quote:

Originally posted by Phantom229:
If Paul wants to throw his money at a project, I wish him all the best.

Paul Allen is an interesting billionaire, seems to "spend" money in interesting, cool ways. Owns a shitload of sports teams (all successful),Ticketmaster, production companies, military aircraft museums, state-of-the-art recording studios around the globe (including one on his 400 ft yacht), amazing guitar collection (including Hendrix's Woodstock Strat and Clapton's Brownie), airplane collection, etc. etc.

Spruce Goose part two, the sequel, for the first time.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:

quote:

Originally posted by Phantom229:
If Paul wants to throw his money at a project, I wish him all the best.

Paul Allen is an interesting billionaire, seems to "spend" money in interesting, cool ways. Owns a shitload of sports teams (all successful),Ticketmaster, production companies, military aircraft museums, state-of-the-art recording studios around the globe (including one on his 400 ft yacht), amazing guitar collection (including Hendrix's Woodstock Strat and Clapton's Brownie), airplane collection, etc. etc.

Oh I'm well aware of his aviation interests. I use to work his Mig 29 and WW2 fighters at Paine and now I'm across the runway from his hanger at Boeing. He has some badass toys.

Why is everyone refering to the Spruce Goose as if it wasn't a successfully tested aircraft? The program had already been cancelled by the government by the time it flew and there was no need for it. That doesn't mean it failed to accomplish what it was designed to do.

quote:

Originally posted by Orguss:
Why is everyone refering to the Spruce Goose as if it wasn't a successfully tested aircraft? The program had already been cancelled by the government by the time it flew and there was no need for it. That doesn't mean it failed to accomplish what it was designed to do.

That may be a bit generous.

The Goose flew once, about a mile, in ground effect, in 1947. Other performance characteristics were never demonstrated.

At the end of the dot com cycle I installed a demo platform on Scaled Composite Proteus, Mike flew some of the flights for us. The last time I saw Burt he was walking out the front of the hangar to fly to Oshkosh....

...our 30 something project manager had just finished explaining to Burt that he had a contract and needed to fly, so some of the pilots had to stay at Scaled instead of going to Oshkosh..
lol
I was already driving back to Hollywood for the long weekend by the time he was wheels up.

I would be surprised as heck if the Stratolaunch did not perform.

Yea, I have more faith in Scaled Composites' engineers than I do in a bunch of keyboard aeroNOTical engineers...

I've followed Burt Rutan since I was a kid. I have more KitPlane magazines in storage than anyone, from the Dragonfly to LongEZ. That guy was an engineer and his designs were not chance - they were calculated. I'd step into one of his planes before just about any other...and one of these days I might fly a LongEZ. Rebuilding a 76 Seacraft boat cured me of any desire to work with fiberglass

Cool plane, I'm loving this era of private space launch!

Speaking of Burt Rutan, here is a quote about anthropogenic global warmimg.

quote:

"I put myself in the (Those who fear expansion of Government control) group, and do not hide the fact that I have a clear bias on Anthropogenic global warming (AGW). My bias is based on fear of Government expansion and the observation of AGW data presentation fraud – not based on financial or any other personal benefit. I merely have found that the closer you look at the data and alarmists’ presentations, the more fraud you find and the less you think there is an AGW problem... For decades, as a professional experimental test engineer, I have analyzed experimental data and watched others massage and present data. I became a cynic; My conclusion – “if someone is aggressively selling a technical product whose merits are dependent on complex experimental data, he is likely lying”. That is true whether the product is an airplane or a Carbon Credit."

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

That may be a bit generous.

The Goose flew once, about a mile, in ground effect, in 1947. Other performance characteristics were never demonstrated.

Yeah, the Goose was designed to fly tons of cargo across the Atlantic (based on the fear that the Atlantic might be closed off from the U-boat menace in early in WWII). It never really made what anybody could consider a successful test flight. It technically 'flew,' but I would describe it as having 'hopped' across the surface of the water.

Nobody ever demonstrated that it could have been able to climb, maneuver, or meet ANY of its design criteria. It was, essentially, a failed concept (ESPECIALLY since it wasn't even completed until after the war and YEARS after it was needed - it 'flew' in 1947). It was a money pit. As cool as it was (and I do like the Goose), it would have been better for the war effort had it never been built.

As for this new one, I'm no aeronautical expert, but I do have my doubts about that center section. I can only assume they knew what they were doing when they designed it. Still, I don't know why they wouldn't have attached the two tail sections for added rigidity (unless doing so would have made it LESS sturdy).

I wish them success. Commercialization, IMO, is the key to truly 'routine' access to space.

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
Is she dont fly, it's all the fault of the MIM parts. It should be fine once its in orbit.

That is the carrier aircraft. It will never leave Earth's atmosphere. . . It will carry a smaller spacecraft to a high altitude, drop it, and this smaller spacecraft will then proceed to space. . .

This will not end with an intact airframe. I mean I am not a Bettin' man but ima gonna say I will be watching this from the ground.

The SL is only a carrier ship, and never leaves atmospheric flight. Here's the basic flight plan.

not exactly sure the ultimate responsible party, but if scaled composites is in the loop it will be fine. Their track record is stunning.

Again, not being an aeronautical engineer, what have I got to loose, but that design, as illustrated, will not work. for that center section to be able to withstand the twisting loads, it would have to be constructed of steel i beams, etc, and then the sucker just couldn't fly, it would be too heavy. That picture just shows a constant chord center section from fuselage to fuselage. Conventional aircraft construction within that, would not handle the load. You could do that, but the center section would have to be much larger.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I've been a fan of Rutan's since I first flew Mike Melville's Vari-Viggen (N27MS) back in the early 80's.

You, I, Bruce, Dick and very small handful of RAF people were fortunate enough to fly Mike's handiwork. Not one of Burt's best, but it was the nucleus of many better planes to come: Varieze, LongEZ, Defiant, Catbird, Boomarang, Voyager, Global Flyer, ... and the list goes on and on. None of which would be called conventional.

I have plans to build a Viggen, have all of the tech notes that were produced. While I was a student at Northrop, I machined all of the metal parts as part of some additional class projects

I was also a hangar rat at RAF for a summer sweeping floors and drooling over what he was doing

I've worked on two Long EZ's, and a Defiant

I'd trust Burt's best guess on something even before he put pen to paper to do the calculations - he has a 'feel' for numbers which is an awesome skill

you know the tail number is his and his wife's initials

quote:

The Goose flew once, about a mile, in ground effect, in 1947. Other performance characteristics were never demonstrated.

Little know fact. The PT boat, PT-694 was used as a chase boat went on to become the PT73 of TV fame.

The center section must be quite robust to carry the load of the lunched vehicle. In the age of digital controls, I'd guess the coordination between both halve is precise.

Just done put a husband wife team in both sides who are having a domestic.

Never seen a catamaran plane before.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I have plans to build a Viggen, have all of the tech notes that were produced. While I was a student at Northrop, I machined all of the metal parts as part of some additional class projects

I was also a hangar rat at RAF for a summer sweeping floors and drooling over what he was doing

I've worked on two Long EZ's, and a Defiant

I'd trust Burt's best guess on something even before he put pen to paper to do the calculations - he has a 'feel' for numbers which is an awesome skill

you know the tail number is his and his wife's initials

Yep; Mike and Sally. Melvills have become life long personal friends - we're hosting them for a few weeks later this month. The 180HP Lyc that was in his Viggen now resides in the tail of his EZ, 26MS.