Showing posts with label Space travel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Space travel. Show all posts

Saturday, November 15, 2008

About semi-skilled space workers and how to change that

I was asking myself a question that no current space worker or aficionado would probably want to pose: What would it take to make work in space more professional ?

Most people will probably protest and tell: "Are you crazy man ? Who could imagine more professional people in space than our current astronaut crews ?!"

Indeed our current work force in space are men and women who were educated and trained continusously for many years to fulfill their respective missions. Who could imagine a more professional work force ?

The answer is: I could.

But why? - Because I just call those guys semi-skilled: They trained hard to become an expert in handling almost everything. But they were never trained to become a plumer, a carpenter or an electrician. And Mike the astronaut was an engineer in space travel down on earth but he was not a Master of Science in Biology or Physics. Or if he was a Master of Science in Physics, then he was no Master of Science in Chemistry.

Almost every Joe the plumer or Fred the carpenter would beat their handling skills here on earth.

"So what", people might say: Space is different. We need another kind of specialist there.

I say: "No, that's the error in reasoning: We don't need semi-skilled specialists who can handle stuff in space, we need another space environment for craftsmen, engineers, scientists and tourists !"

I think technical progress in three deceisive areas will make this possible:

  1. a cost effective method of going into orbit
  2. the presence of artificial gravity
  3. re-usable space ships and a carefree re-entry method
Ad 1) A company called SpaceX and others will be able to deliver a cost efficient lift into space soon.
Ad 2) Based on the spinning wheel concept artificial gravity is possible.
Ad 3) a cost effective method to protect space ships from the dangers of re-entry is essential. When there is such, many more real specialists can be brought into space and work there effectively.

We don't need specialists up there who can just handle stuff, we need specialists up there who can do stuff because it's their job, their profession !

If we have those people up there, not every broken pipe or problem will cost millions or take weeks to repair.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Über Mülleimer im Weltraum und die Notwendigkeit zu recyclen

Zitat aus Yahoo-News vom 28.08.2008: "US-Kollege Greg Chamitoff wartete den Hometrainer, auf dem sich die Astronauten fit halten. Gemeinsam mit Kommandant Sergej Wolkow (Russland) luden sie ferner Nachschub aus dem ATV in die Station um und verstauten Abfälle in ihm.

Der Frachter, der Anfang April an der ISS angedockt hatte, wird im September abgekoppelt und verglüht als kosmische Mülltonne über dem Pazifik. In den vergangenen Monaten ist die Flugbahn der Station bereits viermal mit den ATV-Triebwerken geliftet worden."

Erste Frage: Ist es notwendig das ATV abzukoppeln, bevor ihm der Treibstoff ausgeht ? Stellt das ATV ein Sicherheitsrisiko für die ISS dar, wenn es nach Verbrauch des eigenen Treibstoffs an der ISS angedockt bliebe ?

Muß der genutze Andockstutzen unbedingt frei gemacht werden ?

Zweite Frage: Benötigt man, um das ATV an der ISS befestigen zu können, unbedingt einen Andockstutzen oder könnte man das ATV auch anders befestigen (damit der Andockstutzen frei wird) ?

Dritte Frage: Muß das ATV unbedingt klimatisiert werden, um es als Lagerraum nutzen zu können ? Könnte man es später wieder mit Energie versorgen und in Betrieb nehmen, falls man das möchte (d.h. wenn eine Schleuse am Andockstutzen vorhanden wäre) ?

Vierte Frage: Könnte man auf einfache Weise eine Verschlußtür für den Andockstutzen schaffen ? Oder reicht vielleicht sogar ein Vorhang aus einer nicht benötigten Abdeckplane ?

Fünfte Frage: Wieviel mehr Energie wird bei Anhebung der Flugbahn der ISS benötigt, wenn ein ATV angedockt bleibt ? Wieviel kostet das mehr ?

Sechste Frage: Könnte man das ATV ggf. als Gegengewicht für eine rotierende ISS-Station (für künstliche Schwerkraft) nutzen (zusammen mit weiteren ATV oder sonstigen Raumfähren (Progress etc.) ? -> siehe The need for artificial gravity: http://bulsara-photon.blogspot.com/2005/03/lack-of-gravity.html

Siebte Frage: Wieviel Energie wird benötigt, um ein ATV (leer) zur ISS hoch zu bringen ? Mit anderen Worten: Wieviel kostet das ? Welche Vorteile und welcher finanzielle Vorteil geht verloren, wenn man das ATV abstürzen läßt ?

