all being torn apart by useless, totally useless and unnecessary dissent. MANUFACTURED dissent. More taxpayer money has just GOT to be found to kickstart an era that can and should build on and exceed the considerable accomplishments of Apollo. To call Apollo just a 'Flag & Footprints' thing is to denigrate mankinds' greatest accomplishment with a simple yet facile soundbite. <br /><br />Doesn't anyone think Private sector investors wont bail out at the second if not first sign of failure when private space decides to shoot for the Moon? You just watch them! But it doesn't have to be that way: There CANNOT be a failure of nerve, especially now, be it from Nasa, Virgin Galactic or Space X. It's ALL important and inclusive to succeed. Space is part of our future.<br /><br />If anybody doesn't agree with this, then why would they want to participate on this forum (and similar) and haunt, torment or tear apart our future in space? Call <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[subzero788]

"While busy trying to make safe suborbital spaceships, Rutan said he has another goal: “I want to go to the Moon in my lifetime.”"<br /><br />Does anyone think this is even remotely possible? He's turns 63 this year.<br />

 

[gunsandrockets]

"I'm not up on "T" space and googling it produced a link to Toronto University."<br /><br />For a link to t/Space try here...<br /><br /><br />http://www.transformspace.com/<br /><br /><br />t/Space was one of the bidders for the CEV contract but only Lockheed-Martin and Boeing/Northrup-Grumman were awarded contracts to continue. Back before the 'Apollo on steroids' plan was mandated by NASA, NASA asked all the bidders to submit their own ideas about the best way to get the job done. A rundown of those plans can be found at www.astronautix.com.

 

[barrykirk]

Your correct about that. I did mis-state things. In the back of my mind I was thinking major systems such as SRB versus liquid fuel and not components.

 

[frodo1008]

I am sorry! I misunderstood. I thought we were only talking about the Saturn program. <br /><br />I didn't realize that the SS-1 and SS-2 that you were talking about was for Burt Rutan and his various craft!<br /><br />That is what confused me!<br /><br />I was aware of the designations that you put forth for the Saturn, but couldn't figure out what this SS-1 and SS-2 designations were about. Thanks a lot for clearing it up for me!

 

[frodo1008]

No problem. We all make mis-statements here at one time or another!

 

[nyarlathotep]

<font color="yellow"><br />The most useful places to visit are the NEAs and Mars, yet I've heard and seen comments on talk shows and blogs saying; "Asteroids, the Moon & Mars are just useless lumps of rock. There's NOTHING there!!"<br /><br />How can one effectively fight that ignorance, which ALWAYS gets superior airtime to those who struggle to justify spaceflight??</font><br /><br />You send cheap mass produced probes to the nearest hundred rocks to determine their composition. If you find anything of value on them, private industry will pay for the rest.

 

[scottb50]

Hopefully the kegs kept flowing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[radarredux]

> <i>Rutan said he has another goal: “I want to go to the Moon in my lifetime.”</i><br /><br /> />> <i><font color="yellow">Does anyone think this is even remotely possible? He's turns 63 this year.</font>/i><br /><br />Sure. He didn't say anything about returning safely, so it could be done today. Just send Rutan up in a rocket that impacts directly into the Moon. All you need is enough life support for ~3 days. Rutan lands on the Moon within in lifetime.<br /><br />Of course, the impact kills him .0001 seconds after landing/impacting on the Moon, but the goal has been achieved. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /></i>

 

[qso1]

