Blue Origin - launch, seperation and vertical landing
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
I wasn't talking about Blue Origin specifically or their economics. I assumed the question was a general one about how long it took to get a pad back into action again. I know back in the mid 1960s, NASA was able to get their Titan Pad back up and working within a couple of days after Gemini 6 failed to launch - even though the rocket engines had been running a for a few seconds and various pyrotechnic devices etc had fired.
Normally there is a gap of a few months between successive firings from a launch pad.
I wasn't for one moment assuming that Blue Origin would be making daily launches from one pad.
Thats where a step change in technology like Sabre would winNormally there is a gap of a few months between successive firings from a launch pad.
I wasn't for one moment assuming that Blue Origin would be making daily launches from one pad.
Absolutely.
But it's a while away yet. As I said earlier (although you tried to shoot me down on this), Sabre/Skylon does indeed need a lot more funding. I know they have received a boost recently but they could do with a lot more.
I'm sure it's where the genuine future of achieving orbit lies.
Maybe they should be trying to soft soap Elon Musk?
But it's a while away yet. As I said earlier (although you tried to shoot me down on this), Sabre/Skylon does indeed need a lot more funding. I know they have received a boost recently but they could do with a lot more.
I'm sure it's where the genuine future of achieving orbit lies.
Maybe they should be trying to soft soap Elon Musk?
Eric Mc said:
Absolutely.
But it's a while away yet. As I said earlier (although you tried to shoot me down on this), Sabre/Skylon does indeed need a lot more funding. I know they have received a boost recently but they could do with a lot more.
I'm sure it's where the genuine future of achieving orbit lies.
Maybe they should be trying to soft soap Elon Musk?
Soft soap Mr Musk ah you mean give more British tech to the Americans it would be nice to see we develop a technology rather then selling it short there is so much we have sold or given away in the pastBut it's a while away yet. As I said earlier (although you tried to shoot me down on this), Sabre/Skylon does indeed need a lot more funding. I know they have received a boost recently but they could do with a lot more.
I'm sure it's where the genuine future of achieving orbit lies.
Maybe they should be trying to soft soap Elon Musk?
Toaster said:
Soft soap Mr Musk ah you mean give more British tech to the Americans it would be nice to see we develop a technology rather then selling it short there is so much we have sold or given away in the past
It would be nice if Britain could go it alone in such a project - but it can't. Some of the money Bond has had already came from foreign sources (he told me this himself). He wouldn't, of course, reveal who these investors were.Eric Mc said:
It would be nice if Britain could go it alone in such a project - but it can't. Some of the money Bond has had already came from foreign sources (he told me this himself). He wouldn't, of course, reveal who these investors were.
It's one thing having foreign investment and that investment does not mean IPR is given away, pension funds etc will invest in many projects but do not demand ownership of a technology but are interested in a return on any money invested. I suspect that BAE with its many investors would need an understanding of the intellectual capital and possibly some ownership of any more that comes with their money.
Eric Mc said:
Presume away.
Ah I see, but it was you that stated: "At that time they were reluctant to reveal too much because it has since been disclosed by Bond that they ran into Official Secrets Act problems following their original British Aerospace involvement in HOTOL".
So if the technology is covered as you say by Official secrets, then any IPR that is shared would be restricted, which may or may not be foreign interests. Typically it would be limited to western organisations such as the European Space Agency and partners and possibly the americans. But that doesn't mean other countries can just use the technology.
So I'm not presuming as much as you may think......
Just look at the make up of the board http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/about_management....
Eric Mc said:
Toaster said:
Ah I see, but it was you that stated:
So I'm not presuming as much as you may think......
How do you know what I am thinking?So I'm not presuming as much as you may think......
Eric Mc said:
Are you a mind reader?
Its a dark art and someone has to do itEric Mc said:
Are you presuming what I think as well?
Well we all do this Eric its called communication, a person says something (transmitter) and the other person (Receiver) hears/sees what is said interprets it and responds.I guess we are all guilty of presuming and mind reading it does make things far more exciting and interesting
Eric Mc said:
Does the capsule fire rockets at the last second to cushion the landing? The Soyuz capsule has used this type of system quite successfully for decades.
Good Guess Eric, although it still didn't look smooth"A CLASSIC PARACHUTE LANDING
The crew capsule descends under parachutes for a smooth landing, in the same way as the earliest space pioneers. Three independent parachutes provide redundancy, while a retro-thrust system further cushions your landing."
https://www.blueorigin.com/technology
Onboard video from the recent test flight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNPpdHYD8jo&fe...
Note how the paint on the underside of the ring fin goes brown - I wonder if that's due to re-entry heating or engine exhaust deposits
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNPpdHYD8jo&fe...
Note how the paint on the underside of the ring fin goes brown - I wonder if that's due to re-entry heating or engine exhaust deposits
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff