Search Results : “hl-10”

Aug 052022
 

The same seller trying to sell the Martin X-23 lithograph is also selling a lithograph of an orbital HL-10.

Turns out that these two lithographs are, at least based on stains on the X-23 matting, the same two lithographs sold just a few months ago. I’m dubious of turning around two lithographs that sold for $384 together for a grand or more each. The seller has a *lot* of high-value items… celebrity autographs and such, so he’s presumably doing well, but normally a lithograph like this would sell for well under $100.

Shrug.

Anyway, the art depicts an HL-10 coming in for a landing. The configuration includes a raised cockpit and reaction control thrusters at the tail; the white paint seems burned off along the underside. This would indicate an orbital craft after re-entry. Given the lack of an apparent hatch in the rear, this would not seem to be an operational orbital HL-10 (depicted hereabouts many times in the past) but instead a slightly smaller test vehicle, probably with a single pilot, possible lobbed on a once-around flight.

 Posted by at 10:01 am
Oct 012021
 

A 1964 Boeing design for an orbital HL-10 derivative, to be used for space station logistics. This would be launched atop a Saturn Ib. Cargo would be carried up int he adapter, which would be expended; passengers would go up and down within the body of the spaceplane. A heat shield would cover the canopy until after re-entry.

 Posted by at 4:22 pm
Jan 192021
 

A ca. 1964 Boeing rendering of an HL-10-derived spaceplane in orbit. Numerous companies – Boeing, McDonnell, Lockheed, Northrop, etc. – contemplated the development of a logistics spaceplane based on the HL-10. The spaceplane itself would, rather like the X-20 Dyna Soar, have been minimally functional in space; most of the propulsion and power would have come from the attached adapter module. The conical adapter would have also carried the bulk of the vehicles payload to be delivered to orbit, and would be used to provide a de-orbit burn for the spaceplane. The adapter would therefore burn up on re-entry, leaving the lifting body to glide to a runway landing. The spaceplane itself would be crammed full of astronauts and the life support they’d need; there would generally be little capacity for anything else, certainly not payload going back downhill. This was fine, though, as there were few enough payloads other than humans that made sense to send *back* down the gravity well.

 

 Posted by at 8:18 pm
Oct 202012
 

This one, based on the same crude mockup, moved the pilot lower. It is much more like the HL-10 as actually built, with no disruptions to the basic lifting body mold line. It does have a quite different window arrangement, however.

Curiously, it seems that seating for more crew than just the pilot was considered. This indicates that this planning wasn’t just for a purely research vehicle, but an orbital vehicle intended to transport a crew.

 Posted by at 10:31 pm
Oct 182012
 

From photos circa 1963-1964 show a full-scale NASA-Langley mockup of the forward nose section of the HL-10 lifting body shape. Incorporated into this was a framework showing a potential canopy configuration. This would clearly have been for a low-speed (non-orbital) test version, much like the HL-10 that was actually built.

 Posted by at 12:54 pm
Jul 052012
 

From the NASA HQ history office, a photo of a Martin Marietta model of the HL-10. The ID plaque on the base of the model reads “NASA HL-10 LIFTING ENTRY RESEARCH VEHICLE,” but the interior clearly shows that this design was intended for transportation of crew, and possibly cargo, to space.

This most likely dates from around 1967, when Martin was studying HL-10-type orbital craft for NASA. This appears to be the “D/3” configuration, one of a fairly large number of HL-10-based designs. The D/3 was capable of carrying three crew (up to six) and would be launched atop a Titan IIIc launch vehicle.

 Posted by at 12:08 pm
Aug 042022
 

Currently on ebay is a lithograph of the Martin X-23 PRIME (Precision Reentry Including Maneuvering reEntry) subscale lifting body, a mid-1960’s program to build small test vehicles for the full-scale X-24A lifting body. This depiction shows it without the “bump” on the forward fuselage simulating the contours of the cockpit canopy. The seller is rather optimistic with a $1875 Buy-It-Now price, although he will consider offers.

Another copy of the same lithograph, along with a lithograph of an orbital HL-10, sold a few months ago for less than $400. That was too rich for my blood for two lithographs, never mind nearly two grand for one. Shrug.  But at least the listing provides a fairly decent photo of the art. I *believe* I’ve only seen it reproduced in B&W.

 Posted by at 4:18 pm
Mar 272022
 

I have long bemoaned the fact that interesting aerospace history stuff sometimes sells on eBay at painfully high prices and sometimes even to people who aren’t me (the outrage of it all). Such is the case with this listing:

Vintage NASA Concept Art Frank DiPietro Martin Marietta SV-5D PRIME Lifting Body

Two nice vintage lithographs… one of the Martin SV-5D (AKA, X-23) subscale lifting body, and one of the NASA-Langley HL-10 (an early concept with a raised cockpit, possibly also a Martin interpretation). The initial bid price for these was $100; after a number of recent eBay expenditures, that was more than I was willing to go for. So it’s just as well that the final selling price was $384, which seems really, really high. Perhaps the bidders thought that these were the original paintings? Or perhaps the market for lithographs has skyrocketed.

Well, I guess it’s time that I unload some stuff. Not that I necessarily want to, but the bills lately…. uuuuugh. I recently saw a modestly cruddy Convair F-106 joystick go for well over $700. Well, guess what I have: a *really* *nice* F-106 joystick. Anybody want to bribe me before I put it on eBay? If so, send me an email with your insanely generous offer…

 

 Posted by at 9:20 pm
Jan 272019
 

A magazine ad from 1966 depicting a lifting body in space. The design seems reasonable (sort of a cross between the M2 and the HL-10) but could very well be a product not of engineers but of the art department. The angle is not the most informative, but it appears that this design has something of a squared-off nose. Note that the cockpit canopy is exposed, something that very few small lifting body re-entry vehicle designs had… for the simple reason that the windows would likely melt during re-entry, and that would defeat the purpose in making the thing recoverable (along with likely damaging pilot morale). As vehicles get bigger, such as the space shuttle, the windows get further away from the nose and can be made survivable. But little designs like this? Not very likely with 1960’s tech. Otherwise, though, it is an attractive illustration.

 Posted by at 6:39 pm
Oct 192017
 

A rare piece of color art depicting an early Dyna Soar being dropped from a B-52. The Dyna Soar is equipped with two rocket engines used to boost it to higher altitude and higher speed (supersonic, though not very supersonic… think the test flights of the M2-F3 and the HL-10). Note that this shows the Dyna Soar having been tucked into a modified bomb bay in the B-52’s fuselage; planning  would soon move the Dyna Soar to under the wing, using the same attachment point used by the B-52 to carry the X-15 and the lifting bodies.

 

 Posted by at 11:59 am