Five years ago, I had the privilege of witnessing a pivotal moment in space history. I was at the Mojave Air & Spaceport on June 21 to watch as Mike Melvill flew SpaceShipOne to an altitude of about 100 kilometers, achieving the first privately-funded suborbital spaceflight. It was an exciting moment as the spacecraft came down for a landing in front of us on that warm morning. A new era of spaceflight had opened up. Less than four months later, SpaceShipTwo captured the Ansari X PRIZE on the 47th anniversary of the launch of Sputnik 1.
At the time, optimism abounded that space tourism would the next big wave of adventure travel. SpaceShipOne’s builder, Scaled Composites, announced a deal with Richard Branson to bring space travel to the masses – or at least those with a few hundred thousand dollars to spare. Soon hundreds – and eventually thousands – of people would experience the joys once reserved for professional astronauts.
Today, those visions remain distant dreams. Commercial flights could be two years away. Branson’s Virgin Galactic – long the favorite to begin commercial service first – has experienced setbacks and tragedy along the way. And it is beginning to hear the footsteps of a rival company, XCOR.
Virgin Galactic
If Virgin had followed its original plan to use the small, three-seat SpaceShipOne for tourist flights, it would probably have been flying passengers by now. However, the company heeded calls from customers for a larger cabin that would allow them to float around, "virtually weightless", in the same way that tourists do on parabolic airplane flights.
Building the eight-seat SpaceShipTwo evidently proved to be more complicated than they thought. The effort suffered a serious setback in July 2007 when a rocket propulsion fuel explosion occurred at the Scaled Composites’ Mojave production facility, killing three workers and injuring three others. The investigation stopped work on the space plane for at least one year.
A year after the accident, Scaled brought in SpaceDev to assist with the engine development. The Powoy, Calif.-based company had built the propulsion system for SpaceShipOne, but Scaled subsequently decided to bring the engine development in-house. Bringing back SpaceDev was a tacit admission that this decision had not been a wise one.
Work on the WhiteKnightTwo carrier aircraft has progressed faster than for WhiteKnightOne. The vehicle made its first test flight on Dec. 21, 2008 and it has completed two additional flights since then. Once SpaceShipTwo is ready, there will be a series of flights with the spacecraft held captive, followed by flights including spacecraft release with glide and powered tests.
When commercial service will begin is anyone’s guess. The most recent estimate was late 2010; however, Virgin Galactic President Will Whitehorn is now avoiding any specifics in favor of “milestones.” About 300 people have put down deposits for the flights.
XCOR
Virgin Galactic’s Mojave-based rival is pursuing its much more modest Lynx vehicle, which will carry a pilot and one passenger to an altitude of 61 kilometers (38 miles). This is far below the 110 kilometers (68 miles) that SpaceShipTwo will reach which is close to the now formally-designated "edge of space" at 118 kilometers . Passengers aboard Lynx will experience about three minutes of virtual weightlessness, albeit in a small cabin where movement will be restricted.
Company officials say they hope to begin test flights in the latter half of next year, although that schedule could slip. They are not giving any estimates on the start of commercial service, except to note that test flight programs typically take 12-18 months.
Speaking earlier this month at the Space Access ’09 conference, CEO Jeff Greason said the company is making good progress on engine, aeronautical and structural design work. The company has booked more than 20 reservations for the $95,000 per person flights, a rate less than half the $200,000 fee that Virgin Galactic is charging. Greason said he is happy with the number of reservations, pointing out that it is early in the sales process.
XCOR plans to build a more powerful upgraded vehicle, the Lynx Mark 2, designed to fly to an altitude of 110 kilometers (68 miles). The schedule depends upon progress with the smaller spacecraft.
Different Approaches
XCOR’s gradual approach – flying a small vehicle commercially, then building something larger – is what Scaled Composites might have done absent the involvement of Virgin Galactic. Branson’s company brought the customer experience to the forefront, which led to the development of a much larger – and more complicated – space plane.
This is a big leap, maybe too big. SpaceShipOne flew only 17 times: four with the space plane captive with the carrier aircraft, seven unpowered glide tests, and six space plane powered flights. Only half of those powered flights went suborbital before the vehicle was retired upon winning the Ansari X PRIZE. That isn’t a lot of flights.
I’m sure that SpaceShipTwo will go through a rigorous flight testing program before commercial service begins. However, that process may be more complicated and longer due to the relatively small number of SpaceShipOne flights and the difference in scale between the two vehicles. At 8.5 meters (28 feet), SpaceShipOne was about the same size as the X-1 that Chuck Yeager flew in 1947. Its successor measures 18 meters (60 feet) long.
Who Will Be First?