Achte Frage: Könnte man das ATV ggf. auch später ohne Gefahr für die ISS abstürzen lassen ?

Neunte Frage: Was könnte man auf der ISS alles mehr, oder einfacher machen, wenn das ATV angedockt bliebe bzw. zumindest weiter an anderer Stelle der ISS befestigt bliebe ?

Meine Meinung darüber das ATV als Mülleimer zu verwenden und abstürzen zu lassen: Ich denke, das ist eine schreckliche Vergeudung von Ressorcen. Wie kommt bloß jemand auf die Idee ein Raumfahrzeug oder einen Campingbus als Mülleimer zu nutzen ? Wer macht das denn bei seinem Auto oder Campingbus ?? Auf der Erde ist niemand so reich oder so beschränkt. Nur im Weltraum, da ist so etwas offenbar möglich...

...und das nötige Geld für solche Späße vorhanden.

Doch was ist ein ATV (Automatisches Transfer Vehikel) überhaupt: - Ein ATV transportiert Lebensmittel und Ausrüstung zur ISS (Internationalen Raumstation). Es ist klimatisiert und kann wie ein gewöhnlicher Raum der ISS genutzt werden.

Unklar ist (nirgendwo habe ich davon gelesen), was passieren würde, wenn das ATV an der ISS angedockt bliebe. Zumindest eine teilweise eigene Energieversorgung durch eigene Sonnensegel besitzt das ATV.

Einige Antworten zur neunten Frage, was wären sinnvolle Nutzungsmöglichkeiten für das ATV ? -

...to be continued

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Über die Erwärmung von Oberflächen bei größerer Geschwindigkeit

Es stellt sich die Frage: Warum erwärmen sich Oberflächen ?

Eine Trivialantwort wäre: Wegen Reibung. Das ist aber eine makroskopische Antwort, also billig.

Eine bessere Antwort wäre vermutlich: Weil Vorgänge zwischen Elektronen und Atomkern eine Loslösung mindestens eines Elektrons vom Komplett-Atom bewirken. Gibt es viele losgelöste ehemalige Hüllenelektronen, so spricht man von einem Plasma(gemisch).

Eine Anschlußfrage stellt sich: Welche Temperaturen werden dabei maximal gemessen ?

Eine Gegenfrage wäre: Wie soll denn die Temperatur überhaupt gemessen werden ? Kann man Temperatur überhaupt vernünftig messen ? Wie bewertet man Temperatur ? Sind 1000°C normal, was ist mit 2000°C oder 3000°C ?

Was bewirken 2000°C anderes im Vergleich zu 1000° ? Wird ein Buch bei 2000°C doppelt so schnell verbrannt wie bei 1000° ? - Man sieht, der Begriff Temperatur scheint unsinnig.

Besser wäre vermutlich die Frage: Wenn ich eine Energie von 2000 J zuführe, was geschieht dann anders, als bei 1000 J Energiezufuhr ?

Eine sehr interessante Frage wäre: Welche Mechanismen sorgen für eine Zustandsänderung des Oberflächenmaterials ? Interessant deswegen, weil man vermutlich von mehr als einem Mechanismus auf atomarer Ebene ausgehen kann.

Eine erster Mechanismus könnte sein: Die Ablösung von Hülleneletronen eines Atoms (von außen nach innen).

Eine zweiter, interessanterer Mechanismus könnte sein: Das Schwingen des Atomkerns gegen seine Hüllenelektronen (s. den Artikel Über die Desintegration von Flugzeugen ohne Fremdeinwirkung) Dieses Schwingen dürfte bereits bei Geschwindigkeiten eines festen Makrokörpers in einem Luftkörper oberhalb von ca. 100 km/h Relativgeschwindigkeit eine Rolle spielen.

Gehen wir mal von ca. 1000 km/h Relativgeschwindigkeit zwischen Luft und Festkörper aus:

Dann...


...to be continued

Über die Desintegration von Flugzeugen bei einem Absturz ohne Fremdeinwirkung

Beobachtung: Es fällt auf, dass bei Flugzeugabstürzen oftmals eine fast vollständige Desintegration sämtlicher Bestandteile des Flugzeugs und seiner mit ihm beförderten Inneneinrichtung, Waren und Menschen stattfindet.

