Register here

Author Topic: Stratolaunch  (Read 46163 times)

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #30 on: December 17, 2011, 05:40:24 am »
This underlies a possible launch approach of going uprange, launching, and recovering the first stage of the rocket via a "glide forward" methodology rather than the traditional "boost back" profile, allowing recovery of all assets at the same airport/spaceport and not taking a large deltaV hit on the rocket for the recovery boost.


Huh?  Yeah, right.  How many airports do you think can support this aircraft?  There are just couple that can be used to "launch" the configuration.

Also remember that Mojave is now tagged as a spaceport since the SpaceShip venture was started. I am sure that they will make sure the Stratolauncher can take off from and land there.

Offline Nik

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 382
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #31 on: December 17, 2011, 11:21:59 am »
One outré thought: If those twin hulls carry LOX to top-off the rocket's cryo-tank, there's a slim chance that the aircraft could be fitted with 'jato' nozzles burning kerosene / LOX, reducing the runway requirements at the expense of some range...


Uh, would water-injection, per Harriers' Pegasus engine help ?

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1605
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #32 on: December 18, 2011, 02:56:30 pm »
This underlies a possible launch approach of going uprange, launching, and recovering the first stage of the rocket via a "glide forward" methodology rather than the traditional "boost back" profile, allowing recovery of all assets at the same airport/spaceport and not taking a large deltaV hit on the rocket for the recovery boost.


Huh?  Yeah, right.  How many airports do you think can support this aircraft?  There are just couple that can be used to "launch" the configuration.

Stop being so pessimistic. This can easily be made to work if you simply add a few more completely unproven technologies to the mix as well. If you use a VASIMR engine, powered by a Helium-3 fusion reactor, with guidance provided by space based solar power, it all becomes possible.

Offline RanulfC

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 418
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #33 on: December 19, 2011, 07:34:05 am »
Following list has @ 30 runways in the US that meet or exceed the 12,000ft runway requirement of the carrier aircraft:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_runways
 
Randy

Online George Allegrezza

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 684
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #34 on: December 19, 2011, 09:03:44 am »
Stop being so pessimistic. This can easily be made to work if you simply add a few more completely unproven technologies to the mix as well. If you use a VASIMR engine, powered by a Helium-3 fusion reactor, with guidance provided by space based solar power, it all becomes possible.


You forgot the propellant depots at L1.

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1605
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #35 on: December 19, 2011, 08:04:09 pm »
Stop being so pessimistic. This can easily be made to work if you simply add a few more completely unproven technologies to the mix as well. If you use a VASIMR engine, powered by a Helium-3 fusion reactor, with guidance provided by space based solar power, it all becomes possible.


You forgot the propellant depots at L1.

No, I didn't. I figured that with the inclusion of the unicorn, they weren't necessary.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7256
  • _ \\ //
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2012, 07:54:04 am »
To the Stars

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2012, 02:46:51 pm »
Stratolaunch Systems Announces Ground Breaking At Mojave (Spacedaily.com)

Thanks! I really hope they can get this project to its completion, it is exciting when something that new and that big is undertaken!

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #38 on: April 17, 2012, 12:37:30 pm »
According to the latest issue of Popular Mechanics, the Stratolaunch aircraft is known at Scaled as the Model 351 and named the Roc.

   

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/news/say-hello-to-stratolaunch-the-worlds-largest-plane-6705761?click=pp

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1605
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #39 on: April 17, 2012, 07:53:50 pm »
At their last press conference they indicated that the aircraft would look different than the early concept art. I wonder if this reflects a more accurate version?

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #40 on: July 14, 2012, 06:28:29 pm »
Some information indicating that Scaled was considering using 747s for the Stratolaunch effort seems to be confirmed. A look at the civil register shows that Scaled Composites acquired two Boeing 747-422  (former United Airlines) aircraft: N196UA on March 8, and N198UA on April 14. Both aircraft were built in 1997.

http://www.aircraftone.com/search.asp?pg=2&type=rn&criteria=Scaled+Composites&gid=82DE1B9D-9B4A-46DF-98F0-F223BCBF2696&rc=13&prevpage=1

Offline Byeman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 655
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #41 on: July 15, 2012, 05:03:09 am »
Some information indicating that Scaled was considering using 747s for the Stratolaunch effort seems to be confirmed.

That didn't confirm it.  The many pictures of 747's at the Stratolaunch facility at Mojave did months ago as did their news release.

http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=35339
http://www.stratolaunch.com/news.html
« Last Edit: July 15, 2012, 05:07:04 am by Byeman »

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #42 on: July 15, 2012, 11:24:41 am »
That didn't confirm it.

Fair enough. They could be just snatching engines and stuff OR they could decide to use the fuselages too. It's too early to tell, but I'm tempted to believe that from a financial point of view, a proof-of-concept vehicle would be much less costly to do by joining two proven existing fuselages instead of building two unproven ones from scratch.

Offline Hobbes

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 503
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #43 on: July 15, 2012, 12:10:07 pm »
The 747 fuselage is built for a low wing, which would make it difficult to fit the rocket underneath. They need a high wing.

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6746
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: Stratolaunch
« Reply #44 on: July 15, 2012, 01:42:10 pm »
In principle they could connect 2 747 fuselages with a straight wing segment and carry the rocket on *top*. Separation would be a bit terrifying, but it'd be possible. Also, they could have a "gull wing" center section that bows upwards. Heavy and complex, but doable.
Aerospace Projects Review


And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing