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

RATTLRS

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
Although HyFly seems to have more potential this one is pretty cool too.
 

Attachments

  • 1125-Pic2-RBmissiles.jpg
    1125-Pic2-RBmissiles.jpg
    16.1 KB · Views: 2,063
  • Aerial_RATTLRs_Launch.jpg
    Aerial_RATTLRs_Launch.jpg
    104.7 KB · Views: 932
  • LaunchRATTLERS_B.jpg
    LaunchRATTLERS_B.jpg
    86.9 KB · Views: 868
  • RATTLRS_WingsDeployed.jpg
    RATTLRS_WingsDeployed.jpg
    68.2 KB · Views: 840

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/01/20/321322/rolls-royce-completes-histed-yj102r-engine-test.html

DATE:20/01/09
SOURCE:Flight International
Rolls-Royce completes HiSTED YJ102R engine test
By Rob Coppinger
Rolls-Royce has completed an initial test of its YJ102R engine for the US military's High Speed Turbine Engine Demonstration (HiSTED) programme.
HiSTED is a joint Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) initiative to design, fabricate and ground test a "high Mach expendable turbine". The HiSTED engine is a high-temperature, moderate-pressure-ratio, single-spool, non-afterburning turbojet. It incorporates Rolls-Royce's "Lamilloy technology", which is designed to enable engines to run at higher temperatures allowing greater fuel economy.
Additional engine testing is scheduled to demonstrate its ability to achieve transonic acceleration and Mach 3-plus cruise speed. The engine could be used to propel the US Office of Naval Research's Revolutionary Approach to Time-critical Long Range Strike vehicle, a supersonic, science and technology missile flight demonstrator.
"The HiSTED programme is a classified US programme and we are unable to share any additional information," R-R told Flight International. The YJ102R engine test was carried out at its Indianapolis, Indiana facility by the Rolls-Royce North American Technologies research unit, also known as LibertyWorks.
Other USAF programmes R-R is involved in include Highly Efficient Embedded Turbine Engine (HEETE) and Adaptive Versatile Engine Technology (Advent). In September 2007 R-R was awarded $19.6 million for HEETE, which is part of the USAF's Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engines programme. And in August of that year the company was awarded a $296 million USAF contract for Advent. Advent will focus on the development of variable cycle features that will enable a high-thrust capability and a separate loiter operation with reduced fuel consumption.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
unsufficient funding (?) and program delays (AFAIR, RATTRLS should be flying already in 2007) so far limits its range to 0 km...
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
from FY2008 Navy budget

FY 2007 Accomplishments:
- RATTLRS: Completed critical design review and fabrication of an affordable/efficient aero-configuration,
complete testing of a Mach 3+ expendable turbine engine, perform system checkouts in advance of demonstrating high speed aero-propulsion integration in flight tests.
FY 2008 Plans:
- RATTLRS: Initiate RATTLRS flight tests demonstrating high speed aero-propulsion integration. Initiate data reduction of flight demonstrations and prepare final program report.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
I'd heard somewhere that they needed more ceramic bearings for the test engine(s) and there's lead time on those so that was the holdup. BTW Williams is testing an engine in the same class as the YJ102R.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
all four RATTLRS basing concepts
 

Attachments

  • rattlrs-1.jpg
    rattlrs-1.jpg
    32.6 KB · Views: 717
  • rattlrs-2.jpg
    rattlrs-2.jpg
    63.3 KB · Views: 678
  • rattlrs-3.jpg
    rattlrs-3.jpg
    37.8 KB · Views: 979
  • rattlrs-4.jpg
    rattlrs-4.jpg
    123.5 KB · Views: 142

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
Nice. Given that they're roughly the size of Tomahawk though (they fit in the Mk41 VLS anyway) I'm surprised it doesn't show six on each pylon on the B-52. ???
 
I

Ian33

Guest






Always wondered where this project went to! love the engine design.

Klune. The people making the fuselage.

http://www.klune.com/casestudies/rattlrs
 

seruriermarshal

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
988
Reaction score
80
From FY 2009 Plans :

FY 2009 Plans:EM Gun:
- Continue development and testing of barrel life components with EM lab launcher expanding to 16 MJ ofmuzzle energy.- Continue development of industry advanced launcher prototypes, completing the preliminary designreview and initiating detail design activities and component hardware testing.
- Continue development and testing of projectile component concepts, completing unitary lethality demoand initiating a dispense lethality demo.
- Continue ship integration study efforts.- Complete INP Phase I program mid-way assessment.
- Complete fabrication and installation of pulsed power modules for the Electromagnetic Launch Facility(EMLF) at NSWCDD.

RATTLRS:
- Complete RATTLRS flight test demonstration.
- Complete data reduction of flight demonstration.Above Threshold Reprogramming (ATR) for RATTLRS ($18.789) was approved March 2009 andtransferred from Program Element 0603236N (not reflected in current funding profile).


interesting from 2010 , we can't see RATTLRS, there become LRASM :

FY 2010 Plans:EM Gun:

- Continue development and testing of barrel life components with EM lab launcher expanding to 32 MJ ofmuzzle energy.
- Continue development of industry advanced launcher prototypes, completing detail design activities andinitiating detail design fabrication.- Continue development and testing of projectile component concepts, completing the dispense lethalitydemo and initiating 32 MJ muzzle energy tests.

- Continue ship integration study efforts.- Initiate planning for FY 2011 final INP Phase I assessment.- Initiate next generation pulsed power concept design.

LRASM:

- New Start: DARPA initiated effort for development of missile preliminary designs and performanalysis demonstrating designs compliant with program requirements and that subsystem technologiesdevelopment plans have acceptable risk, schedule and cost.

- Initiate detailed hardware design


http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2010/Navy/0603114N.pdf
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
So what happened to it? It seems to have completely fallen off the radar and it doesn't seem likely it'd have gone "black" or we wouldn't have heard of it in the first place. ???
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
seruriermarshal said:
Or they take it into LRASM .

The picture of LRASM posted in another thread here doesn't remotely resemble RATTLRS. (I was hoping RATTLRS would be the one chosen for LRASM-B but apparently RATTLRS has never even been captive-carried. :( )
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
162
sferrin said:
So what happened to it? It seems to have completely fallen off the radar and it doesn't seem likely it'd have gone "black" or we wouldn't have heard of it in the first place. ???

I don't understand. As you can see above, the 2009 plans were for completing the flight test plan and data reduction. The flight test program was initiated in FY2008, with data reduction continuing through 2009. This is covered in the RDTE descriptive summaries for PE 0603114N "Power Projection Advanced Technology". The 2011 RDTE summary listed completion of the flight test program as a 2009 accomplishment. This is all in the public domain and available online.

RATTLRS is not listed in the RDTE summaries for that PE code for 2010/2011, but LRASM is. For 2009 both were.

"The committee notes that although it is widely agreed that the best opportunity for near-term transition of hypersonics technology will be in cruise missile or conventional strike systems, especially to support time critical and prompt global strike missions, suffi- cient resources for research, development, or testing of the systems has never been focused, coordinated, or sustained within the De- partment of Defense. Examples of these programs include the DARPA Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle (HTV–2), the Air Force’s X–51 program and the now terminated HyFly and Revolu- tionary Approach to Time Critical Long-Range Strike Project (RATTLRS) programs. The committee feels that these programs have all suffered from a lack of investment in addressing funda- mental technical issues and insufficient resources for required flight test and demonstration activities." - Senate Armed Services Committee, FY2009 RDTE request comments (SASC_110-335_RDTE)
 

aim9xray

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
565
Reaction score
200
RATTLRS full-scale mockup at KNTD in the Fall of 2006 for display at a "Friends and Family Day". Images (c) me. Virtually nothing about the program has surfaced since. To me, this would leave two alternatives:

1) The program ran out of money and died a painful death in obscurity, or
2) The program went sub rosa and then succeeded or failed in obscurity.
 

Attachments

  • RATTLRS 2.jpg
    RATTLRS 2.jpg
    101.2 KB · Views: 300
  • RATTLRS 1.jpg
    RATTLRS 1.jpg
    100.7 KB · Views: 325

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
quellish said:
"The committee notes that although it is widely agreed that the best opportunity for near-term transition of hypersonics technology will be in cruise missile or conventional strike systems, especially to support time critical and prompt global strike missions, suffi- cient resources for research, development, or testing of the systems has never been focused, coordinated, or sustained within the De- partment of Defense. Examples of these programs include the DARPA Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle (HTV–2), the Air Force’s X–51 program and the now terminated HyFly and Revolu- tionary Approach to Time Critical Long-Range Strike Project (RATTLRS) programs. The committee feels that these programs have all suffered from a lack of investment in addressing funda- mental technical issues and insufficient resources for required flight test and demonstration activities." - Senate Armed Services Committee, FY2009 RDTE request comments (SASC_110-335_RDTE)

Well that's just all kinds of inspiring. Boiled down it sounds like either "it was too hard so we gave up" or "we were too stupid to see the potential".
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
162
sferrin said:
Well that's just all kinds of inspiring. Boiled down it sounds like either "it was too hard so we gave up" or "we were too stupid to see the potential".

More like the programs were not well coordinated or resourced, and as such were wasting money. How much of an investment had been made in range support for this kind of testing?
Not much. Those kinds of problems were not well thought through. Imagine you had 5 super duper new fighters in development, but no place like Edwards to test them. Instead each fighter program was paying for different testing resources.

But with RATTLRS, there is no indication that anyone felt it was too hard. It completed its flight test program. There was never a concrete plan to turn RATTLRS into an operational system.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
quellish said:
sferrin said:
Well that's just all kinds of inspiring. Boiled down it sounds like either "it was too hard so we gave up" or "we were too stupid to see the potential".

More like the programs were not well coordinated or resourced, and as such were wasting money. How much of an investment had been made in range support for this kind of testing?
Not much. Those kinds of problems were not well thought through. Imagine you had 5 super duper new fighters in development, but no place like Edwards to test them. Instead each fighter program was paying for different testing resources.

But with RATTLRS, there is no indication that anyone felt it was too hard. It completed its flight test program. There was never a concrete plan to turn RATTLRS into an operational system.

So why no pictures,video or articles discussing the test flights? You'd think, given all the hype and publicity around RATTLRS they'd have said something. The question I have is why nobody seems to be interested in making a concerted to developing high-speed technologies in the US. The image that comes to mind is a bunch of monkeys trying to have relations with a football. :(
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
162
sferrin said:
So why no pictures,video or articles discussing the test flights? You'd think, given all the hype and publicity around RATTLRS they'd have said something. The question I have is why nobody seems to be interested in making a concerted to developing high-speed technologies in the US. The image that comes to mind is a bunch of monkeys trying to have relations with a football. :(

Many of the Navy programs at Pt. Mugu and China Lake never produce public photos. It's just not the way they do things. You can contact public affairs at ONR and see if they can provide anything. They may even be able to tell you the disposition of any remaining hardware.

No, there are several different organizations that are developing different solutions in parallel. That's the problem.
NASA and DoD did have a national hypersonic development program. The various reasons that did not pan out, and why it is not viable in today's political climate, are beyond the scope of this thread.

The fate of RATTLRS, however, seems clear.
 

Mr London 24/7

ACCESS: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
408
Reaction score
89
sferrin said:
The question I have is why nobody seems to be interested in making a concerted to developing high-speed technologies in the US...

Seems like things 'High-Speed' and air-breathing (but not Hypersonic) are still very close-hold, even dating from the Eighties?...
 

DSE

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
461
Reaction score
23
quellish said:
The fate of RATTLRS, however, seems clear.

I believe there have been some issues with testing of the HiSTEAD turbine.
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
162
DSE said:
I believe there have been some issues with testing of the HiSTEAD turbine.

Portions of HiSTEAD are now part of the Mode Transition Demonstration program funded under PE 0603286. It is not clear that the HiSTEAD engine completed testing, but appears likely.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
quellish said:
DSE said:
I believe there have been some issues with testing of the HiSTEAD turbine.

Portions of HiSTEAD are now part of the Mode Transition Demonstration program funded under PE 0603286. It is not clear that the HiSTEAD engine completed testing, but appears likely.

Which engine is the"HiSTEAD" engine? Is that the Williams engine, the RR (Allison) YJ102, or something different? ???
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
HiSTED, not HiSTEAD, and it's LibertyWorks YJ102R

Sferrin, look back at your own posting:)
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1468584&postcount=33
"From an article in this weeks AvWeek:

"Current trials continue to use the 70%-scale PWR-9221FJ engine, and “we will be using a single turbojet engine for the demonstration,” DeFreese adds. The original HTV-3X was to be powered by two turbojets and a single -9221. The final choice of high-speed turbojet is yet to be determined between the two Histed ramburner-configured engines. These are Rolls-Royce Liberty Works’ XTE18, also known as the YJ102R, and Williams International’s XTE88."

The YJ102R is the RATTLRS engine."

djcross from Skunk Works in September 2009
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1465030&postcount=31
"Rolls Royce Liberty Works couldn't get the engine to work. The program is pretty much dead."
 

DSE

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
461
Reaction score
23
quellish said:
DSE said:
I believe there have been some issues with testing of the HiSTEAD turbine.

Portions of HiSTEAD are now part of the Mode Transition Demonstration program funded under PE 0603286. It is not clear that the HiSTEAD engine completed testing, but appears likely.

Despite my misspelling, and incorrect program alignment, I believe there have been real issues with both high Mach turbine tests. Also, fwiw MoTr is dead. Note the "new Darpa MoTr PM" Tom Bussing is no longer at Darpa.
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
162
DSE said:
Despite my misspelling, and incorrect program alignment, I believe there have been real issues with both high Mach turbine tests. Also, fwiw MoTr is dead. Note the "new Darpa MoTr PM" Tom Bussing is no longer at Darpa.

DARPA requested money for it through 2011 (under 0603286E), in a month or so we should know where it went and how much they want for coming years.
 

shockonlip

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
605
Reaction score
4
I like the GE57 approach with some bits added, that I don't want to discuss.
 

DSE

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
461
Reaction score
23
quellish said:
DSE said:
Despite my misspelling, and incorrect program alignment, I believe there have been real issues with both high Mach turbine tests. Also, fwiw MoTr is dead. Note the "new Darpa MoTr PM" Tom Bussing is no longer at Darpa.

DARPA requested money for it through 2011 (under 0603286E), in a month or so we should know where it went and how much they want for coming years.

FY11 is many months in as you note. The program is dead.
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,151
Reaction score
162
mr_london_247 said:
Seems like things 'High-Speed' and air-breathing (but not Hypersonic) are still very close-hold, even dating from the Eighties?...

Sometimes you only need to know *exactly* what questions to ask. For example, doing a FOIA or other records search asking for "TACIT BLUE" will not yield much, but...
"Battlefield Survivable Aircraft Experimental, funded by DARPA from 1978 to 1985, managed by the USAF aeronautical systems center (as of 1999 the aeronautical systems center of air material command), and flown by the Special Projects Flight Test Squadron, a unit of the 416th flight test squadron, at the National Classified Flight Test Facility".
That would give you much better chances than just having them search for a code word. As best you can, answer who, what, where, when, and how in your queries to organizations and people.

There is enough information just on this forum to ask the right questions about several high speed projects from the 80s, like the BGV/Axe and similar, and various MaRVs. I don't have the time myself to do it the right way, and I don't get paid to do it :)
 

DSE

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
461
Reaction score
23
DSE said:
quellish said:
DSE said:
Despite my misspelling, and incorrect program alignment, I believe there have been real issues with both high Mach turbine tests. Also, fwiw MoTr is dead. Note the "new Darpa MoTr PM" Tom Bussing is no longer at Darpa.

DARPA requested money for it through 2011 (under 0603286E), in a month or so we should know where it went and how much they want for coming years.

FY11 is many months in as you note. The program is dead.

As further proof, you will find no mention of MoTR on the DAARPA TTO website any longer.
 
I

Ian33

Guest
is the Vulcan effort part of this? because I get confused at all the different names. :-\
 

DSE

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
461
Reaction score
23
Vulcan is the TBCC, turbine + PDE, program which started out as an aerospace application, but was transitioned to looking at shipboard applications for Phase 2. MoTR was the TBCC, turbine + scramjet, program which morphed out of the Blackswift portion of FALCON. One of the major causes for confusion, imo, what that the industry day briefing for Vulcan contained info pointing towards a possible future combination with a scramjet as well, though the program was really focused on a nearer term solution of mating a current large scale turbine (ala F-100) with a PDE system in ground tests. There was a facility study which looked at how current ground test facilities might handle the requirements and scale of such a test.
 

InvisibleDefender

ACCESS: Confidential
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Messages
152
Reaction score
3
DSE said:
Vulcan is the TBCC, turbine + PDE, program which started out as an aerospace application, but was transitioned to looking at shipboard applications for Phase 2. MoTR was the TBCC, turbine + scramjet, program which morphed out of the Blackswift portion of FALCON. One of the major causes for confusion, imo, what that the industry day briefing for Vulcan contained info pointing towards a possible future combination with a scramjet as well, though the program was really focused on a nearer term solution of mating a current large scale turbine (ala F-100) with a PDE system in ground tests. There was a facility study which looked at how current ground test facilities might handle the requirements and scale of such a test.

Yup - Vulcan is all about shipboard power now. - "Application of this technology is expected to reduce turbine fuel consumption by 20 percent, resulting in a savings of approximately 65 gallons per hour compared to existing DDG-51 Class gas turbine generator sets."

http://www.darpa.mil/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=1794
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
Ground Testing Technical Committee GTTC Newsletter
Vol 7 No 4 January 2006
Winter 2005/2006

RATTLRS Air Vehicle Baseline (AVBL) Forebody Inlet Screening Test.

A high Mach number inlet design for the RATTLRS / AVBL concept was tested at the GRC 1’x 1’ supersonic wind tunnel. The model was tested at Mach numbers 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0. The inlet flow was captured and measured for yaw angles ranging from -2 to +2 degrees, and for pitch angles ranging from -2 to +8 degrees. A new remotely variable
strut was developed for this test and contributes to the tunnel capabilities. This test data will be compared to analytical (CFD)
predictions.
Also of note, the inlet model hardware was created using an
innovative design and fabrication technique. Using a two step
process, the model’s form was generated in a rapid prototype
laser sintering machine. Then, in a high temperature oven, a
bronze infiltration technique was used to create the final metallic
SLS form. The fabrication was awarded the GRC craftsmanship
award and was featured at this year’s Oshkosh show. The data
will serve as the validation reference for evaluating CFD
analyses of integrated inlet / forebodies with 3D flow spillage.
Also, this data will help to advance an inlet / vehicle concept
which is a candidate for flight demonstration or small turbinebased
hypersonic vehicles. (contributed by Mike Henry, QSSGroup, Inc.)


"RATTLRS forebody model installed in the 1x1 SWT."
WTF is that AVBL I never heard about and why it have nothing common with RATTLRS as we knew it (before it was no more)
 

Attachments

  • RATTLRS Air Vehicle Baseline (AVBL) Forebody Inlet.jpg
    RATTLRS Air Vehicle Baseline (AVBL) Forebody Inlet.jpg
    71 KB · Views: 622

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,390
Reaction score
1,433
Looks like artist concepts for Hytech.
 

Attachments

  • h_hytech%20missle%20launch_02.jpg
    h_hytech%20missle%20launch_02.jpg
    40 KB · Views: 143

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,294
Reaction score
1,252
flateric said:
WTF is that AVBL I never heard about and why it have nothing common with RATTLRS as we knew it (before it was no more)

Air Vehicle Baseline, presumably:

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/wind/papers/AIAA-2006-0016-Georgiadis.pdf
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
873
aha! thanks a bunch!!
 

GeorgeA

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
791
Reaction score
121
I remember seeing the AVBL term in a few NASA papers back in the Global Reach days. Might be a generic shape rather than something specific to RATTLRS.
 

Similar threads

Top