Register here

Author Topic: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)  (Read 68634 times)

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« on: April 26, 2006, 03:07:35 am »
Thread to discuss configurations of National AeroSpace Plane (X-30) from various contractors.

General Dynamics proporsal graphics.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2007, 03:03:42 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2006, 01:47:25 pm »
Marquardt NASP promo (Marquardt wasn't a contender in NASP gameplay)
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 12:23:26 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #2 on: April 26, 2006, 01:52:38 pm »
Rocketdyne NASP proporsal
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 02:36:43 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2006, 02:00:08 pm »
Rockwell International NASP
« Last Edit: April 26, 2006, 02:06:07 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Meteorit

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 421
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2006, 09:50:18 am »
Nice. Anymore pictures of different companies proposals anyone? As far as I know NASP contractors included Boeing, Lockheed, McDonnell Douglas, General Dynamics and Rockwell, with Pratt & Whitney and General Electric for propulsion research, and Rocketdyne later contributing to NASP under its own funding. I wasn't aware of Marquardt also participating.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #5 on: April 27, 2006, 11:53:10 am »
Boeing NASP proporsal
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 02:42:06 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #6 on: April 27, 2006, 11:57:26 am »
McDonnell Douglas NASP proporsal
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2006, 08:41:26 am »
Scott, don't you have any info on 'right' stuff?

I have annoyingly little hard data on NASP designs, and most of the good stuff I have isn't for public consumption. NASP remains *tightly* controlled and classified. Sadly, a lot of pre-NASP artwork got recycled by the various firms during the NASP days, and a lot of hypersonic transport ("Orient Express") artwork was called NASP. Most of the McD art you show is actually of an HST, not NASP... though the clearly orbital vehicles are shown to have the exact same geometry. NASP then as now was very classified, and non-NASP designs were cranked out for the public. The companies had to show *something.*

An interesting note: The McD designs you show are clearly in the lineage of the X-43 "Hyper-X." Compare the vertical stabilizers and small wings with those of the X-43... they're much the same. The main difference is with the nose; the X-43 has a wide "spatula" nose to capture more air for the engine. And even here, the X-43 is not a unique design; it is a greatly scaled-down version of a Mach 10 recon/strike vehicle derived from NASP work. This McDonnell-Douglas "Phantom Works" project dated from the extremely late 1980's to the late 90's, and might still be alive to some degree.

I was going to direct you to the drawings on my "bomber projects" page since I created 4-views of the Mach 10 cruiser some months ago; but it seems that I haven't updated that page in rather a long time.
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

Offline Sentinel Chicken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 577
  • American 71 Heavy, contact departure 126.47
    • TAILS THROUGH TIME: Short Trips on the Long Road of Aviation History
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2006, 09:25:15 am »
I have annoyingly little hard data on NASP designs, and most of the good stuff I have isn't for public consumption. NASP remains *tightly* controlled and classified.
Oh, he could tell you, but then he'd have to kill you. :D

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #9 on: April 28, 2006, 10:18:59 am »
'As leader of the X-30 National Aerospace Plane team, he well remembers the day that designers decided to experiment with a spatula-shaped fuselage design-now used in most Boeing hypersonic concepts-that was better suited for horizontal flight.

"This was unlike any hypersonic configuration ever conceived," he said. The craft featured a nose like a spatula, sharp leading edges, a highly non-circular body cross-section, and tails like a fighter aircraft. Only a month had been spent on developing what was called the Non-Circular Body, Krieger noted.

"Those of us in the control room who were part of the National AeroSpace Plane team couldn't have been more proud when the X-43A made its first successful flight," he said. "As well as technical achievement, the X-43 symbolizes a determination to think way outside of the box, to leave behind a traditional concept and come up with a breakthrough design." '

*- Bob Krieger, president of Boeing Phantom Works

Boeing Frontiers Online
http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2004/july/ts_sf8a.html
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 10:23:00 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #10 on: April 28, 2006, 10:52:50 am »

"This was unlike any hypersonic configuration ever conceived," he said. The craft featured a nose like a spatula, sharp leading edges, a highly non-circular body cross-section, and tails like a fighter aircraft.


Errr.... the "unlike any hypersonic configuration ever conceived" is plain wrong. Spatular noses for hypersonic designs have been around since at least the early '60's, and the zealous followers of Vincent Burnelli would like to sue the bejeebers out of Boeing for "stealling" the Burnelli GB888 configuration.

http://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/Canada/Canada_Car/burnelli_designs.htm
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

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #11 on: April 28, 2006, 11:27:22 am »
So-called 'converged' design appeared on 10/29/90 AW&ST cover
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 12:25:18 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #12 on: April 28, 2006, 11:31:16 am »
Several months later nose on public pictures became flattened from a blunt cone to a rounded edge wedge, but the rest of the design was consistent with the 10/29/90 AW&ST cover
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 11:47:11 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #13 on: April 28, 2006, 11:59:06 am »
March 1991 NASA Langley photos of NASP Test Technique Demonstrator.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2010, 05:02:44 pm by overscan »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #14 on: April 28, 2006, 12:10:55 pm »
NASA Langley, TDT Tunnell, November 1992 - NASP model is mutating again (if that really NASP-related).
Interesting, that later ARSLS (Advanced Reusable Small Launch System) craft looks pretty close to wind tunnel model.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Dronte

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Argentinean ugly bird
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #15 on: April 29, 2006, 02:17:58 am »
Here two interesting drawings related with the program X-30 that (I believe) are not very well-known.
 
- An illustration of the possible escape system projected for the X-30, based on a ejectable booth  that would reduce the speed until Mach 1.3- 0.7 and a special version  semi-encapsulated of the ejection seats ACES 2 that would complete the escape sequence starting from that speed. Versions were also studied totally encapsulated to the style of those used in the B-58 or the XB-70 but I don't know any illustration of the same ones.

-The second drawing corresponds to the HALO (High Altitude Launching Option) proposed by Lockheed and dedicated to a preliminary exploration of the aerodynamic concepts implied in the X-30.
It was projected to be an airship of 17.7 meters that would be thrown by a SR-71 modified and it would reach speeds from Mach 10-12 to a altitude of 44200 meters.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #16 on: May 01, 2006, 08:26:37 am »
Dronte, thanks a lot, I've never seen both things.
Can you point on a sources?
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #17 on: May 01, 2006, 12:44:58 pm »
Dronte, thanks a lot, I've never seen both things.
Can you point on a sources?

Both of those bits of art were in Popular Mechanics 12 or so years ago.
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

Offline Dronte

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Argentinean ugly bird
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #18 on: May 01, 2006, 09:17:30 pm »
It is this way. The images are of the copies of November '92 and April '93 of the Argentinean edition of PM.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #19 on: May 06, 2006, 03:37:51 am »
This is probably close to 'final' converged X-30 configuration (aka "configuration a202") and 1993 Langley TTD Tunnel photo (intersesting that WT model seems to lack scramjet module somewhere - may be, it's just aeroelastic model) - note that double-delta wings mutated to all-movable rudders while rudders and vertical fins leading edges became swept back.

