Commercial suborbital point-to-point flights

Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

On 5 Oct 2004 12:33:51 -0700, in a place far, far away,
(Bill Bogen) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

The latter would be a Really Bad Idea. You'd only get to do it once
per vehicle.

Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?


The performance of a typical ICBM....

Will McLean

McLean1382 wrote:

Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?


The performance of a typical ICBM....

Expect it.




--
"And he did bring them. It took a number of years, but one by one he
brought them here. Except for his father, that old man died where he was
born." -+ "Elia Kazan, "America, America"

Bill Bogen wrote:
Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

12,500 mile range is basically orbital, 8.5ish km/s. The
difference in delta V is very small between an anti-podal
missile and a launcher. Also, max velocity would most
likely occur with a shallower launch due to lower gravity
losses.

"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ...
Bill Bogen wrote:
Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

12,500 mile range is basically orbital, 8.5ish km/s. The
difference in delta V is very small between an anti-podal
missile and a launcher. Also, max velocity would most
likely occur with a shallower launch due to lower gravity
losses.

OK, then let's reduce its range to 2,462 miles (3,961 km), New York to
LA. Make it a 4-passenger bizspaceship. Assume jet take-off and
landing, jet fuel (or maybe RP1) & LOX rocket engine. What kind of
delta-vee is required? Resulting max velocity? Trip time? Etc.
Wouldn't such a vehicle have a lot more market than SS1 but be
cheaper/easier to develop than an orbital ship?

"Bill Bogen" wrote in message
om...
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message
...
Bill Bogen wrote:
Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

12,500 mile range is basically orbital, 8.5ish km/s. The
difference in delta V is very small between an anti-podal
missile and a launcher. Also, max velocity would most
likely occur with a shallower launch due to lower gravity
losses.

OK, then let's reduce its range to 2,462 miles (3,961 km), New York to
LA. Make it a 4-passenger bizspaceship. Assume jet take-off and
landing, jet fuel (or maybe RP1) & LOX rocket engine. What kind of
delta-vee is required? Resulting max velocity? Trip time? Etc.
Wouldn't such a vehicle have a lot more market than SS1 but be
cheaper/easier to develop than an orbital ship?

Not sure of the answer but presumably the ship would have to withstand much
higher mach numbers than SS1 which implies much more expensive construction.

Would anyone want to pay $500,000 for a ticket though!

- Michael

"MichaelJP" wrote in message ...
"Bill Bogen" wrote in message
om...
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message
...
Bill Bogen wrote:
Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

12,500 mile range is basically orbital, 8.5ish km/s. The
difference in delta V is very small between an anti-podal
missile and a launcher. Also, max velocity would most
likely occur with a shallower launch due to lower gravity
losses.

OK, then let's reduce its range to 2,462 miles (3,961 km), New York to
LA. Make it a 4-passenger bizspaceship. Assume jet take-off and
landing, jet fuel (or maybe RP1) & LOX rocket engine. What kind of
delta-vee is required? Resulting max velocity? Trip time? Etc.
Wouldn't such a vehicle have a lot more market than SS1 but be
cheaper/easier to develop than an orbital ship?

Not sure of the answer but presumably the ship would have to withstand much
higher mach numbers than SS1 which implies much more expensive construction.

Would anyone want to pay $500,000 for a ticket though!

No reason a ticket would cost so much. A liquid-fueled ship should be
able to be re-fueled, checked out, and re-launched much faster than
SS1, so more flights, so each flight cheaper. Yes, paying back the
development and vehicle build costs will drive up the ticket price but
making a more versatile vehicle that can serve more customers will
drive the price back down.

Anybody know the development, vehicle-build, and operating costs for a
4-passenger bizjet? Then we multiply by some reasonable factor
because of the greater complexity of the bizspaceship (thermal
protection, higher maintenance costs because has rocket _and_ jet
engines, etc) to figure the per flight cost.

(Bill Bogen) wrote in message . com...
"MichaelJP" wrote in message ...
"Bill Bogen" wrote in message
om...
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message
...
Bill Bogen wrote:
Let's say a vehicle is developed with capability somewhere between the
real SpaceShipOne and the theoretical winner of Robert Bigelow's
proposed $50 million prize, an orbital vehicle. Let it be a
sub-orbital vehicle that can transport 2 or more passengers
point-to-point over 12,500 miles in a ballistic trajectory, perhaps
assisted by gliding or jet engines to launch/land.

What kind of delta-vee would it require? What might its max velocity
be? If launched straight up, like SS1, what could its max altitude
be?

12,500 mile range is basically orbital, 8.5ish km/s. The
difference in delta V is very small between an anti-podal
missile and a launcher. Also, max velocity would most
likely occur with a shallower launch due to lower gravity
losses.

OK, then let's reduce its range to 2,462 miles (3,961 km), New York to
LA. Make it a 4-passenger bizspaceship. Assume jet take-off and
landing, jet fuel (or maybe RP1) & LOX rocket engine. What kind of
delta-vee is required? Resulting max velocity? Trip time? Etc.
Wouldn't such a vehicle have a lot more market than SS1 but be
cheaper/easier to develop than an orbital ship?

Not sure of the answer but presumably the ship would have to withstand much
higher mach numbers than SS1 which implies much more expensive construction.

Would anyone want to pay $500,000 for a ticket though!

No reason a ticket would cost so much. A liquid-fueled ship should be
able to be re-fueled, checked out, and re-launched much faster than
SS1, so more flights, so each flight cheaper. Yes, paying back the
development and vehicle build costs will drive up the ticket price but
making a more versatile vehicle that can serve more customers will
drive the price back down.

Anybody know the development, vehicle-build, and operating costs for a
4-passenger bizjet? Then we multiply by some reasonable factor
because of the greater complexity of the bizspaceship (thermal
protection, higher maintenance costs because has rocket _and_ jet
engines, etc) to figure the per flight cost.

At a bizjet share-ware site,
http://www.airelite.com/membership01a.html we see that a $99,500
memberships gets you 25 hours of flight time, presumably at something
like 560 mph (250 m/sec)so you're paying for 14,000 miles or about
three round-trips NY/LA. I don't think it's too bizarre to think that
a bizspaceship (suborbital) service could charge the same amount for
one much faster NY/LA round-trip. Though their per-vehicle build and
maintenance costs would be higher than a bizjet's, their fleet could
be smaller because of the greater flight rate and so generate the same
profits with fewer ships.

OK, then let's reduce its range to 2,462 miles (3,961 km), New York to
LA. Make it a 4-passenger bizspaceship. Assume jet take-off and
landing, jet fuel (or maybe RP1) & LOX rocket engine. What kind of
delta-vee is required? Resulting max velocity? Trip time? Etc.

5500ish m/sec, trip time about 30 minutes (including reentry and glide
to landing).

Not sure of the answer but presumably the ship would have to withstand much
higher mach numbers than SS1 which implies much more expensive construction.

There's the rub. A ballistic trajectory is going to come back in at
about a 30 degree angle, which means just the vertical component is
over 2500 m/sec. Let's see, in airplane terms, that's a sink rate of
500,000 feet per minute... You get into thick air very quickly at
that sink rate.

If you can pull out at 10 g eyeballs down, you reach the bottom of
your dive at 66,000 feet. Unfortunately you do this at Mach 14, hit a
peak indicated airspeed of 2300 knots, and pull 12 g eyeballs out in
addition to the 10 g eyeballs down. I don't know of a material that
can handle Mach 14 at 66,000 feet, but if you can build a ship out of
holysmokium gadzookite, and your passengers don't mind 15 g on
reentry, go for it.

If you can pull 15 g eyeballs down, you pull out at 106,000 feet and
Mach 17. Peak indicated airspeed is about 1050 knots, and eyeballs
out is negligible. This might actually work for an unmanned vehicle;
an F-104 has flown over 1000 knots on the deck at Bonneville.

The common solution to the reentry g problem is the waverider. It
cruises at Mach many, around 200,000 feet. But heating is still a big
giant Kodiak bear.

At a bizjet share-ware site,
http://www.airelite.com/membership01a.html we see that a $99,500
memberships gets you 25 hours of flight time, presumably at something
like 560 mph (250 m/sec)so you're paying for 14,000 miles or about
three round-trips NY/LA.

That's very good to know. That says that if the technical problems
can be overcome, the market problems - mostly subsonic bizjets eating
your lunch - may not be insuperable.

-R