Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

X Prize Team Fires Engines, Prepares for 2004 Launch
space.com ^ | 11/25/03

Posted on 11/25/2003 7:00:20 PM PST by KevinDavis

Canadian rocketeers competing in the X-Prize contest to send passengers on suborbital space hops have test fired their rocket engine, a major milestone in the team's plans to launch sometime next year.

The engine test was a crucial step for the Ontario, Canada-based Canadian Arrow team, one of 25 efforts to send loft a three-person vehicle up 62 miles (100 kilometers) up, return it safely and reuse the spacecraft within two weeks. The X Prize for the first team to do so includes a trophy and $10 million.

"Our team has spent five years researching, designing and building toward the test we performed tonight," said Canadian Arrow leader Geoff Sheerin of the Nov. 21 test. "We had a perfect ignition and a good clean burn. There were a lot of smiles here, that's for sure."

During the late-night test, Canadian Arrow's rocket engine produced 57,000 pounds of thrust using a fuel mixture of liquid oxygen and ethyl alcohol. Project engineers believe their engine, which is modeled after the German V-2 rocket and consumes about 250 pounds (113 kilograms) of propellant per second, is the largest liquid propellant engine in Canada.

Canadian Arrow engineers will continue testing the engine to prepare it for its first flight expected to take place in upcoming months.

In other X Prize-related news, the contest's newest competitor High Altitude Research Corp. (HARC), of Huntsville, Alabama, unveiled its Liberator space capsule during a Nov. 22 presentation and engine test. HARC's flight plan calls for an ocean rocket launch to a maximum altitude of 70 miles (112 kilometers) before reentering the Earth's atmosphere, deploying parachutes and splashing down.

X Prize officials anticipate that their contest will be won within seven to 10 months.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: canada; space; xprize
Next year is going to be a very intresting year in space travel. I thought that Burt had it won, however this is turning into a race!
1 posted on 11/25/2003 7:00:24 PM PST by KevinDavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Normal4me; RightWhale; demlosers; Prof Engineer; BlazingArizona; ThreePuttinDude; Brett66; ...
Space Ping! This is the space ping list! Let me know if you want on or off this list!
2 posted on 11/25/2003 7:00:56 PM PST by KevinDavis (Let the meek inherit the Earth, the rest of us will explore the stars!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
True, some progress from other teams enlivens the race. Wasn't there also a Canadian team with a balloon and rocket combination?
3 posted on 11/25/2003 7:03:54 PM PST by dagnabbit (Stop immigrating Islam. Don't let France happen to America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
Yes, it looks like all the contestants are busy.

Nothing like competition to push the envelope!
4 posted on 11/25/2003 7:06:06 PM PST by petuniasevan (Gamer's famous last words: "Aw man, this is a WUSSY dungeon!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dagnabbit
Wasn't there also a Canadian team with a balloon and rocket combination?

How is that supposed to work (balloon and rocket)?

5 posted on 11/25/2003 7:08:15 PM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
I think: A (huge) balloon lofts a one-stage rocket most of the way. They light the rocket and finish the trip.
6 posted on 11/25/2003 7:10:46 PM PST by dagnabbit (Stop immigrating Islam. Don't let France happen to America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

7 posted on 11/25/2003 7:23:17 PM PST by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
"Our team has spent five years researching, designing and building toward the test we performed tonight,"

Amateurs! NASA would have spent ten years and $2 billion!

8 posted on 11/25/2003 7:25:43 PM PST by irv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: irv
LOL!
9 posted on 11/25/2003 7:34:39 PM PST by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
Someone said somewhere that 62 miles isn't very high, and that it takes a lot more to get orbital. I wish I knew more about this, but I don't. What is the height that orbital starts at? Why is it easy to go 62 miles (which sure sounds damn high to me) but hard to go higher?