"An unclassified aeroelastic vehicle representative of the NASP configuration and referred to as the demonstrator model was developed []. A NASP configuration published in Aviation Week served as the basis for this model. A classified model, referred to as the NPO model, provided by the NASP National Project Office provided guidance for modifying the wing and vertical tail planforms and the wing root condition.The planform and profile of the resulting configuration are shown in [pictures 1 and 2]. The vehicle fuselage is 150 feet long and weighs approximately 300,000 lbs fully fueled with a center of gravity at approximately 56 % of the fuselage length. The root leading edge of the all-moveable clipped delta wing begins at 70% fuselage length. The wing has a root chord length of approximately 27% fuselage length, a span of approximately 9.5% fuselage length, a leading edgesweep of 70" and a trailing edge sweep of 15". The pivot shaft attaches at 65% of the wing root chord. The curved symmetric airfoil is thickest at 65% chord where the thickness is 4% of the local chord. The demonstrator model has twin vertical tails with rudders; the rudder is not modeled structurally. The profile view shows that the forward section of the fuselage acts as a compressor for the airflow as it approaches the engine and the aft portion of the fuselage acts as a nozzle for the engine exhaust."

"The model fuselage geometry was based on an unclassified configuration furnished by the NASP contractor team which is headed by the National Program Office (NPO). The NPO had subsequently decided in favor of an all-moveable wing and produced a classified FEM refferd as to the NPO model. A representative all-movable wing was, therefore, developed and included on the unclassified demonstrator FEM shown"

Later mutations include even aerospike engines installed on the boattail between vertical fins according to Scott Lowther aka OrionBlamBlam, that makes this 'final something' close to that ARSLS (Advanced Reusable Small Launch System) concept above.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2007, 10:13:51 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2006, 04:33:53 pm »
For those who really addicted - 20 Mb, 570 pages of

Title: The Hypersonic Revolution. Case Studies in the History of Hypersonic Technology. Volume III: The Quest for the Orbital Jet: The National Aero-Space Plane Program (1983-1995) 
AD Number: ADA441126   Corporate Author: AIR FORCE HISTORICAL STUDIES OFFICE BOLLING AFB DC   Personal Author:           Schwelkart, Larry   Report Date: January 01, 1998   Media: 474 Pages(s)   Distribution Code:           01 - APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE   Report Classification: (Not Available).   Source Code: 447256   From the collection:   Technical Reports

http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=A441126&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

Sometimes it really more detective reading than DaVinci Code, and at least I know how what the hell is 'DuPont Government Baseline' and what the hell duPont did in NASP project.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #21 on: June 06, 2006, 11:35:38 am »
This really funny diagram from NASP ground maintenance subcontractor (Sverdrup) pic shows X-30 vehicle clearance.
Funny is the fact that while first I thought that it can give an idea of pretty exact X-30 dimensions, then I've read that Sverdrup developed them 'by scaling sketches published in the open literature which showed a typical X-30-sized vehicle ajacent to a Boeing 747.'
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2006, 01:46:29 pm »
Boeing
Two design studies were completed, one was 'winged body', so-called government baseline, i.e. scaled-up duPont design, so basically all published illustrations if refered to this study is not far away from truth.
Later Boenig shifted to Langley-promoted conical accelerator, but entered a serious problems as result was VERY long vehicle with myriad stability/engine control problems. Boeing was downselected from competition.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2006, 01:48:59 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #23 on: June 18, 2006, 02:08:25 pm »
Lockheed
Skunk Works started with a lifting body concept like MDC (attached image from Lockheed CFD-realted paper can give an idea of this studies), but then, trying to accelerate design processs, witched from integrating airfame and propulsion system to putting two huge engines on the sides of a vehicle, abandoning the whole idea of integrated vehicle. Lockheed relied on using not-so-sophisticated construction materials. Weight were growing (Lockheeed's craft being the heaviest NASP design reaching almost 400 000 lbs), and Lockheed guys used trick of launching vehicle using set of wheels that dropped off after take-off (not so far from Copper Canyon and duPont concepts of sled launch), with the landing 'glide-style' on vehicle's belly. The other detail known is that initially crew cabin should be close to the center of fuselage and later moved to the nose, that made aviable it's separation as part of crew rescue system. No images are avaible on this design so far. Not surprising that Lockheed was also downselected.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2006, 02:18:07 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline CFE

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 258
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2007, 09:33:32 pm »
The McDD concept is undoubtedly the inspiration for many artists' "Aurora" concepts.  The fact that McDD released these pictures publicly should tell us that Aurora DOESN'T look like these McDD drawings.

I have a pic of the McDD concept in FedEx markings.  I can have it scanned and posted by January.

As for the "a202 configuration," was that an internal NASA design, or did a contractor come up with it?

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #25 on: September 24, 2007, 02:52:19 am »
Recently published AIAA paper has an insight of MDC and GDFW way to the BWB with spatula nose. As we can see, actual early MDC design wasn't so far from the artists' impressions spreaded in the media.

Hypersonic Boundary Layer Transition – Application to High Speed Vehicle Design
AIAA Paper 2007-0310, presented at 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno NV, January 2007
Kei Y. Lau*
Advanced Global Strike Systems
Boeing Company
St. Louis, Missouri 63166

MDC

"In 1986, McDonnell Douglas won a contract under the NASP Technology Maturalization program to develop an experimental database for CFD validation, which was called the Generic Option 2 program. The database was to be used by the government team and the contractors for CFD development works. The shape for Generic Option 2 was chosen to be blended wing body (BWB) configuration derived from a MDC (McDonnell Douglas) design. The BWB configuration has a bi-elliptic cross section (second pic)... [Photo] shows the installation of the 36 inches aerothermal model in the Calspan 96-Inches Shock Tube Facility."
"The Generic Option 2 Aerothermal Test was very successful and generated a set configuration heating data from Mach 11 to 18 at flight Reynolds numbers. The test set includes configurations with sharp and blunt nosetips. It showed some puzzling boundary
layer transition behaviors that were not expected. At zero degree angle of attack, the sharp nose boundary layer transition onset occurred at the expected location. But the blunted nosetip did not move the onset location aft. When the angle of attack was
increased, the sharp nose onset location moved forward and the blunt nose onset location moved aft.
Additional test runs were conducted using distributed roughness strips at nose location. The strip usually worked very effectively on cones at the Calspan tunnels. It tripped the sharp nose boundary layer, but had no effect on the blunted configuration. The early
transition onset with the blunt nose is obviously not an artifact of tunnel noise. An explanation was needed to understand the transition behavior of this class of configuration.
The blunt nose puzzle was resolved after an extensive CFD and boundary layer rack data study. The bi-elliptic forebody was optimized using method of characteristic and streamline tracing during the configuration development. There was no crosstalk
between upper and lower surfaces in sharp configuration analysis. The blunted nosetip was addition for thermal protection purpose afterwards.
The introduction of the blunt nose caused strong crossflow on the windward surface that resulted in flow bi-focation along windward centerline and a thick boundary layer built-up. The crossflow bifocation de-stabilized the boundary layer and caused very early transition along the windward centerline. The crossflow diminished with increasing angle of attack and allowed the onset to move aft. At the nominal design angle of attack of 4 degrees, the blunt nose had a small effect in delaying transition onset compared to the sharp nose data, but the result nonuniformity of boundary layer circumferentially is causing drag increase and inlet performance impact.
In late 1986, the MDC NASP program established a tiger team to investigate the scramjet engine to airframe integration. In addition to mechanical issues, the figure of merits included propulsion performance, vehicle controllability, boundary layer control, thrust
vs. drag trade-off, inlet performance and flight angularity sensitivity. The lessons learned from Generic Option 2 test program on the difficulty in boundary layer control of a bi-elliptic shape was one of the consideration when MDC made a major configuration switch to a Non-circular-body (NCB) design.
In 1987, Beckwith reported difference in boundary layer transition onset between wedge and cone to NASP symposium at AMES based on an earlier AIAA paper he published on quiet flow tunnel design <...> The discovery helped affirm the decision to further develop the NCB configuration by the McDonnell Douglas NASP team. This configuration eventually evolved into the NASP
forebody shape as we know it today.

In the late 1980’s, two sets of configuration boundary layer transition database were created by the contractors. The McDonnell Douglas tested with an early NCB (Non-Circular Body) design Configuration to gain more insight into boundary layer transition behavior of planar flow. The model was built of machined solid stainless steel block and micro-polish to better than 1 micron finish. Surface mounted pitot tube was used for transition onset detection. The test successfully demonstrated that the NCB configuration behaved like a wedge in transition onset. < Third pic> shows the MDC test model."

GD(FW)
"The General Dynamic-Fort Worth team took a different approach and tested four generic configurations. <Fourth pic> shows the GD-FW test models.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2007, 04:11:24 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #26 on: September 24, 2007, 03:13:48 am »
Found sevaral more MDC Generic Option 2 Aerothermal Test configuration pics.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2007, 03:19:00 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #27 on: September 24, 2007, 04:13:10 am »
As for the "a202 configuration," was that an internal NASA design, or did a contractor come up with it?

a202 was unified contractors/NASA design, a symbiosis of best design concepts
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #28 on: October 19, 2007, 10:40:03 am »
Found some better quality GD NASP publicity leaflet
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline John21

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #29 on: October 19, 2007, 08:16:23 pm »
How much would the technology help the commercial/private aircraft business if it was declassified today? I can understand keeping SOME things secret but why haven't these kind of air/spacecraft materialized into the public domain for commercial use? Maybe I just have a hard time understanding government bureacracy and secrecy. Or maybe I just don't plain trust them. >:( :(

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #30 on: October 19, 2007, 08:33:43 pm »
How much would the technology help the commercial/private aircraft business if it was declassified today? I can understand keeping SOME things secret but why haven't these kind of air/spacecraft materialized into the public domain for commercial use? Maybe I just have a hard time understanding government bureacracy and secrecy. Or maybe I just don't plain trust them. >:( :(

Because this kind of stuff is probably more useful militarily than commercially.  They can't even make Mach 1.5 commercially viable let alone Mach 25.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #31 on: November 08, 2007, 04:57:58 pm »
This is Lockheed NASP semi-final configuration with podded scramjet engines. Various engine modules number and position were studied, but the core idea was moving scramjet modules off the fuselage.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2007, 05:03:26 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #32 on: January 15, 2008, 04:41:41 am »
'Unified' X-30 a202 configuration publicity desktop model
« Last Edit: January 15, 2008, 04:44:07 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #33 on: April 15, 2008, 06:18:52 am »
Actually, with the high level of probability, *this* is final X-30 confuguration.
At least Pratt&Whitney paper authors state so.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #34 on: April 21, 2008, 10:34:03 am »
Another NASP promo from Rockwell International
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1008
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #35 on: April 21, 2008, 03:32:00 pm »
Was the NASP (1983-1995)  supposed to have the same payload as the Space-Shuttle? 

Or was that never published?

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #36 on: April 22, 2008, 07:18:03 am »
Was the NASP (1983-1995)  supposed to have the same payload as the Space-Shuttle? 

Or was that never published?

Aerospaceplane (1957-1963) from 30,000 to 38,000 pounds
duPont NASP - 2,500 pounds
('During 1984, amid the Copper Canyon activities, Tony duPont devised a conceptual
configuration that evolved into the program’s baseline. It had a gross weight of 52,650 pounds, which included a 2,500-pound payload that it was to carry to polar orbit. Its weight of fuel was 28,450 pounds. The propellant mass fraction, the ratio of these quantities, then was 0.54. The fuel had low density and was bulky, demanding high weight for the tankage and airframe. To save weight, duPont’s concept had no landing gear. It lacked reserves of fuel; it was to reach orbit by burning its last drops. Once there it could not execute a controlled deorbit, for it lacked maneuvering rockets as well as fuel and oxidizer for them. DuPont also made no provision for a reserve of weight to accommodate normal increases during development.' - Heppenheimer)
NASP X-30 - 0,000
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1008
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #37 on: April 22, 2008, 06:43:02 pm »
What's the payload capacity of the Space Shuttle?

Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 818
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #38 on: April 23, 2008, 12:18:03 am »
What's the payload capacity of the Space Shuttle?

Kendra,

the payload capability of the Space Shuttle is in the Public Domain. It is easily accessible.

Starviking

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2008, 12:02:13 pm »
The search engine is your friend. So say we all.  :P
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1008
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #40 on: April 23, 2008, 12:14:27 pm »
flateric,

Just out of curiousity, if the X-30 was built and flown, and then paved the way for a space-shuttle replacement, it would have had the same capacity as the old Orbiter, correct?


Kendra Lesnick

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #41 on: April 23, 2008, 12:44:38 pm »
All depends of a *size* of this follow-on. All depends on how much payload nation wants to transport to orbit currently. Energiya could launch 100 tonns to LEO, but *what* to launch? Do you have payloads for the horse? Or donkey will be enough?
« Last Edit: April 23, 2008, 12:48:44 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #42 on: April 25, 2008, 04:33:42 am »
From 1993 Lockheed paper come these drawings, while text mentions it as 'configuration very close to X-30' (usual trick)
Dimensions given are lenght 150 ft, with 60 ft wingspan
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #43 on: May 23, 2008, 12:37:20 pm »
P&W NASP promo lithograph. Of course, P&W logo on scramjet module should be *such* a size, approximately 2 meters in a diameter...
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 12:38:57 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #44 on: June 17, 2008, 10:11:04 am »
Another promo from McDonnell Douglas
Soon we will have the largest NASP images collection on te web (or have it already)
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline pometablava

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 3145
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #45 on: June 17, 2008, 01:51:58 pm »
Quote
Soon we will have the largest NASP images collection on te web (or have it already)

Soon we will be a reference forum ;)

avatar

  • Guest
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #46 on: June 19, 2008, 05:09:43 am »
Hey   I believe  that SPF is already  a super reference forum .  8)

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #47 on: October 18, 2008, 05:22:36 pm »
...leaky-leaky
« Last Edit: October 18, 2008, 05:24:27 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #48 on: October 19, 2008, 12:30:56 am »
HALO (High Altitude Launching Option) proposed by Lockheed and dedicated to a preliminary exploration of the aerodynamic concepts implied in the X-30.
It was projected to be an airship of 17.7 meters that would be thrown by a SR-71 modified and it would reach speeds from Mach 10-12 to a altitude of 44200 meters.

Here goes the HALO itself...
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #49 on: October 19, 2008, 10:06:11 am »
Was this HALO an unmanned version? I still remember the Popular Mechanics issue in '92 that showing a manned, mini X-30 launching from a Blackbird under the name HALO.
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #50 on: October 19, 2008, 11:06:21 am »
HALO (dubbed High Altitude Launching Option in PM article, actually being Hypersonic LAunch Option configuration), is a subscale X-30 configuration for launch from the back of NASAs SR-71, being studied along X-30 model missile launch as cheap alternative for NASP tests at the age of program last convulsions.

