seems that the Triamese orbiter had a complete Gemini-B stuck in its nose for crew escape. Weird.
Triamese reusable space transportation system has the attractive operational capability and significantly reduced operational cost, The concept has been named Triamese since it uses three virtually identical elements to deliver its payload to orbit, Each element is a rocket-powered, vertical takeoff, horizontal landing, reusable vehicle. Good subsonic performance, attained by variable geometry wings, coupled with the use of turbofan engines provides a cruising capability that enhances both operational and logistics activities. Two of the vehicle elements operate as boosters from liftoff to a staging velocity of about 8,000 - fps, after which they decelerate and fly subsonically to a suitable landing site. The orbital elements, complete with payload, then accelerate to low earth orbit. Prior to staging, the rocket engines of all three elements are operating with propellants from
the booster elements.
Ye olde Marcus Lindroos website, vintage 2001.
And the Triamese entry.
So now we have, in the same thread
- Triamese 1968 tech report
- Triamese early website, vintage 2001
- Triamese 2023: Hazegrayart CGI artwork
Because the Triamese was such a smart concept, on paper at least. Never would have thought, back in 2003, I would ever "see" the Triamese fly in such high-res, realistic CGI.
Delta IV Heavy flew earlierYe olde Marcus Lindroos website, vintage 2001.
And the Triamese entry.
So now we have, in the same thread
- Triamese 1968 tech report
- Triamese early website, vintage 2001
- Triamese 2023: Hazegrayart CGI artwork
Because the Triamese was such a smart concept, on paper at least. Never would have thought, back in 2003, I would ever "see" the Triamese fly in such high-res, realistic CGI.
And now it DOES fly . . . Falcon Heavy . . .
cheers,
Robin.
Even a slightly asymmetrical Bimese is inefficient, because you’re still having a S1:S2 mass ratio that is too close to 1.What works is
- trimese with a second stage (Delta IV is an expendable variant, F9 is reusable, minus the second stage).
- "slightly asymetrical bimese" (per lack of a better name).
The second stage is still expendable and more often than not, the center core is expendable.I t did indeed, and I forgot about it . . .
But the point still stands, as Falcon Heavy is re-usable, as the Triamese was meant to be, whereas, the Delta IV Heavy was purely expendable.
cheers,
Robin.
Pressure fed is used on every launch by the spacecraft.Fly-backs and pressure-feds look to join the thylacene and the dodo
not really workable. And most LV's use pressure for strength.I meant Sea Dragon and the like---though Starship's strength is (partially) from pressure.
Looks like Musk didn't get your memo on fly-backs.Fly-backs and pressure-feds look to join the thylacene and the dodo
flying brickyard. Not much difference. Falcon does it more efficiently, with minimal external support and a smaller area.I stand corrected.
Falcon just gives off “falling locomotive” vibes more than shuttle did.