Rocket Renaissance
The Ear of Private Spaceflight Is About to
Start Background Two years ago, people witnessed the
first space travel by SpaceShip One. Three people were involved in this flight:
Burt Rutan, who designed the craft, and Mike Melvill, who flew it--although they
were ably assisted by Paul Allen, one of the founders of Microsoft, who paid for
it. Certainly, people have long been known that manned spaceflight was possible.
What they showed was that it is not just a game for governments. Private
individuals can play, too. People involved Now, lots
of people want to join in, and most of them have just met up at the
International Space Development Conference in Los Angeles, to engage in that
mixture of camaraderie and competition that characterises the beginnings of a
new technology. And, as might be expected, they have two of the necessary
ingredients of success: ideas and money. First, the money. So
far, more than $1 billion is known to have been committed to building private
spaceships and the infrastructure to support them. For example, Mr.. Rum’ s
follow-up vehicle, SpaceShip Two, is expected to cost its backers, Virgin
Galactic, $240m for a fleet of five. The spaceport in New Mexico from which
these are intended to fly will account for another $225m, although New Mexico’s
government is planning to raise this money itself. These are not
small sums, of course. On the other hand, Virgin Galactic has already banked
$14m of deposits towards the $200,000 fare from people who want to travel on
SpaceShip Two, even though it has yet to be built, let alone flown.
All this suggests that spaceflight, if not exactly entering the age of the
common man, is at least entering the age of the moderately prosperous
enthusiast. For entrepreneurs, it is no longer necessary to have billions of
dollars to get into space; millions will now do. And for those who merely wish
to travel there, and have enough money in their bank account, reality is
favourable. Get started As with aircraft a century
ago, a lot of designs are competing with each other, and there is no certainty
about which will succeed. The initial goal is to build a "suborbital" vehicle.
This will not have to develop the tremendous speed needed to go into orbit
around the Earth. instead, it will travel briefly into space, offering a short
thrilling ride out of the atmosphere, a few minutes of weightlessness, and a
spectacular view of the planet from about 100kin. Four important criteria are
how you take off, what fuel you use, what your craft is made of, and how you
come back. Most people’s vision of a rocket launch is straight
up from the ground. But, of the five vehicles most likely to be developed, two
will actually be launched from the air. SpaceShip Two will be carded to high
altitude by a purpose-built aircraft known as Eve before its rocket motor is
ignited. And Explorer, a vehicle being designed by Space Adventures, will be
launched from the top of a high-altitude Russian research plane called the
M-55X, according to Eric Anderson, the firm’s president and chief
executive. As Dennis Jenkins, a consultant engineer at NASA,
America’s space agency, points out, this is similar to using a two-stage rocket
to get into space, with the aircraft acting as the first stage. However, a plane
offers several advantages over a throw-away booster rocket. First, it can be
used again. Second, it uses oxygen from the air, rather than having to carry its
own oxidant, which saves weight. Third, it is lifted by wings. That means the
atmosphere is an advantage, rather than a hindrance. All this means that the
spacecraft itself can be lighter and cheaper. Not everyone wants
to run two vehicles, though. Jeff Greason, president of XCOR Aerospace, a firm
based in Mojave, California, is developing a two-person, ground-launched
suborbital rocketplane called Xerus. Launching from the ground, says Mr.
Greason, is more difficult than air launching, but he reckons that in this case
it has significantly lower operating costs. Fuel choices
The second important design choice is the type of fuel. Unlike a jet
engine, a rocket carries its own oxidant (氧第剂). This is why it can operate in
space. Sometimes that oxidant is oxygen itself, in liquid form. In that case the
fuel, too, is usually liquid-either kerosene (煤油) or liquid hydrogen (氢) —and
the two liquids are stored in separate tanks until they meet in the rocket’s
combustion chamber. Alternatively, both fuel and oxidant are solid, and are
loaded pre-mixed, like the propellant of a firework rocket.
SpaceShip Two, though, follows the design of SpaceShip One and is powered
by a mixture of the two. The combustion chamber of a mixture is partly filled
with solid fuel but no oxidant. However, the fuel is coated round the inside of
the chamber, leaving a hole through the middle into which a liquid or gaseous
oxidant can be pumped, and out of which the exhaust emerges. In SpaceShip One,
the fuel was rubber and the oxidant a liquefied gas called nitrous oxide
(一氧化二氮). Proponents of mixture say they are safer than either
pure solid or pure liquid rockets. George Whittinghill, Virgin Galactic’s chief
technologist, says that they are safer than solid rockets because the flow of
oxidant can be controlled, and combustion halted, if there is a problem. Solid
rockets, like the fireworks they resemble, cannot be stopped until they run out
of fuel. On the other hand liquid-fuelled engines, though they can be shut down,
are complex and temperamental. As Mr. Whittinghill observes, "they have pumps,
seals, valves and lines everywhere, and there is a lot that potentially could go
wrong." All this rather irrates those working on liquid
propulsion. Richard Pournelle, head of investor relations at XCOR Aerospace,
says the comparison is unfair. Liquid propulsion is routine in rocketry while
hybrids are still rare. Numbers alone, therefore, mean that liquid-fuelled
rockets blow up more often. That, Mr. Pournelle argues, does not prove that they
are inherently unsafe. Chuck Lauer, vice- president of business development for
Rocketplane, another firm going down the liquid-fuelled route, agrees and argues
that kerosene is widely used as aviation fuel and nobody complains that it is
unsafe. It is only two years ago that people became aware of the fact that manned spaceflight was actually possible.