<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Prototype of reusable suborbital spaceplane from new startup completes five flights	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/prototype-of-reusable-suborbital-spaceplane-from-new-startup-completes-five-flights/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/prototype-of-reusable-suborbital-spaceplane-from-new-startup-completes-five-flights/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2021 18:04:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: John E Bowen		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/prototype-of-reusable-suborbital-spaceplane-from-new-startup-completes-five-flights/#comment-1181167</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John E Bowen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2021 18:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://behindtheblack.com/?p=78802#comment-1181167</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Observations and questions.

&quot;It&#039;s currently equipped with surrogate jet engines, but these will be replaced by a liquid-fuel rocket engine, which is now undergoing static tests.&quot;

OK, investors may invest in whatever stage of development they choose, but I&#039;d be focusing on how that engine is coming along. With a great body and no engine, you got nothin&#039;. With a great engine, the rest of the rocket is still rocket science, but doable; plus, if the rocket as a whole fails, you still have an engine to sell, and that&#039;s a business model. Just look at Blue Origin, eh, maybe.

Another question I&#039;d ask, is this the right engine? After years of following Bob, and also Doug Messier of Parabolic Arc, with their look at Virgin Galactic&#039;s SpaceShipTwo, I&#039;d say sometimes the answer is No, despite the years of development.

I&#039;m not saying peroxide + kerosene is bad, just that it is different, and the company needs to prove its point. And the smallsat launcher dynamic may well be different. Fuel/oxidizer combinations may work well in small launchers that do not scale up well or seem needlessly expensive for large vehicles. IMHO, for small vehicles, design complexity and reliability are more important concerns, so the designs will look different, but the small launcher company may still succeed. Look at Rocketlab. Carbon fiber construction is pretty expensive, per kilo, but they&#039;ve still made a go of it. Firefly Alpha is also, if I remember correctly.

Changing tack: so, Dawn Aerospace&#039;s competitor is Virgin Orbit. Launch from where you like, and still get an orbit you can live with. Virgin Orbit, with help and advice from their buddies in the Virgin Group, picks 747 as their &quot;first stage.&quot; They may succeed, as a business. Dawn Aerospace has to design an upper stage, presumably some kind of normal looking rocket, and they have to design their first stage, an entirely new aircraft, capable of, what, Mach 4? Well, that seems a challenge for a young startup. Perhaps I&#039;m missing something. Perhaps the winged vehicle releases a two stage rocket, like the 747, and so doesn&#039;t need to reach high speeds itself.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Observations and questions.</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s currently equipped with surrogate jet engines, but these will be replaced by a liquid-fuel rocket engine, which is now undergoing static tests.&#8221;</p>
<p>OK, investors may invest in whatever stage of development they choose, but I&#8217;d be focusing on how that engine is coming along. With a great body and no engine, you got nothin&#8217;. With a great engine, the rest of the rocket is still rocket science, but doable; plus, if the rocket as a whole fails, you still have an engine to sell, and that&#8217;s a business model. Just look at Blue Origin, eh, maybe.</p>
<p>Another question I&#8217;d ask, is this the right engine? After years of following Bob, and also Doug Messier of Parabolic Arc, with their look at Virgin Galactic&#8217;s SpaceShipTwo, I&#8217;d say sometimes the answer is No, despite the years of development.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not saying peroxide + kerosene is bad, just that it is different, and the company needs to prove its point. And the smallsat launcher dynamic may well be different. Fuel/oxidizer combinations may work well in small launchers that do not scale up well or seem needlessly expensive for large vehicles. IMHO, for small vehicles, design complexity and reliability are more important concerns, so the designs will look different, but the small launcher company may still succeed. Look at Rocketlab. Carbon fiber construction is pretty expensive, per kilo, but they&#8217;ve still made a go of it. Firefly Alpha is also, if I remember correctly.</p>
<p>Changing tack: so, Dawn Aerospace&#8217;s competitor is Virgin Orbit. Launch from where you like, and still get an orbit you can live with. Virgin Orbit, with help and advice from their buddies in the Virgin Group, picks 747 as their &#8220;first stage.&#8221; They may succeed, as a business. Dawn Aerospace has to design an upper stage, presumably some kind of normal looking rocket, and they have to design their first stage, an entirely new aircraft, capable of, what, Mach 4? Well, that seems a challenge for a young startup. Perhaps I&#8217;m missing something. Perhaps the winged vehicle releases a two stage rocket, like the 747, and so doesn&#8217;t need to reach high speeds itself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jeff Wright		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/prototype-of-reusable-suborbital-spaceplane-from-new-startup-completes-five-flights/#comment-1180810</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Wright]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2021 05:42:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://behindtheblack.com/?p=78802#comment-1180810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Winged spaceflight needs a lot of love...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Winged spaceflight needs a lot of love&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: V-Man		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/prototype-of-reusable-suborbital-spaceplane-from-new-startup-completes-five-flights/#comment-1180564</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[V-Man]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2021 19:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://behindtheblack.com/?p=78802#comment-1180564</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The engines at the back look like standard R/C jet turbines, which are about a foot long. I&#039;ve seen larger and faster models on the various R/C forums I follow.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The engines at the back look like standard R/C jet turbines, which are about a foot long. I&#8217;ve seen larger and faster models on the various R/C forums I follow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Questioner		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/prototype-of-reusable-suborbital-spaceplane-from-new-startup-completes-five-flights/#comment-1180549</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Questioner]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2021 18:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://behindtheblack.com/?p=78802#comment-1180549</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Yes, it is a large R/C controlled model aircraft.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, it is a large R/C controlled model aircraft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
