Comments on: New Branson bio examines delays and other problems with Virgin Galactic

By: John Douglas

John Douglas — Wed, 05 Feb 2014 12:49:01 +0000

Youn say that the report you cite on the explosion does not mention a dissolving liner in the nitrous tank; I’ve just read the report and it states, inter alia…

“Any materials incompatibility in the system would have excaberated the event. Apparently the TST tank was constructed from composite materials and did not have a metal lining. Experiments that have been conducted show that N2O (which is a very powerful solvent) can dissolve the hydrocarbon binders in a composite material. This hydro-carbon, when present in the gas at the top of the tank, will greatly reduce the energy required to initiate a a detonation event. It has also been suggested that friction caused by vibration of a composite dip-tube flange (retained by steel bolts) was the ignition source. This may well be the case. There may also have been other materials incompatibilities in the system, in valves, other ancillary equipment, or in the balance chamber.”

So it seems that the report does mention the liner.

By: Neil Shipley

Neil Shipley — Wed, 29 Jan 2014 04:13:34 +0000

Yes. I for one, didn’t honestly believe that an engine issue existed except for the fact that the schedule continued to slip. Aeronautics didn’t seem to answer that slip so it had to be something else. What’s left? Well only money and the engine. Funding no issue so engine it is.
Apologies to you DM. You’ve been spot on. Even with a powered flight, we still don’t know whether the existing engine is sufficiently powerful to get the altitiude. We hear the spin but facts are next to non-existent from VG or Scaled and the test reports – well they tell basically nothing.
Cheers.

By: D. Messier

D. Messier — Tue, 28 Jan 2014 20:52:41 +0000

Errors aside, the basic premise of Bower’s reporting — that VG has serious engine issues that it is STILL trying to resolve nearly 10 years into the program — is fundamentally sound. It’s one that they’ve largely kept hidden from view.

I’ve been almost alone in writing about these issues. I was very happy to have Bower’s book published, in that it gets the issue out there in front of a much larger audience that I could ever attract to my blog. I’m hoping, perhaps falsely, that other media will follow up on my reporting and the book and look closely into what’s going on over there.

My reporting on this hasn’t been perfect, either. But, it’s been very accurate, so much so that it has angered Scaled, Virgin Galactic and the airport administration.

Criticism of the errors one makes is deserved. But, don’t get lost in those trees and miss the forest. There’s a much bigger story here.

By: Susan Shepherd

Susan Shepherd — Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:09:39 +0000

Pat, From a technical context more challenging commercial transport vehicles have been done ie. Concord. In a classic commercial transportation model the service provider does not usually design and build the transport vehicle, the powerplant(s) and the launch platform. They will talk about this for decades….as an example of what not do. VG didn’t sell an existing design and system based off a proven track record of designing and building ‘space vehicles’, quite the contrary. VG sold a dream.

Someone will be the first. The question is- what will they be the first to do?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Comet

-Susan

By: Pat Hynes

Pat Hynes — Tue, 28 Jan 2014 00:17:58 +0000

No one has done what Virgin Galactic is attempting technically or in a commercial transportation business. Mis-steps are part of a known process in development of spacecraft or any complex technology. Dangerous, no illusions. It is a dangerous business. From the perspective of a New Mexican, a ticket holder, and as a critical consumer, I know if we fail to try then we have truly failed. This has to work. And, if it doesn’t we will get our money back. WE are not the ones taking the risk at this stage, VG is. They have a lot to lose if they quit.

By: C Knight

C Knight — Mon, 27 Jan 2014 05:50:25 +0000

The report into the OSHA investigation document you cite is very careful not to make any concrete conclusions as to the root cause of the accident. The words ‘could’ and’may’ are used. The authors were very aware that they did not have all the facts and were careful to leave room for other possibilities. It also states that it was not attempting to assign blame. It was an attempt to learn, explore and pass on the possible dangers to others working in the field. since that report was issued other information has continued to emerge, so no firm conclusions have yet been made.

By: Jeff Foust

Jeff Foust — Sun, 26 Jan 2014 22:05:58 +0000

Doug,

The link you included (and the link I provided in the original post) to the Amazon.co.uk site lists a January 27 publication date. You can order books (but not Kindle books, I believe) from the UK site, but you will have to pay significant shipping fees.

By: Doug Weathers

Doug Weathers — Sun, 26 Jan 2014 21:55:17 +0000

The amazon.co.uk site lists the release of the book for Feb. 28. I have no idea if we Yanks can buy it from this link:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0571297099/

By: Trent Waddington

Trent Waddington — Sun, 26 Jan 2014 21:52:35 +0000

Hopefully this kind of public criticism (no matter how inaccurate) will encourage Virgin Galactic to be more open with what the heck they’ve been doing for the last ten years. It’s a shame that so few of the media have been interested in this story.