| Author | Message | ||
     Slaughter |
Michael Alsbury - you're going to be missed. Going to be hard starting work on Monday. His wife Michelle is devastated. Nothing much else to say. Been a bad week. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2816833/Ma rried-father-two-pilot-fifteen-years-experience-ki lled-Virgin-Galactic-test-flight-Richard-Branson-d efends-500million-project-vows-finish-started.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-virgin-galac tic-crash-ntsb-20141101-story.html#page=1
| ||
| Oldog |
Steve: sorry to hear this my condolences to you and the family of your friend a successful outcome of the venture would be a fitting tribute to your friend | ||
| Two_seasons |
Some of the deepest moments in thought can be found through grief. Sorry for your loss Steve. | ||
| Slaughter |
7 and 10 year old kids and a young widow. | ||
| Slaughter |
Second NTSB Briefing (the first was just an intro) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYFVbQ4YCP0&list=U Ue5dWbxxvQqDAHmyMrEF7Kw&index=1 | ||
| Reepicheep |
That industry is a very small world, that is going to have an impact on everyone. My prayers and condolences to all that are a part of it. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
http://news.yahoo.com/probe-virgin-spaceship-crash -may-085338983.html;_ylt=AwrBJR8tdlZUJ0YAc5XQtDMD | ||
| Fast1075 |
Nitrous and nylon. Wasn't Spaceship One a Nitrous and rubber propulsion system? A semi-solid/hybrid that could be throttled? My sympathies and admiration of the bravery of the lost. (Message edited by fast1075 on November 02, 2014) | ||
| Kenm123t |
Can we help the families Slaughter? Let us know what we can do | ||
| Slaughter |
SS1 was rubber, SS2 has run both. Both are designed to be stopped by shutting down oxidizer, not throttled. | ||
| Slaughter |
There is an official GoFundMe site for Mike's widow and children. http://www.gofundme.com/MikeAlsbury?fb_action_ids= 10100439569032328%2C10205484503135337&fb_action_ty pes=og.shares Pete Siebold (surviving pilot) asked that ALL donations go to the Alsbury family. | ||
| Slaughter |
Note - NTSB is making "statements-of-fact" and not drawing conclusions. Last night's press conference: | ||
| Reepicheep |
When they finish this, I want the NTSB to investigate and make recommendations on all three branches of government, and all large government agencies. That was an outstanding briefing and backed by an outstanding approach. And they need to have intelligence tests that have to be passed before a reporter is allowed to ask questions. My 6th grader would have had a better understanding and asked better questions than they did. Continued prayers for all those involved... it sounds like this may turn out to be yet another case where a minor and (should have been) immaterial human error combined with a major control or mechanical flaw to escalate into an event that caused the loss of the platform. Vehicles will crash and we will learn and build better ones, it's the loss of life that is the real tragedy here. We lost a brave and talented man. | ||
| Slaughter |
I listened to the questions and AGAIN had my impressions of the news media lowered another notch. NTSB is handling this in a very professional manner... but it's the media without any self-control. | ||
| Court |
>>>And they need to have intelligence tests that have to be passed before a reporter is allowed to ask questions. +1 These folks are simply not very bright. | ||
| Ourdee |
Video is fine till Christopher opened it up to questions. | ||
| Torquehd |
Very professional and well spoken. I think I pick up a hint of well controlled annoyance at many of the ridiculous questions. While I'm terribly sorry to hear of the loss of a man who I'm sure was a gifted individual, I am glad to hear that the issue was not fuel related. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Holy shit. How many times does they poor guy have to explain the same thing over and over? What a bunch of morons. I do like the NTSB guy tho. This sounds like a software glitch to me.... Can someone explain why the feathering at lower speed would destroy the plane.? Seems odd that it's designed to be deployed at 1.4 MACH and deploying it at 1.0 MACH caused a catastrophe. | ||
| Hughlysses |
Can someone explain why the feathering at lower speed would destroy the plane.? Seems odd that it's designed to be deployed at 1.4 MACH and deploying it at 1.0 MACH caused a catastrophe. It's intended to only be feathered outside of the atmosphere; it stabilizes the craft as it re-enters the ultra-rarified atmosphere WAY up there. I imagine it's not designed for the loads that were encountered at even a low mach number in the relatively dense lower atmosphere. | ||
