Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Da Vinci Project Postpones X-Prize Attempt

michael posted more than 9 years ago | from the life-insurance-not-paid-up dept.

Space 109

brainstyle writes "To some people this won't come as much of a shock: the Da Vinci Project's inaugural launch has been delayed. I'm a Canuck, so I'm rooting for these guys, but it always felt a bit iffy. The Canadian Arrow team seems to be doing things a bit more intelligently, so if any Canadian launch works, I'd bet on that one."

cancel ×

109 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The Da Vinci Post. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344547)

A New York Times First Seller.

Hmm (5, Funny)

kundor (757951) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344556)

I wouldn't put too much stock in Canadian Arrow. The first picture on their home page apparently shows a giant soda cup drowning in the ocean.

Re:Hmm (-1)

Rob Carr (780861) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344687)

The Canadian Arrow is a great rocket, but availability [discountrocketry.com] will be a problem if they hope to win the X Prize. Hopefully they already bought theirs.

Re:Hmm (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344713)

the discountrocketry.com has some really anoying spyware. Please mod down.

Re:Hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10345341)

Forget being moded... someone took the site down =)

Re:Hmm (1)

Rob Carr (780861) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346283)

the discountrocketry.com has some really anoying spyware.

I buy from them occasionally. I just reran Ad Aware and Spybot - neither reports that I have anything.

Two questions: what spyware do they have and what do I need to detect it? (I'm running Firefox for a browser - it may simply be that I didn't see it as a result.

My apologies to all.

Re:Hmm (1)

Rob Carr (780861) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346370)

the discountrocketry.com has some really anoying spyware.

I did not realize at the time I posted my message that Kevin Funk, the owner of Discount Rocketry, had passed away. [google.com] I chose Kevin's site because he'd been a fine person to deal with. I have not been able to contact whoever is taking care of the last business of Discount Rocketry, but I doubt that Kevin would have used spyware on his site.

On the other hand, it would surprise me that someone would take advantage of his passing to sneak something malicious onto his site.

Again, I apologize to anyone who was attacked because of my posting the URL.

Re:Hmm (2, Funny)

xmas2003 (739875) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344712)

Lets just hope they don't end up on the Splatometer [slashdot.org]

Hmm... (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346365)

...and double-Hmmm.... from the original post:

I'm a Canuck, so I'm rooting for these guys

Here in Australia, root has a different meaning, but suffice to say we do it for fun. :-)

And when we don't win? (5, Interesting)

rocjoe71 (545053) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344572)

Since it's just as likely as not that a Canadian team won't win, what's to encourage these teams to carry on developing their space programs? With or without an X-Prize, it would still be worthwhile to have a space program we could call our own.

Re:And when we don't win? (5, Informative)

brainstyle (752879) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344626)

There's the annual X Prize Cup [space.com] which will hopefully give a number of teams motivation to keep working on what they're doing. Anyways, I doubt that many of the teams would quit just because the prize was won... I mean, I think they all just want to get into space, and they're closer now than they've ever been (even if they're still a ways off).

Re:And when we don't win? (4, Insightful)

Nos. (179609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344678)

Not only that, but I think private industry is watching all the top contenders pretty seriously. I'm sure companies like Boeing and Airbus are watching this and dreaming of selling tickets to orbit the Earth a few times.

Re:And when we don't win? (4, Insightful)

Buran (150348) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344874)

And did we quit crossing the Atlantic because Lindbergh won the Orteig prize and no money was left?

No.

This isn't going away either.

Re:And when we don't win? (2, Insightful)

kormoc (122955) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344985)

Tho most of the population back then wanted to be able to cross the atlantic themselves. I'd venture to say most people now a days is rather apathic about space at best. There are lots who are down right hostle towards space flight. It's not quite the same..

Re:And when we don't win? (2, Insightful)

Buran (150348) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345121)

I know a lot of people who are apathetic about air travel, or scared of it (and won't listen when I explain that cars are far more dangerous, yet they have cars!) ... and yet we still have aviation.

It doesn't matter if there are disinterested people as long as there are enough interested people.

Re:And when we don't win? (1)

kormoc (122955) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345233)

Sure, but I'd bet more of the population was for air travel when it was a emerging tech then is for space travel now. I'm just questioning if we have the critical mindshare as a culture to do this yet or if it's going to be years down the road yet.

Re:And when we don't win? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10345284)

Actually, there was a great deal of hostility.

People opposed airplanes on religious grounds. If God had meant for humans to fly (etc).

An oldtimer I know used to tell the story of some of her neighbors who told her she was going to Hell because she flew from the midwest to California on an early commercial flight. They were evidently serious, too.

Then again, that was in a little town. Meanwhile, in the cities, the modernist movement was all about cool tech and transportation.

Re:And when we don't win? (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346380)

The prize was not for a flight across the atlantic it was for a nonstop flight from NY to Paris. People had crossed the atlantic before Lindbergh. What people do not seem to remeber is that air travel did not take off per say until the goverments got involved. Yes it was airmail that started civil really got air travel going. Including Lindbergh flight. He made his living as an airmail pilot.

Re:And when we don't win? (1)

RALE007 (445837) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346485)

Why would aircraft manufacturers sell tickets for a space flight? If Boing or Airbus became involved in space tourism, I'm thinking they'd stick to their core business model of designing and building their own vehicles. I'm pretty sure they're not dreaming of shifting their entire business model to become ticketing agents in the space tourism industry.

Re:And when we don't win? (4, Informative)

shawn(at)fsu (447153) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344672)

I think the encouragement is that they put a lot of effort and money in to it already. In many competitions you don't stop because someone else one you keep going to prove that you can finish, like marathons and climbing Mt Everest. Granted you wont get as much publicity or notoriety as the first team to do it but you will still have done it. I really don't think that most of these teams are doing it for the money I think they are doing it because some one put out a challenge.

Re:And when we don't win? (2, Interesting)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344782)

Most of the X-Prize entries don't really lead directly to a "space program". The designs would have serious problems scaling up for orbital launches. (The X-Prize is an excellent showcase and proof-of-concept for the idea of cheap private launches with fast turn-around time.)

However I'm sure all the designers have folders full of ideas for what they'd like to do next if there's more capital available. Sort of like Wernher Von Braun and his plans for trans-Atlantic bomb^w^w Moon-rockets and space-stations.

Re:And when we don't win? (2, Informative)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344813)

Since it's just as likely as not that a Canadian team won't win, what's to encourage these teams to carry on developing their space programs?

Well, the Canadian Arrow team is planning on developing an Extreme Skydiving [canadianarrow.com] industry.

Re:And when we don't win? (2, Funny)

plog (816386) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344848)

Northern lights reach down
to pull us up

shifting patterns reflected
on the purity of snow
will be our solace, eh

we are already on top of the world

A better Canadian Haiku (1)

jeff.paulsen (6195) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345405)

Maple leaves fall, eh?
Molson from state liquor store
Worker's Paradise

I have a fever ... (-1, Troll)

airrage (514164) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344576)

I have fever and the only prescription is MORE COWBELL. I mean your gonna want that COWBELL. If Bruce Dickenson says MORE COWBELL then I think we ought to listen to Bruce and give him what he wants MORE COWBELL. Really try to explore this space with your COWBELL, really let loose. Seriously, love that COWBELL.

Until it gets canceled (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344582)

"The Canadian Arrow team seems to be doing things a bit more intelligently, so if any Canadian launch works, I'd bet on that one."

Except that it would probably get canceled [wikipedia.org] right after its first test launch. :)

Its not even a race any more (-1, Troll)

steak (145650) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344601)

scaled composites has this thing locked. "write this down...M...A...R...S...mars bitches, thats where were heading."

Cheer them on (4, Funny)

nizo (81281) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344605)

Also don't forget to remind them about all the beer they could buy with the X-prize money.

Re:Cheer them on (1)

mark1gti (102573) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346194)

I hope Spaceship One is first, but I hope the Canadian effort is successful too. Best of luck to whomever wins. Here's hoping both make it into space and back in one piece with lots of smiles and cheers on landing.

overheard on launch day (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344609)

4...3...2...1...Take off eh?

Seconds later... (1)

shigelojoe (590080) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344926)

"Oh, what's this all aboot!?!?! The gosh-darned ignition doohickey won't work! Guess I owe Dan Akyroyd a tooney and a Labatt Blue!"

Re:overheard on launch day (1)

HumanTorch (568372) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345203)

That's the funniest thing I've heard all week!

Re:overheard on launch day (1)

Drakonian (518722) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345411)

Damn, I hope that is sarcsam. The Canadian "eh?" cliche gets modded up despite the total lack of humour.

