In the second test flight in as many months Virgin Galactic’s commercial spaceship, SpaceShipTwo (SS2), VSS Unity has flown higher and faster than ever before.
During the flight, Chief Pilot Dave Mackay and co-pilot Michael “Sooch” Masucci took the spacecraft to an altitude of 295,007ft (89,918 m) and reached a speed of Mach 3.04 (2,255 mph)
The latest test takes Sir Richard Branson’s project a step closer to its goal of introducing commercial sub-orbital space flight. This refers to spaceflight in which the spacecraft reaches outer space, but doesn’t reach an altitude where it orbits the Earth. The company has previously said that it hopes to begin commercial flights by the end of 2019. So far, around 700 people have signed up to take a ride on the spacecraft.
The reusable spaceplane was launched from the Mojave space port in California aboard the company’s giant composite carrier aircraft WhiteKnightTwo. It was released from the carrier craft at an altitude of 44,000 feet (13411 metres) before being catapulted 55 miles above the Earth by VSS Unity’s powerful hybrid rocket engine.
During the flight, the crew enjoyed several minutes of weightlessness while the pilots “feathered” the spaceship in preparation for a Mach 2.7 re-entry.
The feathering system, designed by the engineer Burt Rutan, was inspired by the badminton shuttlecock, and works by changing the configuration of the spacecraft’s aerodynamic structure to create drag and slow the vehicle down as it returns to earth.
The glide back home was followed by a smooth runway landing and a rapturous reception from the crowd on the flight line, which included staff and some of Virgin Galactic’s future astronaut customers.
The flight marked the first time that the rocket had carried a third crew member: Beth Moses, Virgin Galactic’s Chief Astronaut Instructor, who became the first woman and the first non-pilot to fly on board a commercial spaceship.
Commenting on the flight Chief Pilot Dave Mackay, a former RAF test pilot said: “Beth, Sooch and I just enjoyed a pretty amazing flight which was beyond anything any of us has ever experienced. It was thrilling yet smooth and nicely controlled throughout with a view at the top, of the Earth from space, which exceeded all our expectations. I am incredibly proud of my crew and of the amazing teams at Virgin Galactic and The Spaceship Company for providing a vehicle and an operation which means we can fly confidently and safely. For the three of us today this was the fulfilment of lifelong ambitions, but paradoxically is also just the beginning of an adventure which we can’t wait to share with thousands of others.”
Sir Richard Branson said: “Flying the same vehicle safely to space and back twice in a little over two months, while at the same time expanding the flight envelope, is testament to the unique capability we have built up within the Virgin Galactic and The Spaceship Company organisations. I am immensely proud of everyone involved.”
Good stuff! This is a small stone’s throw away from orbital flight, I think.
Congratulations to the crew on their flight and safe return. It’s worth noting that as well as altitude, the sub-orbital design permits a lower velocity (Mach 3 vs Mach 25 to low Earth orbit) and this explains how the innovative feathering system functions without burning away … much less kinetic energy (½mv² of course 🙂 ) to dissipate as heat
It is a sub-orbital flight, not orbital. For that you need the mach 25 (orbital velocity) that you mentioned in your posting. At mach 3, unless there is some force, such as lift from aerofoils or upward thrust from a rocket or other motor, the machine will inevitably return to earth .
Is space tourism really the way we want to use Earth’s resources?
Whilst I applaud the technological advances involved in this project I hope it will be used for something better than just a money making scheme ferrying rich people up to space and back again.
Lets make that 22 Cents.
Right on, 20 – space tourism only if no CO2 emitted, or FF burnt –
For the future it is essential to lower the cost of space exploration and this is a good method using a commercial company.
The article states that SS2 doesn’t reach an altitude at which it orbits the Earth. It’s not *Altitude* that causes an object to orbit but *speed*. It’s high enough; it’s just not fast enough.
It’s not just about speed…if it had speed in the vertical it would just carry on out into deep space. To go into orbit, it must have speed relative to the circumference of the globe.
Basically, horizontal (coaxial) speed must be such that as the ship falls back to earth the earth keeps falling away from it due to its curvature. So, a spaceship in orbit is actually falling all the time, but it’s moving so fast that the earth is not there!
Hope that all makes sense!
In energy terms this is about 3% of the way to orbit.
For a suborbital flight at height 90 km and velocity mach 3 (circa 800 m/s) the energy is around 1.2 MJ / kg
For an object in low earth orbit at height 200 km and velocity 7970 m/s energy is around 32 MJ / kg
A photo taken in Skye in today’s newspapers is said to show SS2 in flight (somewhere over California I imagine) . Is that feasible?
On a Flat Earth it would be. Maybe those crazies are right after all?!!!
Does it have the burn trail behind it? if so, yes, its possible during its accent.
I can’t see how it would be possible. The ISS is around 4 times higher up than the altitude Virgin SS2 achieves, yet it doesn’t appear over the horizon until it’s half way over the Atlantic.
Very confused.. you can not compare the two, ISS is in orbit, virgin is not, just staright up and down, it does not have to appear over any horizon.
OK look at it another way, when the ISS is 200 miles directly above the western USA you can’t see it from the UK due to the curvature of the planet, so how could it be possible to see SS2 from Skye at only 50 miles altitude?
OK, so you are talking about Skye as in the Isle of Skye in Scotland?