Jun 102014
 

In the runup to the Saturn program, American aerospace companies studied every possible variation on large launch vehicles. One idea that seemed promising was the use of large solid rocket motors, singly or in clusters, to form large booster stages. It was sensible enough… in the late 1950s large solid rockets were better developed than large liquid rockets. Solids can put out truly monstrous levels of thrust, and reasonably reliably; and they require minimal preparation once stacked up and ready to go. In contrast, liquid rockets are complex and finicky, but with the advantage of substantially higher specific impulse.

In 1959 Lockheed released the results of an early study for NASA on a series of large boosters using solid rocket motors. They studied a range of vehicles, with 2, 3 and 4 stages; 300,000, 1,000,000 and 5,000,000 pound gross weights, and targeting 300 nautical mile circular orbits, geosynchronous, escape and soft lunar landings.

Shown below are diagrams of 1,000,000-pound gross weight boosters using 180-inch diameter solid first stages (440,000 pounds of propellant) and liquid upper stages (LOX/RP-1 or LOX/LH2 for the second stage and LOX/LH2 for the third). Payload weights were given for representative vehicles rather than specific designs.

solids 1

Payload: 39,800 pounds to 300 n.m.; 9,400 pounds to geosynchronous; 12,400 to escape; 3,900 pounds to soft lunar landing

———————–solids 2

Payload: 51,500 pounds to 300 n.m.

——————————-solids 3

Payload: 39,800 pounds to 300 n.m.; 9,400 pounds to geosynchronous; 12,400 to escape; 3,900 pounds to soft lunar landing

——————–solids 4

Payload: 15,000 pounds to geosynchronous; 18,400 pounds to escape; 5,600 pounds to soft lunar landings

 Posted by at 3:34 pm
Jun 082014
 

I’m getting close to being done with this one. The main article, clearly, is the one on the Model 2050E Dyna Soar, the second far smaller article is on the McDonnell F-4(FVS) and derivatives, the third is the old Bill Slayton CL-295 article from the original version of APR. There will be a few more small pieces, not shown here.

v3n4 ds2050e v3n4 cl295 v3n4 f4fvs

Issue V3N5 will almost certainly be smaller than this. Apart from the Lunar Gemini article, it will likely be composed of a number of all-new smaller articles. I’d like to move forward a short article from further down the run to this one, due to having some new info, but that info is embargoed by the source till later in the year. It’d be nice to get back on the two-month schedule for APR, but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that.

 Posted by at 1:13 am
Jun 072014
 

An illustration of the proposed RF-4X from the early 1970s. This was to be a highly modified version of the F-4E Phantom II capable of attaining Mach 3 for short periods. This would be possible by used more advanced inlets with water injection for pre-compressor cooling. The water would be stored in conformal tanks above the fuselage. The RF-4X would be a recon platform for the Israelies, sort of a low-budget, less stealthy SR-71.

rf-4x

More on the RF-4X HERE.

 Posted by at 3:39 pm
Jun 042014
 

Every now and then the notion of a modern version of the Saturn V pops up. It’s a silly idea; even if NASA decided that they needed a functional replica of the Saturn V, they couldn’t afford it. Not because the blueprints are missing; they can be obtained from several sources on microfilm. But the tooling to build a Saturn V is all gone. Many of the materials called for no longer exist. Many of the sub-components come from catalogs that no longer carry them, from companies that folded decades ago. To rebuild the Saturn V would be every bit as hard as building a brand-new vehicle along the same lines, but with modern materials, components and design/manufacturing practices.

Still, the idea of a modern Saturn V seems to appeal to many, including many at NASA. Below is a page from a 2011 Space Launch System presentation showing some of the concepts batted around regarding a modernized Saturn V. Note that the designs shown here were probably not designed in any real fidelity… spreadsheets and Powerpoint is likely as far as most of them got.

2011 SLS

 Posted by at 1:15 am
May 272014
 

As originally conceived, the B-58 Hustler would have a large centerline pod that would contain both fuel for the outbound portion of the mission and a single large nuclear warhead. Numerous variations on this pod were planned, including rocket-boosted versions to serve as standoff weapons. As it turned out, the pods kept leaking fuel into the weapons bay, so a two-component pod eventually replaced the unified pod.

b-58 pod

 Posted by at 12:06 am
May 242014
 

I know nothing of this company apart from what’s on the website. They’ve built some sort of prototype that seems capable of hovering and forward motion while in ground effect; that’s a good start, but far from what’s really needed for a truly practical flying motorbike (though it appears that what they’re currently working on is essentially a ground-hugging hovercraft-like vehicle, not a free-flyer). Note that the videos on the website also have the sound shut off, possibly because the prototype is probably loud enough to give bystanders brain damage.

I admit to being somewhat stumped about the utility of the thing if it can’t fly freely. Seems an expensive way to build something that could be done better by a standard ATV. On the other hand, if a future version is powerful enough to fly freely – and almost certainly controlled almost entirely by computer – I can see a lot of interest in such a thing.

http://aerofex.com/theaerox/

 

dev_top

 Posted by at 4:19 pm
May 152014
 

A fighter design from ~1990 could take off in under 600 feet, land vertically, carry two AMRAAMs, two ASRAAMs and one 20mm gun and 500 rounds. Used a remote augmented lift system for VTOL thrust, weighed about 28,000 pounds.

stovl

 Posted by at 10:00 pm
May 072014
 

Slowing plugging away on the greatly revised X-20 Dyna Soar article. Shown below is what it currently looks like… something of a mess. There are still a great many more illustrations I want to add, including a bucket of my own CAD diagrams, but how many will end up here is uncertain. It’s already pushing 100 pages when you include the CAD diagrams; probably too big. Perhaps a later stand-alone version will have everything plus the kitchen sink…

Image306

And the CAD diagrams:

x-20-booklet-2014-03

 Posted by at 9:25 pm
May 072014
 

A mid-1960’s concept from General Electric showing a Manned orbital Laboratory-type space lab with two docked Gemini capsules and one nuclear reactor for power. Derived from the SNAP-10a system, this powerplant featured a small reactor at the apex of the cone; the cone itself is the radiator for the system. The SNAP-10a was not a spectacularly efficient system… it produced around 30 kilowatts of thermal energy, of which only 500 were converted to electricity. The system shown below would have been a larger, more powerful and hopefully more efficient system.

The small compact and busy-looking item on the far left of the image would have been the reactor itself. Between that and the structural truss work connected to the large radiator was a thick radiation shield, composed of something like tungsten. Even with this massive chunk in the way, the reactor was still segregated far away from the crew.

ge nuke space station

 Posted by at 12:34 pm