Re:overheard on launch day (1)

ppanon (16583) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346378)

It's more than just the "eh?". It's the whole phrase. Now take off you hoser, eh?

Re:overheard on launch day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10346393)

Of COURSE it's sarcasm. You don't HEAR /. posts, unless you use a screenreader and/or have synthesia*

*This post was not meant to offend the blind or people who have synthesia.

Re:overheard on launch day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10346441)

4...3...2...1...Take off eh?

Wonder if they'll get Geddy Lee to do the countdown...

I Hereby Invoke (1)

dupper (470576) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344620)

Godwin's Law [canadianarrow.com] !

(Yeah, yeah, I know the corollary.)

Canadian Arrow...? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344625)

I'd never heard of the Canadian Arrow before it was mentioned on /. [slashdot.org] a while back. I can't find the answer on their webpage, so I'll ask if anyone knows: was the name "Canadian Arrow" chosen with the Canadian Avro Arrow [www.exn.ca] in mind?

If so, that would be cool. If not, I hope it's a happy coincidence and not a prophetic one. Just don't let "US" steal the idea this time, guys.

Free flatscreens. [tinyurl.com] Proof here. [freeipodguide.com]

Re:Canadian Arrow...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344719)

They were going to call it the Aero, but the chocolate bar sponsorship never happened.

Re:Canadian Arrow...? (1)

erick99 (743982) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344746)

Too late: All of your name are belong to us. Signed, The U.S.

Based on German technology (3, Informative)

Buran (150348) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344928)

The Canadian Arrow is a modified A-4/V-2 missile which incorporates some of the ideas that von Braun had for his system back in the 1940s but never was able to try before his government was no longer funding him. (He dropped the V-2 work after the late 1940s to build his next rocket, Redstone.)

Canadian Arrow spacecraft in launch configuration [canadianarrow.com]

V-2 systems diagram [wikipedia.org]

And the interior is A-4/V-2 based as well:

Canadian Arrow engine [canadianarrow.com]

A-4 components during production before installation of outer skin [wikipedia.org]

In addition to this, the photo of the landed return capsule is very reminiscent of the Gemini program.

CA descent capsule awaiting recovery [canadianarrow.com]

Gemini crew capsule awaiting recovery [starshipmodeler.org]

What goes around comes around!

Re:Based on German technology (2, Funny)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344944)

What goes around comes around!

This is very true of rockets, especially if they make orbit.

Re:Based on German technology (1)

Buran (150348) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344967)

Yes, but remember...

"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun.


- Tom Lehrer

Canuck ? (-1, Offtopic)

smeenz (652345) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344635)

I obviously don't live in your part of the world.. what's a Canuck ? m-w.com says it means someone who is canadian, especially french canadian, but I assume there must be some difference or implication between the meanings of canuck and canadian that requires the use of a different word ?

Re:Canuck ? (-1, Flamebait)

Cobalt Jacket (611660) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344670)

This [wikipedia.org] is what a Canuck is.

Re:Canuck ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344809)

Jesus, you pretentious JACK ASS, if you could take ALL THE TIME to type in that link to the questionable Wiki page, why not JUST FUCKING TELL HIM? Or are you too fucking good for that?

Re:Canuck ? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344675)

It's like the difference between "New Zealander" and "Kiwi". :)

Re:Canuck ? (1)

Coltman (623132) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344679)

Its kinda like calling a New Zealander a Kiwi.

Re:Canuck ? (2, Funny)

nizo (81281) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344736)

Its kinda like calling a New Zealander a Kiwi.

I assume the Kiwi nickname in this case refers to the bird and not the fruit?

Re:Canuck ? (2, Interesting)

smeenz (652345) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344765)

Yes.. the fruit is in fact called a kiwifruit, not a kiwi, in this country (NZ). For a short time it was even called a zespri in an desperate attempt by exporters to get some more dollars by using the letter z in a product name.

And to make things every more confusing, it used to be called a chinese gooseberry, until they found it grew better here in NZ than it did in China.

Re:Canuck ? (1)

smeenz (652345) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344741)

heh.. I almost suggested that as a possible comparison in my original question, but hit submit too quickly, and as everyone knows, you can't fix it up after hitting submit :)

And the pronounciation ? Can as in Canadian, and uck as in "puck", or as in "ook" ?

Re:Canuck ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344768)

Uck as in puck.

Eh?

Re:Canuck ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344776)

As a canadian, I'd say canuk like I say puck or that other 4 letter word that ends with uck.

Around here you definatly don't hear the term that often... except maybe the comic book hero Captain Canuck but that goes back a few decades. http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Study/4273/cc.html

Re:Canuck ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344799)

uck as in puck .... i mean it is canadian eh :P

Re:Canuck ? (1)

kormoc (122955) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345056)

I've always said it as Can-ook, and it drives those canucks crazy ;)

Re:Canuck ? (3, Informative)

rford (314096) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345120)

Canuck is usually used in a patriotic way, at least when used by Canadians.

This is probably due to the influence of Johnny Canuck [collectionscanada.ca] an Uncle Sam like character.

Re:Canuck ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10345149)

THE definative phrase, IMHO is:

"To really run amok takes a canuck."

Whats missing? (2, Insightful)

satterth (464480) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344640)

Contributing factors to this revision were availability of a few key components and their integration into the overall space flight program.
I wonder what if anything is not available. Too bad, and i was even planning on driving out and watching the launch.

Re:Whats missing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344821)

They have to wait on jumper-cables being delivered to the local Hudson's Bay post by dog-sled.

Re:Whats missing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344871)

The pilot?

Re:Whats missing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344890)

A spacecraft. If they just had that, things would be cool...

And some fuel of course.... Yea... beyond that, things are looking good...

And a pilot... yea. That's about it...

But they already have a cool prototype that they take around to schools who need something to do that day.

Yes, everybody seems to care about it... (3, Interesting)

Zx-man (759966) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344647)

...although no one actually does. To the date the success of both of the projects are quite reasonably doubtable...

Blah (-1, Flamebait)

manuelpl (689817) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344671)

The Canadian Arrow team seems to be doing things a bit more intelligently, so if any Canadian launch works, I'd bet on that one." Oh come on ... Canada Blah ! Only a canuck would think that way.

Arrow name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344686)

It's named Arrow with reverence to the Avro Arrow. The subject of the Arrow still brings up strong feelings of patriotism, quite a rare thing here in Canada. And as for the Arrow being shut down again? Not with that name..

Re:Arrow name (3, Funny)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344863)

With the hockey season on hold, maybe general excitement over the Canadian X-Prize teams could really .. take off, eh? (Don Cherry could do the colour. Just tell him that the Russians have the only currently working manned-space program, and then stand back.)

DOES ANYBODY IN THIS CHAT ROOM GIVE A RATS ASS??? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344704)


Just so wrong... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344726)

I understand the need for corporate sponsorship, and welcome it if it helps bring about the success of an effort like this one, but still, The da Vinci Project, officially called the Golden Palace.com Space Program powered by the da Vinci Project hurts just to read it.

Let's all (hopefully) welcome noted online casino Golden Palace.com into the pantheon of world space agencies. I'll be first in line to play at the LEO blackjack tables.

Re:Just so wrong... (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344918)

What was the domain name that the (unfortunately Canadian) jerk who jumped in the Olympic swimming pool had written on his body? The news reports [wkrn.com] quite properly don't say.

glue guns in space (5, Funny)

mcguyver (589810) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344745)

I'm glad they are delaying their attempt because the glue gun in this picture has me worried.

DaVinci project and glue gun [davinciproject.com]

da Vinci Design: Not very practical (4, Insightful)

Spencerian (465343) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344769)

I'm all for concept stuff to make an achievement, but which one, if offered to you, would you fly in; the da Vinci rocket, or Rutan's SpaceShipOne?

The Tier One system is by far the more aircraft-like of the two, has many abort modes that offer you some level of safety in a still-dangerous adventure, and appears to have plenty of money to ensure the design is not contrived.

IANARS, but it also appears that the Tier One design is highly scalable. Just make a large enough plane that can achieve a high altitude that can carry a large enough orbiter and fuel, and this thing can become a new LEO personnel or unmanned shuttle, or the much-lamented spaceplane.

At the least, quite a few of us would pay a few thousand to ride the thing like a rollercoaster to get our astronaut wings, experience weightlessness, and see the Earth in a way few of us have ever seen it.

But using a balloon and a cylinder? Hm.

Re:da Vinci Design: Not very practical (3, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344886)

But using a balloon and a cylinder? Hm.

Garage rocket scientists, perhaps? I'm not saying that their design is scaleable or good - just that sometimes, ordinary people tinkering around such stuff may lead to greater revolutions in science than a high-profile well known project.

Why? Because they are willing to take the risk. Their loss isn't as much as that of someone whose invested significantly more.

Their design may not be good or scaleable, but it might open up avenues in other areas we would not know about unless we tried it. That's the best part about engineering these things - you do not really know what's going to happen.

But that's just me.

Re:da Vinci Design: Not very practical (3, Interesting)

maxpublic (450413) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344921)

I agree. If everyone built vehicles along the lines of Rutan's Spaceship One then less would be learned and the contest wouldn't be nearly as interesting. The wackier the designs the more intrigued I am, and the Da Vinci project strikes me as pretty wacky.

Max

Re:da Vinci Design: Not very practical (5, Informative)

david.given (6740) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344920)

IANARS, but it also appears that the Tier One design is highly scalable. Just make a large enough plane that can achieve a high altitude that can carry a large enough orbiter and fuel, and this thing can become a new LEO personnel or unmanned shuttle, or the much-lamented spaceplane.

Alas, it can't; there are fundamental reasons why SpaceShipOne or any similar vehicle can't get into orbit. This principally boil down to not being able to get enough delta-V from that rocket technology, and no thermal protection system for reentry. Changing the propulsion system and adding a TPS would involve a fundamental redesign from scratch.

What it is is a good technology demonstrator. They're getting experience in dealing with multistage vehicles, rocket propulsion, freefall attitude control, supersonic flight, etc; all well worth while, and all necessary on the path to a real orbital vehicle.

Plus the PR benefits are huge, too --- you could probably write the whole Tier One programme off as advertising. Think how much publicity Scaled Composites has gotten out of this...

Re:da Vinci Design: Not very practical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10345039)

IANARS
Nonsense. This is slashdot. On here, YAARS, YAAL, YAAQP, or any other acronym you can come up with.

Re:da Vinci Design: Not very practical (2, Interesting)

iamlucky13 (795185) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345949)

It's not fully scalable. I don't remember the specifics, but for whatever reasons, their hybrid engine begins to experience a rapidly diminishing thrust-to-weight ratio as it's scaled up. Also, the rocket is designed for sub-orbital flight at about 4000 mph (if I remember correctly), not the 16000 mph re-entry an orbital vehicle would undergo. A new design will be necessary to advance this program into orbital space flight.

The mothership concept is definitely scalable. In fact, Scaled Composites just won a contract to use the White Knight as the lift vehicle for the X-43 drop tests. They showed that they could perform the task at a lower cost than the Air Force B-52 that is normally used.

Re:da Vinci Design: Not very practical (1)

akorvemaker (617072) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346000)

which one, if offered to you, would you fly in; the da Vinci rocket, or Rutan's SpaceShipOne?

Honestly. I'd probably take either if they were offering. Unfortunately, they're not. At least not to me. Which would I prefer? Well, that might be another issue.

Ah, who am I fooling? I'd take the Da Vinci. Go Canada!

New Prize (1)

Mateito (746185) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344791)

In further news, an undisclosed eccentric canadian billionaire has created a similar prize for his country men in an attempt to help them "get off the ground".

Its called the "eh-prize".

BLASPHEMY (2, Funny)

oneiron (716313) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344808)

How can any slashdot reader not root for our collective idol, the almighty John Carmack, and his crew over at Armadillo Aerospace?

Re:BLASPHEMY (1)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344846)

Because the only way an armadillo is likely to fly is by application of a large slingshot?

Re:BLASPHEMY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10344883)

all you need is sufficient thrust. a Cannon would do quite nicely.

--Kehvarl AC/CD

Re:BLASPHEMY (1)

maxpublic (450413) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344942)

Because they aren't anywhere close to launch?

Max

Re:BLASPHEMY (1)

antispam_ben (591349) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346079)

I'll root for anyone* in any country who has a reasonable chance to go into outer space.

Godspeed, eh?

* except for Really Bad People, but even for them I might be in favor of a no-frills, no-suit, no-capsule spaceflight.

Re:BLASPHEMY (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346305)

Because some of us are rather tired of this collective stroking of Carmack's cock. Especially since Doom3 sucked.

Non-sense? (1)

ElDuderino44137 (660751) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344820)

"so if any Canadian launch works, I'd bet on that one."

Hey There,

If you knew which one worked ...
Why would you need to bet?

Cheers,
-- The Dude
P.S.
Someone needs to moderate the posted articles!?

Re:Non-sense? (1)

brainstyle (752879) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344834)

If you knew which one worked ... Why would you need to bet?

Because that way I'd know I'd win said bet?

Re:Non-sense? (1)

Spud the Ninja (174866) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345043)

Did you miss the first half of the sentence? "that one" refers to the Canadian Arrow.

To die or not to die? (-1, Troll)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344830)

Basically, the test pilot / "Astronaut" decided not to die on that day.

Re:To die or not to die? (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346597)

Oh come on. Bad joke maybe. Troll? As usual the /. mods are smoking crack.

better links (3, Interesting)

baldw1n (743697) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344832)

John Carmack of Armadillo Aerospace also said [google.com] some stuff [xprize.org] about DaVinci. He also wrote a pretty interesting summary [google.com] about his recent zero-gravity experience.

Re:better links (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345090)

At least he did not use a BFG on these Canadians to keep his team in the running, ha ...

that summary is great (1)

subtropolis (748348) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346779)

I know the booties are for traction, but i'm sure they're differently coloured not only to let the minders keep track of their charges but also to appeal to a certain kind of nerd. I didn't see any red members - perhaps it's so as not to make them uneasy on their first 'mission'.

this image [armadilloaerospace.com] he posted looks like it could be a promotional shot for a new sitcom about the wacky misadventures of the world's first private, zany space company.

And i think i just saw cnn's thing from that promotional flight. There was indeed at least one holding the bag to her face, being lead away and looking a tad more than solemn (thank god the minders do that - eeww! float over there!) Miles O'brien (sp) says he kept it down.

If 5 million dollars... (0, Offtopic)

Malevolyn (776946) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344849)

...isn't transferred to this account in seven days...

Very minor (4, Informative)

babtras (629678) | more than 9 years ago | (#10344902)

I called Kindersley, where the launch is to take place. They assured me that the delay is "very minor" and the delay is likely to be only about a week. They will give about 7 days notice before the launch.

indeed (1)

shlepp (796599) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345225)

I have faith in these fellow Candians. I have a good feeling that they will get that v2 into space.

A catastrophe (1)

Hao Wu (652581) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345397)

This is worst news except only for space shutle disaster, 1, and 2.

Everyone, Please pen letter to your governor. Thell them you feel how SPACE progress is essential to long term survival of democracy.

Re:A catastrophe (1)

Aerog (324274) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345429)

Maybe this time they won't pick a weekend where everybody and their dog is trying to get to a football game and we can actually get some buses to go! Seriously, the Physics Students' Society at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon (about 2 hours away) has been working on a trip out to watch the launch, and renting buses has been a nightmare. We basically had to try to book a pub crawl through a local bar that starts at 2:00 AM (to make it out with time to set up for the proposed 5:30 launch). Maybe this time we can get some buses! Woohoo!

Forecast calls for a 100% chance of fun had by all in attendance, regardless of the outcome.

Would I volunteer for the canada arrow ??? (1)

vmaxxxed (734128) | more than 9 years ago | (#10345556)



Im amazed by the number of people supporting the
Canadian Arrow project.

But, if you ask me, as a pilot, I would never
volunteer for that thing. It has too many single points of failure.

Somthing more like the SS1 has much better chances of failing, and still bringing you back.

Im not personally against them, and I
surely wish them good luck. But just look at the
engine. Just the turbopump is more complex than SS1
.
Make no mistake, the few minutes after blast off, at low alt, are its Achilles heel.
Just like any other rocket....

* Guidance puter failure at low alt = crash
* Engine failure at low alt = crash
* Parachute failure = crash


Maybe i am bias because I am a pilot, but I rather
fly something that I can bring back with no
puter, no parachute, or no power.

Just my two cents. God bless both teams.

Re:Would I volunteer for the canada arrow ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10345742)

Turbopump? there's no turbopump. Its a pressurized tank system..

A REAL Canadian space program.... (1)

sadomikeyism (677964) | more than 9 years ago | (#10346275)

would be fuelled by beer and back bacon.

I wonder what kinda isp you could get outta that combination, eh? Mebbe you'd have to substitute summa da water wit hydrogen peroxide....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>