Virgin Galactic has long been the odds-on favorite to begin commercial flights first. It started earlier, is backed by the Virgin Group, and has Branson as a human megaphone. However, given the delays in its program, it’s not inconceivable that XCOR might get there first.
There will likely be some argument as to whether the Lynx vehicle will actually be flying in "space" at 61 kilometers (38 miles). Technically speaking, it won't, but it may not matter much. The brilliant images of the curvature of the Earth set against the vast blackness of space will likely render such arguments moot to the general public.
XCOR officials would likely be very pleased to beat Virgin into space. However, Greason downplays any rivalry between his company and its more high-profile competitor. “I am not motivated by beating the other guy, I’m motivated by succeeding,” he said, adding that competition is healthy for the industry. “Whoever the players are, there is no way this market will mature with only one operator.”
As often observed, ultimate success in a new market does not necessarily go to the first company to deliver product. Many lessons become obvious only as the market develops and subsequent competitors can often avoid some of the pot-holes. Also, the impact of problems that can occur with a 8-passenger space plane can be quite different than for a 2-passenger version. Greason might be the tortoise that beats the Branson hare in this race, and the definition of market success could soon expand to include orbital spaceflight opportunities. The dream may be delayed, but the anticipation is building.
Virgin Galactic vs. XCOR: Who Will Be First?
By Douglas Messier, Posted 04/17/09


Comments
Who is better (my opinion)
From: Hunter Peters, 03/30/11
I personally like VG better because they have more money to put into the rockets dispite the price that is almost 2 times larger.
From: Douglas Messier, 05/07/09
Dear Anonymous: The Virgin Galactic/Scaled Composites team has a lot of the advantages you mention. But, that is not the full story. The pacing element for their program is the spaceship rocket engine. Trying to scale it up for the much larger SpaceShipTwo seems to have been a significant challenge. The fatal explosion in 2007 has caused major delays and they struggled to find its cause and make changes. Scaled is expert in composite aircraft, as you correctly point out. However, they have less expertise with rocket engines. During the development of SpaceShipOne, they had SpaceDev to assist them. Scaled subsequently brought the work in house. A year after the explosion, they brought back SpaceDev. The interesting issue here is: They have designed SpaceShipTwo to meet revenue and passenger requirements. However, now they have to get the engine to meet the needs of lifting the spacecraft. That seems to be the challenge. XCOR's expertise is in rockets, as you mention their EZ-Rocket and Rocket Racer. They seem to be building an airframe around what the engine can do. For the Mark II, they will lighten the airframe and improve the engine's performance so they can fly to 100 kilometers or higher.
The Difference between XCOR and Virgin Galactic.
From: anonymous, 05/01/09
The VG Team has the depth of management and sales that Virgin brings to the table, while, XCOR has a very thin management bench. Virgin has managers with experience in Railroads, Airlines, Retail, Consumer goods, Entertainment, banking, finance, media,radio,records,festivals. XCOR, well, they know a bit about chip design and a bit about finance, and a bit about propulsion. Virgin has deep pockets and investors putting hundreds of millions of dollars in. XCOR has shareholders they can tap for a million or so and some small government contracts. Virgin has Scaled Composites with all their team and flight test experience building upon Proteus, White Knight 1, Virgin Global Flyer and now WK2. XCOR has the Rocket Racer and the EZ-Rocket. Virgin is now in test flight in the stratosphere, XCOR is not. Now XCOR has a smaller task, flying one passenger to 100,000 feet, but that is still a serious challenge. The NF-104, The Mig-21 E-66 and Ye-50 and SM-12,30,50 were all operated up near this altitude. This is a very tough regime to enter, maintain stability and return safely. XCOR has attempted several medium performance aircraft programs, the NeXt-1, New-262 and Archangel and never been able to raise funds to complete those programs. I admire the vision at XCOR, but, I think they are underequipped to do this effort.
Tortoises, Hares and Other Kinds of Entrepreneurs
From: Richard Mains, 04/28/09
Messier's story is a reminder that a good product that can reliably deliver value to customers often finds a solid market niche, no matter the competition. Personal spaceflight is no doubt a very generic term for what may evolve into a grand adventure to the edge of space for a range of people with many different interests. Some may appreciate a group experience in simulated weightlessness along with the view. Others may want to try out some novel idea they've had, make a special video, be a part of briefly controlling the space plane, learn about a new technical area, or even market their own product. Companies that succeed in the long haul will likely provide a safe, reasonably-priced adventure, but will probably be the best as providing flexibility and adaptability of the experience to a wide range of customers. The impact of flying the public to where Earth is clearly seen as a finite space ship all on its own, may well influence many in ways we haven't anticipated.
Add Your Comment