Quote
The HALO is a conceived as a man-rated vehicle to be air launched from an SR-71 platform and is proposed as a testbed for an airbreathing hydrogen scramjet. A feasibility study has been performed and indicates that the proposed trajectory is possible with minimal modifications to the existing SR71 vehicle. The mission consists of launching the HALO off the top of an SR-71 at Mach 3 and 80,000 ft. A rocket motor is then used to accelerate the vehicle to the test condition. After the scramjet test is completed the vehicle will glide to a lakebed runway landing. This option provides reusability of the vehicle and scramjet engine. The HALO design will also allow for various scramjet engine and flowpath designs to be flight tested.

This is to my knowledge, the only first-hands HALO illustration ever appeared.

More reading

The Hypersonic Revolution. Case Studies in the History of Hypersonic Technology.
Volume III: The Quest for the Orbital Jet: The National Aero-Space Plane Program (1983-1995)
http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=A441126&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20010111034
Design of a Flush Airdata System (FADS) for the Hypersonic Air Launched Option (HALO) Vehicle
AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 12th, 20-24 Jun. 1994, Colorado Springs, CO, United States
« Last Edit: October 19, 2008, 11:07:56 am by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #51 on: October 19, 2008, 11:13:26 am »
Nice find. As for the HALO version I mentioned earlier, it's on page 2 of this thread
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Offline CFE

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 258
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #52 on: October 20, 2008, 09:22:28 pm »
What would have prevented HALO from suffering the same fate as the D-21 drone?  I assume they'd limit the launch speed and point the mothership into a shallow, nose-down attitude prior to separation.

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #53 on: October 20, 2008, 09:47:05 pm »
What would have prevented HALO from suffering the same fate as the D-21 drone?

Nothing.

There are reasons why "Hey, let's launch this off the back of an SR-71" concepts don't seem to get built.
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

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #54 on: October 24, 2008, 02:04:44 pm »
dubbed in 1991s contractor's paper as 'declassified preliminary McDonnell Douglas NASP configuration', this pic gives some clues of vehicle size
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #55 on: October 24, 2008, 02:26:01 pm »
Of course it's from MCD. Like any family, it has certain prominent features.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2009, 07:41:09 am by XP67_Moonbat »
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #56 on: October 24, 2008, 02:33:07 pm »
Maybe that thread on MCD Hypersonic Projects, 60's and 70's, should be expanded to include the 80's and 90's. All these projects have a really strong family resemblance.
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Offline airrocket

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Dreams To Reality
    • Retro Flight
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #57 on: October 24, 2008, 07:06:52 pm »
MCD hypersonic reasearch.....Shock Confined Combustion, base burning, LH2 vaporized ISP injection, all weather metal TPS......!  MCD was gold in the sixties. That heritage still exists in today's dreams. Unfortunately those dreams seem father from reality today than they were then.
Vis Viva

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #58 on: October 24, 2008, 09:48:57 pm »
What would have prevented HALO from suffering the same fate as the D-21 drone?  I assume they'd limit the launch speed and point the mothership into a shallow, nose-down attitude prior to separation.

There were successful launches of the D before the destruction of 941 and the
loss of Ray Torrick.

Granted, there were also additional challenges in launching an airbreather from the back
of the M.

I was involved in the restoration of the M and the D at Seattle Museum of Flight (SMOF)
and I can tell you that NASA retained 940's post when 940 was sent to SMOF to go on
display. We were supplied a suitable non-functional replacement to use for the exhibit by
a SMOF donor.

So I think NASA was thinking of using 940's post possibly on a SR in the future or retaining
it for future reference for something else. This was some time ago of coarse.

Offline CFE

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 258
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #59 on: October 26, 2008, 03:19:01 pm »
Possibly the post was being retained for the LASRE program, the mounting of an aerospike rocket engine to an SR-71.  NASA's Blackbird flew with LASRE in place (was this a mockup or actual flight hardware?) but never ignited the rocket in-flight.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #60 on: October 26, 2008, 03:53:21 pm »
Escape capsule for Boeing's 1988 horizontal-take-off and landing 'Hypervelocity Technology Vehicle'...mmm...familiar 'conical accelerator' shapes...

source
HYPERVELOCITY TECHNOLOGY (HVT) CREW ESCAPE
Lanny A. Jines, P.E.
Aerospace Engineer
Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories
Flight Dynamics Laboratory
Crew Escape and Subsystems Branch
Air Crew Escape Group
WPAFB, OH 45433
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 19433

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #62 on: November 16, 2009, 10:52:14 am »
oh my
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #63 on: November 16, 2009, 11:47:23 am »

Ah the danger of out of context quotes and missing
a few key words!!

A little clarity to shine on this:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-7825209.html

Pratt says low speed propulsion for NASP exceeds goals.
(Pratt & Whitney Group; National Aero-Space Plane)
Defense Daily | June 14, 1989 | COPYRIGHT 1989 Access Intelligence, LLC.
This material is published under license from the publisher through the
Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. 
All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group.

PRATT SAYS LOW SPEED PROPULSION FOR NASP EXCEEDS GOALS.

Pratt & Whitney, which is competing with Rocketdyne to build the propulsion
system for the X-30 National Aerospace Plane (NASP), reports that its
"low-speed" system to power the NASP from takeoff to Mach 7 has exceeded
performance goals during initial tests. The NASP's scramjet takes over
propulsion from Mach 7. Joseph Zimonis, Pratt & ...


Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #64 on: November 16, 2009, 03:39:55 pm »
exactly what was NASP's propulsion system to take it from 0 to Mach 7 suppose to be?   ???
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline quellish

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • I am not actually here.
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #65 on: November 16, 2009, 05:19:29 pm »
exactly what was NASP's propulsion system to take it from 0 to Mach 7 suppose to be?   ???

For a long time, classified.
If I remember correctly, it was an ejector ramjet
« Last Edit: November 16, 2009, 05:59:23 pm by quellish »

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #66 on: November 16, 2009, 06:58:15 pm »

If you read T.A. Heppenheimer's "Facing The Heat Barrier: A History of Hypersonics",
he indicates that the X-30 was to use for its Low Speed System (LSS), the
Special System, an ejector ramjet and the Low Speed Oxidizer System, which used
LACE. (Footnote 28: 1989 NASP Technical Maturation Plan, task 2.1.02; Air Power History,
Fall 2000, diagram, p. 26; DTIC ADB-191715, p. ES-4; ADB-968993, p. 24.)

They didn't have it working by the time the program ran out of money, so
were going to use a rocket instead, and then come back to LACE later.

Read the story starting on pg. 239 (top) to pg 244, ending at "Materials"
(these are the page nos. on the bottoms of the actual pages).

This book is available for download from NASA:
http://history.nasa.gov/sp4232-part1.pdf
http://history.nasa.gov/sp4232-part2.pdf
http://history.nasa.gov/sp4232-part3.pdf

Pretty Interesting!

Offline quellish

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • I am not actually here.
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #67 on: November 16, 2009, 09:33:53 pm »

Pretty Interesting!


Pretty loud either way!

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #68 on: November 16, 2009, 11:59:14 pm »

Yes Dan, definitely loud.

You're right, an ejector.

I think we're going to hear more about cryo-cooling however.
You can get a  nice pressure ratio!


Offline quellish

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • I am not actually here.
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #69 on: November 17, 2009, 11:15:13 am »

Yes Dan, definitely loud.

You're right, an ejector.

I think we're going to hear more about cryo-cooling however.
You can get a  nice pressure ratio!



I'd forgotten about the LACE aspect of it. Around the same time, Rockwell was looking at LACE and related things. A good amount of their own money was spent on it, which was surprising considering how difficult it can be to get working.
MIPPC seemed very promising before it "disappeared"

Offline Meteorit

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 421
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2009, 02:07:48 am »
Does anyone have a three-view drawing of the "duPont Government Baseline" vehicle? Also any dimensional info besides the TOGW of 50,000 pounds? I've been thinking for some time of making a 3D model of this design to go along my 3D Tu-2000A that shares a very similar configuration. Would make for an interesting comparison; also perhaps eventually have it flyable in the Orbiter simulator.

Image from The Hypersonic Revolution. Case Studies in the History of Hypersonic Technology. Vol.3 referenced above.

Offline archipeppe

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1457
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #71 on: December 16, 2009, 02:24:03 am »
Does anyone have a three-view drawing of the "duPont Government Baseline" vehicle? Also any dimensional info besides the TOGW of 50,000 pounds? I've been thinking for some time of making a 3D model of this design to go along my 3D Tu-2000A that shares a very similar configuration. Would make for an interesting comparison; also perhaps eventually have it flyable in the Orbiter simulator.

Image from The Hypersonic Revolution. Case Studies in the History of Hypersonic Technology. Vol.3 referenced above.


If someone has that 3 views, even very rough, I will restitute it in full-colour drawing.

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #72 on: January 02, 2010, 06:26:17 pm »
A few pages from a General Dynamics brochure from the late 1980's calling for the development of the National Aerospace Plane. The first page shows a design I'm otherwise unfamiliar with.
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

Offline Meteorit

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 421
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #73 on: January 03, 2010, 11:37:43 am »
I think it could be the "defense" NDV on the second page, or a variant thereof.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #74 on: January 24, 2010, 08:27:05 pm »
Larger version of an artist's concept of the Rockwell X-30 proposal.

Source: Orionblamblam's 'Unwanted Blog' http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=2585
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 11:30:35 pm by flateric »

Offline Meteorit

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 421
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #75 on: March 27, 2010, 04:57:16 pm »
Some NASP videos found at Youtube:

For those who thought Star Wars was too realistic: duPont baseline first deploys a satellite from a sizeable payload bay and then takes some passengers to a space station. Also has a lovely NASP scale model (I want one!  ;D).




At least this one has sufficient amount of "if"s, "may"s and "might"s. Gotta admire that heatproof strobelight on the X-30's bottom. Contains some shots of X-30 simulator cockpit.

« Last Edit: October 11, 2010, 03:00:50 am by flateric »

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #76 on: March 27, 2010, 05:30:55 pm »

For those who thought Star Wars was too realistic: duPont baseline first deploys a satellite from a sizeable payload bay and then takes some passengers to a space station.

Wow. Now that's some impressively low-rez computer animation...

Quote
Also has a lovely NASP scale model (I want one!  ;D).

I've got that one. Actually, it's the only official desktop model I have that's display-worthy. Been contemplating recasting it.

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

Offline ozmosis

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #77 on: June 09, 2010, 04:03:19 pm »
Here is an image from I believe popular mechanics showing an American Airline version of the NASP  (can anyone find out which exact issue that was?)  And below that is a model I used to have of the Orient Express.

Lastly I want to know if anyone here has any old issues of air and space magazine.  The Aug/Sept 1986 issue had on the cover a really neat illustration of the NASP, along with more pictures and an article on the inside.  I can never find this issue on ebay or anywhere else.  Matter of fact if anyone here knows good online stores to buy old magazines I would most appreciate it.

Offline ozmosis

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #78 on: June 09, 2010, 05:22:57 pm »
Robert McCall paintings (From his official website)

notice the first one seems based on the Boeing design and the last 2 look like the Rockwell design

Offline Mark Nankivil

  • Archive Raider
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #79 on: August 20, 2010, 07:10:47 am »
Greetings All -

A nice looking model of a concept for the X-30 NASP:

http://cgi.ebay.com/TOPPING-PENWAL-X-30-NASP-OLD-CONCEPT-SPACE-MODEL-EXLNT-/200508723226?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0

Enjoy the Day! Mark

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #80 on: August 20, 2010, 08:08:33 am »
Penwal X-30 concept model

Quote
I bought several X-30 concepts from a Pratt & Whitney engineer and this is a duplicate. As a part of a five-company team, Pratt & Whitney pursued propulsion technologies for the National Aerospace Plane (NASP); the prototype aircraft was designated X-30. This model was made sometime in the 1980’s by Penwal, one of the companies founded by Topping Models alumni  (Walt Hyatt with Jerry Pennington) after Topping’s closing in 1965. It is in excellent shape, with the tiniest bit of yellowing that should clean up nicely with Novus #2 cleaner/polish (although I would just leave it). But there are no chips, breaks, dings, scrapes, flakes, or any other flaws anywhere. Never broken, never repaired--it’s in excellent condition. The fuselage is just over 16” long and the wingspan is 4 inches. The model is made of a solid, heavy and hard injection-molded material and is exceptionally well finished. There are red and blue markings running the length of the fuselage and up the vertical stabilizer. The cockpit windows are gray, the nose is black. Small American flags mark the left wing and each side of the stabilizer. The words “United States of America” run along both sides of the fuselage. The model sits firmly on the stand via two deep pins but is easily removed. The like-new base is a richly finished custom wood faceted triangle with black Plexiglas upright. There is a small Pratt & Whitney eagle logo on it, and a gold nameplate with “X-30 National Aerospace Plane” printed in black. Underneath is a mint label bearing Penwal’s name, logo, and Chino address.The three original protective felt dots are like new. Model will be fastidiously packed with insurance and tracking included.


Offline Mark Nankivil

  • Archive Raider
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #81 on: August 20, 2010, 09:31:57 am »
Thanks Triton!  Mark

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #82 on: August 20, 2010, 10:46:26 am »
Thanks Triton!  Mark

You're welcome.  :) Thank you for finding the model, Mark!
« Last Edit: August 20, 2010, 11:38:16 am by Triton »

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #83 on: October 02, 2010, 08:22:35 am »
Some additional NASP art:


Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #84 on: October 02, 2010, 08:35:21 am »
Some additional NASP art:



Offline OM

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 753
    • OMBlog
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #85 on: October 02, 2010, 11:59:11 pm »
Quote
Gotta admire that heatproof strobelight on the X-30's bottom.

...That's the Photonic Pulse Drive  ;D

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #86 on: October 09, 2010, 12:45:13 pm »
Some additional NASP art:

and some more:


Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #87 on: October 09, 2010, 01:13:39 pm »
DSE, thanks for these rarities
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #88 on: October 10, 2010, 03:21:10 am »
DSE, thanks for these rarities

You're welcome. I was doing some cleaning up and came across these. I'd even forgotten I had the HYTEST brochure.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #89 on: October 11, 2010, 02:52:38 am »
generic NASP baseline educational leaflet
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #90 on: October 30, 2010, 12:30:08 pm »
Quote
Six Copper Canyon/NASP tunnel entries were completed in the 16’TT between 1984 and 1993. Hypersonic technology development in the 16’TT actually started prior to the NASP program with an air breathing launch vehicle study in 1974 and continued up to facility shutdown in 2004 with nine Pegasus/X-43 entries.
The photograph shows a front view of one of the early Copper Canyon NASP configurations mounted in the 16-Foot Transonic Tunnel. The configuration was a winged cone (forebody/truncated cone (afterbody) with a ring of air-breathing supersonic combustion ramjets (or scramjets) completely circling the body.

http://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/historic/16-Foot_Transonic_Tunnel
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #91 on: October 30, 2010, 01:11:49 pm »
Six Copper Canyon/NASP tunnel entries were completed in the 16’TT between 1984 and 1993. Hypersonic technology development in the 16’TT actually started prior to the NASP program with an air breathing launch vehicle study in 1974 and continued up to facility shutdown in 2004 with nine Pegasus/X-43 entries.

Hmmm, not sure why they stopped with the history at that point. The final test was also related to hypersonic airbreathing propulsion. The NASP 5B powered model was retested to get vehicle nozzle data to verify the methods being to predict the aftbody performance for the ISTAR vehicle in the transonic regime. Predicting where the overexpanded engine flow shocks back up to ambient is a tough problem especially when doing less than full up hi-res 3-D CFD during configuration development studies. In some cases the simpler methods didn't even get the sense of the pitching moment correct.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 01:26:26 pm by flateric »

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #92 on: November 02, 2010, 10:30:44 am »
Hmmm, not sure why they stopped with the history at that point. The final test was also related to hypersonic airbreathing propulsion. The NASP 5B powered model was retested to get vehicle nozzle data to verify the methods being to predict the aftbody performance for the ISTAR vehicle in the transonic regime. Predicting where the overexpanded engine flow shocks back up to ambient is a tough problem especially when doing less than full up hi-res 3-D CFD during configuration development studies. In some cases the simpler methods didn't even get the sense of the pitching moment correct.

Well, I'm wrong. I guess the NGLT mention was this last test. Note that ISTAR was also the rbcc variant of X-43B. Ugly newspaper clipping:


Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #93 on: November 02, 2010, 10:40:19 am »
I just wonder how funny Boeing's 'Conical Accelerator' NASP configuration would look resting on its - quite trickily designed I assume - landing gears.
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #94 on: November 02, 2010, 02:27:37 pm »
I just wonder how funny Boeing's 'Conical Accelerator' NASP configuration would look resting on its - quite trickily designed I assume - landing gears.

The government baseline?

I don't think I've ever seen it with landing gear.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #95 on: November 02, 2010, 03:29:26 pm »
nope
that one in Langley WT
other clues are
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,250.msg44404.html#msg44404
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5238.msg41501.html#msg41501
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,250.msg2636.html#msg2636

According to Hypersonic Revolution Vol.III by Larry Schweikart -

Two Boeing design studies were completed, one was 'winged body', so-called government baseline, i.e. scaled-up duPont design, so basically all published illustrations if refered to this study is not far away from truth.
Later Boenig shifted to Langley-promoted (sic!) conical accelerator, but entered a serious problems as result was VERY long vehicle with myriad stability/engine control problems. Boeing was downselected from competition.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2010, 03:31:57 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline quellish

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1949
  • I am not actually here.
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #96 on: November 02, 2010, 03:55:35 pm »
The original du Pont design had no landing gear:
"To save weight, duPont’s concept had no landing gear. It lacked reserves of fuel; it was to reach orbit by burning its last drops. Once there it could not execute a controlled deorbit, for it lacked maneuvering rockets as well as fuel and oxidizer for them. DuPont also made no provision for a reserve of weight to accommodate normal increases during development."

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,250.msg33427.html#msg33427

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #97 on: November 02, 2010, 04:13:09 pm »
The original du Pont design had no landing gear:
"To save weight, duPont’s concept had no landing gear. It lacked reserves of fuel; it was to reach orbit by burning its last drops. Once there it could not execute a controlled deorbit, for it lacked maneuvering rockets as well as fuel and oxidizer for them. DuPont also made no provision for a reserve of weight to accommodate normal increases during development."

More humorous was the contention that one engine design had "no moving parts." It was the "airframe" surface that moved. I can't remember if that was the duPont or Billig design.

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #98 on: November 02, 2010, 04:14:50 pm »
I just wonder how funny Boeing's 'Conical Accelerator' NASP configuration would look resting on its - quite trickily designed I assume - landing gears.

How much different would this had been than DC-X?

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #99 on: November 02, 2010, 04:20:27 pm »
Well, duPont baseline 3-view in last edition of Jay Miller's 'X-Planes' (source unknown, labelled among with two other drawings in collage - last ones are definitely from official papers - as 'from Armand Chaput collection) - has some fimsy landing gear wheels position shown (say, MLG struts should be too high and dangerously close to fuselage CM counting vehicle shape and weight of powerplant).
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #100 on: November 02, 2010, 04:29:06 pm »
How much different would this had been than DC-X?
Delta Clipper was a honest Heinlein-style VTVL rrrocket from my childhood books, and bad things happen to her when she tried to laid in its back (the thing what Conical Accelerator NASP should have done repeatedly in standart mode) ;)
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline mz

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 681
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #101 on: November 03, 2010, 04:12:13 pm »
Maybe you would have had much less trim problems with the conical accelerator design.

Everybody interested in NASP should read the book listed by flateric, it's freely available online.

Well, basically anybody interested in large government programs.

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #102 on: November 04, 2010, 02:05:53 am »
nope
that one in Langley WT
other clues are
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,250.msg44404.html#msg44404
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5238.msg41501.html#msg41501
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,250.msg2636.html#msg2636

According to Hypersonic Revolution Vol.III by Larry Schweikart -

Two Boeing design studies were completed, one was 'winged body', so-called government baseline, i.e. scaled-up duPont design, so basically all published illustrations if refered to this study is not far away from truth.
Later Boenig shifted to Langley-promoted (sic!) conical accelerator, but entered a serious problems as result was VERY long vehicle with myriad stability/engine control problems. Boeing was downselected from competition.

OK I thought after I posted that you may have meant that escape
capsule design vehicle. That design looks like it may block some of the
inlet flow on the top of the vehicle at positive angles of attack.
Not sure how serious that design was or whether it was just something
to show to work out the escape capsule idea.

Flateric, there have been A LOT of conical hypersonic vehicles
that have been analyzed.

Besides the ones you mentioned, a few more that come to mind:
- Tony Ferri's famous conical design he proposed with thermal compression
  and held up by his GASL guys during NASP as something to look at.
- At least two (maybe a few more) from Republic that I have that are not
  in a good enough form to share.
- NASA Langley's RBCC Generic Accelerator Wind Tunnel model that Bill Escher
  talks about in some of his RBCC papers.
- Bill Escher's Synerjet
- USAF cone shaped vehicle in Sweetman's Aurora book shown taking off (concept).
  It's like from USAF XD Dept. or something like that, at Wright Patterson.

I'm sure there are many more.

I agree it would be nice to know what the actual NASP contractor proposals
were, but when I read "Hypersonic Revolution", first, it's like a program
management book, not a technical book, and the feeling I'm left with
is that nobody knew what to build and that there was a lot of posturing.

To build this bird you don't throw billions at it, make an impossible goal,
and give it to airframe and engine companies who don't believe in it because
the textbook on how to do it isn't on their shelves. You give some resources
to the guys that are passionate about it and have done the work on it up to
that point. You assign an airframe and engine contractor to offer advice. But
basically get out of the f----- way! Would you have gone SSTO? Probably not,
but you would have gotten to mid-teens Mach with a few research vehicles.
And that would have been AWESOME !!

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
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

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #104 on: January 26, 2011, 01:37:00 pm »
I do have some interest in this, but find the size of the verticals to
be a bit excessive.

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #105 on: April 11, 2011, 01:24:11 am »
Another promotional leaflet of the "converged" design which I have not seen on this thread before:

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #106 on: April 11, 2011, 02:10:46 am »
sincere thanks for this!
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #107 on: April 11, 2011, 02:57:46 am »
the HALO (High Altitude Launching Option) proposed by Lockheed and dedicated to a preliminary exploration of the aerodynamic concepts implied in the X-30.
It was projected to be an airship of 17.7 meters that would be thrown by a SR-71 modified and it would reach speeds from Mach 10-12 to a altitude of 44200 meters.

Just a thought: could this HALO be related to the one that was supposed to be a secret British stealth aircraft in the 1990s? Here is an article found online and especially translated for this post:

Quote
The HALO

The HALO (High Altitude, Low Observable) is said to be a secret aircraft of triangular shape tested in United Kingdom skies. Rumours have it that the HALO is an unmanned prototype that might prefigure the next generation of stealth reconnaissance aircraft and play down the technology of the F-117A and the B-2 bomber. The HALO may be supersonic and fly to speeds up to 3000 mph. It is said to be developed at British Aerospace's Warton, Lancashire, facility.

The HALO has already been mentioned several times in British press. The January 5, 1997 edition of the Sunday Mirror reported: « Rumours about a possible British stealth aircraft by the name of HALO (High Altitude, Low Observable) have suddenly gained more credibility when a Lancashire photographer accidentally took a picture of one of those aircraft while he was busy shooting landscapes. The triangular aircraft mysteriously appeared on one of his pictures. "The strangest thing about it is how silent the aircraft is", said the photographer, who prefered to remain anonymous ».

Ufologist McAndrew explains that « hundreds of triangular UFOs have been spotted in England, especially over Lancashire. ». Such sightings were so numerous that the UFO received the nickname « Silent Vulcan ».

« Witnesses describe a 30-ft triangular silvery object, with no visible wings or engines » McAndrew said. « Others have observed these UFOs escorted by two Tornado jets ». The objects flies like nothing else. It can stop to a standstill then pass by and rush away at alarming speed. ».

The United Kingdom possesses numerous airbases capable of hosting and testing such aircraft. From 1992 to 1994, £100 million were spent on developing stealth technology in England.  This included, for instance, the building of a Research & Development Complex in Warton in 1995. Researchers generally consider that the following two airbases are involved in stealth projects:

RAF MACRIHANISH - It is located at the top of the Kintyre peninsula on the west coast of Scotland, and was previously used by U.S. SEALS. In the 1980s, some F-117s were tested on that base. The alleged Aurora is said to use this base in Europe.

RAF WEST FREUGH - Also located on the west coast of Scotland, this could be host to the HALO aircraft.


Source of the article is disputable since it is a French website devoted to UFO sightings. Also the translation being done from the French (which itself relied heavily on initial English language material) I do not guarantee that the quotes included are word-for-word equivalents of the originals.

Source: http://quelquechosedansleciel.wordpress.com/plasma-springs/
(also in PDF form)

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #108 on: April 11, 2011, 03:23:11 am »
Just a thought: could this HALO be related to the one that was supposed to be a secret British stealth aircraft in the 1990s?
no way
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline ozmosis

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #109 on: April 11, 2011, 10:17:53 pm »
Popular Mechanics - August 1986 - America's Orient Express

Offline ozmosis

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #110 on: April 11, 2011, 10:19:53 pm »
Popular Science - November 1991 - X-30: Out Of This World In A Scramjet

Offline ozmosis

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #111 on: April 11, 2011, 10:21:19 pm »
*Continued from above*

Offline XP67_Moonbat

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #112 on: April 12, 2011, 09:10:25 am »
Funny you should mention the HALO concept. I was just thinking about  that the other day. I used to have the PM article on it waaaay back when. Don't know what happened to it. My folks tossed out a lot of stuff after I left for the service.
In God we trust, all others we monitor. :-p

Offline ozmosis

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #113 on: April 12, 2011, 09:38:23 am »
Funny you should mention the HALO concept. I was just thinking about  that the other day. I used to have the PM article on it waaaay back when. Don't know what happened to it. My folks tossed out a lot of stuff after I left for the service.

Popular Mechanics - January 1993 - First Scramjet Could Piggyback On Blackbird

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #114 on: April 15, 2011, 12:39:39 pm »
A McDAC incarnation, a bit chewed up

« Last Edit: April 16, 2011, 09:16:12 am by DSE »

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #115 on: April 15, 2011, 12:40:55 pm »
and a conical incarnation, uhmmm Gov't Baseline, cica 1980. Thanks to sferrin for jogging the addled brain matter.

« Last Edit: April 16, 2011, 03:12:37 am by DSE »

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #116 on: April 15, 2011, 12:41:21 pm »
Oh yeah, add "X-30" to the list.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #117 on: April 15, 2011, 12:47:15 pm »
it's not 'conical', it's Government baseline derived vehicle, no?
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #118 on: April 16, 2011, 03:10:38 am »
it's not 'conical', it's Government baseline derived vehicle, no?

Been a long two weeks. I believe you are correct as this image is circa 1980. My bad.

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #119 on: April 23, 2011, 01:01:54 pm »
Some photos of the later configuration and a few other vehicles.

« Last Edit: May 09, 2014, 11:46:20 am by PaulMM (Overscan) »

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #120 on: April 23, 2011, 03:02:19 pm »
what a wonderful weekend surprise here
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #121 on: April 23, 2011, 03:23:06 pm »
Nice model pics. I had seen all these designs before of course, but the last one doesn't ring a bell... Any idea what it is?

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #122 on: April 23, 2011, 03:37:18 pm »
Nice model pics. I had seen all these designs before of course, but the last one doesn't ring a bell... Any idea what it is?

X-43B.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2011, 03:39:25 pm by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #123 on: April 23, 2011, 04:19:10 pm »
Nice model pics. I had seen all these designs before of course, but the last one doesn't ring a bell... Any idea what it is?

X-43B.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of a "B" variant with forward canards.

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #124 on: April 23, 2011, 05:00:05 pm »
Nice model pics. I had seen all these designs before of course, but the last one doesn't ring a bell... Any idea what it is?

X-43B.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of a "B" variant with forward canards.

There was suppose to be a "C" as well.  Both cancelled of course.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #125 on: April 24, 2011, 03:43:02 am »
Nice model pics. I had seen all these designs before of course, but the last one doesn't ring a bell... Any idea what it is?

X-43B.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of a "B" variant with forward canards.

See the poster I posted in:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9729.msg120995.html#msg120995

ISTAR was the RBCC version of X-43B. There was a TBCC version as well.

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #126 on: April 24, 2011, 03:46:57 am »
Nice model pics. I had seen all these designs before of course, but the last one doesn't ring a bell... Any idea what it is?

X-43B.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of a "B" variant with forward canards.

There was suppose to be a "C" as well.  Both cancelled of course.
You can thank Admiral Steidle and John Mankins and the spiral of spirals for that.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2011, 03:48:55 am by DSE »

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #127 on: April 24, 2011, 09:36:00 am »
3 B's and a C
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Meteorit

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 421
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #128 on: April 24, 2011, 11:34:37 am »
We also have a thread on X-43B.

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8887
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #129 on: April 24, 2011, 11:57:17 am »
We also have a thread on X-43B.


Looks like I missed it the first time around or I'd have posted the high rez pics way back when.  Mods feel free to move them.  :)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline DSE

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 444
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #130 on: April 25, 2011, 02:28:05 am »
3 B's and a C

Off the old NGLT website at MSFC? I believe remnants of that site still live on in a few pieces, at least within a few months ago when I came across it again.

