ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Rocketeers try, try again

Posted: Monday, June 30, 2008 6:10 PM by Alan Boyle


PlanetSpace
The sun glints off a shiny mockup of PlanetSpace's
Silver Dart hypersonic glider.

PlanetSpace may not have kept up with the ambitious spaceship-building schedule it set out three years ago, but the U.S.-Canadian venture says it's moving ahead with concepts for a new suborbital craft as well as an orbital launch system.

On the suborbital front, the company is working on a quarter-scale, turbojet-powered version of its Silver Dart hypersonic glider that will be tested as an unpiloted aerial vehicle. Meanwhile, on the orbital front, PlanetSpace says it has teamed up once again with Lockheed Martin and ATK to repitch a proposal for resupplying the international space station.

SpaceX and Orbital Sciences, two companies that beat out PlanetSpace in earlier NASA competitions, say they have also submitted proposals.

Suborbital flight: Beyond the graphics
Unlike those two other companies, PlanetSpace has not yet launched anything into outer space - which has led skeptics to complain that the company is more about computer-generated graphics than it is about actual hardware.


PlanetSpace
An artist's conception shows the Silver Dart in space.

PlanetSpace has a few things going for it, however: Its chairman, Indian-American entrepreneur Chirinjeev Kathuria, has made millions in other ventures related to telecommunications and medical equipment - and his cash helped keep Russia's Mir space station on life support for a few extra months in the year 2000. Its president and CEO, Geoff Sheerin, has drawn upon his hands-on experience at Canadian Arrow to work out technical details and help out with partnerships.

One of Sheerin's current projects is aimed at turning PlanetSpace's suborbital dream into a scaled-down reality: The Silver Dart is based on the U.S. Air Force's FDL-7 design of the 1960s, which was proposed as a military space plane but never made it past testing.

PlanetSpace envisions using the Silver Dart as a suborbital or even orbital craft that could be blasted into space on top of a rocket and glide back down to a landing, like the space shuttle. To verify computerized simulations of the craft's aerodynamics, the company plans to test the quarter-scale version of the plane as an UAV at Canadian and U.S. sites, Sheerin said.

He said the UAV measures just less than 13 feet long and 6 feet wide, and weighs in at 200 pounds. Propulsion will be provided by three turbojet engines.

"This bird will fly this year," Sheerin said. "It's being worked on right now."

Going for 'the real contract' in orbit
On the orbital side of the operation, PlanetSpace's biggest selling points are its partners:  Lockheed Martin Space Systems, which has been involved in NASA missions ranging from the space shuttle program to the Pluto-bound New Horizons probe; and ATK, which makes the shuttle's solid-rocket boosters. Both those companies play roles in NASA's next-generation space effort as well as PlanetSpace's Plan B for space station resupply.

Earlier this year, the trio of companies put in a bid to pick up $171 million in the second round of NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program, or COTS. That program is aimed at supporting the development of private-sector launch systems for sending cargo (and perhaps crew) to the station during the agency's 2010-2015 "spaceflight gap."

PlanetSpace lost out to Orbital Sciences in February, just as PlanetSpace lost out to SpaceX during an earlier round in the COTS competition. But Kathuria said the trio of companies will try, try again to win a piece of NASA's $3.1 billion station resupply contract.

"That's the real contract," Kathuria told me.

Kathuria said PlanetSpace's proposal was submitted in time to meet today's deadline, and spokesmen for Orbital and SpaceX confirmed that they filed proposals as well.

It's safe to assume that all three companies will be offering the options they laid out for the COTS competition: For Orbital, that would be the Taurus 2 rocket and the Cygnus spacecraft; for PlanetSpace's group, that would be ATV's Athena-style rocket and Lockheed Martin's Orbital Transfer Vehicle; and for SpaceX, it's the Falcon 9 rocket and the Dragon capsule

NASA is due to select the winners by Nov. 28, and the five months between now and then could get interesting. Here are other tidbits from the commercial spaceflight scene:

  • SpaceX: SpaceX is preparing for its third test launch of the Falcon 1 rocket from Omelek Island in the Pacific Ocean. Launch had been planned for late June, but was delayed due to a defect found in an engine nozzle. The next launch opportunity runs from July 29 to Aug. 6. One of the scheduled payloads is a NASA-built experimental solar sail called the NanoSail-D. Other experimental payloads include NASA's PreSat nanosatellite and the Pentagon's Trailblazer experimental sensing satellite.

  • Spacehab: President Jim Royston confirmed that his company was letting its unfunded COTS agreement with NASA lapse, and that Spacehab did not submit a proposal for the NASA resupply contract. But Royston told me that work is continuing on the Allsat multipurpose satellite service system, and that vehicle may well make an appearance someday at a space station near you. Spacehab is concentrating on how the space station can be used as a national laboratory for microgravity research, he said.
  • Virgin Galactic: Mojave Skies photoblogger Alan Radecki passed along a series of photos of the WhiteKnightTwo mothership under construction at Mojave's Scaled Composites shop, courtesy of Virgin Galactic. Flight Global's Rob Coppinger presents a "spy picture" of WhiteKnightTwo with the wing attached. WhiteKnightTwo, which eventually will carry the SpaceShipTwo rocket plane up to 50,000 feet for its air launch, is due to be rolled out for public display on July 28.