Man könnte daher vielleicht besser von einer Desintegration auf atomarer Ebene sprechen, als von einem Auseinanderbrechen des Flugzeugs (was impliziert, dass größere Materialverbünde intakt bleiben, wenn man so will: eine makroskopische Desintegration stattfindet).

Untersuchung a: Es wäre daher interessant herauszufinden, bei welcher atomaren Belastung ein Atom desintegriert. Zunächst würde man vermuten, dass hierfür der aufbrechende Zusammenhalt der benachbarten Hüllenelektronen verantwortlich ist. Das ist auch vermutlich nicht falsch, aber eigentlich nicht der entscheidenede Punkt:

Da nämlich der Kern deutlich schwerer ist, als seine sämtlichen Hüllenelektronen zusammmen, so kann man modellmäßig sicher besser von einer volumenmäßig kleinen und gewichtsmäßig großen Masse in einem Hohlkörper mit dem ungefähren Durchmesser 10EE-10 m sprechen.

Weil die Massenträgheit (bis zu einem Gegenbeweis) auch auf das System Atomkern-Atomhülle zutrifft, kann man sich den Effekt einer plötzlichen Abbremsung (sprich: Crash eines Flugzeugatoms auf den Erdboden) gut vorstellen:

Der Atomkern nähert sich plötzlich einseitig der "unteren" (dem Erdboden zugewandten) Seite der Atomhülle: Dadurch finden starke Abstoßungsreaktionen zwischen Atomkern und seiner unteren Atomhülle statt.

Mit dem möglichen und zu beweisendem Effekt, dass viele Elektronen quasi durch ihren eigenen Atomkern "weggesprengt werden". Und zwar so weit, dass eine Atombindung zwischen benachbarten Atomen nicht meht gegeben ist.

Untersuchung b: Grundsätzlich wäre es daher interessant, die Grenzgeschwindigkeit(en) herauszufinden, bei der Zerstörung nur auf Grund von makroskopischen Atomverbundsfehlern auftritt und bei welchen Geschwindigkeiten in einem unbeschädigten Atomverbund ein Versagen auf Grund von Interaktionsvorgängen zwischen Atomkern und Atomhülle auftritt.

...to be continued

Thursday, June 12, 2008

La curiosidad de la entrada a la atmósfera terrestre

Referencia: Hay una curiosidad al respeto de la entrada de un vehiculo espacial a la atmósfera terrestre.

Al menos yo lo miro como una observación especial: Si un vehiculo espacial se acerca a la superficie de la tierra, cuando sube por la
atmósfera terrestre, pasa un sector de unas 30 kilometros donde experimenta temperaturas muy altas.

Este sector se extiende aproximadamente desde la altitud de 85 kilometros hasta la altitud de 50 kilometros.

En cuanto a la temperatura, este sector es más peligrosa para el vehiculo espacial
comparado con el sector de 50 km hasta 20 km de altitud.

Pero porqué es más peligrosa ? - Al pronto no parece muy lógico.
Porqué ? - Porque la densidad atmosférica no es tan denso que es en las altitudes debajo de 50 kilometros.

No hay tan muchas moléculas de aire entre la altitud de 80 km y la altitud de 50 km comparado con el sector de 50 km hasta 20 km de altitud.

Conclusión: No hay en el momento. Pero es muy interesante pensar sobre este.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Sun flares

On April 18th, 2008, ESA (the European Space Agency) published an
article about sun flares:
http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEM4SB4XQEF_index_0.html

In case it's gone there, I've uploaded a PDF-copy to my web space:
2008-04-18-ESA-Solar flares set the Sun quaking.pdf

The article describes a correlation between sun flares and solar quakes.

Cited from that article: "The correlation is not the end of the story.
Now the researchers have to work to understand the mechanism by which
the flares cause the oscillations."

The interpretation of the correlation won my attention as
my interpretation differs.

Saturday, February 02, 2008

About extraterrestrial life

Observation: From time to time - when there is a German astronaut involved in a space project - I observe this news in the (German) press:
German astronaut believes in extra terrestrial life

It's never been said directly so far, but what is says in between the lines is:
German astronaut believes in little green men from planet Mars

My statement concerning such articles: Are we still in medieval times ? Does anybody still seriously believe that all life forms on earth (Menkind, trees, animals, bacteria...) are the only life forms in the whole universe ?

Suggestion for people believing in that:
  • Check out the undersea research concerning bacteria life
  • Check out astronomy sources concerning extra solar planets
  • Just think how unique life really is.
Reference:
"Deutscher Astronaut glaubt an außerirdisches Leben"
DPA - Samstag, 2. Februar, 16:11 Uhr

Lübeck (dpa) - Der deutsche Astronaut Hans Schlegel glaubt an außerirdisches Leben. «Da bin ich felsenfest von überzeugt», sagte er den «Lübecker Nachrichten».

«Auf welchem Niveau, ist aber Spekulation. Die entscheidende Frage ist, werden wir jemals so weit kommen, um in der Lage zu sein, mit außerirdischem Leben Kontakt aufzunehmen? Da bin ich skeptisch.» Der 56-Jährige startet am kommenden Donnerstag (7.2.) mit der US-Raumfähre «Atlantis» und dem europäischen Weltraumlabor «Columbus» vom Weltraumbahnhof Cape Canaveral (Florida) zur ISS.

Schlegel soll bei seinem ersten Außeneinsatz in den Weltraum aussteigen, um «Columbus» an die Station anzubauen. «Dass mein amerikanischer Kollege und ich aussteigen, stellt schon eine höhere Gefährdung da», sagte er. «Die Anzüge sind praktisch unser eigenes kleines Raumschiff. Wir haben darin unsere eigene Kühlung, Sauerstoff und Stromversorgung, und wir sind nur mit einer Sicherheitsleine mit der ISS verbunden. Da muss alles funktionieren.» Er freue sich sehr auf den Einsatz.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

SpaceShipOne - First private suborbital spaceship

SpaceShipOne, the first privatly built spaceship was built by Scaled Composites, a Californian, Mojave desert located experimental aircraft company.

Burt Rutan constructed SpaceShipOne, the first privately built spaceship. It went into space on September 29th 2004 and October 4th 2004 on a suborbital pretty ballistic flight path, reaching altitudes of more than 100 km (62 miles). By doing this twice within a fortnight SpaceShipOne won the Anzari X-Prize (worth $10 Mio.).

To achieve this goal of a (suborbital) space flight, two aircrafts were actually constructed: The socalled White Knight carrier aircraft and a rocket propelled space ship named SpaceShipOne, which was carried up to 45'000 feet (15 km) before being released and ignited.

Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Deep impact of a fridge

Today, a copper fridge released by a space probe named Deep Impact ("the car") intentionally hit a comet named Tempel 1. This is pretty much the truth.

The complete space probe was lifted into earth orbit and released into space some 172 days ago with a speed of about 10.2 m/s (37,000 km/h or 20,000 miles/h). It took a big amount of propulsion energy to get it up to this speed.

The produced thrust was big enough to get the probe into space and let her leave earth gravity. However, it wouldn't have been big enough to directly escape from our solar system. For major deceleration or acceleration manoevers, Deep Impact would have needed the assistance of other planets of our solar system.

Alternatively one could have taken an additional rocket into space but that was no serious option. ("If it's difficult to take a car into orbit, how would one be able to take a big truck there..."). Any time consuming deceleration or acceleration manoevers were abolished for Deep Impact.

As a result, Deep Impact ("the car") was shot into space without brakes but with a copper fridge on his loading space.

Europe started a similar space probe named Rosetta in 2004 for going to a comet named Tschurjumow-Gerasimenko. This mission will complement the direct approach of Deep Impact. It is intended to perform a soft landing on the comet's surface in 2014. It has no own brakes either. However, it uses the other planets of our solar system to speed up to the same speed as the target comet (as a "free-rider"). Disadvantage with Rosetta: It takes a hell of a time.

I wonder if these two missions will bring any reasonable results for the human kind apart from being great PR successes ? Am I an ignoramus ?

Monday, March 14, 2005

The necessity for artificial gravity

During current space missions there is no gravity within the space vehicles. This results in a serious muscle degradation of astronauts. The only countermeasure for this problem seems to be sports. Alas this cannot stop the muscle degradation completely.

The other serious problem about long term space travel is the high-level radiation from the sun which can not be shielded properly. But I don't wonna talk about this second major problem.

It's a bit strange to see all these committed people at NASA (and possibly other space institutions) work so hard on training astronauts to bear and fight this muscle degradation in regard to the planned Mission to Mars.

It seems that nobody in national space industries is willing to accept the fact that a human being is simply not made for weightlessness.

Accepting this would make things so much easier: Because it would allow us to set all forces free for the development of artificial gravity.

The loyalty to maintain old ways of thinking is widespread. If you look at all those people involved into the preparation of the human element, it's understandable: Having artificial gravity would make many scientists and engineers loose their sophisticated current projects.

However there are always other projects available and I bet even more interesting ones. But the habit of wanting to understand the process of weightlessness makes scientists and engineers kinda blind for the major uselessness of their actions: Of course it would be nice to understand more about the human body and weightlessness but the current importance of weightlessness is irrational in my point of view.

As long as the concept of artificial gravity is not yet tested, noone can really say how the human body would react. This might also deter people from using it.

The absurdity of training men and women to fight the non-presence of gravity: The absurdity of traing people to fight the non-presence of gravity can be made more obvious by simply imagining what would happen if the same scientists would want to explore the other hardly explored realm beside space: The realm of the earth oceans.

No scientist would want to train humans to fight the forces of the deep sea: Here it's generally accepted by people that technical help is needed to explore the depths of the oceans. Why not so in space ?? Of course one day it might be possible to get humans accustomed to the deep sea by implanting gills. But we're talking about present day science here.

It's rediculous to spend so much energy, time and money in space to do something that does not provide a good return on investment. And I claim that only artificial gravity would make life and work and the production of goods economically viable.

To show the absurdity of current efforts let's see another example: A top athlete is trained to swim against the continuous stream of a river. The athlete can fight the power of a steady stream for let's say a year and thereby keep his position. But the thing is: He can never win during his lifetime.

Conclusion: If the human race is going to let people stay in space for more than a rediculously unefficient short time period, there is a need for artificial gravity.

The usual argument against this concept is: The additional costs are tremendous. But I heavily doubt that: Has anyone checked the truth of this argument lately (in regard to technical realizability and costs) ?

Besides the trick is to make the impossible affordable !!

How can we produce artificial gravity ? - Currently there seems to be only one way to produce artificial gravity and that is by using a spinning wheel: However, variations are imaginable of course to minimize costs:

Nobody says that the spining wheel concept must be implemented by a homogeneous wheel. What we need here is simply some little amount of fantasy to alter the concept:

Let's assume for example that the ISS (International space station) - even though it is unsuitably constructed for weightlessness (i.e. drawers in the ceilings and the floors and such stuff) - is meant to be transferred into a space station with artificial gravity:

1) Well, all joints would have to be reinforced to make load changes bearable in cases of sudden acceleration changes of the spinning process.

2) All ISS-modules would have to be ordered in a vertical fashion (with their larger dimensions) in regard to the surface of the earth: The reason for this is that the spinning axis should be vertical to the surface of the earth. Many vertical configurations are imaginable and that includes modules being ordered in parallel (but of course still vertical) to the earth surface.

Since the ISS is just about 350 km above the surface of the earth it is within reach of earth gravity. If you would then spin the wheel with its axis parallel to the surface of the earth, you would have the problem to accelerate people inside the wheel half of the 360°turn with the acceleration of the wheel plus the acceleration of the earth (earth gravity) while you're going downwards (towards the earth surface) and while you're turning the wheel upwards away from the surface of the earth you would still have the wheel acceleration but thistime minus earth acceleration (earth gravity).

This would make astronauts feel pretty much like in a roller coaster and of course it would not be wishful to upset a stomach without need.

The problem can be avoided by letting the wheel circle around an axis vertical to the surface of the earth. Putting it thisway, earth gravity does not contribute to the acceleration of the spinning wheel.

3) A few high load non-metallic wires would be nice of maybe 100 m length or less.

4) A counter weight would be obligatory: It could be made of waste modules and filled with no more needed fluids or solid materials.

5) Connect the wires with the ISS and the counter weight(s) and let the ATV (the European Autonomous transfer vehicle), the Russian progress space freighter or the American Space Shuttle start the rotation of the total construct.

By the way, if we put a metal fabric onto the non-metallic wires at the wires towards the counter weight, we can even produce electricity because we are moving throught the magnetic field of the earth and electric power is induced into the metallic part of the wire.

Final statemmet: Nobody can tell me that these changes cannot be made for an affordable prize by private companies. Of course, if NASA was the sole provider of these changes, I bet that billions would be spent. But that does not mean that billions are really necessary to get the job done ! Of course well established private companies will probably take what they can get if NASA asks them to make an offer... so this might rather be a call for all start ups to get the job done.

This article was heavily revised on the 9th August 2008.

Sunday, March 13, 2005

Mission to Mars

They say a flight to the Mars will cost at least 20 billion dollars.
That's $20,000,000,000.

Last time that a major amount of money was spent mankind was going to the Moon.

Don't get me wrong: That was real great ! I'm a big fan of that undertaking. But I don't wonna do it just once.

The fact that it must have been a tremendous sum turned out in 1972 when the public learned that there would be no more flights to the moon. Wars on earth seemed to be more important so that no more public money was available for the peaceful progress of mankind.

Some people take the view that private industry nowadays can do it better anyway and cheaper, too. I'd support that opinion.

I think we should have learned from the big regress concerning manned space travel after the sudden death of the manned moon travel program.

Shall we leave it up to our children to see the other planets of our solar system ? Shall we just leave it up to a few astronauts/cosmonauts/taikonauts to go there ?

I must confess: I'm more selfish.
I wonna have it myself - and I wonna have it now.

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Global Flyer

The obvious story:

Virgin Atlantic Global Flyer achieved the first solo non-stop circumnavigation of the world without stopping or refuelling the aircraft.
Place of take off and landing: Salina Airport, Kansas, USA
Starting time: 18:47 CST (00:47 UTC), Monday, February 28th 2005
Landing time: 13:50 CST (19:50 UTC), Thursday, March 3rd 2005
The resulting flight time was about 67 hours and 2 minutes.


Virgin Atlantic Global Flyer (isn't she a beauty or what ?!!)

Steve Fossett (piloting the Global Flyer) founded two financial companies before his career as an adventurer: He made his fortune in the American financial markets with his brokerage companies Lakota Trading, Inc. and Marathon Securities, Inc.

He is a friend of British billionaire Richard Branson who owns companies such as Virgin Records, Virgin Atlantic Airways and basically all companies with the word Virgin in it.

Some technical data of the Global Flyer:
Cockpit: Pressurised and large enough for one pilot
Length: 11.7m, Height: 3.6m, Wingspan: 35m
Global Flyer empty weight: 1.5t
Fuel capacity: about 8.5t
Speed: about 460km/h (290mph or 250 knots)
Ceiling height: about 15,000m
Engine: Williams FJ44-3 ATW
Thrust: about 10,200 Newtons
So if you'd level that engine vertically upwards, it would take you about 1t (=1000kg) of weight to hold it back hovering in the air.


Williams International of Walled Lake, Michigan, delivered the FJ44-3 ATW engine. Information about the engine on Virgin Atlantics' homepage (Richard Branson) can be found here: Williams.

Chelton Flight Systems delivered the instrumentation.

Advanced Composites Group Inc. (ACG) delivered the LTM45 series composite prepreg materials.

The flight route was carefully chosen to meet the criteria of the Federation Aeronautique International (FAI). Among other requirements this includes a route length of about 37,000 km.

From left to right: Richard Branson, Burt Rutan, Steve Fossett

The real story:
Dick Rutan (older brother of Burt Rutan, above) and Jeana Yeager (his former wife) in fact achieved the first non-stop circumnavigation of the world without stopping or refuelling in 1986 with a similar looking plane called
Voyager.

Place of take off and landing: Edwards Airforce Base, California, USA
Starting time: December 14th 1986
Landing time: December 23rd 1986
The resulting flight time was about 9 days (!) and 3 minutes.


Voyager Aircraft of 1986 (now exhibited in the Smithonian)

Technical data of the Voyager:
Cockpit: Non-pressurised and large enough for two pilots
Length: 9.90m, Height: 3.1m, Wingspan: 33.80m
Voyager empty weight: about 426 kg (939 lbs)
Fuel Capacity: about 4.4t
Speed: average 185km/h (115mph)
Ceiling height: about 6000m
Engine types: Two
Continental Motors IO-240 engines
Air cooled front engine: 130 horse powers
Liquid cooled rear engine: 110 horse powers

So what's the point?
Burt Rutan constructed both planes (Voyager and Global Flyer) with his company Scaled Composites.

Burt Rutan also constructed SpaceShipOne, the first privately built spaceship. It went into space on September 29th 2004 and October 4th 2004 on suborbital flight curves, reaching altitudes of more than 100km (62 miles). By doing this twice within a fortnight SpaceShipOne won the Anzari X-Prize (worth $10 Mio.).

So, my point about these aircrafts is: The man who constructed them. That's the real story.

Sunday, February 27, 2005

Life is indefinite



R1) Life is expanding indefinitely.
R2) Life in universe is not an exception, it's the rule.
R3) The distance between inanimate spots is finite.