Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 312 posts

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#31

Post by zepolud »

Test pilots? In the 21st century?

I find it absolutely reckless and inexcusable to require live humans riding on a prototype rocket when you have all the processing power needed to automate/remote manage the vehicle literally in your pocket.

EDIT: To those downvoting, you should really check that all current spaceplanes have the capability to fly and land autonomously--Boeing X-37, Dream Chaser, even Buran was fully autonomous and that was 25 years ago. There is simply no excuse for Virgin for being sloppy.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#32

Post by slg »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #21
melling wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone dying is devastating. Trying to conquer space a handful of people at a time is the slow and dangerous way of accomplishing this task. We should be building machines to explore the solar system. This can be done for a fraction of the cost, time, and it will allow him to allow us to iterate quickly. In 100 years, more humans will live off earth if we iterate with machines, etc now than if we move slowly trying…

Its sad, sure. Sorry for their loss. But people take far greater risks for far less reason. Monster Truck rallys. Motorcycle racing. Skiing. We don't change national priorities every time somebody dies at those activities. SO lets keep it in perspective, and salute the brave folks who are trying to expand human boundaries.

Those aren't really fair comparisons as they are several orders of magnitudes less dangerous than space flight. My quick estimates say that roughly 1-3% of people who try to get to space die during some point of the journey. Some quick Googling put the fatality rate for skiing at roughly .00002%. If 1% of people who tried skiing died, you could bet there would be national discussions about it.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#33

Post by krisoft »

JanSolo wrote: post #18

This is very bad. Not just for the family and friends of the poor guy who died, but for commercial manned spaceflight in general. SpaceshipTwo is considered the 'simplest' and 'safest' of all the upcoming manned commercial vehicle. It has many features that should help keep it reliable. For example, instead of a real liquid rocket engine, it uses a hybrid engine; it has almost no moving parts apart from a valve or tw…

All of those you said are very true. It's also worth mentioning that that very 'safe' engine has already killed three people, and injured three others during a cold-flow test. Very tragic.

see for details: http://www.knightsarrow.com/rockets/scaled-composites-accide...

or the "Test program accident" at the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#34

Post by [deleted] »

mixmax wrote: post #23

What this weeks events show us is that space travel is hard. Really hard. Most systems operate in extreme conditions, sometimes bordering on the improbable. Thousands, sometimes millions of horsepower in an engine smaller than a car, cryogenic liquids at -200 degrees celsius cooling a nozzle that is 3000 degrees celsius 5 millimeters away, heatshields designed to absorb obscene amounts of heat, the list just goes on…

[deleted]

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#35

Post by tomrod »

atlantic wrote: post #30
mixmax wrote: post #23

What this weeks events show us is that space travel is hard. Really hard. Most systems operate in extreme conditions, sometimes bordering on the improbable. Thousands, sometimes millions of horsepower in an engine smaller than a car, cryogenic liquids at -200 degrees celsius cooling a nozzle that is 3000 degrees celsius 5 millimeters away, heatshields designed to absorb obscene amounts of heat, the list just goes on…

> This is commendable, and is what drives the human race forward. Without these fearless men we wouldn't have gone to the moon. We wouldn't have explored the depths of the ocean. We wouldn't have flown the skies. That's one way of looking at the matter. Another is that without this untrammelled technological evolution (I hesitate to use the word "progress") we wouldn't be living through the greatest mass extinction e…

Until when? The next large asteroid? The next close-by gamma burst? The sun goes nova?

Let's go see the universe, and take life along with us.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#36

Post by smackfu »

krisoft wrote: post #33
JanSolo wrote: post #18

This is very bad. Not just for the family and friends of the poor guy who died, but for commercial manned spaceflight in general. SpaceshipTwo is considered the 'simplest' and 'safest' of all the upcoming manned commercial vehicle. It has many features that should help keep it reliable. For example, instead of a real liquid rocket engine, it uses a hybrid engine; it has almost no moving parts apart from a valve or tw…

All of those you said are very true. It's also worth mentioning that that very 'safe' engine has already killed three people, and injured three others during a cold-flow test. Very tragic. see for details: http://www.knightsarrow.com/rockets/scaled-composites-accide... or the "Test program accident" at the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo

Yeah, "rocket" + "safe enough to carry tourists regularly" just seems like a difficult combination.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#37

Post by JanSolo »

ggreer wrote: post #28
JanSolo wrote: post #18

This is very bad. Not just for the family and friends of the poor guy who died, but for commercial manned spaceflight in general. SpaceshipTwo is considered the 'simplest' and 'safest' of all the upcoming manned commercial vehicle. It has many features that should help keep it reliable. For example, instead of a real liquid rocket engine, it uses a hybrid engine; it has almost no moving parts apart from a valve or tw…

The engine has been the bane of SS2. The original rubber/N2O design was problematic enough that Virgin switched from rubber to a plastic. Apparently this was the first powered flight to use the new fuel. While the design lacks complicated turbopumps and cryogenic fuels, it does have one drawback: the N2O is contained in a pressure vessel. If that tank is damaged while still full (or close to), bad things can happen.

Agreed.

Don't forget that this is not the first fatality associated with this engine. In 2007, 3 people were killed in an explosion during a static test at Mohave Air & Space port.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#38

Post by ColinDabritz »

My thoughts are with the Virgin Galactic team. Spaceflight is difficult, dangerous, and I believe crucial to the future of humanity. Test piloting is always dangerous, more so with space vehicles, but that doesn't make it any less heartbreaking or impactful when you lose someone. I'm sure they will learn from this even as they mourn the loss.

Virgin Galactic, especially those you lost today, you have my deepest respect for Daring Greatly.

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#39

Post by tomrod »

mixmax wrote: post #23

What this weeks events show us is that space travel is hard. Really hard. Most systems operate in extreme conditions, sometimes bordering on the improbable. Thousands, sometimes millions of horsepower in an engine smaller than a car, cryogenic liquids at -200 degrees celsius cooling a nozzle that is 3000 degrees celsius 5 millimeters away, heatshields designed to absorb obscene amounts of heat, the list just goes on…

There was a comment earlier asking for a source that someone didn't make it.[0]

[0] News report: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/oct/31/spaceshiptwo-...

Re: SpaceshipTwo crashes shortly after Mojave test flight

#40

Post by moskie »

atlantic wrote: post #30
mixmax wrote: post #23

What this weeks events show us is that space travel is hard. Really hard. Most systems operate in extreme conditions, sometimes bordering on the improbable. Thousands, sometimes millions of horsepower in an engine smaller than a car, cryogenic liquids at -200 degrees celsius cooling a nozzle that is 3000 degrees celsius 5 millimeters away, heatshields designed to absorb obscene amounts of heat, the list just goes on…

> This is commendable, and is what drives the human race forward. Without these fearless men we wouldn't have gone to the moon. We wouldn't have explored the depths of the ocean. We wouldn't have flown the skies. That's one way of looking at the matter. Another is that without this untrammelled technological evolution (I hesitate to use the word "progress") we wouldn't be living through the greatest mass extinction e…

Such an incredible false choice you present.
Post reply on HN