I mentioned in another post somewhere that he probably won't live to see that goal accomplished. I should say however, he could do it if his or some other company is able to build the hardware and fly lunar missions within the next 15 years or so. He'd be 78 in fifteen years. John Glenn was about that age when he went back into space aboard the shuttle in 1998. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">Does anyone think this is even remotely possible? He's turns 63 this year.</font>/i><br /><br />On a more serious note (from my last reply), I think he has a good chance. Assuming Rutan takes reasonable care of himself, he probably has a good 20+ years left to live. the question then is whether there will be frequent enough trips to the Moon by 2026 to allow private citizens to hitch a ride on a government or commercial service.<br /><br />There are several issues that would help this along including:<ol><li>Suborbital tourism takes off.<li>ISS and/or Bigelow provide a reasonable market for private orbital launch services.<li>Resources and solutions to exploit them are found on the Moon to generate more interest than the currently planned two missions per year.</li></li></li></ol><br />If these pan out, then I think there will be room for privately funded ventures to the Moon by 2026.</i>

 

[elguapoguano]

"Shuttle Guy"<br /><br />No, I wish I was. I was in DC at the Air and Space Museum back last year, the week after Space Ship One was hung. Made the trip over to Udvar Huzy as well. SR-71 and Enterprise were very impressive. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#ff0000"><u><em>Don't let your sig line incite a gay thread ;>)</em></u></font> </div>

 

[spacefire]

maybe he means around the Moon.<br />That'd be doable today for a mere 100 million. Who knows, in twenty years it might be doable for 10 million/passenger. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[specfiction]

If I were someone firmly in the NASA camp, I would be praying for someone like Rutan to succeed. Why? Because what NASA needs is for someone outside the organization to articulate a clear vision for manned space; one that includes innovation and economic viability. Why outside the organization? Because it is clear that although many NASA employees are highly qualified and competent professionals, they are anchored to a political management that is not worthy of them.<br /><br />NASA needs brilliant mavericks that will capture the imagination or the public, as well as being realistic about the risks of putting people high atop high explosives. Perhaps we can recapture the urgency of the 60's space race if some of the entrepreneurs out there ride point on this new frontier.<br />

 

[qso1]

No problem, I probably wasn't as clear as I could have been on the SS-1 SS-2 thing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[john_316]

We'll see how imaginative those rich boys are when Bronson rides the first SS-2 flight to orbit and see how that fares.<br /><br />Then all those Mavericks can put there money where their mouths are. <br /><br />And for Bronson, I sure do wish him alot of luck....<br /><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">Branson</font>/i><br /><br />Maybe he was thinking of Charles Bronson; although, given that he is dead he probably won't be flying on SS2.<br /><br />Side note: Armadillo Aerospace has been doing some more tests of their engines and rockets. The cement blocks used for their tie down tests are impressive (see video as they are standing their rocket up - each one looks to be about 64 cubic feet of concrete).<br /><br />The one negative thing I have to say is that they have the ugliest rockets.<br /><br />http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=323<br />http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2006_04_18/holdDownTest.mpg</i>

 

[qso1]

Oh believe me, I'm pro NASA but I'm also a realist. I've seen what's happened to human space flight the past three decades as far as going beyond LEO. Part of the realist in me is the hope that Burt Rutan and others will be successful in at least getting inexpensive access to LEO so NASA can take advantage of that access and focus on going to the moon and mars.<br /><br />Then of course, one day if commercial space flight finds a profitable reason to set up shop on the moon, mars , or asteroids, NASA will either continue as an FAA like organization, or come to an end while commercial space flight assumes the role of getting humanity into the cosmos. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[josh_simonson]

>Then of course, one day if commercial space flight finds a profitable reason to set up shop on the moon, mars , or asteroids, NASA will either continue as an FAA like organization, or come to an end while commercial space flight assumes the role of getting humanity into the cosmos. <br /><br />NASA's reason for existance is to do research and produce new technologies, not to be an space taxi service. Given cheap access to LEO, NASA would do more deep space missions and work on ever more advanced things. NASA should be looked at like a university rather than a rocket company.

 

[qso1]

Sounds about right to me. Let private industry handle the taxi service to LEO anyway. Provided they are up to it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[john_316]

thanx for the spelling reminder S_G... Ya know branson or bronson all the same just a letter here or there off....<br /><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br /><br />