Virgin Galactic
Discussion
Wow, Toaster found one astronaut who decided he'd made a bad career choice.
But he contradicts himself:
1) “Would I have flown if I had known there was a four percent chance of death?” Hauck asked. “No, I don’t think I would have flown.”
2) "For humanity to successfully journey into space, we must not only be able to mitigate and accept risk, but embrace it as well."
Clearly he wasn't.
In answer to the question 'what would happen if this or other rockets with a 96%-97 chance of success rate started breaking up and landing in populated area's?' the answer is that some people will die. Just like 1,000s of people die in accidents every day.
It seems these days that there are far too many members of the human race trying to stop other members of the human race from doing things.
But he contradicts himself:
1) “Would I have flown if I had known there was a four percent chance of death?” Hauck asked. “No, I don’t think I would have flown.”
2) "For humanity to successfully journey into space, we must not only be able to mitigate and accept risk, but embrace it as well."
Clearly he wasn't.
In answer to the question 'what would happen if this or other rockets with a 96%-97 chance of success rate started breaking up and landing in populated area's?' the answer is that some people will die. Just like 1,000s of people die in accidents every day.
It seems these days that there are far too many members of the human race trying to stop other members of the human race from doing things.
Thanks for revealing who it was Simpo.
I would suggest that Hauck was specifically talking about the Space Shuttle - which the astronaut corps seriously turned against after the Challenger accident when it was revealed that fundamental engineering issues with the system had NEVER been communicated to the astronauts themselves. They were very angry about this and quite vociferous.
I would strongly recommend Mike Mullane's book "Riding Rockets" for a heartfelt explanation of how the astronaut team viewed their Shuttle missions.
Having read nearly every biography of every APOLLO astronaut, you can tell that there was a completely different attitude to the Saturn 1B and Saturn V launchers. The Apollo astronauts were much more confident in those rockets than they ever were with the Shuttle.
I would suggest that Hauck was specifically talking about the Space Shuttle - which the astronaut corps seriously turned against after the Challenger accident when it was revealed that fundamental engineering issues with the system had NEVER been communicated to the astronauts themselves. They were very angry about this and quite vociferous.
I would strongly recommend Mike Mullane's book "Riding Rockets" for a heartfelt explanation of how the astronaut team viewed their Shuttle missions.
Having read nearly every biography of every APOLLO astronaut, you can tell that there was a completely different attitude to the Saturn 1B and Saturn V launchers. The Apollo astronauts were much more confident in those rockets than they ever were with the Shuttle.
ash73 said:
Did people watch Brian Cox last night? At some point all life on Earth WILL be wiped out by a cosmological event
He is just following in Carl Sagan's footsteps there, Sagan went into detail on that subject in Pale Blue Dot, how the odds (long term), mean we will be hit by a 'planet killer' astroid or something, and that we had to take steps to be comfortable in local space, visit asteroids, Mars and prepare for dealing with that.Edited by RobDickinson on Wednesday 5th November 20:07
- not enough coffee this morning..Edited by RobDickinson on Wednesday 5th November 20:08
Simpo Two said:
If the famous rogue asteroid doesn't get us - bearing in mind the last biggie was in the age of the dinosaurs - then the end of the word will be when the sun swells into a red giant and incinerates everything. So it's a race to see what will get us first - asteroid or sun?!
Nothing to worry about.....http://www.passc.net/EarthImpactDatabase/Worldmap....
SFN: NTSB provides timeline of SpaceShipTwo mishap:
Just 13 seconds after Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo began a rocket-powered test flight last Friday — and just five seconds after its innovative aero-braking system was inadvertently deployed at supersonic speeds — the spaceplane apparently broke up, killing one pilot and injuring another, according to a National Transportation Safety Board timeline released Monday.
NTSB Acting Chairman Christopher Hart said SpaceShipTwo was dropped from its carrier jet at 10:07:19 a.m. PDT. At the controls in the commercial rocket plane’s left seat was pilot Peter Siebold. Michael Alsbury, the co-pilot, was in the right seat.
Two seconds after release, the pilots fired the ship’s hybrid rocket motor, burning solid propellant with nitrous oxide to begin the powered portion of the test flight. Then, just eight seconds later, between 10:07:29 a.m. and 10:07:31 a.m., SpaceShipTwo’s aero-braking system was unlocked by Alsbury while the spaceplane was traveling at 1.02 times the speed of sound.
Three seconds after that, video and telemetry suddenly stopped as the spacecraft apparently began breaking apart. Alsbury was killed in the crash. Siebold somehow escaped the wreckage and parachuted to the desert far below. Hart said Siebold, recovering from injuries in a local hospital, had not yet been interviewed and investigators do not know how he got out of the spacecraft, or even whether he was conscious, as SpaceShipTwo began breaking up.
A major question in the investigation is what prompted the co-pilot to unlock the mechanism earlier than expected and how that might have contributed to the accident. It was not immediately known whether aerodynamic forces alone could have forced the feather to extend at the lower velocity or whether some other factor might have played a role.
But Hart said NTSB investigators have formed a new “human factors” committee to investigate cockpit displays and controls and how pilots interact with the high-tech control systems. Investigators also will look into the data displayed during the test flight to determine whether velocity readings, and other measurements, were accurate.
Not a great deal new, but clearly the engine, fuel and fuel tank are dropping down the list of primary causes
Just 13 seconds after Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo began a rocket-powered test flight last Friday — and just five seconds after its innovative aero-braking system was inadvertently deployed at supersonic speeds — the spaceplane apparently broke up, killing one pilot and injuring another, according to a National Transportation Safety Board timeline released Monday.
NTSB Acting Chairman Christopher Hart said SpaceShipTwo was dropped from its carrier jet at 10:07:19 a.m. PDT. At the controls in the commercial rocket plane’s left seat was pilot Peter Siebold. Michael Alsbury, the co-pilot, was in the right seat.
Two seconds after release, the pilots fired the ship’s hybrid rocket motor, burning solid propellant with nitrous oxide to begin the powered portion of the test flight. Then, just eight seconds later, between 10:07:29 a.m. and 10:07:31 a.m., SpaceShipTwo’s aero-braking system was unlocked by Alsbury while the spaceplane was traveling at 1.02 times the speed of sound.
Three seconds after that, video and telemetry suddenly stopped as the spacecraft apparently began breaking apart. Alsbury was killed in the crash. Siebold somehow escaped the wreckage and parachuted to the desert far below. Hart said Siebold, recovering from injuries in a local hospital, had not yet been interviewed and investigators do not know how he got out of the spacecraft, or even whether he was conscious, as SpaceShipTwo began breaking up.
A major question in the investigation is what prompted the co-pilot to unlock the mechanism earlier than expected and how that might have contributed to the accident. It was not immediately known whether aerodynamic forces alone could have forced the feather to extend at the lower velocity or whether some other factor might have played a role.
But Hart said NTSB investigators have formed a new “human factors” committee to investigate cockpit displays and controls and how pilots interact with the high-tech control systems. Investigators also will look into the data displayed during the test flight to determine whether velocity readings, and other measurements, were accurate.
Not a great deal new, but clearly the engine, fuel and fuel tank are dropping down the list of primary causes
Eric Mc said:
It could very well prove to be that old bugbear of cockpit design - ergonomics - was a contributory factor.
Indeed. Perhaps there neded to be some kind of safety lock to stop the gadget operating above X mph. In a parallel, I've often wondered what would happen if I got my (automatic) car up to 100mph and then selected 'R'. Would the gearbox explode or is there some kind of centrifugal widget that prevents it? I don't fancy testing it to find out...Simpo Two said:
Eric Mc said:
It could very well prove to be that old bugbear of cockpit design - ergonomics - was a contributory factor.
Indeed. Perhaps there neded to be some kind of safety lock to stop the gadget operating above X mph. In a parallel, I've often wondered what would happen if I got my (automatic) car up to 100mph and then selected 'R'. Would the gearbox explode or is there some kind of centrifugal widget that prevents it? I don't fancy testing it to find out...Silent1 said:
Simpo Two said:
Eric Mc said:
It could very well prove to be that old bugbear of cockpit design - ergonomics - was a contributory factor.
Indeed. Perhaps there neded to be some kind of safety lock to stop the gadget operating above X mph. In a parallel, I've often wondered what would happen if I got my (automatic) car up to 100mph and then selected 'R'. Would the gearbox explode or is there some kind of centrifugal widget that prevents it? I don't fancy testing it to find out...I'm not going to try!
A chap I worked with had a Celica VVTI jobby, rancid car but he liked it.
One day he was giving it large and as you have to take those cars engines to eleventy-thousand RPM's before they have any power he went to change down to get the revs up and somehow managed to put it into 2nd whilst doing 90MPH.
It killed his clutch, transmission, cat, all kinds of other bits really made quite a mess of his new car.
Toyota accepted that the car shouldn't have let me select 2nd at that speed and repaired the car under warranty.
Maybe VG could offer a similar policy for future flights
One day he was giving it large and as you have to take those cars engines to eleventy-thousand RPM's before they have any power he went to change down to get the revs up and somehow managed to put it into 2nd whilst doing 90MPH.
It killed his clutch, transmission, cat, all kinds of other bits really made quite a mess of his new car.
Toyota accepted that the car shouldn't have let me select 2nd at that speed and repaired the car under warranty.
Maybe VG could offer a similar policy for future flights
Virgin Galactic will resume flight testing this year, using their own pilots rather than ones from the manufacturer Scaled Composites
http://news.discovery.com/space/private-spacefligh...
http://news.discovery.com/space/private-spacefligh...
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff