Talk:SpaceShipOne flight 15P

SpaceShipOne flight 15P is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 19, 2004	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Time in space

Do we know how long it spent in space? A few seconds? Rmhermen 23:48, 21 June 2004 (UTC)[reply]

3 1/2 minutes of free fall; that's mentioned in the article. Duration above 100 km is calculable using basic mechanics: just about 10 s. I'll add that to the article. 81.168.80.170 14:48, 18 July 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan's Space Report No. 529 has some figures for the inertial orbit parameters at apogee (-6374 x 100 km x 35.0 deg.) might be useful for producing a semi-accurate sketch. -Wikibob | Talk 23:18, 2004 September 27 (UTC) (Moved from Talk:SpaceShipOne 195.167.169.36 12:17, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC))

SpaceShipOne flight 15P in the news

An article in the New Scientist gives interesting details about this flight including some "potentially catastrophic" glitches. This could be a source of some really interesting additions to this article.

For example:

"Melvill's first frightening moment on the historic flight came at the very instant he flipped the switch to turn on the hybrid rocket motor. The craft suddenly lurched over 90DEG to the right, and as soon as he brought it back to level it then rolled 90DEG to the right."

(link found on Slashdot)

Edit 30 seconds later: I see someone has already started adding this material. mennonot 16:50, 22 June 2004 (UTC)[reply]

X0

Why does X0 redirect to this article? it makes no mention of X0 in the text. —Pengo 22:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name comes from it being the precursor to the first X Prize flight. -- Thinking of England (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since X0 no longer redirects here, should we remove the {{otheruses|X0}}? -- Thinking of England (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After reading WP:Hatnote I decided to remove the {{otheruses|X0}} tag. X0 spaceshot and X0 flight do redirect here (as does SpaceShipOne flight 15), so this is a case of "disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous" -- Thinking of England (talk) 09:35, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

English variant and date format

@Philoserf: Thank you for your cleanup work. I'm skeptical of the use of DMY dates, though. Per MOS:TIES, the fact that Scaled Composites is an American company should have us using American English and MDY dates. However, the US military uses DMY. Do you have any evidence that Scaled Composites follows the military and uses DMY? If not, I think we should flip it to MDY on this article. — voidxor 16:42, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to flip it. I picked one based on "some" aspect of the content. Glad to defer. —¿philoserf? (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]