X-Wing Rocket Launches, Disintegrates 240
An anonymous reader writes "Remember the 21-foot X-Wing with four rocket engines? It launched yesterday from Plaster City and here's the video showing what many thought inevitable: total destruction in mid-air. From the post: "I can only say two things. The first is: absolutely amazing. And the second: poor Porkins." "
That was lame. (Score:5, Interesting)
That was lame. Even if it hadn't disintegrated early, it was on an arc that would have hit the ground in about five seconds.
Now if they'd built it as a large R/C model aircraft, it would have been cool. That's been done [rcuniverse.com] in a 24 inch wingspan model, so it's possible to fly that shape.
It did very well. (Score:2, Interesting)
of view I consider the construction itself as usable for further designs.
I think I can also come up with a possible solution why the construction collapsed.
The thrusters aren't to be blamed for this.
It's the X-shaped twin wing, which is the problem in here, with the increasing velocity the wind forces between the twin wings pushed them into opposite directions, resulting in an alteration of the flightvector as you can see in the video, and when it collapsed,
the wings acted like long arms which applied huge torque onto the vessels body,
and so breaking it apart.
Re:Build a smaller one that works (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Too bad they weren't engineers (Score:4, Interesting)
The early rocket experiments didn't have general guildlines to go from - and so they discovered problem after problem by experiment.
They also didn't have parts with known specifications - they were building their own engines which were often sources of problems.
An amateurer rocket designer today can buy off the shelf parts - and know exactly what their tolerances are. If their engines are certified to produce x N of force +/- y% then you can simply design for that. If they have a 99.99% reliability rate you don't need to worry about them just blowing up.
To me this whole thing sounded more like an exercise in amusement than trying to actually get a rocket off the ground. Nothing wrong with that - but it is hardly big news when the thing disintegrates in mid-air...
Re:Spacecraft becomes Aircraft. (Score:3, Interesting)
As for Atlantis, it's also pretty much a helicopter.
90% of spacecraft in fiction than enter atmospheres work like helicopters once there, not planes.
Re:Too bad they weren't engineers (Score:5, Interesting)
On a vehicle like the X-wing...which no one's ever done aerodynamic tests on...which has reverse facing wings...and pylons sticking out from them...and is shaped like a rocket with huge wings attached.
If you can estimate those forces easily and come up with it's coefficient of drag then I would like to subscribe to your newsletter...
Brings back memories. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Too bad they weren't engineers (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Too bad they weren't engineers (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'm not surprised (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Too bad they weren't engineers (Score:1, Interesting)
I've also had occasion to train shuttle pilots and mission specialists over the years. When they were working with my teams' systems, they were serious and socking away the nuances of the system. Much respect for those folks.
OTOH, you'd never see me getting into the space shuttle for a launch. That thing is a death trap, if only due to the complexity and interdependence of 6M parts heading in the same general direction.
Two words for the X-Wing guys