As of 1964, the GA of the Models 176, a lifting body, stowed-wing spaceplane. See HERE for late 1960’s artwork of a larger version.
Oct 072012
Oct 072012
The SRB-X is one of the most derided launch vehicles ever seriously considered. Initiated by NASA in the early 1980’s, the idea was to use Shuttle hardware – specifically Reusable Solid Rocket Motor components – to provide Shuttle-class payload capability. Theoretically the SRB-X, a stack of large solid rocket motors, would provide a low-cost semi-reusable launcher that would be rugged, reliable and could continue to fly if the shuttle itself was laid up for some reason. In reality, it would very likely have been every bit as expensive as we’ve come to expect from the Shuttle program.
In 1983 Boeing analyzed the SRB-X system for NASA, studying detailed designs as well as a range of alternates. The basic SRB-X booster used a core vehicle composed of RSRM segments, using RSRMs as boosters. In order to use stock Shuttle launch facilities, the boosters were mounted well outboard of the core… with the same separation distance as between the RSRMs on a standard Shuttle stack. This added considerably to structural weight. Alternates studied included versions that were just linear stacks of RSRM-derived stages (leading to very long boosters) and versions that used Titan hardware including the UA-1205 boosters and the Titan III first stage as the second stage of the vehicle.
Oct 022012
A Bell Helicopter concept in model form of an armed derivative of the XV-15 tiltrotor. This dated from the early/mid 1980’s and represented a ground attack aircraft… largely what the US Army was looking for in what became the LHX/RAH-66 Comanche program, just in tiltrotor form. As a tiltrotor, it would have had a much faster and more fuel efficient cruise, but a less efficient hover, than a helicopter. The Army turned out to not want tiltrotors for this application, and made sure that they were effectively excluded from the LHX competition.
Note the hand-written notation that missiles would only be fired in hover… otherwise, they would pass through the proprotor disk. However, it seems likely that missiles could be fired while the rotors were tiltedless than fully upwards, meaning that the craft could fire and move at a fair rate at the same time, just not at full speed.
Sep 302012
This 1959 Boeing booster concept not only did away with the cockpit, but also the jet engines and the wings. Instead, this was a simpler design intended for ocean splashdown and recovery. Aerodynamic flaps maintained stability.
Sep 292012
Base Point #2 concept from Boeing/North American in 1959, showing a glide-back booster.
Sep 242012
From a February 1980 report, layout drawings of the SCAMP as then envisioned. Most obvious difference from the F-16XL is the vertical tail… instead of the F-16 tail, it utilized the base of the F-16 tail with an all-movable vertical stabilizer… which was previously a horizontal stabilizer.
Sep 242012
Tony Chong has an article up on his blog describing the Northrop N-205 design, a T-38 massively altered into an all-rocket powered vehicle designed to launch itself to the edge of space.
Talons in Space: Northrop’s N-205 Proposal
Sep 232012
Same basic concept for the booster, but with a cockpit and canards. A manned booster rather than unmanned.
Sep 202012
The design for what became the F-16XL began in 1977 as the Supersonic Cruise and Maneuver Prototype at General Dynamics-Fort Worth. The idea was to incorporate lessons learned in SST design into military aircraft. The SCAMP was to be a highly modified F-16 with a 56-inch fuselage stretch, an all-new cranked-delta wing, and an all-new vertical tail, along with many smaller changes. The use of computers – already new with the baseline F-16 – would allow the aircraft to be flown… otherwise unlikely, due to the relaxed static stability of the design (i.e. left to it’s own the design would oscillate in attitude and angle of attack until it went truly unstable). The SCAMP would be capable of carrying a much greater payload than the F-16, such as a sizable bombload.
The F-16XL as actually built used an F-16 vertical tail. But this earlier SCAMP design, from a February 1980 report, used a new all-moving vertical tail. Even earlier designs used all-moving wingtips, which were themselves the horizontal stabilizers from a regular F-16. While that idea undoubtedly had merit, it would not allow for missiles to be carried on the wingtips, and thus fixed wingtips were designed in.
Sep 192012
A variant of the previous design, with the upper stage carried on the back rather than on the nose. Otherwise broadly similar.
