NASA/Langley SpaceJet Concept

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,629
Reaction score
626
Hi,

here is a shuttle concept using detachable turbojet.
 

Attachments

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,262
Reaction score
124
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

Triton said:
hesham said:
Hi,

here is a shuttle concept using detachable turbojet.
Is this Starraker?
No. That's one of the numerous variations on the NASA-Langley "Spacejet" concept. Separate flyback jet "pods" beneath a large spaceplane.
 

OM

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
753
Reaction score
0
Website
www.io.com
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

...Jeez, Hesham! Rotate your images next time. Damn near sprained my neck trying to figure out which way to view that one! :eek: :eek: :eek:
 

SAustin16

Bravo to All Brave Test Pilots
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
128
Reaction score
0
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

Interesting that they experimented with two separate engines both with flyback capability, versus a single integrated twin engine configuration. I would think a single twin engine would have provided a simpler more elegant solution, without the risk of the two engines colliding during the detachment/separation phase.
 

FutureSpaceTourist

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
589
Reaction score
0
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

There's a 1981 SpaceJet paper in the NASA archives:

[quote author=http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=264007&id=1&as=false&or=true&qs=Ntt%3DSpacejet%26Ntk%3Dall%26Ntx%3Dmode%2Bmatchall%26Ns%3DHarvestDate%257c1%26N%3D0]
Title: Aerodynamic tests and analysis of a turbojet-boosted launch vehicle concept (spacejet) over a Mach number range of 1.50 to 2.86
Author(s): Riebe, G. D.; Small, W. J.; Morris, O. A.
Abstract: Results from analytical and experimental studies of the aerodynamic characteristics of a turbojet-boosted launch vehicle concept through a Mach number range of 1.50 to 2.86 are presented. The vehicle consists of a winged orbiter utilizing an area-ruled axisymmetric body and two winged turbojet boosters mounted underneath the orbiter wing. Drag characteristics near zero lift were of prime interest. Force measurements and flow visualization techniques were employed. Estimates from wave drag theory, supersonic lifting surface theory, and impact theory are compared with data and indicate the ability of these theories to adequately predict the aerodynamic characteristics of the vehicle. Despite the existence of multiple wings and bodies in close proximity to each other, no large scale effects of boundary layer separation on drag or lift could be discerned. Total drag levels were, however, sensitive to booster locations.
[/quote]
 

XP67_Moonbat

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
2,153
Reaction score
8
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

For a good quality article on SpaceJet, go here:

http://www.up-ship.com/eAPR/articles.htm
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,262
Reaction score
124
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

SAustin16 said:
Interesting that they experimented with two separate engines both with flyback capability...
Actually, more like *eight* engines, four per pod. Varied from concept to concept though.
 
R

RGClark

Guest
Re: NASA Langley SpaceJet Concept

hesham said:
Hi,

here is a shuttle concept using detachable turbojet.
Thanks for that. How does this compare to the Stratolaunch concept? You would think a small shuttle-like craft such as the Sierra Nevada Dreamchaser could be used as the reusable upper stage for it.

Bob Clark
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,629
Reaction score
626

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,629
Reaction score
626
Also Boeing SSTO;


http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19820011352_1982011352.pdf
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,629
Reaction score
626
Hi,


I don't know this concept,may be from North American.
 

Attachments

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,171
Reaction score
47
hesham said:
Hi,
I don't know this concept,may be from North American.

no not a spaceJet nor NAA
but something more interesting: a early Boeing Dyna Soar reusable Booster !
were have you found this, Hesham ?




 
R

RGClark

Guest
hesham said:
Also Boeing SSTO;

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19820011352_1982011352.pdf
Thanks. Very cool.

Bob Clark
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,629
Reaction score
626
Thank you Clark,


and for the Boeing Dyna Soar picture,I will send it in its topic.
 

RanulfC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
468
Reaction score
21
XP67_Moonbat said:
Reminds me of the RASV concept.
Uhm, Moonbat? The first pic reads "Reusable Aerodynamic Space Vehicle" (RASV) :)

Randy
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,221
Reaction score
38
Ah, million thanks. I perfectly know the wayback machine but tried finding this forum very page from 2012. Didn't worked. I will remember that trick. Thank you again.

come on, was my post kind of *censored* ? (shake his head in disbelief) ok, swearing, vs politically correct and sensitive ears (rolls his eyes).

Let's say Frank Wolf was a very annoying naughty boy on the whole case. And yes, the chinese spy he witch-hunted had porn in his laptop, not NASA "secrets". Hey, that's how thing happened, in April 2013.
Just ask Keith Cowing at NASAwatch, he still furious about it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,221
Reaction score
38
"Feasibility Study of Reusable Aerodynamic Space Vehicle" SAMSO report, 1977

Is that report classified ?
 

dan_inbox

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
547
Reaction score
31
come on, was my post kind of *censored* ? (shake his head in disbelief) ok, swearing, vs politically correct and sensitive ears (rolls his eyes).
As I remember, Archibald's use of profanity here is a repeat occurrence, repeatedly causing moderators to intervene. Like they need more work.
Hopefully time will come to learn from experience, mature some, and keep the testosterone display for sites where they are welcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,266
Reaction score
414
Different people have different levels of comfort with profanity, but it is rarely required in written posts.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,221
Reaction score
38
come on, was my post kind of *censored* ? (shake his head in disbelief) ok, swearing, vs politically correct and sensitive ears (rolls his eyes).
As I remember, Archibald's use of profanity here is a repeat occurrence, repeatedly causing moderators to intervene. Like they need more work.
Hopefully time will come to learn from experience, mature some, and keep the testosterone display for sites where they are welcome.
And WHO are you to speak me like this ? go censor other people, et MERDE to you, dear compatriote. Va péter un coup, ça te soulagera...
 

RanulfC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
468
Reaction score
21
And it all came from this project. Amazing..... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-X
Well it's not a bad start at least though it could definatly use some trimming of the complexity :) LIke "ZeroX" the SpaceJet idea was to reduce the booster 'aircraft' to a minimum while using the more robust spaceplane wings for most of the lift. Trying to 're-rendezvous' with the "Lifting Bodies" and super/hypersonic speeds never made a great deal of sense to me as shown in the movie itself :)

Randy
 

dan_inbox

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
547
Reaction score
31
As I remember, Archibald's use of profanity here is a repeat occurrence, repeatedly causing moderators to intervene. Like they need more work.
Hopefully time will come to learn from experience, mature some, and keep the testosterone display for sites where they are welcome.
And WHO are you to speak me like this ? go censor other people, et ***more profanity***
You don't understand, Archibald: I do not censor any posts here. Moderators do.

My comments:
1- if I repeatedly triggered moderation, I'd feel shame. It's negative contributions to the site and its operators. Can't you see it? Does it feel mature?
2- you post profanity, and you still associate CAEA in the sig of foul posts? CAEA must be thrilled with such manners.
 
Top