- Joined
- Sep 26, 2008
- Messages
- 1,687
- Reaction score
- 15
Here:
Attachments
-
355.1 KB Views: 375
-
29.9 KB Views: 112
https://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/saudi-arabia-investment-our-space-companies?ampChange is happening on a number of fronts in Saudi Arabia. The Crown Prince His Royal Highness Mohammad bin Salman Al-Saud has started to loosen societal restrictions and encourage a more progressive stance on areas such as women’s rights. There have been small steps to date but he is committed to bringing about these modern changes.
At the same time, the Crown Prince is making some bold economic moves as he guides the Kingdom away from its dependence on oil. On Tuesday he announced plans for a $500 billion new city in the north of the Kingdom and today I’m pleased to announce the intention of the Public Investment Fund (PIF) of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), pending approval by the US government, to invest approximately $1 billion into our US based space companies, Virgin Galactic, The Spaceship Company and Virgin Orbit.
This is exciting news for our companies. For our wonderful staff, customers and partners, this investment is a sign of confidence from the international investment community that our vision, our approach and our technology are the right path to commercialising space access. Both VSS Unity and LauncherOne are poised to reach significant technical milestones in the run-up to launch, and we are eager to build out R&D and our US facilities to support next generation vehicles and services.
We are now just months away from Virgin Galactic sending people into space and Virgin Orbit placing satellites around the Earth. This investment will enable us to develop the next generation of human spaceflight, more economic satellite launches and accelerate our programme for trans-continental point-to-point space travel. It also includes the possibility to develop a space-centric entertainment industry in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
We will remain majority shareholders, and our companies will remain firmly rooted in Virgin brand values and based in southern California and New Mexico.
It is also exciting news for the people of Saudi Arabia. As I wrote before, it is time of transformational change in the country’s history thanks to Crown Prince and his bold Vision 2030. The country is putting its oil wealth into growing other sectors such as education, entertainment, tourism, and future forward technology.
Their wish to invest in our space technology is positive progress of the larger societal transformation the Crown Prince seeks to bring to his country and citizens.
We look forward to welcoming KSA as our partners in opening access to space to change the world for good.
Any idea why they ditched the wing one sees on Pegasus?blackstar said:Here:
Might actually be lighter to go with a vectored thrust engine on the first stage, eliminating the need for a wing.sferrin said:Any idea why they ditched the wing one sees on Pegasus?blackstar said:Here:
Was that not an option on Pegasus? ???TomS said:Might actually be lighter to go with a vectored thrust engine on the first stage, eliminating the need for a wing.sferrin said:Any idea why they ditched the wing one sees on Pegasus?blackstar said:Here:
I just remember at the time Orbital singing praises about the "revolutionary" wing. One would have got the impression that the benefits were pretty significant. (Maybe moreso in the Marketing dept. than in reality?)TomS said:Clearly it was an option, since the second stage uses TVC and is very similar to the first stage in other respects. But they decided in that specific application, the wing was better. I can't find a good reference, but my recollection is that the case for using a wing on Pegasus is fairly marginal. It's possible that newer technology has changed that, or that the launch parameters for the new system are enough different to eliminate the need.
https://archive.org/stream/PopularMechanics1981/Popular_Mechanics_06_1981#page/n0/mode/2upMotocar said:Excuse the off topic ...! A direct predecessor of these initiatives. I am interested in knowing if any of the friends of the forum will have the Popular Mechanis magazine of June 1981 in its English edition
Looks like Truax's Volksrocket.what looks like the cone of a V2 rocket with a seat
Hi,blackstar said:Here:
Uppss...! Published in Popular Mechanics March 1981 page 146Orionblamblam said:https://archive.org/stream/PopularMechanics1981/Popular_Mechanics_06_1981#page/n0/mode/2upMotocar said:Excuse the off topic ...! A direct predecessor of these initiatives. I am interested in knowing if any of the friends of the forum will have the Popular Mechanis magazine of June 1981 in its English edition
Looks like Truax's Volksrocket.what looks like the cone of a V2 rocket with a seat
I would bet it goes back a lot farther. Did Orbital ever consider it for the Pegasus back in the 1980s or did they go straight to the L-1011? One downside of airliners is that they have wings mounted at the bottom of the fuselage, limiting the size of the load. The Air Launched Sortie Vehicle proposal of the early 1980s would have mounted a rocket atop a 747. Transport planes like the C-5 with a high-mounted wing have advantages. There have been other, more recent proposals for mounting the rocket on top of the 747.antigravite said:Launching an orbital rocket from a modified B747 has been around for awhile. Among others, back in 2003, this option was under high scrutiny by Rafael, Israel's Armament authority, to propose a responsive minisat launcher, based on their Black Sparrow system.
The 747 was one of the options studied in 1991, when they opted for an L1011. The other main options were the DC-10 and a B-52G (I imagine there would be treaty issues with a commercially owned B-52!).blackstar said:I would bet it goes back a lot farther. Did Orbital ever consider it for the Pegasus back in the 1980s or did they go straight to the L-1011? One downside of airliners is that they have wings mounted at the bottom of the fuselage, limiting the size of the load. The Air Launched Sortie Vehicle proposal of the early 1980s would have mounted a rocket atop a 747. Transport planes like the C-5 with a high-mounted wing have advantages. There have been other, more recent proposals for mounting the rocket on top of the 747.
wow thx!TomS said:The 747 was one of the options studied in 1991, when they opted for an L1011. The other main options were the DC-10 and a B-52G (I imagine there would be treaty issues with a commercially owned B-52!).blackstar said:I would bet it goes back a lot farther. Did Orbital ever consider it for the Pegasus back in the 1980s or did they go straight to the L-1011? One downside of airliners is that they have wings mounted at the bottom of the fuselage, limiting the size of the load. The Air Launched Sortie Vehicle proposal of the early 1980s would have mounted a rocket atop a 747. Transport planes like the C-5 with a high-mounted wing have advantages. There have been other, more recent proposals for mounting the rocket on top of the 747.
The analysis of alternatives is mentioned briefly in the following report.
http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2684&context=smallsat
Just ask Elon Musk!Michel Van said:I have only one question
In October is 14 years ago that Space Ship One flew first time
Were is Space Ship Two commercial flights ?
Next to that Branson enjoy record-breaking attempts or guest starred in Movies or TV series, Game shows, usually playing himself...Archibald said:Musk is far, far more serious than Branson. Branson is a good car salesman, but as far as engineering goes, he is a total loss. Branson likes partying, alcohol, drugs, chicks, and hype, and giant adds for Virgin.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/06/virgin-orbit-launcherone-maiden-flight/Virgin Orbit is just months away from the first launch of its LauncherOne rocket. The company is currently undergoing an extensive test campaign to ensure that the vehicle will function correctly on its maiden flight.
http://spacenews.com/virgin-orbit-wins-faa-license-for-first-launcherone-mission/Virgin Orbit has received a license from the Federal Aviation Administration for the first launch of its LauncherOne vehicle, which the company hopes to perform later this summer.
The FAA issued the license June 29 for the first launch of the air-launch system, using the LauncherOne rocket flown from a customized Boeing 747 that takes off from Mojave Air and Space Port in California. The payload for that launch is identified as a “mass simulator with CubeSat,” but doesn’t specify the identity of the cubesat or cubesats that will fly on the mission.
The FAA license is for a reusable launch vehicle (RLV), even though LauncherOne itself is expendable. The Boeing 747 used as the launch platform is reused, but Northrop Grumman’s Pegasus rocket, which is also an air-launched system, is licensed as an expendable launch vehicle by the FAA.
https://spacenews.com/virgin-orbit-performs-launcherone-aircraft-flight-tests/The carrier aircraft for Virgin Orbit’s LauncherOne system has performed a series of test flights in preparation for upcoming flights with the rocket attached.
The flights of the company’s Boeing 747 aircraft, nicknamed “Cosmic Girl,” were the first since the company installed a pylon on the plane’s left wing that will be used to carry the LauncherOne rocket on future flights of the air-launch system.
Oops, my mistake, that is what happens when you type fast. Thanks sferrin.sferrin said:90 km not 90k feet.
LauncherOne's first stage lit up our Mojave test site on Friday for the first hot-fire in our final series of full-scale, integrated system tests.