It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

#SpaceShipTwo has experienced an in-flight anomaly. rumor parachutes seen, Confirmed Loss of vehicle

page: 8
26
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The same design has worked perfectly until now. Even the shuttle had to throttle down when going supersonic. It puts a lot of stress on a vehicle and can cause problems in many areas.

I understand the throttle down part, but the change in airframe shape was not the way to go to achieve drag IMO.




posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

At the altitudes they're at when they're normally deployed it's not an issue. It serves a dual purpose doing it this way. It lessens weight, and saves space. That allows for a smaller carrier, and launch vehicle. The lack of anything to keep them from moving in the event of early unlock is a concern for me.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The lack of anything to keep them from moving in the event of early unlock is a concern for me.

Obviously....as i said earlier, HOW?? A school boy error.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

No, a calculated risk that they lost. They apparently bet on procedures to keep them out of trouble. Just like NASA did for years. It finally caught up to them just like it did NASA.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Shadowhawk

Indeed.

Shadowhawk, I got to thinking. My memory recalls four space vehicles that have landed in the Mojave.

The X37B--unmanned and the Space Shuttle, both orbital and needing to be launched into space from a launching pad elsewhere.

The X15 and the Galactic SpaceShip, both suborbital and needing assisted launchings from aircraft, but did take off from the Mojave and landed there, too. And both programs now have one aircraft that ended up crashing on the desert, with one loss of life each time.

Also, I have noticed that more of the noteworthy crash sites are now marked. I would think that this crash site will eventually be marked, perhaps with a nice memorial such as at the X15 site. A fitting tribute to civilian space endeavors.

And that brings me to this thought. Even though it is not unheard of for only one of two crewmembers to survive, I will be curious as to why only one SpaceShip crew member safely landed.



posted on Nov, 4 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The lack of anything to keep them from moving in the event of early unlock is a concern for me.


Me, too, Zaphod. If stress on the feathers caused them to either deploy or tear off, well, now we will find out what happens with early unlocking in that situation. From the news photos I’ve seen, it looks like at least one feather boom landed quite apart from the rest of the aircraft. So sad all of this. But that is the nature of flight test. Still sad.

Mr. Branson wanted to fly in December. That seemed a little premature and really should have been considered a test flight itself!! The reality now seems to be that paying customers should be waiting a little longer for their ride.

Oh, I need to correct myself on the prior post. The X37B might not have landed back at Edwards after a launch from Vandenberg. I was probably confusing a released test glide return to Edwards. I forgot the runway at Vandenberg, our original “space port”.



posted on Nov, 4 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Any one remember when boeing sent Virgin
two engines that had very bad faults in them?
or Sabotage!

the Then do not wont any one they dont control in space.
they Killed concorde.
normal plains crash a Lot.
they keep going!
it got to close to space!



posted on Nov, 4 2014 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: desert

You can see in the stills that the feathers were off first, as the fuselage was just starting to break up.

They've already said they're going to stay the course, so it's just a matter of recovery time now.



posted on Nov, 6 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Ok, I think I might have looked at the same still you referred to. Yes, wow, the booms were definitely detached. Now, I had a question from that still when I heard the engine didn’t explode. That still makes it look like the fuselage flipped over, nose to tail. Crazy.



posted on Nov, 6 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: desert

Once the feathers came off, they lost aerodynamic stability, and that's exactly what they did. They pitched up, which started the breakup of the fuselage.



new topics




 
26
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join