X-30A COPPER CANYON and Tupolev Tu-2000A

Tuomasn

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
5 January 2006
Messages
456
Reaction score
227
My 3D models of two comparable 1980s SSTO projects:

This one is meant to represent the "Government baseline" vehicle that was the end result of the $5.5-million COPPER CANYON study program run in 1984-1985, and input for NASP Phase 2. It was scaled up somewhat from the initial "du Pont baseline" which was to be an "F-15 sized 50,000 pound (22,700 kg) vehicle" to an "SR-71 sized 80,000 pound (36,000 kg) vehicle". Propulsion was provided by du Pont designed engines using a scram-LACE cycle. Payload 2,500 pounds (1130 kg) to polar orbit, propellant mass fraction 0.54, Isp 1,400 s, delta-V 47,000 fps (14,300 m/s).
 

Attachments

  • 001.png
    001.png
    86.5 KB · Views: 479
  • 002.png
    002.png
    112 KB · Views: 454
  • 005.png
    005.png
    96.3 KB · Views: 443
  • 003.jpg
    003.jpg
    411 KB · Views: 439
The Tupolev Tu-2000A was to be a demonstrator of a single-stage to orbit spaceplane comparable in function to the US X-30 vehicle. Development started in 1986 as a response to NASP.
Length: 55.5 m
Wingspan: 14.0 m
Height: 12.25 m
Empty weight: 40,000 kg
Take-off weight: 70,000 kg
Propulsion: 2 x D-100 turbofans (Mach=0-2.5), dual-mode scramjet (Mach=2-20), 2 x liquid-propellant rocket engines (Mach>=20), all using slush hydrogen fuel.
 

Attachments

  • 005.jpg
    005.jpg
    486.9 KB · Views: 122
  • 006.png
    006.png
    111.8 KB · Views: 107
  • 004.png
    004.png
    96.1 KB · Views: 103
  • 003.png
    003.png
    114.4 KB · Views: 377
Finally some comparison views of both vehicles. Note the size difference, though no exact dimensions for the "Government baseline" vehicle are available. Takeoff weights 36,000 kg vs 70,000 kg. Which one is more realistic? ;)
 

Attachments

  • 201_Tu-2000_Baseline.png
    201_Tu-2000_Baseline.png
    119.4 KB · Views: 85
  • 203_Tu-2000_Baseline_orthographic.png
    203_Tu-2000_Baseline_orthographic.png
    156.5 KB · Views: 102
  • 204_Tu-2000_Baseline_orthographic.png
    204_Tu-2000_Baseline_orthographic.png
    132.1 KB · Views: 139
The problem is the final configuration of Tu-2000 was very different from the early concepts shown to public.
 

Attachments

  • 4-1.jpg
    4-1.jpg
    66.3 KB · Views: 156
flateric said:
The problem is the final configuration of Tu-2000 was very different from the early concepts shown to public.

I'm aware of that. If one only could have three-views of that configuration (or more images of that model)...
(Another one from buran.ru attached.)
 

Attachments

  • Tu-2000.jpg
    Tu-2000.jpg
    162.2 KB · Views: 154
These are only two images that left of that model. Model itself was lost either during Tupolev DB relocation or was given to MATI and stolen there.
Drawings are still classified.
 
What a shame the model was lost :( I think Tupolev museum has the model of the initial Tu-2000 configuration. That drawings are not public was to be expected though.
For this comparison the Tu-2000A is more relevant anyway since it's clearly influenced by the original du Pont design (which has no resemblance to the final NASP configuration either).
Hopefully we can have a NASP a202 / Tu-2000 comparison some day.
 
Does there a formal specification exist for Tony duPont's vehicle which became the Government Baseline?
 
What was the intended role of the Tu-2000? I saw it mentioned in a copy of Jane's All the World's Aircraft in the school library, but it could be referring to another project, and I remember very little, if any, information that was written.
 
Back
Top Bottom