Virgin Galactic Cockpit photos...

This is nothing short of amazing and it is true we are seeing history in the making. Keep in mind it'll be a lot safer than the time when aviation was brand new for a couple of reasons.
1. People care about safety in every vehicle more than they used to.
2. These people are engineers of the highest caliber. They aren't making bicycles in their spare time...
 
jhugz said:
Is it just me or does that have a bad Gulfstream ring to it.

For just 2 million dollars you could be a FO of the space shuttling hauling stuff into space. It is the fast track to the moon. Don't waste your time CFIing when you could fly the shuttle.
Click to expand...


Haha NICE
 
jwp_145 said:
Answered my own question:

WhiteKnightTwo consists of a twin boom with two jet engines per hull.<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference">[8]</sup> One hull is an exact replica of that of SpaceShipTwo (to allow tourist training), and the other will carry cut-rate day-trippers into the stratosphere.
Click to expand...

jhugz said:
Is it just me or does that have a bad Gulfstream ring to it.

For just 2 million dollars you could be a FO of the space shuttling hauling stuff into space. It is the fast track to the moon. Don't waste your time CFIing when you could fly the shuttle.
Click to expand...

If yall are going to quote wikipedia it's probably best to check the sources.

The first mother ship had a single fuselage. The new one accommodates the expanded ship with twin hulls that hold the SS2 suspended between them. The interior of one hull is a replica of the SS2: Passengers will ride along in training for a full-on space voyage the next day. FAA permitting, the second hull will carry cut-rate day-trippers into the stratosphere. The vehicle is being engineered to perform zero-g aerobatic swoops on the way down.
Click to expand...

http://www.wired.com/science/space/magazine/15-06/ff_space_virgin
 
I always follow through with the references before I consider wiki to be anywhere near quasi-reliable...

That being said, what did you add to this thread by telling me to check the reference. It pretty much says the same thing in the wired article? I was in a hurry so I just copied and pasted. Didn't realize that my post needed to be in APA format.
 
jwp_145 said:
I always follow through with the references before I consider wiki to be anywhere near quasi-reliable...

That being said, what did you add to this thread by telling me to check the reference. It pretty much says the same thing in the wired article? I was in a hurry so I just copied and pasted. Didn't realize that my post needed to be in APA format.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat: Simmer down Champ...
 
jwp_145 said:
I always follow through with the references before I consider wiki to be anywhere near quasi-reliable...

That being said, what did you add to this thread by telling me to check the reference. It pretty much says the same thing in the wired article? I was in a hurry so I just copied and pasted. Didn't realize that my post needed to be in APA format.
Click to expand...

LOL, nah I wasn't giving you crap about the format. Just the way it was quoted and Jhugz response made it sound like yall thought they're running a Gulfstream-type pay for astronaut program. Didn't want anyone else to get confused. :dunno:
 
Clearblue said:
LOL, nah I wasn't giving you crap about the format. Just the way it was quoted and Jhugz response made it sound like yall thought they're running a Gulfstream-type pay for astronaut program. Didn't want anyone else to get confused. :dunno:
Click to expand...


My apologies bro.... I also post on vitalmx.com a motocross forum, and you can't take any s-hit over there.... gotta come out guns blazing! I was still in that mode! haha
 
jwp_145 said:
Seriously though, does anyone know why White Knight 2 has the two separate fuselages? And in which one do the pilot's controls reside?
Click to expand...

Don't know if you read this or not--don't mean to insult anybody's knowledge, but *I* thought this was interesting...

According to the Sport Aviation article, the original and primary impetus for placing the cabin/cockpit on a boom rather than the aircraft centerline was to enable the cabin to be placed closer to the ground, which made the sight picture compatible with what the SS2 pilot would see during an approach and landing, while also making ingress/egress and servicing less complicated. (WK2 was to be used as a "simulator" for SS2, with "spoiler flaps" to replicate the lift/drag ratio of SS2). In addition, the elimination of the second body on the aircraft centerline reduced the drag that would have resulted from proximity effects. It sounds like the second cabin resulted from a "hey, we've already got a boom with a cabin in it, how cool would it be to make another one for observers?" brainstorm.

At least that's how Sport Aviation made it sound. Very cool, regardless!
 
ProudPilot said:
I should mention that there are going to be those that say they haven't paid their dues.

If you're mad you didn't go into engineering, not our problem. These guys are really taking big risks and managing them just right. I'm eventually going back to school for Aerospace Engineering and I know I won't be able to touch these guys. These guys really outshine NASA and ESA.
Click to expand...

I am a big fan of what Virgin is trying to accomplish. However, those in the private space flight business need to be careful with what they say and how they characterize NASA. There are some speeches out there of Burt Rutan that really blast NASA. A suborbital space flight is no where near the energy level of a small orbital launch, not to mention a heavy lifter like the Shuttle.
 
High_Alpha said:
Anybody read the article in the EAA magazine about this thing? Awesome.

Everything I read about Scaled just makes me envious...it sounds like what Skunk Works must have been like back in the day...
Click to expand...

My tech advisor on the Mark IV I'm building is an engineer over at Scaled Composites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top