they broke the sound barrier

http://venturebeat.com/2013/04/29/virgin-galactic-flight/

If you were in the Mojave Desert today and heard something loud, it could have been the inaugural test flight of Virgin Galactic’s full spaceship today. The rocket blew past the sound barrier in the first flight-test of its rocket engine today, paving yet another road (if the road was made out of air) to commercial space travel. Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2013/04/29/virgin-galactic-flight/#ZL4uAGTCldYrmdVr.99

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Pln9JKEjFks

I was on a beach one morning on the German island Borkum in the North Sea. There was a military base on the island, so flyovers were common. It was a little overcast and heard the deafening roar of a low flying jet above, followed by the loudest noise I've ever heard. At first I thought for sure that he had crashed but soon realized that he had just broken the sound barrier right over my head. I swear that I felt the sand shake. I never saw the plane.

What the reasoning behind the feathering?

Also, with Virgin Galactic saying it wont go orbital, anyone know enough about space flight to elaborate on what the challenges of orbital vs sub-orbital are?

PHeller wrote: What the reasoning behind the feathering? Also, with Virgin Galactic saying it wont go orbital, anyone know enough about space flight to elaborate on what the challenges of orbital vs sub-orbital are?

Fuel and power. 17,000 mph to get to orbital, give or take a few mph. Fuel burn increases with vehicle weight and speed

Velocity and duration. To do a suborbital lob, you can fire a little rocket for a little bit and copy Alan Shepherd's ballistic arc but to do a John Glenn, you need 17+ thousand mileanhour escape velocity. That takes more fuel than this lil thing can carry. It's still a very cool setup!

PHeller wrote: What the reasoning behind the feathering?

I assume you mean the tail booms. The entire empennage rotates upward during re-entry.

I believe it is done to reduce drag on the tail surfaces during the fastest portion of reentry, but someone more informed than me probably knows better.

I remember seeing Melvill take Space Ship One into the record books. It started an uncontrolled rolling motion on the way down. I thought he might screw the pooch. But he rode it out like a Yeager.

PHeller wrote: What the reasoning behind the feathering?

So sayth Popular Science:

Now for the difficult part: reentry. Traditionally, there have been two dangerous strategies for returning a spacecraft to Earth: the high-speed, heat-intensive, straight-down drops such as those used in the Apollo program, and the precarious, controlled flights of the shuttle. Rutan has devised an ingenious third method for SpaceShipOne. During descent, the entire wing structure of the ship will tilt upwards about 70 degrees, making the entire craft look like a peacock lifting its tail. The wings control and guide the craft as it drops from space, while the fuselage acts as a giant air brake, slowing the ship's descent. The drop is inherently stable, Rutan says: It doesn't require precision maneuvering like the shuttle, and even though the ship hits Mach 3 on the way down (far slower than the Shuttle's re-entry speed), the airbrake system eliminates the need for thick heat shields. At 80,000 feet, the wings return to a level position, and SpaceShipOne returns to Earth as a glider.

Also, with Virgin Galactic saying it wont go orbital, anyone know enough about space flight to elaborate on what the challenges of orbital vs sub-orbital are?

Basically what Jay_W said. The need for fuel is reduced by giving it an initial velocity and height advantage by utilizing WhiteKnightTwo (also a very cool piece of engineering) however SpaceShipTwo would need to be a good order of magnitude larger in order to reach orbit due to it's fuel limitations.

I wish I had the cash to take a ride on something like that.