I just drove back down from Mojave. While I was up there, people who were watching the news might actually have a better idea than I do of the actual flight results, because I couldn't get into the press conference, and none of the reporters who did were talking until they'd filed.

There's some discussion going on in this post that the damage to the vehicle may have been more severe than thought. If the fuselage literally "buckled," that's a Very Bad thing, and I'm not sure what it means except that either their design is wrong, or its execution is. Of course, there was damage on the last flight as well, and they flew this one. I don't know when they were planning to announce the Ansari X-Prize attempt, but I suspect that if they'd had a picture perfect flight today, it would have come sooner than it will now. I'm betting on at least one more flight test before the official attempt, particularly since it seemed to be underperforming as well (it barely achieved altitude, and it wasn't carrying the ballast to account for passengers).

More tweaking ahead. Of course the fact that it's tweakable is exactly the point of the program.

[Update a couple minutes later]

Kevin Murphy has a play by play.

[Another update a couple minutes later still]

Here's Leonard David's account based on the press conference.

[Late night update]

Jeff Foust has the best reporting on the flight that I've read so far.

ABC News had about 2 to 3 second view of the damage. It looked to be on the fairing that covered the nozzle, left side, two or three feet back from the end where the nozzle emerges. The normal curve of the fairing is horizontal, and in it was a vertical crease and buckle about 20 inches long. It looked more like it had resulted from bending forces along the crease, rather than impact or something. It did not look like it was a structural item, but an aerodynamic covering for the engine. Given that the "bang" occured on the way down, and that the fairing does not appear to be anchored at the back, a wild ass guess would be that there was a bit more flutter than anticipated.

Keep in mind I only got a flash look, am not an expert, so I may have completely misinterpreted what I saw.

What really made my hair curl was the first time I saw the "close" tape of the ignition, and there was such a strong and definate roll that for a second I thought Melvill was doing a vertical roll on the way out. But Burt wouldn't have picked anyone that crazy, and apparantly there was a control problem on ascent.

Here's a picture of the damage. Doesn't look too serious.

Alan Radecki has (as usual) some AWESOME photos posted from today. Here's the link:

http://www.mojavebooks.com/mhv/040621-1.htm

Good link, Dave. Those are very good pictures. I loved the line "This is what Mojave is all about - trains, planes, space ships and wind turbines!" When I see those pictures, I think, "This is the way the 21st century was SUPPOSED to look. These are the kind of things that were SUPPOSED to happen."

There's still a long way to go before this becomes an established business, and I've been disappointed too many times not to be very cautious, but a few years ago I didn't think this would happen. No matter what, this is real progress.

I'm betting the model 346 mentioned in Foust's article will be a larger model of SpaceShipOne, and they'll launch from a conventional (or fairly conventional) plane that can handle far more weight. I hope Rutan is right that they'll move on to orbital flight soon.

Good link, Dave. Those are very good pictures. I loved the line "This is what Mojave is all about - trains, planes, space ships and wind turbines!" When I see those pictures, I think, "This is the way the 21st century was SUPPOSED to look. These are the kind of things that were SUPPOSED to happen."

There's still a long way to go before this becomes an established business, and I've been disappointed too many times not to be very cautious, but a few years ago I didn't think this would happen. No matter what, this is real progress.

I'm betting the model 346 mentioned in Foust's article will be a larger model of SpaceShipOne, and they'll launch from a conventional (or fairly conventional) plane that can handle far more weight. I hope Rutan is right that they'll move on to orbital flight soon.

Sorry about the message dupe ... I was having a connection problem right when I tried to post.

NPR had a report on the launch yesterday on All Thigns Considered. It included an interview with Alex Roland. Rand, you might want to comment on this interview, since he was being rather negative and (IMO) inaccurate. For example, he used the $20 M figure to dismiss the idea of widespread appeal of suborbital space tourism (never mind this is the development cost, not the per-passenger cost of an operational system.)

The NPR story is here.

I saw a BBC evening news story later on, and when he spoke about possibility of widespread space tourism the reporter said something on the order of "the prices for such trips will remain in high hundreds of thousands for many decades to come".
I wanna hire this guy as my personal investment advisor .. NOT

Misunderstanding the relationship between expenditure and investment, money and wealth, is at the root of the NPR worldview.

I would expect that the $20 Million figure includes at least design work on Project 346, and also that the White Knight, or at least its design, has the capacity to launch the larger ship. I already speculated, in the comments somewhere last night, that a longer plane with more fuel capacity has been part of the package.

Alex Roland, saying something inaccurate and disingenuous?

I'm shocked, shocked!

I may do a published piece on ignorance about costing issues, even among so-called "experts" who should know better.

Too bad these press idiots couldn't figure out you couldn't change out all the toilets and urinals at JSC for 20 milllion dollars.

From what I can gather from the various articles and other media, the damaged fairing is a rather minor problem. THE problem is the un-commanded roll(s)as these, (as was the previous un-commanded pitch problem) never cropped up in ANY of the simulations or design runs.

So far as I can tell they are pretty satisfied with the shape of the ship over-all.

Randy

Hey Paul, I followed your link, but the audio didn't have Alex Roland or any interview at all. It was just a wrap-up piece about the SpaceShipOne flight - reporter voice only. The audio is also just a couple of minutes long. I'm not an NPR listener so I don't know from personal experience - is 'All Things Considered' a lengthy program? Maybe what NPR has posted as audio is just a piece of the program you heard? Any enlightenment appreciated.

Hmm. I didn't listen to that link -- I had assumed it included both the news piece and Roland's interview (which immediately followed it on the air).

Sorry for the confusion. I don't know where his interview is online (or even if it is online.)

Via slashdot, this New Scientist article goes over both the fairing failure, and the roll problem:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996052

Rutan says they won't go for the pair of attempts needed for the X-prize until they figure out the problems, but it doesn't seem like they are unsolvable. IMO, this was still a great achievement, and they will get it done.

Ok, I think this is the audio of the Roland interview. I didn't listen to it, but it is described as such.