BBC: "Bert Rutan, the man behind the only aircraft to fly non-stop around the world, is set to unveil what he calls the world's first manned sub-orbital space programme."

Editor's note: With regard to the article by David Whitehouse posted Friday, 18 April, 2003, 13:45 GMT 14:45 UK: Does anyone actually read these BBC stories before they are posted? It would be polite to to spell Mr. Rutan's name properly ("Burt" not "Bert"). Moreover, this is not the "world's first manned sub-orbital space programme". I cannot imagine that Burt Rutan would have ever referred to his new project as the BBC says he did i.e. "he calls the world's first manned sub-orbital space programme".

The U.S. flew several chimps and several humans in Mercury capsules on Redstone rockets, and flew a series of X-15 flights over the course of a decade - 40 years ago. Rutan was behind "the only aircraft to fly non-stop around the world" without refueling !!. It most certainly was not "the only aircraft to fly non-stop around the world". In 1949 Captain James Gallagher and his crew took a B-50 named "Lucky Lady II" and made the first nonstop flight around the world. They were refuelled four times in flight by KB-29 tankers.

Update: In an email sent to NASA Watch late Friday from Burt Rutan, Rutan reports that the actual words used were "History's First Private Manned Space Program". Also, the BBC has now added a few words to its original version of the story (which we have archived) - i.e. "Burt Rutan, the man behind the only aircraft to fly non-stop around the world without refueling, has unveiled what he calls the world's first private space programme." Alas neither the BBC or the author has bothered to tell its readers that it made a number of mistakes by virtue of saying that the article was posted at 13:45 GMT 14:45 UK. So much for honesty from the BBC's online science expert.

There's more:

BBC: "A capsule, rocket motors and the aircraft from which the capsule will be launched into space are to be shown for the first time at Mr Rutan's base in California."

Editor's note: It's an aircraft, not a "capsule".

BBC: "The company also had a major role in the Pegasus rocket which is launched into space from beneath the wing of a carrier rocket."

Editor's note: Pegasus is launched from a converted commercial jetliner, not a rocket. This error has since been corrected in the article.

BBC: "The rocket and capsule that will take the astronauts into space will be air-launched from the Proteus high-altitude aircraft."

Editor's note: No it will not. The aircraft to be used is not Proteus. This error has since been corrected in the article - again, with no note made to readers of the earlier error.

These facts are utterly obvious from the materials posted on Scaled Composite's website. Perhaps if David Whitehouse had waited until the embargo lifted at 1700 GMT he could have looked at the website and gotten all of this correct. Instead, he posted his article at 13:45 GMT including supposed quotes given to the BBC such as "He [Rutan] told BBC News Online: "The event is not about dreams, predictions or mock-ups. We will show actual flight hardware: an aircraft for high-altitude airborne launch, a flight-ready manned spaceship, a new, ground-tested rocket propulsion system and much more." when, in fact, these words (and others in the BBC article attributed to Rutan as quotes given to the BBC) are lifted verbatim from an embargoed email Rutan sent out to various media outlets on 2 April 2003.

Editor's note: David Whitehouse was informed, most explictly and repeatedly, on a previous occassion, that any and all email sent by him to NASA Watch would be subject to publication. I have only issued such a caveat to one journalist: David Whitehouse - and only after he sent me a slew of nasty emails on a previous occassion - including several under a pseudonym. Despite a previous, explicit warning, he has chosen to ignore this notification. It is only under such circumstances that I publish this sort of email. As such, his unsolicited email to me with regard to my comments on his story is presented verbatim, without editorial comment --- except to say that if I indeed held the BBC in the contempt Whitehouse seems to think that I do, then I would not have done more than a dozen interviews with virtually every radio and television service the BBC offers after the Columbia accident. Rather, my issue is with his consistently poor reporting.

From: "David Whitehouse" dr_d_whitehouse@msn.com
Date: Fri Apr 18, 2003 9:00:23 PM US/Eastern
To: NASAWatch@reston.com
Subject: re Nasawatch

Return to NASA Watch