E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSJune 21, 2004: NBC's George Lewis reports on SpaceShipOne's first spaceflight.
The mastermind behind the first privately funded spaceship says he's disappointed by the pace of progress since SpaceShipOne took its historic trip, seven years ago today. But there's hope on the horizon, in the form of SpaceShipTwo.
Aerospace designer Burt Rutan has retired from his top post at the company he created, Scaled Composites, and is now living in North Idaho with his wife, Tonya. His new digs are hundreds of miles from California's Mojave Air and Space Port, where SpaceShipOne took flight and where SpaceShipTwo is now undergoing unpowered glide tests.
"I feel good about the decision to retire and leave Mojave, mainly due to my health uncertaintites and to the wonderful place we now live," Rutan, 68, told me in an email. When he refers to his health, he's talking about heart troubles that forced him to undergo surgery in early 2008. And when he refers to the appeal of his current locale, he's talking about Idaho's political environment as well as its mountains and lakes.
Bebeto Matthews / AP file
Burt Rutan presides over a 2008 news conference about SpaceShipTwo.
"Conservatives just take better care of each other and govern better," he said. "Oh, I also love the weather and the views."
When SpaceShipOne broke the space barrier on June 21, 2004, Rutan was hoping he'd be one of the first passengers on a commercial flight to the edge of space, more than 62 miles (100 kilometers) up. He even said he wanted to "go to the moon in my lifetime" and "see my grandchildren go to the more interesting moons of Jupiter and Saturn."
Today, folks are still talking about the possibility of sending passengers around the moon — perhaps by 2015, although today Russia's space chief voiced doubts about that prospect. It doesn't look as if anyone will be going to the moons of Jupiter or Saturn anytime in the next few decades, though, and even that first private-sector passenger flight to space has not yet taken place.
"Yes, disappointed that progress has been slow," Rutan wrote.
Rutan has always shied away from laying down firm schedules for the future. Even in his retirement, he declined to talk about how soon SpaceShipTwo would be taking on customers — or, for that matter, about any other ventures he might be taking on. "I cannot talk about future things, never did. Just stay tuned," he said.
But if Scaled Composites and Virgin Galactic stick with the schedule they've laid out, rocket-powered test flights could begin within the next year, with the aim of sending test pilots once again across the outer-space boundary.
The year 2012 appears to be the very earliest target for the first commercial suborbital spaceflights. Such journeys would give Virgin Galactic's customers a taste of zero-G and a view of the curving Earth beneath the black sky of space, at a cost of $200,000 a seat. There are other companies in the suborbital space race, including XCOR Aerospace (aiming for flights from Curacao in 2014) and Armadillo Aerospace (which has partnered with Space Adventures). For now, however, Virgin Galactic still appears to be closest to entering the market, with New Mexico's Spaceport America taking shape as its base of commercial operations.
Zenith Press
"Burt Rutan's Race to Space" traces the aerospace designer's decades-long career.
Until the next-gen spacecraft actually fire up their rockets, space dreamers will have to content themselves with lower-flying adventures such as zero-gravity flights and astronaut training sessions. Or you could read the book: "Burt Rutan's Race to Space," a new volume from Dan Linehan, author of the "SpaceShipOne" coffee-table book, has just been published.
While "SpaceShipOne" focused on the run-up to the rocket plane's history-making flights, "Burt Rutan's Race to Space: The Magician of Mojave and His Flying Innovations" takes a wider look at the aerospace guru's career, from his days as a designer of homebuilt airplanes to his work on SpaceShipTwo. Rutan's work on record-setting long-distance aircraft such as the Voyager and the GlobalFlyer is well-known, but I was surprised to see some of the other not-so-ready-for-prime-time projects in which Scaled Composites played a role, including the DC-X rocket prototype, the Roton test vehicle and NASA's X-38 crew return vehicle.
Now the Voyager and SpaceShipOne are hanging in the Smithsonian, and a new generation of aerospace designers are following in Rutan's footsteps. Here's what Mike Melvill, the first pilot to become an astronaut in SpaceShipOne, wrote in the foreword to "Burt Rutan's Race to Space":
"It will be interesting to watch the continuing progress of Scaled Composites, where Burt has left an unbelievable legacy of truly astonishing aircraft designs and ensured that there is a cadre of exceptional designers, engineers and test pilots with an unmatched shop full of the best composite fabricators in the world."
Even though he's retired, and even though he doesn't like to talk about future things, Rutan himself couldn't resist taking a forward-looking perspective as he looked back on what happened seven years ago today.
"The thing that sticks out," he wrote, "is that hundreds of children were there to watch."
Will June 21, 2004, go down in history as the true start of the commercial space age? Or will it turn out to have been a false start? What do you think? Feel free to weigh in with your comments, and let's see what happens by June 21, 2012.
Stay tuned for a Q&A with Dan Linehan in a future posting. Linehan's earlier book, "SpaceShipOne: An Illustrated History," has just become available in paperback.
You can connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page or following @b0yle on Twitter. Also, give a look to "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
Wait a minute? What Private Sector Space Age? All I see are a bunch of Amateurs playing with Toys.
Why not give that money that's going to the amateurs to the true professionals, NASA. After all, NASA has put a man on the moon. The Amateurs have only flown in sub orbital space.
And NASA has had over 50 years experience... What do the Amateurs have? Seven? (Actually I think the Amateurs have had less than seven years experience in space... Maybe more likely 1 day but I could be wrong.)
And this is my Opinion on this subject.
Because unfortunately NASA is forced to change direction every 4 - 8 years. You can't get anywhere with short term goals like that, you need to be able to maintain course over several decades to get large projects done. And these private space companies are far from amateurs, they've employed plenty of ex-NASA (some were even started by former astronauts) and other rocket scientists and engineers to make sure they're ships will fly.
Look at Space-X or Bigelow Aerospace for good examples. These companies are quite serious about getting into lower Earth orbit. Space X is due to start delivering cargo to the ISS towards the end of this year, it's said it should have a crew rated capsule ready to go next year at some point, and their Falcon 9 rocket has achieved Earth orbit.
Bigelow Aerospace has two prototypes of it's expandable space stations, launched in 06 and 07 respectively, that are STILL in orbit at this moment. Their first planned space station will have DOUBLE the crew capacity of the ISS, cost considerably less than the $100 billion the ISS took to construct, and be completed within a year of the first module being deployed. Mr. Bigelow, as of 2010, had invested $180 million into the company and has stated several times he is willing to fund up to $500 million through 2014 to see the first station completed. 500 million for a station that can hold up to 12 people vs 100 billion for one that can hold 6.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if you don't base yours on facts I'm just going to dismiss it as foolish.
Let's also not forget that NASA is dolling out a certain amount of money to private space companies as incentives, so the money WAS at NASA. I personally think it's a good plan for NASA to invest in these companies so that private American companies can take the Low Earth Orbit taxi service burden off of NASA. I love the space shuttle but I also want to see NASA exploring beyond LEO. So, with the last shuttle mission less than 3 weeks away I am looking to the horizon. Private American companies will fill the void left by the retirement of the Shuttle. American companies will provide American jobs and remove our reliance on the Russians for access to space. And once NASA finishes the SLS (hopefully by 2016-17) NASA will once again be the leader in human spaceflight by quite a margin.
When NASA landed people on the Moon THEY were basically amateurs that just had a lot of money behind them, launching people on glorified missiles designed for war. The civilian space groups now have all of that data, success and failure both, to draw upon but they are having to compete with the military who keep trying to further weaponize space and to limit civilian space activity so that we do not know what all they already have up there.
"Wait a minute? What Private Sector Space Age? All I see are a bunch of Amateurs playing with Toys."
We normally distinguish 'amateur' from 'professional' by whether or not they get paid for what they do (I'm an Amateur Radio operator, for example, FCC rules forbid us from charging anything for communications). Scaled Composites has been in the aircraft manufacturing business since 1982. Several years ago, it was acquired by Northrup-Grumman, but mostly takes a hands-off 'skunk works' attitude to it. Richard Branson's Virgin Group is a long established business as well.
Amateurs?
"Why not give that money that's going to the amateurs to the true professionals, NASA."
Oh, but Burt does that. Scaled does that. I do that. If you're a US citizen, you likely do that, too. It's called corporate and personal income taxes. Now, there is a place on your tax form allowing you to 'give' the IRS any money above that which you legally owe them, but it goes to general revenue, you can't single it out for any particular branch of government. Private investors support what Scaled, XCOR, Armadillo and others do. Who are you to suggest 'taking' that from them?
"NASA. After all, NASA has put a man on the moon. The Amateurs have only flown in sub orbital space."
What's your point? NASA has not does that since 1972. Would NASA sell me a ride to the Moon? (for $150 million USD, the Russians will take me around it) To Low Earth Orbit? (for about $50 million USD, the Russians will) Will they fly me suborbitally?
Oh, that's right, NASA hasn't been allowed to fly commercial payloads since Challenger. If I want to go, Butr might be able to help me, if my pockets are deep enough. NASA can't do it at any price. Before long. SpaceX and Boeing (yes, Boeing, just Boeing not NASA...are they amateurs) could do so, as well.
And remember, there waas a time when Boeing, lockheed-Martin, Northrup-Grumman were companies no one ever heard of, either...
"And this is my Opinion on this subject."
You're welcome to it, but get those apples and oranges straight, first...
I have no idea why NASA's failure should be touted as a success? NASA's failure?
Yes, NASA's failure. NASA has had great success on numerous occasions. However, NASA has failed miserably in it's most important task. NASA has failed to create a viable environment where the private sector can thrive.
Just look at the history of exploration. Government funding leads to great wealth in the private sector while the government funding moves on to other areas of exploration. Government also moves on to taxing that great wealth.
But, NASA has been doing this for 50 years and we still have no viable private sector exploiting the greath wealth to be created in space activities. It's like NASA believes they should always live on the public dole.
NO! We need government funding to explore new worlds. We need government funding to explore propulsion. We need government funding to explore life-extension. We need government funding to explore how to reduce healthcare costs by 90% or more ( I rarely ever go to a doctor and you should not have to either). We need government funding of engineering concerning how to build a bigger planet (a bigger Mars is needed).
But, we can not do any of those things because NASA has failed in getting the private sector involved and generating explosive wealth. No wonder politicians fail to fund those other government funding needs. The politicians and the public only see expense. If NASA were successful then JOBS and wealth would be seen greatly in the private sector and government might then be seen as the initial funding investor it needs to be.
magnets, MOST of the work that NASA "does" is actually done by the private sector. I'm sure you've heard of NASA's JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory). Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't JPL operated by the California Institute of Technology (which is a private research university)? I mean, come on, you think the private sector has been utilized by the government in all things space?? What about Lockheed Martin or Boeing or Honeywell or Northrop Grumman or Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne? Just for giggle here is a wikipedia page that lists on-site contractors at NASA facilities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NASA_contractors
And if you are talking about a private company or sector that makes their own spacecraft or space stations or satellites then you have completely missed the boat. We are living in the era when this industry literally takes off. In the last decade NASA has spent hundreds of millions of dollars spurring on private industry growth in the space industry.
The government DOES fund research and development of propulsion, life-extension, engineering of all kinds (although I don't quite understand how one would make a planet bigger, and I don't see why we "need" a bigger Mars. And I work in a structural engineering office.) And right now the second biggest debate on capitol hill (behind Jobs) is healthcare. The government would actually love to reduce healthcare costs. It's part of Paul Ryan's "path to prosperity" and it's the main goal of Obamacare. Those plans are ALL ABOUT reducing healthcare costs. Whether or not they actually DO cut costs remains to be seen, the point is that is the idea: Reduce health care costs. It's all part of getting our economy back on it's feet.
I would love to hear burts' take on non-rocket propulsion and the directions those technologies may take, his comments on things like the vasimir engines and the florida U prof working on the saucer. Things like the casimir effect, the hutchinson effect and electrogravitiacs in general seem quite silly but it would be great to hear Rutan comment in depth about them, and if he could be persuaded to yada on about alternative aerodynamics, like step wings, negative resistance material airfoils and....oh, I see ya all look a bit confused, yea, thats next years stuff, sorry...well to hear him sort what he figures is plausible future tech from the make a buck dissappear quick tech would be worth at least a 400 level grad class in aerospace engineering. You coulda pushed him a bit on his thoughts on orion et all. As much as burt wants to believe the private space industry started seven years ago with him at the pivotal event, naw...not quite...when those two fellas in the neatherlands break the space barrier in a homemad craft, yea man, then it's here. We are at a point now where it is only a matter of time till someone gets ahold of that old book, balloon to the moon, and with some tech upgrades and some homemade robotics, shows us that dragging rocks back from the moon can be a positive cash flow endeavour. I hope we continue to hear from Rutan in retirement, whatever that is, I couldn't imagine a day does not go by without him sketching an airplane\spaceplane concept on the back of an envelope. If he's like me, they can have the damn pen when the pry it from my cold dead fingers, course I gotta remember, when moses dropped, I was first to say, quick, get his gun!!....give em hell burt, I know there is more you want to build, if nothing else tune out and help me build the uss enterprise....no warp, no transporters, no fusion, but thers plenty to do till science catches up....
There is as yet no private space age as far as taking humans to low earth orbit and beyond. Suborbital flights like Spaceship II only duplicate the capability of the X-15 rocket plane of the 1950s and 1960s. Nuclear rocket engines such as those developed under the NERVA program could enable a real private space age by radically reducing the cost per pound of low earth orbit from $2,500 to $3,500 all the way down to $350 per pound or less. Implementing that technology will take some time, however, and only be enabled through a strong public-private partnership.
Space-X's Falcon 9 has achieved Earth orbit, and they have a crew capsule that will begin delivering cargo to the ISS later this year. They've stated that they should have a crew capsule ready to go by next year. They're also developing a heavy lift launcher of their own that will be capable of putting up nearly twice the weight that the space shuttle was able to. True, their flights still cost millions of dollars, but the overall price is nearly half of what it costs for a NASA launch.