Here’s another good story about the upcoming flight, the X-Prize, and its implications, with an LA angle.

[Via Clark Lindsey]

Many X Prize competitors plan on making their millions in space tourism, even if they don

Here’s another good story about the upcoming flight, the X-Prize, and its implications, with an LA angle.

[Via Clark Lindsey]

Many X Prize competitors plan on making their millions in space tourism, even if they don

Here’s another good story about the upcoming flight, the X-Prize, and its implications, with an LA angle.

[Via Clark Lindsey]

Many X Prize competitors plan on making their millions in space tourism, even if they don

Michael Mealing has some interesting commentary (similar to what I might say if I had the time) to a conventional-wisdom article from James Burk. Yes, it is a fisking, but a gentle one, and a needed one.

I don’t know if I’ve mentioned this previously. I’ve been thinking it, but may have been too busy to post.

Here’s my theory on why they picked the solstice. It has nothing to do with the fact that it’s the solstice. I think that it’s because thirty days later is the thirty-fifth anniversary of the first moon landing. Burt (and perhaps Paul Allen) seem to be big on anniversaries.

[Update at 3:30 PM PDT]

Andrew Gray has an even better theory in comments:

Unless I’m miscounting, thirty days *less one*; isn’t Apollo 11 generally taken as being July 20th? (which is also the anniversary, I note, of the eventual recovery of Liberty Bell 7…)

But on that note, July 21, 1961 – Liberty Bell 7’s flight, being the second suborbital flight, might be considered not inappropriate as a date?

That aside, this does beg the question… what is in the two weeks after that, if he’s so keen on anniversaries? It’d be unusual to not have one for the second flight, if this is his plan as you suggest…

He’s right on the arithmetic–I forgot about the old “thirty days has September, April, June, and November.” And it would be an appropriate anniversary.

But as for the fourteen-day one, they would be foolish to wait fourteen days for the second attempt. They’ll do it as quickly as they can, so they have some margin in case they have weather or other problems. The first time you have the luxury of choosing an anniversary date, but the second one has to be driven solely by winning the prize.

Clark Lindsey has some details of an Aviation Week (subscription required, so no link) article on the planned SpaceShip One flight in the latest RLV News. Well worth a read.

Here’s a UPI story about alt-space. The writer, Irene Mona Klotz (of whom I hadn’t previously heard), seems to get it. It’s great to see this kind of coverage in the mainstream press.

What’s even better is that it’s the first in a series on the emerging suborbital industry.

Here’s a UPI story about alt-space. The writer, Irene Mona Klotz (of whom I hadn’t previously heard), seems to get it. It’s great to see this kind of coverage in the mainstream press.

What’s even better is that it’s the first in a series on the emerging suborbital industry.

Here’s a UPI story about alt-space. The writer, Irene Mona Klotz (of whom I hadn’t previously heard), seems to get it. It’s great to see this kind of coverage in the mainstream press.

What’s even better is that it’s the first in a series on the emerging suborbital industry.

Yes, Andrew, it’s just for one day, unfortunately.

And I assume that this means that the NASA briefing in response to the Aldridge report, which was supposed to occur on that day, will be postponed until Monday?

[Update]

A couple commenters aren’t reading my post carefully. I’m not referring to the Aldridge Report release, which is scheduled for Thursday. I’m referring to the NASA response to it, which was scheduled for Friday. Follow the link.

[Update late afternoon]

As another commenter points out, the whole thing has been delayed until next week.