  • Blue Origin: Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos generally keeps his private space effort under wraps, but he touched upon Blue Origin's future in an interview aired by NPR's "On Point" program. (Jump to the 37-minute point.) "Bezos confirmed suspicions some of us have had that he is presently developing a second testbed vehicle to follow up on the flights of the small 'Goddard,'" industry observer Charles Lurio said in The Lurio Report. One or two more test beds will follow before commercial service begins, Bezos said. Will Blue Origin hit its 2010 schedule? "We'll have to wait and see," Bezos said. Lurio said "it may be legitimate to ask if Blue Origin is going to skip suborbital commercialization in favor of going to orbit." 

  • Elsewhere: Transformational Space (a.k.a. t/Space) and Constellation Services International, which both have unfunded COTS agreements with NASA, say they're not putting in proposals for space station resupply. Rocketplane Kistler originally had COTS funding, but lost it and isn't taking part in the latest competition either. "I hope that the process leads to resupply of the space station in a financially reasonable, regular and repetitive manner," George French, Rocketplane's chairman and CEO, told me.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Americans in Orbit-50 Years Inc., a non-profit organization, will launch two astronauts and 10,000lbs. of space science experiments, Feb. 20, 2012. The purpose is to once again give universities access to orbit and commemorate the 50th anniversary of America's first orbital space flight.  
I didn't even take time to read the piece...the vehicle says it all...you have got to be kidding me...how much did that thing cost?
In 1959, there were probably 1000 of those things in various backyards around the country...looking exactly like what you see above...a pop riveted spaceship...oh, boy, can't wait to get aboard...
This is the kind of "rocket science" that gets me excited (all over again) about space travel.

I was wondering, though, if this spaceship properly protects its passengers from space (and sun) radiation?
There is *zero* aerodynamic justification for a sharp-edged, flat-planed, stealth-profile vehicle and numerous reasons to dismiss it out of hand.  These people have absolutely no idea what they're doing - the concept vehicle was designed that way to be stealthy, not to be a good spacecraft OR aircraft, let alone what happens when you put it on top of a rocket.  Here's a genius way to go about getting to space: Dig up some viewgraph fantasy from the Skunk Works basement - preliminary work on a distant ancestor of one of the moodiest, most high-strung, least durable types of aircraft in existence (stealth), that was too iffy even for the spend-crazy maniacs of the Cold War DoD - and then try to shoot it 60 miles up on top of a rocket before subjecting it to the g's and heat of reentry.  They may get in some drop-tests of a scale model, but this thing will *never* be made into an operational spacecraft, even as a scale demonstrator.  The technical problems will just mount and mount, the expenses balloon, and the project will just fade away.  It makes me sick watching them pretend to have a serious program - all they have is a skin-deep mock-up, some archaeological found art from their "partner" (heh) Lockheed's catacombs, and some (likely weak) computer modeling.  They have no rocket, no engine, nothing.  This is a farce.  They're paying Lockheed for the privilege of being condescended to, like a debutante dancing with a cerebral palsy student.  The stars will burn out before Planetspace gets a funded NASA contract.
This photo is just a plywood prop, equipped with trailer tires and a broom stick.
Most likely better viewed from far away. If you squint your eyes it almost looks real.
I bet the I bet Mr.Sheerin's personal secretary upholstered the cockpit with fleece.
Speaking of fleecing….
Keep exploring!!! Don't let the picture deceive you. This is state of the art hardware not a kit car.
All they need to do is spray some of that black super ball material all over it and it can be marketed as a stealthy, sub-space, global weapon of mass destruction...just in case the telecomsat scams don't pan out as planned...good management technique, eh?
Go Chirinjeef!
It looks kinda like the space car in one of Alan's earlier postings...maybe they can get together...
Give yourselves a break and assess your chances of survival right here on Eart by clicking on my name below...we ain't goin' nowhere with these clowns at the helm.
PS...
what happens to the control surfaces on re-entry, or, for that matter, when in supersonic flight?
that thing would tumble worse than Yeager did...don'tcha think?
"Lessons of History" does not mean doing the same stupid things over and over...it means learn and move forward...
TRIPLE GEEZ!!!
"Planetspace has a few things going for it, however: Its chairman, Indian-American entrepreneur Chirinjeev Kathuria, has made millions in other ventures related to telecommunications and medical equipment - and his cash helped keep Russia's Mir space station on life support for a few extra months in the year 2000. Its president and CEO, Geoff Sheerin, has drawn upon his hands-on experience at Canadian Arrow to work out technical details and help out with partnerships."
Ok Alan, assuming what you say is true, if these guys are so good, Kathuria with his money and Sheerin with his " his hands-on experience" how come these guys have done nothing. I mean surely with all that money and know how they could have done more than build yet another plywood model in the past 3 years since they dissolved Canadian Arrow in 2005. What is missing? Canadian Arrow seemed to be able to do quite a bit more with its limited recourses. Where are the completed NASA COTS milestones?  
Oh and why would you put a jet engine on a test glider? (assuming that there is a test glider)
And Alan as I mentioned in our last email conversation it would seem that you did recently talk to these guys….did they happen to say if they were going to finally honor their commitments to the share holders …Mr.Sheerin are you out there?
Having ATK and Lockheed as partners is a huge vote of confidence.  I wonder what some of you guys (Disgruntled Investor et al) think you know about PlanetSpace that these blue-chip companies don't? Do you really claim to have done due diligence while they haven't, yet they've attached their good name and  credibility to PlanetSpace?