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #131 on: May 21, 2011, 06:23:27 pm »
Found two interesting pictures of X-30 designs among pictures of desktop models located at Pima Air & Space Museum:
http://www.freewebs.com/aeroscale/pima.htm

First picture is captioned as the "DoD X-30" (probably a generic design) while the second is labeled as the "Dupont X-30".
This makes me wonder if it's the same Dupont as in the infamous DP-2 project...

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #132 on: May 21, 2011, 07:01:54 pm »
This makes me wonder if it's the same Dupont as in the infamous DP-2 project...

Yes. Same duPont designed a spaceplane with fantastically optimistic weight and performance assumptions, and essentially kicked off the NASP.
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

Offline LeLouvre

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • **
  • Posts: 1
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #133 on: September 07, 2011, 01:04:14 am »
Escape capsule for Boeing's 1988 horizontal-take-off and landing 'Hypervelocity Technology Vehicle'...mmm...familiar 'conical accelerator' shapes...

source
HYPERVELOCITY TECHNOLOGY (HVT) CREW ESCAPE
Lanny A. Jines, P.E.
Aerospace Engineer
Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories
Flight Dynamics Laboratory
Crew Escape and Subsystems Branch
Air Crew Escape Group
WPAFB, OH 45433

As a high school student in 1987, I had a summer internship working with this group at Wright-Patterson AFB. I helped with some computer projects in support of crew escape vehicle research for the National Aerospace Plane and Space Station Freedom.

I was given some artwork, most or all of which, IIRC, was already outdated when I got there. It depicts several crew escape concepts.

Hi-res scans of the lo-res prints are here: http://www.mediafire.com/?8d22rh55cho7c
(update: resized versions are in overscan's post below...thanks for that!)

I don't have any art for the space station; sorry.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2011, 04:52:31 am by LeLouvre »

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #134 on: September 07, 2011, 01:10:20 am »
Thank you very much! Very impressive arrival at the forum)
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10114
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #135 on: September 07, 2011, 04:10:41 am »
Images resized and posted...
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #136 on: December 19, 2011, 10:56:13 am »
« Last Edit: December 19, 2011, 11:00:36 am by Triton »

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #137 on: January 06, 2012, 12:02:30 pm »
 
Thanks for the heads-up Triton !!
 
I know the guy who bought this.
 
It is very cool, and in great shape !
 
He thanks you!
 

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #138 on: February 13, 2012, 08:30:07 am »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Mark Nankivil

  • Archive Raider
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226
« Last Edit: April 16, 2012, 05:44:19 am by flateric »

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #140 on: March 08, 2012, 01:11:43 am »
Cool! So that would be their X-30 proposal, right?

With the DP-2 white elephant behind them and little else on the shelves, I really wonder how DuPont expected to be viewed as a serious player on that one...  :o

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #141 on: March 23, 2012, 04:48:13 pm »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #143 on: May 23, 2012, 03:37:47 am »
Rockwell's X-30 model
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #144 on: June 06, 2012, 03:23:15 pm »











« Last Edit: June 06, 2012, 03:31:07 pm by flateric »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #145 on: June 06, 2012, 03:34:36 pm »


"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #146 on: June 06, 2012, 03:40:37 pm »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #147 on: September 19, 2012, 05:16:52 pm »

Offline George Allegrezza

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 678
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #148 on: September 19, 2012, 05:19:44 pm »
So they are claiming a NASP model was built in 1975?  Something doesn't compute there.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #149 on: September 19, 2012, 05:50:44 pm »
So they are claiming a NASP model was built in 1975?  Something doesn't compute there.

The seller has been clueless for a long time, I just wanted to know if the model itself looked legitimate or worthwhile.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #150 on: September 19, 2012, 06:34:27 pm »
just a placeholder model to show "NASP"
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6721
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #151 on: September 19, 2012, 09:08:39 pm »
I just wanted to know if the model itself looked legitimate or worthwhile.

It's a legit model. I did a restoration of just such a model for a client a couple years back. Another one of these is shown here: http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=8613
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

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8954
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #152 on: September 19, 2012, 09:30:01 pm »
Thank you, Orionblamblam.

Offline shockonlip

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 605
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #153 on: September 20, 2012, 05:44:18 pm »
 
So what does this collector have against horizontal stabilizers?
 
Previously sold NASP model photo attached!
 
 

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10114
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #156 on: May 09, 2014, 11:48:48 am »
X-30 / "Orient Express" mockup at Wright-Patterson Air Force base (?)


Source:


https://www.flickr.com/photos/bertreiheld/sets/72157622871828572/
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline archipeppe

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1457
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #157 on: May 09, 2014, 01:58:34 pm »
X-30 / "Orient Express" mockup at Wright-Patterson Air Force base (?)


Source:


https://www.flickr.com/photos/bertreiheld/sets/72157622871828572/


Considering the dimensions it seems more like a scale model rather than a full scale mock-up, indeed it remains stunning.... 

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #158 on: May 09, 2014, 02:59:15 pm »
"A 50-foot, detailed 1/3d scale mock up of the X-30 was built by engineering students at Mississippi State University"
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Mr London 24/7

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 349

Offline Mr London 24/7

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 349
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #160 on: May 10, 2014, 12:12:03 pm »
NASA-TM-101386 - Technology Issues Associated With Fueling the National Aerospace
Plane With Slush Hydrogen:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890000752.pdf

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 12922
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #161 on: September 10, 2014, 06:04:27 am »
Just came across this picture which I don't think I've seen here before:


Offline Mark Nankivil

  • Archive Raider
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1226

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 19433
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #163 on: June 16, 2015, 05:51:45 am »
Hi,


from the book; Research Planes

Offline Steve Pace

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2256
  • Aviation History Writer
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #164 on: June 16, 2015, 09:06:21 am »
Just came across this picture which I don't think I've seen here before:


COOL - Thanks for sharing! -SP
When you know you're right, go ahead.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 19433
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #165 on: January 16, 2016, 04:29:57 am »
Hi,

I don't know if those two hypersonic projects from Marquardt and NASP suitable for
this thread or not ?.

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19861020/51/2


Offline RAP

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 283
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #166 on: May 01, 2016, 11:58:41 am »
X30 escape system from AWST.

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #167 on: March 26, 2017, 06:28:38 pm »
...
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #168 on: March 26, 2017, 07:08:59 pm »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Online flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7882
Re: National AeroSpace Plane (X-30)
« Reply #169 on: May 11, 2017, 06:42:40 am »
Model, NASP, thermal protection wind tunnel
Collection Item Summary:
This is a hypersonic wind tunnel model of the NASP configuration instrumented with temperature and pressure sensors for thermal protection studies.
Credit Line
Transferred from NASA, Langley Research Center.
Display Status:
This object is on display in the Moving Beyond Earth exhibition at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC.
Materials
Stainless steel, steel, plastic, electrical wiring, adhesive tape
Dimensions
16.51 x 101.6 x 76.2cm, 34lb. (6 1/2in. x 3ft 4in. x 2ft 6in.) (Approximate, as photographed)
16.51 x 101.6 x 38.1cm (6 1/2in. x 3ft 4in. x 1ft 3in.) (Approximate)
Date
1990s
Physical Description
Stainless steel wind tunnel model with yellow tape on the edges of the wings and verticals. The model has a display stand.
Inventory Number
A20061120000
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works