| Slaughter |
Yeah - the placement of lever in "enable" position is just a preparation for eventual deployment. The 1.4 Mach would occur way up where the dynamic pressure is so very low - but again, this 1.4M is just a speed to basically "take the safety off" (to use a shooting analogy) Realize the speed of sound is pretty freaking slow when the air density is so low at altitude. | ||
| Reepicheep |
From what I gathered from the briefing (can't remember details now, just my conclusion), if the pilot made any mistake, it was that they "turned off the safety" about 2 seconds earlier than it would be normally turned off. After that, the feathering lever was never touched (the trigger was not touched) yet the feathering started (the gun went off). So if there was a human error, it was a very minor one, and something really major with the spaceship happened when it was not told to happen, and was not supposed to happen. (this is all uninformed opinion based on a cursory watching of a press conference...) | ||
| Hootowl |
I'm interested to know how they know that the pilot moved the lever and that the lever didn't move by itself. If there was a lockout on the lever, it was probably mechanical, and that could have vibrated out of position, allowing the lever to move. They probably know, or they wouldn't have said anything, I'm just curious how they know. | ||
| Sifo |
I'm interested to know how they know that the pilot moved the lever and that the lever didn't move by itself. I think they have cockpit video of him moving the lever. Still, it's just the locking lever. Something else went wrong to cause the feathering, if that is what caused the crash. Has that much even been verified yet, or is that just speculation. I'm sure the investigators have plenty of data on the feathering status. They tend to not release too much before they have conclusions though. | ||
| Aesquire |
I could speculate. ... but won't. I do remember a problem a prototype plane had. The landing gear retracted on take off and it dinged the prop. The engineers blamed the pilot for hot dogging, but what happened was a faulty gear switch. The plane had a "squat switch" on the gear to prevent it from being retracted on the ground, sensing weight on the gear. The retract switch in the cockpit had been tested but had shorted out in the retract position. When the weight came off the gear, it retracted. Not saying this is anything like what happened to SS2, but I do wonder. | ||
| Slaughter |
Yeah - you will note NTSB releases "statements-of-fact" - not conclusions. This is a ground-breaking investigation for them. Amazing to see them in action. | ||
| Sifo |
I kind of hate to say it this way, but it's got to be kind of cool for the NTSB to have as much data available as they do on this. That's got to be a nice change from what they normally face. At least there will be some very solid answers to what happened in this case. | ||
| Slaughter |
Tom - you are correct. 16 cameras, radar, thousands of channels of data for structure and controls and all systems. It's a lot of data to go through but it means they won't have to do a lot of heavy reconstruction and guessing. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/election- day-what-happened-to-virgin-atlantic-ss2/ | ||
| Sifo |
Interesting piece there. I hadn't considered that the feathering probably happened under power, along with the implications of doing that. That's a mode that shouldn't be allowed to happen. He made the claim that the NTSB was going to prevent further test flights until their report is finalized though. I'm quite sure this is not true, unless the NTSB has changed their mind on this point. They had clearly stated that they were not grounding further flights. I was also under the impression that it was the copilot that survived. The one who moved the locking lever. I have to admit, I'm pretty shocked that they would have unlocked that control early on a test flight. It's always been my impression that complicated test flights of this sort are very well scripted, and follow a pretty detailed checklist. Even a normal operation checklist wouldn't have them unlocking that control at that point in time. Still, I want to hear it from the NTSB. They tend to tell it like it is and let all politics just deal with the facts. I hope it really doesn't take them as long as they said it might. | ||
| Torquehd |
was this in the news: ? | ||
| Reepicheep |
Very cool video. How neat that I can't tell if it is real or a special effect (but I think it is real). |