On the topic of Space Act Agreement milestones, PlanetSpace was up to date as of last September. Since then, the Lockheed/ATK venture has loomed larger, and Kathuria says the milestones are being renegotiated to incorporate the development schedule for that venture. I can't shed any further light on shareholder relations or other internal matters.
Good Article Alan!

Wow are there ever some jaded comments in here!  Disgruntled - maybe you should invest in something a little safer for you - try Bonds!

Steve - whats up man? Try Reading the article next time! That pop riveted space ship says Mock up underneath it PS, Nice Personal Web Site - I find you guilty of overusing <br> tho.

Alec I actually thought you were going to come to a point somewhere in that rant on aerodynamics; but you ended up with "farce" and an odd prediction of the stars burning out. NASA has given money to companies that have dropped out, why not invest in a partner that wants to work with you rather then opt out and miss milestones? So I disagree I think they could get money and I also think that Lockheed and ATK wouldn't let themselves be associated with a Farce.

Well as I see it, and as best as I understand it,  they (PlanetSpace) are using a previous NASA design and working on proposals to garner contracts before designing models. To me this seems a logical way to conduct business rather then build - spend money - on something no one wants! Just my thoughts...

To the Canadians among us - Happy Canada Day,
For the Americans - Happy Independence Day on the 4th!

Later!
PJ,

Well said. :)


PJ in response to your posting I have to agree with the other posters here.
I have been following this stuff on line for quit a while now and I have seen several companies evolve in the past few years. Some into legitimate companies and other promising companies erode into shams, and let downs.
Planetspace came on strong a few years ago but seemed to get mired down into endless proclamations of launch dates and elaborate plans.
This in striking contrast to Canadian Arrow the now defunct xprize team that seemed to be able to consistently develop and provide evidence of real work.

You stated "NASA has given money to companies that have dropped out, why not invest in a partner that wants to work with you rather then opt out and miss milestones?"

Well PJ, that is a good question why would NASA want to work with a company that has missed milestones.
Hence why Planetspace has not ever received a contract from NASA.
Planetspace according to their unfunded COTS agreement with NASA, had set milestones which they were supposed to attain in a given amount of time. These milestones were developed by Planetspace and NASA. All of which can be referenced on the NASA website.
By June of 2008 they were supposed to have completed a 3rd stage assembly, Hot fire engine test, production of silver dart airframe, just to name a few.

PJ you also stated the following
"So I disagree I think they could get money"

could get money??? I thought Kathuria was their "Paul Allen" this according to what Sheerin said.

"and I also think that Lockheed and ATK wouldn't let themselves be associated with a Farce."

Well that is the whole problem with Trust. I would bet Lockheed and ATK have both never set foot in a Planetspace factory or for that matter ever seen anything other than power point presentations, old Canadian Arrow videos of long ago tests.
Name dropping and riding on past associations will only get you so far. eventually you have to put up or shut up.
I think the problem is that they have never had the money (the big money that is) I don't think Kathuria has funded any development of hardware what so ever.
Like Rocketplane they have unveiled big plans but have never put wrench to bolt.
By insinuating that they have done all kinds of stuff they are hoping to net bigger investment. If this was not the case I am sure we would have seen more accomplished than someone stating 'we have done that'.
A company like Lockheed or ATK will "partner" with any organization that will cut them in on a contract. Of course they will lend there expertise that is if you have the money to pay for it. My guess is that nothing in terms of development has ever happed between Planetspace and these organizations other than conceptual work. They need a signed deal from NASA first, And Planetspace is not going to spend a dime that they don't have to begin work. This is why they have not ever been able to show completed work. They are still in need of big money. And in order to get investment you need a sound team and the ability to do things, skills, knowledge this sort of thing.
That is just my take on it, but I think it makes sense.
PJ they have lots of cheerleaders what they need is people who can get things done.
I like the DART I just don’t see it happening with this group.

[ALAN ADDS: I've mentioned that PlanetSpace's unfunded COTS milestones are now being renegotiated in light of the Athena-based project. It's OK to be skeptical ... there comes a time when you just have to deliver the goods, whether you're PlanetSpace (which hasn't yet built hardware) or SpaceX (which has, and is aiming to get to orbit next time around) or any other venture that still has to prove itself fully. But I'm being somewhat more selective about the comments going forward, so I hope you'll understand if some comments are not approved. I don't want to fuel comment campaigns either for or against particular companies.] 

The only "disgruntled Investors" are the ones who gave up on the dream! :) AK


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1176167

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google