Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → Correct me if I'm wrong...
Correct me if I'm wrong...
2004-09-29, 2:59 AM #1
...but doesn't Space Ship One attempt the first of two flights to win the X-Prize today?
omnia mea mecum porto
2004-09-29, 4:27 AM #2
I think it got delayed.
D E A T H
2004-09-29, 4:30 AM #3
Yep.
The music industry is a cruel and shallow money trench where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.
2004-09-29, 6:19 AM #4
****, you mean I just woke up to watch the webcast for nothing?
Stuff
2004-09-29, 8:01 AM #5
Quote:
Originally posted by kyle90
****, you mean I just woke up to watch the webcast for nothing?

Actually, no:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/09/29/news.space.xprize.dc.reut/index.html
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you...
2004-09-29, 9:48 AM #6
Score! I just watched it, and they were successful!

Welcome to the future.
Stuff
2004-09-29, 9:51 AM #7
Isn't John Carmack competing in the same contest?
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2004-09-29, 11:45 AM #8
Yes, as a matter of fact he is. Here is the website.
Stuff
2004-09-29, 11:47 AM #9
Carmack is gonna win cause he always does.
"Those ****ing amateurs... You left your dog, you idiots!"
2004-09-29, 12:03 PM #10
Well, he's got less than two weeks to hurry up and get into outer space! Twice! ;)
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2004-09-29, 3:54 PM #11
Well, actually, Rutan is planning on launching again on Monday... so that leaves very little time for Carmack if he wants to win.

But if he does, I want to see a Union Aerospace logo on his spaceship.
Stuff
2004-09-30, 10:17 AM #12
No, I don't think John Carmack had any intentions of actually winning the prize... It seemed he was more worried about the commercial viability of the venture. (after all, the X-Prize was a mere $10 million US, which is a fraction of the development costs of any of the contenders) When it comes to this, I see that John Carmack very well may be the clear winner; Armadillo Aerospace's craft will be far less expensive to construct and use, and has a far higher capacity; only two people actually can fit on SpaceShip One, as they've taken the option of stowing an extra 200 lbs. of equipment instead of a third person. Carmack's craft, on the other hand, may fit more people than a Space Shuttle (but only for sub-orbital zero-G flights)
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you...
2004-09-30, 11:28 AM #13
Space Ship One is also just a prototype, and was only used to prove that certain techniques and technology would work. The future craft from Scaled Composites will have better performance all around than SSO.

Also, nottheking, where did you get the price of AA's spacecraft? I can't find anything mentioning it.
omnia mea mecum porto
2004-09-30, 12:30 PM #14
Quote:
Originally posted by Roach
Also, nottheking, where did you get the price of AA's spacecraft? I can't find anything mentioning it.

I didn't get the cost of building one (I mis-worded myself there), but I got the estimated cost of a flight. AA suggested in their news that the cost, per person, for a flight would be $100k. By comparison, Virgin suggested that the cost for a flight on a craft inspired by SpaceShip One would be arround $190k. I couldn't help but think that that would stem from the cost of building and maintaining the craft.
Wake up, George Lucas... The Matrix has you...
2004-09-30, 3:58 PM #15
Uh, Space Ship One HAS to carry 3 people. Otherwise it fails. That's part of the contest rules.
D E A T H
2004-09-30, 5:08 PM #16
The equivelent of 3 people at least.
obviously you've never been able to harness the power of cleavage...

maeve
2004-09-30, 5:31 PM #17
Yeah, but in the end it has to be able to carry 3 people. If they opt to put in 200 pounds of equipment instead of another person, they fail, because that's equipment, not people. :p
D E A T H
2004-09-30, 5:51 PM #18
Quote:
On board Wednesday was enough ballast to stand for two passengers, including tools belonging to the team and Rutan's college slide rule.


It has to be able to carry 3 people. This is mostly geared for a successful launch rather then moving people at this time, hence they can use the weight equivilent. Here is the official rule...
Quote:
The flight vehicle must be flown twice within a 14-day period. Each flight must carry at least one person, to minimum altitude of 100 km (62 miles). The flight vehicle must be built with the capacity (weight and volume) to carry a minimum of 3 adults of height 188 cm (6 feet 2 inches) and weight 90 kg (198 pounds) each. Three people of this size or larger must be able to enter, occupy, and be fastened into the flight vehicle on Earth's surface prior to take-off, and equivalent ballast must be carried in-flight if the number of persons on-board during flight is less than 3 persons.

for complete rules,

go here.
obviously you've never been able to harness the power of cleavage...

maeve
2004-09-30, 6:06 PM #19
Great thread title!

Walter: "Am I wrong?!"

Dude: "No, but -"

Walter: "Am I wrong here?!"

Dude: "But -"

Walter: "That rug really tied the room together, did it not?"
COUCHMAN IS BACK BABY
2004-09-30, 6:08 PM #20
It's good to see that this wasn't a creation of NASA.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2004-09-30, 6:36 PM #21
It's kind of funny that these guys are the only ones to have a successful space program (so far).

I know the rules, outlaw--and as I said, if it can carry 2 people and 200 pounds of equipment, it's not able to carry 3 people. It's able to carry 2. :p
D E A T H
2004-09-30, 6:55 PM #22
Welcome tu da futah.
2004-10-01, 1:14 AM #23
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer
Great thread title!

Walter: "Am I wrong?!"

Dude: "No, but -"

Walter: "Am I wrong here?!"

Dude: "But -"

Walter: "That rug really tied the room together, did it not?"


"We are nihilists, Lebowski. We believe in nothink!"

Anyway, so far SSO has been designed and produced with $20 million. I can't really say how well AA's space craft will do until they actually build it, and so far, from looking through their past tests, it looks like they've had a few bugs.
omnia mea mecum porto
2004-10-01, 8:20 AM #24
I was thinking the other day, I was watching Space Ship one take off and I was thinking, hey this is all great and such, but in the back of my mind there was another subconscious thought, took me a good 30 minutes to realise what it was.

Why does it have to be so damn ugly?

I mean call me wassisname zoolander, but seriously, I wouldn't go into space in a thing looking like that. Even the crap in star trek looks better than that thing.
2004-10-01, 9:48 AM #25
Quote:
Originally posted by GHORG

Why does it have to be so damn ugly?


I know what you mean. It looks like a giant penis with stubby wings attached to the sides. And I don't like how all those little round windows look.
Stuff
2004-10-01, 10:04 AM #26
Now that I think about it, there's also a Canadian team in close competition with Rutan...davinciproject.ca or something. However, at this point it's not clear if the design will work or go crashing into a nearby city...
COUCHMAN IS BACK BABY

↑ Up to the top!