• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Boeing TAV - was this speculation or a serious concept?

The Artist

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
638
Reaction score
263
Back in 1985 Aviation Week ran a piece of Boeing art with an article on a White House Aeronautics policy. The art depicted what I took to be a transport TAV in Boeing house colors. This attachment is a drawing I did when I saw that article and I'm posting it here to support my question. Does anyone know if the painting was from a serious design study, or was this simply a "gee, wouldn't it be great if we could build something like this" picture?

Thanks,
Mike
 

Attachments

  • Boeing TAV request.jpg
    Boeing TAV request.jpg
    57.5 KB · Views: 390

Steve Pace

Aviation History Writer
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
2,268
Reaction score
54
There was a Trans Atmospheric Vehicle (TAV) program once but I don't know if Boeing was a participant - although it probably was.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,118
Reaction score
1,639
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
The Artist said:
Back in 1985 Aviation Week ran a piece of Boeing art with an article on a White House Aeronautics policy. The art depicted what I took to be a transport TAV in Boeing house colors. This attachment is a drawing I did when I saw that article and I'm posting it here to support my question. Does anyone know if the painting was from a serious design study, or was this simply a "gee, wouldn't it be great if we could build something like this" picture?

Given that the majority of the fuselage was taken up not by propellant tanks but by a passenger section with airliner-style windows, my assumption has always been that it was pure propaganda, with minimal basis in engineering.
 

hole in the ground

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
238
Reaction score
11
Orionblamblam said:
Given that the majority of the fuselage was taken up not by propellant tanks but by a passenger section with airliner-style windows, my assumption has always been that it was pure propaganda, with minimal basis in engineering.

Really? It looks to me to be pretty similar in proportion to the Space Shuttle. They have simply changed out the payload bay for cabin space, admittedly the windows are a little optimistic but SS2 has shown that they arent beyond the realms of possibility.
 

archipeppe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
623
hole in the ground said:
Really? It looks to me to be pretty similar in proportion to the Space Shuttle. They have simply changed out the payload bay for cabin space, admittedly the windows are a little optimistic but SS2 has shown that they arent beyond the realms of possibility.

Yes, but SS2 is not designed to go on orbit and it never going hypersonic as well....
 

hole in the ground

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
238
Reaction score
11
Ah ok, I wasnt aware that SS2s reentry was slower than the Space Shuttles. All of the 'graphics' that I have seen suggest a pretty similar 'fiery' reentry.
 

archipeppe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
623
hole in the ground said:
Ah ok, I wasnt aware that SS2s reentry was slower than the Space Shuttles. All of the 'graphics' that I have seen suggest a pretty similar 'fiery' reentry.

Probably is only to add some "dramatic" effect on it.
In reality SS2 could reach more or less 1,2 Km/sec, while the Space Shuttle make its re-entry well above 7 Km/sec.
It' s easy to see the HUGE difference in terms of Aerothermodynamics effects between the two space vehicles...
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
661
Re-entry has been described (by Branson I think) as extremely smooth... It had better be. You don't pay millions of dollars for a half-hour ride just to be messed up on the way back...
 

shockonlip

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
605
Reaction score
7
archipeppe said:
hole in the ground said:
Ah ok, I wasnt aware that SS2s reentry was slower than the Space Shuttles. All of the 'graphics' that I have seen suggest a pretty similar 'fiery' reentry.

Probably is only to add some "dramatic" effect on it.
In reality SS2 could reach more or less 1,2 Km/sec, while the Space Shuttle make its re-entry well above 7 Km/sec.
It' s easy to see the HUGE difference in terms of Aerothermodynamics effects between the two space vehicles...

A small point, if SS2 reaches 2 Km/sec, that is roughly 6000 ft/sec which is roughly Mach 6, which is hypersonic.
 

archipeppe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
623
shockonlip said:
A small point, if SS2 reaches 2 Km/sec, that is roughly 6000 ft/sec which is roughly Mach 6, which is hypersonic.

I don't beleve in it.
The SS2, as like SS1, is pretty conventional aircraft in terms of material (even if it is made mostly by composites), it could bear - with little protection - Mach 3+ terminal velocity, that is high supersonic, but for sure it couldn't do so with an hypersonic Mach 6.

For comparison you could look the structure of the North American X-15 that was designed, by since, to face hypersonic speed and its associated thermal loads.
 

mz

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
676
Reaction score
12
You only have enough kinetic energy in a 100 km hop for v=sqrt(2gx)=sqrt(2*9.81*100000)=1.4 km/s, that's about Mach 4.5. And the velocity would be that after a 100 km free fall. The vehicle is going to experience some deceleration already at lower speeds higher in the atmosphere.

Still, you could do a lot of hypersonic testing by renting an external space on the vehicle... :)
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,118
Reaction score
1,639
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
hole in the ground said:
Orionblamblam said:
Given that the majority of the fuselage was taken up not by propellant tanks but by a passenger section with airliner-style windows, my assumption has always been that it was pure propaganda, with minimal basis in engineering.

Really? It looks to me to be pretty similar in proportion to the Space Shuttle.

The TAV program designed vehicles that, while not generally being SSTOs, were designed to be as reusable and as operational as possible, which generally meant no expendable stages. Thus the upper-stage spaceplanes needed to have a lot of propulsive capability on their own. Which meant that the vast bulk of their internal volume was taken up with propellant tanks.
 

shockonlip

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
605
Reaction score
7
archipeppe said:
shockonlip said:
A small point, if SS2 reaches 2 Km/sec, that is roughly 6000 ft/sec which is roughly Mach 6, which is hypersonic.

I don't beleve in it.
The SS2, as like SS1, is pretty conventional aircraft in terms of material (even if it is made mostly by composites), it could bear - with little protection - Mach 3+ terminal velocity, that is high supersonic, but for sure it couldn't do so with an hypersonic Mach 6.

For comparison you could look the structure of the North American X-15 that was designed, by since, to face hypersonic speed and its associated thermal loads.

Well you're the one who wrote: "In reality SS2 could reach more or less 1,2 Km/sec, ...".

I read your "1,2 Km/sec" as "1 to 2 Km/sec". If that's what you meant, then 2 Km/sec is greater than 6000 ft/sec
which is over Mach 6 (ignoring temp effects).

If you actually meant 1.2 Km/sec, then that is close to 4000 fps which is closer to Mach 4.
That seems to work out with what mz calculated as well.

So which was it?
 

shockonlip

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
605
Reaction score
7
I'm sorry I didn't know that too!

Great Italy!!

Home of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ducatti, Pagani, and the great Antonio Ferri !!
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
661
archipeppe said:
shockonlip said:
So which was it?

Oh-oh.... in Italy 1,2 is equal to 1.2 in USA.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.....

Not just in Italy, but in France too. I believe it's another case of Latin vs. Anglo-Saxon. "1,250" for us means "1.250" for you, and "1.250" means "1,250" for you. Confusing, right?
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,539
Reaction score
325
I believe it's another case of Latin vs. Anglo-Saxon

Also in Spain, but use of Anglo-Saxon notation is progressively prefered.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
661
shockonlip said:
I'm sorry I didn't know that too!

Great Italy!!

Home of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ducatti, Pagani, and the great Antonio Ferri !!

I personally would have added Sophia Loren, Gina Lollobrigida to that list... ;) :D
Not to mention all the great filmmakers such as Visconti, Fellini, Pasolini, Zefirelli, and so forth...
And the singers? Pavarotti, Remondi... Zucchero... LOL

Sorry for going totally off-topic!!!
 

The Artist

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
638
Reaction score
263
Seeing this thread take off prompted me to go digging for the original image that I did that drawing from. (I don't have the best filing system - things get moved around depending on what I did with them last.) The rest of the article does not really address this design as it is about a White House policy Paper.

I had a feeling that this was a pie in the sky image because I remember thinking that there wasn't enough room for the engines and associated plumbing. Still, I thought it would be nice if a 3-view drawing turned up.

Thanks for your comments.
Mike
 

Attachments

  • Boeing TAV image.jpg
    Boeing TAV image.jpg
    154.2 KB · Views: 493

shockonlip

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
605
Reaction score
7
Stargazer2006 said:
shockonlip said:
I'm sorry I didn't know that too!

Great Italy!!

Home of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ducatti, Pagani, and the great Antonio Ferri !!

I personally would have added Sophia Loren, Gina Lollobrigida to that list... ;) :D
Not to mention all the great filmmakers such as Visconti, Fellini, Pasolini, Zefirelli, and so forth...
And the singers? Pavarotti, Remondi... Zucchero... LOL

Sorry for going totally off-topic!!!

I agree as well.

But right now archipeppe is shaking his head and making gestures at me because I
mispelled Ducati as Ducatti. I apologize! This is especially bad as I have a Ducati.
I can only think it was caused by recently typing Bugatti too many times!
 

archipeppe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
623
shockonlip said:
But right now archipeppe is shaking his head and making gestures at me because I
mispelled Ducati as Ducatti. I apologize! This is especially bad as I have a Ducati.
I can only think it was caused by recently typing Bugatti too many times!

Don't worry, doesn't it matter.
I'm accustomed with the fact that foreign people tend to interpretate the single T or P as double, like archipeppe that could be archipepe as well....

Anyway that drawing also remind me more a suborbital aircraft, like SS2 and so on, than a real orbital vehicle.
It seems to be a melting by a Space Shuttle and a McDonnell Douglas MD 80.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
818
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
From DefenseImagery.mil:

An artist's concept of a transatmospheric vehicle (TAV) above the earth.

Photo courtesy of Boeing Co.
Photographer's Name: BOEING CO. Location: UNKNOWN
Date Shot: 1/9/1985 Date Posted: unknown VIRIN: DF-ST-85-11980

Source:
http://defenseimagery.mil/imagery.html#a=search&s=artist%27s%20concept&t=0&p=9&guid=fcfa5a96602c298ef5e7d56aa2ffdb3bf7e733e1
 

Attachments

  • DF-ST-85-11980.JPEG
    DF-ST-85-11980.JPEG
    530.4 KB · Views: 362

Similar threads

Top