In any case this is really cool. I'm very, very happy to see this, and of course want the USA (a USA team that is) to win.
10 posted on 11/25/2003 7:40:19 PM PST by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
Geo-stationary satellites are about 22,300 miles up and they "hang" there.
11 posted on 11/25/2003 7:57:38 PM PST by Old Professer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
If you're trying to send a spacecraft into orbit, mere height isn't enough. Remember, an object in orbit is falling all the time, but falling around the Earth -- in other words, falling towards the ground at the same rate as the ground is curving beneath it. Therefore, to be in orbit, you need more than just height; you need velocity, a velocity horizontal with respect to he surface of the Earth. Without that velocity, your rocket will simply fall straight back down. That's why satellites have to be launched by rockets — to get the necessary sidways velocity (about 17,500 miles per hour relative to the Earth's surface) necessary to allow them to fall around the Earth rather than back down to its surface.
12 posted on 11/25/2003 8:00:50 PM PST by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
Why doesn't NASA simply fund competitive prizes rather than throw billions of our tax dollars into centrally-planned contracts for the Orbital Spaceplane (etcétera)? Congress has basically given them the go-ahead:

http://www.spaceprojects.com/prizes
13 posted on 11/25/2003 8:05:16 PM PST by Analyzing Inconsistencies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dagnabbit
I think: A (huge) balloon lofts a one-stage rocket most of the way. They light the rocket and finish the trip.

Wait...I thought that the plan was to inflate a giant balloon under the rocket on the launch pad, and then someone pricks it with a pin to initiate the launch.

14 posted on 11/25/2003 8:23:30 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
What is the height that orbital starts at?

At 62 miles, there's enough friction from the tenuous atmosphere at 17.5KMpH (as B-Chan has mentioned) that I believe any type vehicle will decay within one orbit, so it has to start above that.

I have heard of spy satellites tasked down to 67 miles. However, they could stay that low only a short time before having to use their onboard motor to kick them back up to a sustainable orbit--probably at least 250 miles.

Why is it easy to go 62 miles (which sure sounds damn high to me) but hard to go higher?

It ain't easy to get to any significant altitude. The higher you plan to go, the more fuel and engine you have to have, which makes everything bigger, requiring still more fuel and engine, etc. Oh--you want a payload too? Sheesh! Order up still more engine, fuel, etc.!

62 miles was chosen, I'm sure, because it's a nice round 100 kilometers. I think that the old X-15 rocket plane pilots got their astronaut wings on those flights that went over 50 miles high.

15 posted on 11/25/2003 8:37:05 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
What is the height that orbital starts at?

It is speed, or velocity, that determines being in orbit, not height. The suborbital will be moving 4000 mph at maximum.

Orbital speed would be 17,500 or so. That is over 4 times faster, which means several obvious things. The orbital version would be much bigger because it needs to carry much more fuel. The greater weight means the motor needs to be much bigger. The manned capsule would be very different because it has to re-enter the atmosphere at the higher speed. If the capsule is not properly designed or if there is a serious problem on re-entry, the capsule will burn up as we all know by now. The sub-orbital capsule could also be destroyed on re-entry, but the much lower speed means that it would break up in flight rather than burn up.

The difference between an orbital and a sub-orbital launch is also that the rocket would be ten times the size. If a sub-orbital launch is barely do-able at this time, the orbital launch is far from being do-able. For cost, the orbital launch would also be ten times more expensive, and these sub-orbital launches aren't cheap.

16 posted on 11/26/2003 9:22:59 AM PST by RightWhale (Close your tag lines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Erasmus
I think that the old X-15 rocket plane pilots got their astronaut wings on those flights that went over 50 miles high.

That is quite true. Robert M. White, Joseph A. Walker, Robert A. Rushworth, Joseph H. Engle, John B. McKay, William H. Dana, William J. Knight, and Michael J. Adams all got their astronaut wings this way.

17 posted on 11/26/2003 9:30:42 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid" - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
Astronaut wings are given at 50 miles.
18 posted on 11/26/2003 9:44:20 AM PST by Flightdeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
That is quite true. Robert M. White, Joseph A. Walker, Robert A. Rushworth, Joseph H. Engle, John B. McKay, William H. Dana, William J. Knight, and Michael J. Adams all got their astronaut wings this way.

"My name, Jose Jimenez."

+<]B^)

(Actually, that was said by a different Bill Dana.)

19 posted on 11/26/2003 7:10:53 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson