Aviation News Network - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 2005-04-01
SPACESHIP ONE TO FLY AT OSHKOSH
SpaceShip One, the world’s first successful civilian-built spaceship, will fly into space at AirVenture 2005.
SpaceShip One twice flew into space with a pilot and ballast equal to two passengers in September 2004, winning the Ten Million Dollar X Prize. Plans had called for Mothership White Knight and SpaceShip One to stop at AirVenture for public display prior to being put on display at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.
But in a startling change of plans, Designer Burt Rutan and EAA President Tom Poberenzy announced that Spaceship One would make another flight into space during AirVenture, this time with passengers instead of ballast.
"Spaceship One will be piloted by Aviation Journalist, Publisher and Test Pilot Jim "Captain Zoom" Campbell." announced Rutan. "The passengers will be Campbell's close personal friends Chuck Yeager and Bob Hoover."
"Yeager and Hoover were passed over in Astronaut selection 45 years ago." said Poberenzy. "This trip into space is our way of making that up to them."
Campbell, who reminds everyone that "We're a graduate of the National Test Pilot School," will also be taking his first actual trip into space.
"I'll pilot White Knight, since even Jim Campbell can't fly two aircraft at the same time." said Mike Melvill, pilot of the SpaceShip One's first flight into space. "We'll take off from Whitman field and climb to nearly 50,000 feet before releasing SpaceShip One. Jim Campbell will fire the rocket engine and pilot SpaceShip One to more than 62 miles above the earth (328,000 feet) then glide back to land at Whitman field."
"With our vast Pilot In Command experience we could simultaneously pilot both White Knight and SpaceShip One easily." said and obviously excited Campbell. "We have flown more than a thousand different aircraft, yet we're still snubbed by those Guinness Book people, and we're uniquely qualified for this important mission."
We plan to not only fly Spaceship One into space and return to the runway at Whitman field, but we'll test the phugoid oscillations during reentry." Campbell continued. "We'll make a low pass over runway 36, rolling and looping in front of the crowd, then we'll make a dead stick landing and coast right to the announcers stand just as we taught our close personal friend Bob Hoover."
"We have worked as a test pilot, stunt pilot, flight instructor (CFI/A/I/ME/H), you name it... We fly fixed wing, rotorcraft, single/multi-engine, gliders, balloons, ultralights -- Did I tell you that we're a former world ultralight record-holder -- jets, warbirds, antiques... the works in our turbulent thirty plus years as a test pilot." Campbell explained. "This mission will be even more challenging than flying relief missions in Ethiopa or serving as Bodyguard to then Governor Reagan. I've heard from many EAA members and aviation enthusiasts about this flight, and I believe that they are just as excited about this as we are."
In article <pf1q41p0ski9htke2vbjadqkl8k9068...@4ax.com>, Aviation News says...
ROFL!!! Best April Fools Joke in a long time !! Bet zoom thinks they wrote it ...so it must be true1! :-) Only one minor item needs to be brought forth concerning this comment.
>"I'll pilot White Knight, since even Jim Campbell can't fly two >aircraft at the same time." said Mike Melvill,
Actually I remember that during one of the zoom wars it was mentioned that zoom claimed to have flown 2 planes at once. I don't have the actual statement but it was something to the effect that while piloting one plane he flew in formation with himself with another plane that he flew by RC. He probably did an aerobactic routine with him self :-)I'm sure it was a blast!!
>Aviation News Network - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 2005-04-01
> SPACESHIP ONE TO FLY AT OSHKOSH
>SpaceShip One, the world’s first successful civilian-built spaceship, >will fly into space at AirVenture 2005.
>SpaceShip One twice flew into space with a pilot and ballast equal to >two passengers in September 2004, winning the Ten Million Dollar X >Prize. Plans had called for Mothership White Knight and SpaceShip One >to stop at AirVenture for public display prior to being put on display >at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.
>But in a startling change of plans, Designer Burt Rutan and EAA >President Tom Poberenzy announced that Spaceship One would make >another flight into space during AirVenture, this time with passengers >instead of ballast.
>"Spaceship One will be piloted by Aviation Journalist, Publisher and >Test Pilot Jim "Captain Zoom" Campbell." announced Rutan. "The >passengers will be Campbell's close personal friends Chuck Yeager and >Bob Hoover."
>"Yeager and Hoover were passed over in Astronaut selection 45 years >ago." said Poberenzy. "This trip into space is our way of making that >up to them."
>Campbell, who reminds everyone that "We're a graduate of the National >Test Pilot School," will also be taking his first actual trip into >space.
>"I'll pilot White Knight, since even Jim Campbell can't fly two >aircraft at the same time." said Mike Melvill, pilot of the SpaceShip >One's first flight into space. "We'll take off from Whitman field and >climb to nearly 50,000 feet before releasing SpaceShip One. Jim >Campbell will fire the rocket engine and pilot SpaceShip One to more >than 62 miles above the earth (328,000 feet) then glide back to land >at Whitman field."
>"With our vast Pilot In Command experience we could simultaneously >pilot both White Knight and SpaceShip One easily." said and obviously >excited Campbell. "We have flown more than a thousand different >aircraft, yet we're still snubbed by those Guinness Book people, and >we're uniquely qualified for this important mission."
>We plan to not only fly Spaceship One into space and return to the >runway at Whitman field, but we'll test the phugoid oscillations >during reentry." Campbell continued. "We'll make a low pass over >runway 36, rolling and looping in front of the crowd, then we'll make >a dead stick landing and coast right to the announcers stand just as >we taught our close personal friend Bob Hoover."
>"We have worked as a test pilot, stunt pilot, flight instructor >(CFI/A/I/ME/H), you name it... We fly fixed wing, rotorcraft, >single/multi-engine, gliders, balloons, ultralights -- Did I tell you >that we're a former world ultralight record-holder -- jets, warbirds, >antiques... the works in our turbulent thirty plus years as a test >pilot." Campbell explained. "This mission will be even more >challenging than flying relief missions in Ethiopa or serving as >Bodyguard to then Governor Reagan. I've heard from many EAA members >and aviation enthusiasts about this flight, and I believe that they >are just as excited about this as we are."
"We" had one "AJ 37 Viggen pilot" visiting an airport here in Sweden, taking about that he was a retired airforce pilot, it was some years ago before terrorist protection was popular, so he could visit the tower, he met a private pilot there from the local flying club, and was invited to fly in the C-172, after take off the private pilot banked 20 degree and the "Viggen" pilot got scared, so he returned to the safe ground with the now shaking passenger.
It doesn't take much to reveal a liar.
Another one was talking him self into piloting a Mitchell A 10? He lived but it was expensive for the owner that let him fly without seeing his licence.
> Aviation News Network - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 2005-04-01
> SPACESHIP ONE TO FLY AT OSHKOSH
> SpaceShip One, the world's first successful civilian-built spaceship, > will fly into space at AirVenture 2005.
> SpaceShip One twice flew into space with a pilot and ballast equal to > two passengers in September 2004, winning the Ten Million Dollar X > Prize. Plans had called for Mothership White Knight and SpaceShip One > to stop at AirVenture for public display prior to being put on display > at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.
> But in a startling change of plans, Designer Burt Rutan and EAA > President Tom Poberenzy announced that Spaceship One would make > another flight into space during AirVenture, this time with passengers > instead of ballast.
> "Spaceship One will be piloted by Aviation Journalist, Publisher and > Test Pilot Jim "Captain Zoom" Campbell." announced Rutan. "The > passengers will be Campbell's close personal friends Chuck Yeager and > Bob Hoover."
> "Yeager and Hoover were passed over in Astronaut selection 45 years > ago." said Poberenzy. "This trip into space is our way of making that > up to them."
> Campbell, who reminds everyone that "We're a graduate of the National > Test Pilot School," will also be taking his first actual trip into > space.
> "I'll pilot White Knight, since even Jim Campbell can't fly two > aircraft at the same time." said Mike Melvill, pilot of the SpaceShip > One's first flight into space. "We'll take off from Whitman field and > climb to nearly 50,000 feet before releasing SpaceShip One. Jim > Campbell will fire the rocket engine and pilot SpaceShip One to more > than 62 miles above the earth (328,000 feet) then glide back to land > at Whitman field."
> "With our vast Pilot In Command experience we could simultaneously > pilot both White Knight and SpaceShip One easily." said and obviously > excited Campbell. "We have flown more than a thousand different > aircraft, yet we're still snubbed by those Guinness Book people, and > we're uniquely qualified for this important mission."
> We plan to not only fly Spaceship One into space and return to the > runway at Whitman field, but we'll test the phugoid oscillations > during reentry." Campbell continued. "We'll make a low pass over > runway 36, rolling and looping in front of the crowd, then we'll make > a dead stick landing and coast right to the announcers stand just as > we taught our close personal friend Bob Hoover."
> "We have worked as a test pilot, stunt pilot, flight instructor > (CFI/A/I/ME/H), you name it... We fly fixed wing, rotorcraft, > single/multi-engine, gliders, balloons, ultralights -- Did I tell you > that we're a former world ultralight record-holder -- jets, warbirds, > antiques... the works in our turbulent thirty plus years as a test > pilot." Campbell explained. "This mission will be even more > challenging than flying relief missions in Ethiopa or serving as > Bodyguard to then Governor Reagan. I've heard from many EAA members > and aviation enthusiasts about this flight, and I believe that they > are just as excited about this as we are."
> Aviation News Network - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 2005-04-01
> SPACESHIP ONE TO FLY AT OSHKOSH
> SpaceShip One, the world's first successful civilian-built spaceship, > will fly into space at AirVenture 2005.
> SpaceShip One twice flew into space with a pilot and ballast equal to > two passengers in September 2004, winning the Ten Million Dollar X > Prize. Plans had called for Mothership White Knight and SpaceShip One > to stop at AirVenture for public display prior to being put on display > at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.
> But in a startling change of plans, Designer Burt Rutan and EAA > President Tom Poberenzy announced that Spaceship One would make > another flight into space during AirVenture, this time with passengers > instead of ballast.
> "Spaceship One will be piloted by Aviation Journalist, Publisher and > Test Pilot Jim "Captain Zoom" Campbell." announced Rutan. "The > passengers will be Campbell's close personal friends Chuck Yeager and > Bob Hoover."
> "Yeager and Hoover were passed over in Astronaut selection 45 years > ago." said Poberenzy. "This trip into space is our way of making that > up to them."
> Campbell, who reminds everyone that "We're a graduate of the National > Test Pilot School," will also be taking his first actual trip into > space.
> "I'll pilot White Knight, since even Jim Campbell can't fly two > aircraft at the same time." said Mike Melvill, pilot of the SpaceShip > One's first flight into space. "We'll take off from Whitman field and > climb to nearly 50,000 feet before releasing SpaceShip One. Jim > Campbell will fire the rocket engine and pilot SpaceShip One to more > than 62 miles above the earth (328,000 feet) then glide back to land > at Whitman field."
> "With our vast Pilot In Command experience we could simultaneously > pilot both White Knight and SpaceShip One easily." said and obviously > excited Campbell. "We have flown more than a thousand different > aircraft, yet we're still snubbed by those Guinness Book people, and > we're uniquely qualified for this important mission."
> We plan to not only fly Spaceship One into space and return to the > runway at Whitman field, but we'll test the phugoid oscillations > during reentry." Campbell continued. "We'll make a low pass over > runway 36, rolling and looping in front of the crowd, then we'll make > a dead stick landing and coast right to the announcers stand just as > we taught our close personal friend Bob Hoover."
> "We have worked as a test pilot, stunt pilot, flight instructor > (CFI/A/I/ME/H), you name it... We fly fixed wing, rotorcraft, > single/multi-engine, gliders, balloons, ultralights -- Did I tell you > that we're a former world ultralight record-holder -- jets, warbirds, > antiques... the works in our turbulent thirty plus years as a test > pilot." Campbell explained. "This mission will be even more > challenging than flying relief missions in Ethiopa or serving as > Bodyguard to then Governor Reagan. I've heard from many EAA members > and aviation enthusiasts about this flight, and I believe that they > are just as excited about this as we are."
Aye aye
Took some tough negotiating But finally they were allowed to park their whats'it next to my B17 replica
>UHHHH I think you mean military vehicle. Government vehicles still need >license (both plane and pilot!).
As far as I know, "public use" aircraft (and their pilots) are exempt from the FAA requirements. Agency *policy* may require pilots and aircraft to hold appropriate FAA documents, but policies can be altered.
Back when the Shuttle was first launched, I seem to recall something about the FAA ruling that it had no jurisdiction in such a case...basically, transitory use of the airspace. NOTAM it, and they were satisfied.
> As far as I know, "public use" aircraft (and their pilots) are exempt from the > FAA requirements. Agency *policy* may require pilots and aircraft to hold > appropriate FAA documents, but policies can be altered.
> Back when the Shuttle was first launched, I seem to recall something about the > FAA ruling that it had no jurisdiction in such a case...basically, transitory > use of the airspace. NOTAM it, and they were satisfied.
> But who knows....
Ron,
You're right about public use aircraft, the Forest Service issues its own pilot licences though all of our company's pilots also had FAA certificates. That wasn't true for all companies. The Forest Service also inspected all of our aircraft and ALL FARs were optional. That's NOT a good thing when it comes to duty times and crew rest. That made for some really miserable days and nights. The Marshal Service, on the other hand, required FAA certificates but understood the sensitive nature of our passengers sometimes required some deviation from the rules.
If you think the Shuttle isn't a military craft, you should try and dig out the spec mission that sized the payload bay.
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:31:18 -0800, "Richard Isakson" <r...@whidbey.com> wrote: >If you think the Shuttle isn't a military craft, you should try and dig out >the spec mission that sized the payload bay.
The sad thing is, much of the shuttle requirements were based on military requirements...but the Air Force pulled out of the program in the '80s, including mothballing the brand-new Vandenberg shuttle launch complex.
This is a good thing for AirVenture as they are slowly strangling on their falsified attendance figures... It will bring a suplus of visitors this year, heck I might even go to look at Burt's handi work...
OTOH, it's gonna take a lot of new ticket sales to fund all the salaries and retirement bennys that are being sucked from the AirVenture feed trough. (a simple statement of fact, not a political manifesto)
Dan Nafe wrote: > In article <1112731049.022318.96...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, > fredfigh...@spamcop.net wrote:
> > Richard Isakson wrote: > > > ...
> > > If you think the Shuttle isn't a military craft, you should try and > > dig out > > > the spec mission that sized the payload bay.
> > The bay was sized so as to be capable of deploying the HST, which > > supposedly just happens to have the same aperture as a KH-12.
> Or perhaps it was the other way around...
The original LST ws planned to be 120 inches aperture and scaled down to be shuttle deployed.
That doesn't clarify the issue. Supposedly nobody knows what happened to the 'spare' HST optics fabricated by Kodak. One supposes they went into a KH-12.
fredfigh...@spamcop.net wrote: > Dan Nafe wrote: > > In article <1112731049.022318.96...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, > > fredfigh...@spamcop.net wrote:
> > > Richard Isakson wrote: > > > > ...
> > > > If you think the Shuttle isn't a military craft, you should try > and > > > dig out > > > > the spec mission that sized the payload bay.
> > > The bay was sized so as to be capable of deploying the HST, which > > > supposedly just happens to have the same aperture as a KH-12.
> > Or perhaps it was the other way around...
> The original LST ws planned to be 120 inches aperture and scaled down > to be shuttle deployed.
> That doesn't clarify the issue. Supposedly nobody knows what happened > to the 'spare' HST optics fabricated by Kodak. One supposes they went > into a KH-12.
> The original LST ws planned to be 120 inches aperture and scaled down > to be shuttle deployed.
> That doesn't clarify the issue. Supposedly nobody knows what happened > to the 'spare' HST optics fabricated by Kodak. One supposes they went > into a KH-12.
I've always wondered if putting the wrong mirror in Hubble was an accident. Is it possible that they launched a black program right in front of our eyes?
> <fredfigh...@spamcop.net> wrote ... > > The original LST ws planned to be 120 inches aperture and scaled down > > to be shuttle deployed.
> > That doesn't clarify the issue. Supposedly nobody knows what happened > > to the 'spare' HST optics fabricated by Kodak. One supposes they went > > into a KH-12.
> I've always wondered if putting the wrong mirror in Hubble was an accident. > Is it possible that they launched a black program right in front of our > eyes?
> Rich
I'm not as up with all of the satelite stuff, but am interested. What is the HST optics, and what does that have to do with Hubble, and a black project, right in front of our eyes? -- Jim in NC
> I'm not as up with all of the satelite stuff, but am interested. What is > the HST optics, and what does that have to do with Hubble, and a black > project, right in front of our eyes?
Jim
HST means Hubble Space Telescope. After the one point five billion dollar Hubble was launched it was discovered that that it couldn't see the stars very well. An investigation discovered that the wrong mirror had been built into the spacecraft. Like they've got large mirrors laying around everywhere and this was a simple mistake. Oops. Or was it a mistake? The company that made the mirror also made mirrors for US spy satellites. Could it be "the wrong mirror" was installed on purpose so that the hubble became a replacement spy satellite?
> Hubble was launched it was discovered that that it couldn't see the stars > very well.
Yep, I'm up with that.
An investigation discovered that the wrong mirror had been built
> into the spacecraft. Like they've got large mirrors laying around > everywhere and this was a simple mistake.
It was my understanding that a rather stupid mathmatic mistake had been commited. Is that wrong?
Oops. Or was it a mistake? The
> company that made the mirror also made mirrors for US spy satellites. Could > it be "the wrong mirror" was installed on purpose so that the hubble became > a replacement spy satellite?
> Rich
But would the "wrong mirror" in the Hubble be able to focus on terra firma? I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
Are spy satelites mirrors as large as the Hubble's? -- Jim in NC
Richard Isakson wrote: > <fredfigh...@spamcop.net> wrote ... > > The original LST ws planned to be 120 inches aperture and scaled down > > to be shuttle deployed.
> > That doesn't clarify the issue. Supposedly nobody knows what happened > > to the 'spare' HST optics fabricated by Kodak. One supposes they went > > into a KH-12.
> I've always wondered if putting the wrong mirror in Hubble was an accident. > Is it possible that they launched a black program right in front of our > eyes?
ONe summer at Stellaphane (Amatuer telescope makers' convention) I heard a talk by the Kodak guy. He said that they tried to talk NASA into having a contest--test both sets of optics and use the best of the two in the Space Telescope. Nasa declined (one presumes that would involve making changes to the existing contract with Perkin Elmer(?) which they would probably fight as they would not want to risk losing the good publicity they'd get from THEIR optics being in the Space Telescope. Boy did that work out well for them!
So, no to your theory. The contract Kodak won was for designated back up optics from the moment the RFP was released.
Unless of course somehow the Kodak and PE optics were swapped. But that would imply that the fault was discovered befor the optics went to be assembled--in which case one hopes they'd have been fixed.
> > I'm not as up with all of the satelite stuff, but am interested. What is > > the HST optics, and what does that have to do with Hubble, and a black > > project, right in front of our eyes?
> Jim
> HST means Hubble Space Telescope. After the one point five billion dollar > Hubble was launched it was discovered that that it couldn't see the stars > very well. An investigation discovered that the wrong mirror had been built > into the spacecraft. Like they've got large mirrors laying around > everywhere and this was a simple mistake. Oops. Or was it a
mistake?
No, they did not put the wrong mirror into the Space Telescope (It wasn't named for Hubble until after launch). During figuring and testing of the primary mirror one of the optical elements in the test aparatus was installed backwards. This introduced spherical aberration into the test aparatus, and so the primary mirror was figured to remove that same amount of spherical aberration from the ensemble, which means the primary was figured WITH spherical aberration that compensated for that in the test aparatus.
The > company that made the mirror also made mirrors for US spy satellites. Could > it be "the wrong mirror" was installed on purpose so that the hubble became > a replacement spy satellite?
No. PE (or whoever it was) got the contract in part because of their expertise in making large mirrors for spy satellites. However the people who were experienced in that work were not allowed to work on teh Space Telescope mirror so it was made by less experienced people.
Kodak won the contract to make a second set of optics, a back up set to be used if something happened to the set being made by the primary contractor. AFAAK, Kodak did a good job.
That second set has supposedly disappeared and the rumor is it was used in an KH-12, the issue was moot by then as it was certainly never possible to replace the primary mirror in the HST on-orbit.
Unless Kodak screwed up and the mirros were switched so that it IS the Kodak mirror that is in the HST AND NASA decided to just use the mirror known to be defective instead of having it refigured.
OR, I suppose, unless PE was working on a KH-12 mirror at the same time and again, switched them and didn't bother to fix the bad optics.
Remember, the optical elements were fully completed at the contractor facility and then shipped to NASA for assembly into the ST. It's not like the whole telescope was made at PE and then inserted into a satellite.
Prior to assembly of the Space Telescope, re-figuring of the primary mirror would not have been a major task. After assembly, swapping mirrors was not feasible.
So the "mirrors were swapped" theories are a non-starter. Not a problem for the run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorist.
