Reaction Engines SABRE engine (Skylon Spaceplane)

My understanding is that they would fly a lot higher than Concorde, so the boom is reduced. Besides, if you don't need to stop in Middle East to refuel...
 
Actually, I believe their proposed route passes over the Arctic ocean, through the Bering straits and over the Pacific ocean. Technically, this is actually a westerly route to Australia, and a return flight up the Red and Adriatic Seas would allow you to go supersonic most of the way, whilst making the combined round trip count as a circumnavigation.
 
CNH said:
Europe to Australia in 5 hours? ROFL. Who wants to go to Australia any way? [Maybe some would like to come back ...] Seriously, there are what ... 20 million people in Oz? Not exactly a mass market.

As for Mach 5 and the rest - has no one learned anything from Concorde? Supersonic flight over land is a big no no.
Click to expand...

Haven't you heard? You don't have to go to Australia !

The Australians will come to the UK, and park their scramjets at Heathrow !

Last week at the 2011 Spaceplanes Conference in San Fransicso, they presented 3 papers on the next phase
of their 20 year development roadmap using scramjets and rockets for access to space entitled SCRAMSPACE
"(Scramjet-based Access-to-Space Systems) an Australian Space Research Program funded
project that represents the first phase of this road map. SCRAMSPACE is centred around an affordable, expertise
building flight at the scramjet entry point to the access-to-space Mach range (M8-M12). The flight will address
scramjet performance, materials, and instrumentation, supported by ground-based performance and vehicle control
developments in this range. Future phases of the road map will progressively incorporate scramjet technologies,
currently being developed in Australian hypersonics laboratories, into flight experiments of increasing speed and
sophistication. Ultimately, scramjet and rocket technologies will be brought together to demonstrate a prototype
hybrid rocket / scramjet access-to-space system".
 
CNH said:
Europe to Australia in 5 hours? ROFL. Who wants to go to Australia any way? [Maybe some would like to come back ...] Seriously, there are what ... 20 million people in Oz? Not exactly a mass market.

As for Mach 5 and the rest - has no one learned anything from Concorde? Supersonic flight over land is a big no no.
Click to expand...

I wanna visit Oz, (but entry permit and customs inspection are hell)
there other market for Mach 5, like route like China/ Japan to USA or Europe
Skylon precursor BAe HOTOL was also proposed as hypersonic passenger craft !
50 persons form London to Sydney in 45 Minute
with engine boostphase almost to orbit, then glide to Airport like Space shuttle
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,277.msg93538.html#msg93538
 
The boom may be reduced, but it'll still be there. So it leaves Heathrow - where is it when it hits Mach 1?
 
Matej said:
I had a looong talk with the Reaction Engines representatives, a very usefull one, so when I will have some free time to spare, I will write some extract of it.
Click to expand...

I think its about time...

So, my first impression is that they perfectly know, what they are doing. I was not overwhelmed by the megalomaniac plans to conquer the universe. They have a very clean, simple and realistic point-to-point strategy, mostly related to the propulsion system. Regarding the vehicle - for now its just the preferred concept without solved details.

When speaking about the engine, they used already developed and proved technologies and they even did some work on joining and testing them together as one connected system. There was only one unproved technology left - precooling system. In the mid 2010 they were preparing to test this last piece of puzzle and as FutureSpaceTourist pointed out, they are going to launch those tests this summer. The point-to-point strategy gave them the advantage to be able to request the funds not for the all-new complex, complicated and expensive engine, but rather to the separate technologies, that can have also other applications, not only in the SABRE engine. It means, that even if the Skylon will never be realized, they will be usefull in the other industry areas. What I found very interesting is that they were able to collect (thanks to that kind of strategy) relatively a lot of money. They started with the specific studies/analysis with the costs of hundreds of thousands Eur, then they were working with the millions and now they collected tens of millions in funds. That is impressive. So when they claim that there are the investors ready to spent 350M USD after the successfull precooler test, it is not a surprise for me. Honestly, if I be the investor, I would really consider to give them some money for the engine technology development.

Another story is the vehicle. Because they are concentrating almost all the efforts to the propulsion, vehicle is now in its concept stage. They made the preliminary work on the aerodynamics and some subsystems, but it seemed to me that they didn't figure out some of the important details. The thermal protection system is one of the examples - I surprised them a bit with that question. They said that they can use some sort of the modern ceramic tiles, but when I argue by the complexity, expense and the different size/shape of almost all of the tiles on the Space Shuttle, I didn't receive any good answer. It means for me that there is still the probability, that the design of the vehicle can change, as they start the detailed work on it in the next phase. I also couldn't resist to use the Scott's note that it would snap in half on reentry. They answered in detail and generally it was about the argument, that the vehicle will have the very low weight during the reentry compared to the takeoff and also it will have very provident trajectory.

To summarize it, they absolutely convinced me that the SABRE engine is the right thing to do and I am sure it can be realized. Regarding the Skylon vehicle, well, it belongs to the group of the much realistic European vehicles, however I am carefull in this case. If it ever became reality, we are talking about beyond 2025 timeframe.
 
Matej said:
Matej said:
I had a looong talk with the Reaction Engines representatives, a very usefull one, so when I will have some free time to spare, I will write some extract of it.
Click to expand...

I think its about time...

So, my first impression is that they perfectly know, what they are doing. I was not overwhelmed by the megalomaniac plans to conquer the universe. They have a very clean, simple and realistic point-to-point strategy, mostly related to the propulsion system. Regarding the vehicle - for now its just the preferred concept without solved details.

When speaking about the engine, they used already developed and proved technologies and they even did some work on joining and testing them together as one connected system. There was only one unproved technology left - precooling system. In the mid 2010 they were preparing to test this last piece of puzzle and as FutureSpaceTourist pointed out, they are going to launch those tests this summer. The point-to-point strategy gave them the advantage to be able to request the funds not for the all-new complex, complicated and expensive engine, but rather to the separate technologies, that can have also other applications, not only in the SABRE engine. It means, that even if the Skylon will never be realized, they will be usefull in the other industry areas. What I found very interesting is that they were able to collect (thanks to that kind of strategy) relatively a lot of money. They started with the specific studies/analysis with the costs of hundreds of thousands Eur, then they were working with the millions and now they collected tens of millions in funds. That is impressive. So when they claim that there are the investors ready to spent 350M USD after the successfull precooler test, it is not a surprise for me. Honestly, if I be the investor, I would really consider to give them some money for the engine technology development.

Another story is the vehicle. Because they are concentrating almost all the efforts to the propulsion, vehicle is now in its concept stage. They made the preliminary work on the aerodynamics and some subsystems, but it seemed to me that they didn't figure out some of the important details. The thermal protection system is one of the examples - I surprised them a bit with that question. They said that they can use some sort of the modern ceramic tiles, but when I argue by the complexity, expense and the different size/shape of almost all of the tiles on the Space Shuttle, I didn't receive any good answer. It means for me that there is still the probability, that the design of the vehicle can change, as they start the detailed work on it in the next phase. I also couldn't resist to use the Scott's note that it would snap in half on reentry. They answered in detail and generally it was about the argument, that the vehicle will have the very low weight during the reentry compared to the takeoff and also it will have very provident trajectory.

To summarize it, they absolutely convinced me that the SABRE engine is the right thing to do and I am sure it can be realized. Regarding the Skylon vehicle, well, it belongs to the group of the much realistic European vehicles, however I am carefull in this case. If it ever became reality, we are talking about beyond 2025 timeframe.
Click to expand...

Lots of good points there - I think you nailed their strategy quite well. They focuse on the hardest part first - the engine.
If they obtain a workable engine, fine. I just hope that workable engine can then find its way on a workable spaceplane.

a while back at NASA spaceflight.com Mark Hempsell briefly discussed Skylon. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21530.180
And there, too (better thread)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22434.msg627560#msg627560
 
Thank you both for the extra information, very interesting.

Archibald said:
If they obtain a workable engine, fine. I just hope that workable engine can then find its way on a workable spaceplane.
Click to expand...

Quite! But even if the spaceplane doesn't materialise, I like to hope that the technology will still be used in some aerospace vehicle that members of this website would appreciate :)
 
Skylon Spaceplane review "without showstoppers".

BBC TV teletext news reported this morning that ESA technical review of Reaction Engine's Skylon & Sabre gave them a clean bill, "without show-stoppers". Next phase is to be ground-testing of a jet engine with pre-cooler.
;D
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13506289
 
Re: Skylon Spaceplane review "without showstoppers".

Nik said:
BBC TV teletext news reported this morning that ESA technical review of Reaction Engine's Skylon & Sabre gave them a clean bill, "without show-stoppers". Next phase is to be ground-testing of a jet engine with pre-cooler.
;D
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13506289
Click to expand...

Good news, but they better get a move on with regards as to the airframe front!
 
I used to be skeptical about Skylon (SSTO ? bah. Spaceplane ? re-bah) but recent events changed my mind. That thing might really work in the end.
Kudos to Alan Bond, who survived HOTOL failure and fifteen years (1993 - 2008) of low profile research, trying to prove his concept might work. The effort payed!

Then, if Skylon ever flies, it will open a whole can of worms. Von Braun shuttle; Sanger antipodal bomber. Reagan's Orient Express; see what I mean ?
 
martinbayer said:
ESA assessment report is available here: http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/bispartners/ukspaceagency/docs/skylon-assessment-report-pub.pdf

Martin
Click to expand...

Thanks, that was a very interesting read. Having read some about rigid airships, the thing actually does resemble them more than airplanes like is said there.

I'm still not convinced it would be cheaper to develop or operate than a two stage reusable rocket.
 
The Skylon spaceplane project has several go/no-go points and the first of these is the full-scale test of the frost-control on the engine precooler.
The full-scale precooler was, according to various reports due to be tested in June. We're now into July and nary a sign of a precooler test or any results.

When will we see if the project will make it past its first, and possibly most critical hurdle?
 
Reaction Engines' June newsletter is now on-line but nothing substantive yet on the pre-cooler tests:

http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/news_jun11.html
Commencement of Pre-cooler Heat Exchanger Testing Process
The testing process for the pre-cooler heat exchanger technology began this month. Over the past few months, the B9 test site has been stripped down and the dummy pre-cooler has been removed and placed in storage. The Viper jet engine has been refurbished in preparation for the testing.

The pipe runs for both the helium loop and N2 supply have been tested. The helium loop instrumentation and control for the operation of the valves are also in place.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mz said:
I'm still not convinced it would be cheaper to develop or operate than a two stage reusable rocket.
Click to expand...

I have been following Skylon for a long time as I was always a fan of HOTOL.

They reckon initially $40m a launch and with a fleet on the go they could get it down to $10m per launch whether that is realistic is anyones guess. They reckon Skylon could orbit 5 tonnes (33069 lb) and I believe that is to GTO. I wonfer how does the Ariane 5 compare?

I really hope they can do it, it is such a cool project and even if they can get a working Sabre engine out of the deal there is huge potential to sell it to the space/defense industry.

I can't help feeling that inorder to achieve a feasible air frame they will need outside help who knows maybe in 20 years BAE and reaction could team up and Britain could be leading the way in payload delivery.

Good luck to them I say!
 
In 2009, Mark Hempsell of REL appeared on the Space Show (still available for podcast download - check wikipedia page for Skylon) and said that, if Skylon didn't work out, they'd go to a 2-stage vehicle.

The problem, he said is that it would double the cost because you'd need a fortune to develop the carrier aircraft and the same again for the to-orbit vehicle.

Personally, I'd say that the 2nd stage vehicle would carry less than the Skylon because of the limitations on weight that the 1st stage could carry.
 
Well, they could team with Mitchell Burnside Clapp to bring the Black Horse / Black Colt / Pathfinder lineage back.

Pull a Black Arrow - Gamma 8 - H202/kerosene rocket engine out of a museum, fire it on the bench.
Have an Airbus or Boeing tanker modified for inflight refueling of H2O2.
Use space shuttle components to save some costs.
Upper stages - any cryogenic or Breez or Block D would be fine.

There you go... that thing might work IF one don't try orbital SSTO straight on (Black Horse). Suborbital with an upper stage (Black Colt or Pathfinder) is doable with today's technology.

To max payload, modify an A380 as a tanker :D
 
The latest RE newsletter finally has an update on their pre-cooler testing.

[quote author=http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/news_mar12.html]
Pre-cooler testing at B9 has begun

The testing of the Pre-cooler, now fully integrated into the B9 test stand with the Viper jet engine, has finally begun this month after a number of delays shaking down the system. The initial tests have gone very well and represent a good start to the test campaign which will last several months.

The flow thorough the Pre-cooler has been found to be aerodynamically stable without any significant structural deflection or vibration.
[/quote]
 
No vibration ?


They should still get 'Eolian Harp' frequencies which, incidentally, would give convenient 'real-time' diagnostics...
 
Here's an interview with Alan Bond from November 2011:

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYos3J_8D5Q


He talks about various aspects of Skylon and why they believe it's technically viable. Interestingly he says that investment in the company has only been about £10 million over the last 8 years or so. That'll be dwarfed by the reported $350 million riding on the success of the current pre-cooler tests.
 
I know they've tried to eliminate icing problems, but what about FOD?
 
REL appear to be ratcheting up the publicity. The BBC's space/science correspondent has a piece today on Skylon and the on-going pre-cooler tests:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17864782]
[...]
Reaction Engines Limited (REL) believes the test campaign will prove the readiness of Sabre's key elements.

This being so, the firm would then approach investors to raise the £250m needed to take the project into the final design phase.

"We intend to go to the Farnborough International Air Show in July with a clear message," explained REL managing director Alan Bond.

"The message is that Britain has the next step beyond the jet engine; that we can reduce the world to four hours - the maximum time it would take to go anywhere. And that it also gives us aircraft that can go into space, replacing all the expendable rockets we use today."
[...]
Click to expand...

At least that gives an expected date by which the pre-cooler tests will have finished!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am reliably informed that the first phase has gone very well i.e. nothing unexpected, and that the B9 test area is being/has been reconfigured for the next phase. It's taken longer than expected as they don't have an unlimited supply of the precooler modules, so have to be very careful with them! The precooler system does actually work - it only needs to operate for the first 10 minutes or so of the flight, but they have to actually demonstrate it to release funds for the next round. Obviously it's very intense down at REL HQ at the moment, and there's all the prep for Farnborough going on too!
FOD? Not sure I've heard anything on it, but not all the air coming through the intakes goes to the precooler - a good chunk goes down a bypass to a ring of burners at the rear - http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/sabre.html
So long as a chunk of stuff doesn't actually break the pre-cooler tubing I think it's not a big issue - they could always sweep the runway before a takeoff... :)
 

Attachments

  • SABRE_notes.jpg
    SABRE_notes.jpg
    205.5 KB · Views: 917
aemann, thanks for the update. Good to hear things are progressing.

Any work being done of the airframe configuration? Is the long slender fuselage and wingtip mounted podded engines still seen as the way to go?

In otherwords have you been asked to do some more of your fantastic artwork ;)
 
I too have wondered about the engines. As alan said, essentially skylon is hotol but with the fuel tank distributed either side of the wings and c of g. I guess the engines were moved to wingtips because otherwise they would be heating the rear of the fuselage, but on re-entry its surely got to get pretty hot anyway. My worry is that there is going to be an occasion when one of the engines malfunctions at some stage. I dont know how much power those engines can kick out but an asymmetry of thrust has got to be bad.
 
Ultra Lightweight Heat Exchanger displayed during the Farnborough 2012. In Reaction Engines they are pretty convinced, that they will have Skylon-like vehicle before 2020 at least for flight tests. Again my impression was, that they perfectly know, what they want and what they are doing.
 

Attachments

  • HETE1.jpg
    HETE1.jpg
    199.8 KB · Views: 541
  • HETE2.jpg
    HETE2.jpg
    247.7 KB · Views: 520

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom