"SpaceShipTwo could be single stage to SUBorbit"

"Bob Myers" wrote in message
...
However, I seem to recall that there was an idea, part of the old Air
Force "Man In Space, Soonest" proposals, that did involve basically
strapping on some additional boost to an X-15 and getting the thing into
orbit, no? Not sure how they were planning on dealing with the "getting
it back down" problem, either...

True there were orbital X-15 proposals (e.g. X-15B), but it essentially
amounted to straping a several rocket stages to the X-15. Drawings showed
one to 3 Navaho's boosting an X-15, but the Navaho was such an early (i.e.
inefficient) vehicle that it would have actually taken four of the G-38
version to put an X-15B into orbit. Based on hte empty/full mass values, it
appears that the X-15 itself didn't provide much, if any, of the launch
delta-V in this configuration. However, it would have had to have provided
all of the deorbit burn.

X-15B
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/x15b.htm

G-38 Navaho Booster
http://www.astronautix.com/stages/g38oster.htm

Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
There was indeed a plan to strap a bunch of solid rockets to an X-15 and
put it in orbit, with a heat shield. The Powers That Be decided that
humans couldn't function under the stresses of space flight though and
went with a fully automated "capsule". Would be a different world if the
X-15B had been flown and worked.

I've seen this X-15B many times at the museum and the ablative coating is
definitely not on the aircraft.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...eet.asp?id=556

Note the appearance of the aircraft in the "HiRes" pictures. Also note the
drop tanks in picture #1.

Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon

On Wed, 12 May 2010 05:57:02 -0700, Robert Clark wrote:

On May 10, 2:47Â*pm, Robert Clark wrote:
Â*Interesting article he

SpaceShipTwo could be single stage to suborbit says ESA firm. By Rob
Coppinger
on April 29, 2010 4:24 PM
"Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo could be a single stage to suborbit
vehicle using liquid chemical propulsion according to independent
research carried out by a company that has been contracted by the
European Space Agency for suborbital and hypersonic transport studies."
"... the UK firm came to the conclusion that the volume within which
SS2 carries its solid rocket motor and nitrous oxide supply could
equally hold a liquid chemical propulsion system capable of providing
enough thrust for long enough for a horizontal take-off and ascent to
50,000ft and above without the need for
WK2."http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/hyperbola/2010/04/spaceshiptwo-
coul...

If you also filled up the passenger compartment with fuel leaving only
a pilot's cabin could it even become orbital?


The usefulness of just using a single stage for the suborbital flights
is to save on costs. Using two vehicles would cost twice as much to
develop and twice as much in per flight costs.

When people say things like that, it is a good argument that there is no
intelligence on the usenet.

Multistage rockets to orbit are the used BECAUSE they are cheaper than a
single stage to orbit, if you could even GET a single stage to orbit and
back again.

It just kinda makes you wonder about people.

On 5/12/2010 9:40 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
"J. wrote in message
...
There was indeed a plan to strap a bunch of solid rockets to an X-15 and
put it in orbit, with a heat shield. The Powers That Be decided that
humans couldn't function under the stresses of space flight though and
went with a fully automated "capsule". Would be a different world if the
X-15B had been flown and worked.

I've seen this X-15B many times at the museum and the ablative coating is
definitely not on the aircraft.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...eet.asp?id=556

Note the appearance of the aircraft in the "HiRes" pictures. Also note the
drop tanks in picture #1.

First, that's an X15A--no X15B was ever built or flown. Second, there
was never any plan to "drop" the auxiliary fuel tanks. And apparently
they have stripped it because it was white when I saw it many years ago.

On May 12, 10:13*am, Marvin the Martian wrote:
...

The usefulness of just using a single stage for the suborbital flights
is to save on costs. Using two vehicles would cost twice as much to
develop and twice as much in per flight costs.

When people say things like that, it is a good argument that there is no
intelligence on the usenet.

Multistage rockets to orbit are the used BECAUSE they are cheaper than a
single stage to orbit, if you could even GET a single stage to orbit and
back again.

It just kinda makes you wonder about people.

This is for the *suborbital* XCOR flight which does cost half as much
per passenger as the two-stage Virgin Galactic system.

Bob Clark

On May 11, 8:57*am, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:
"Marvin the Martian" wrote in messagenews:usWdnd2hQtY7HHXWnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@gigan ews.com...

The delta V for LEO is about 9 km/s. No fracken way in hell is that
little plastic thing going to go to LEO. Maybe if you strapped a nuclear
rocket engine to it, but those are illegal.

It's simply the rocket equation.

Basically, all this damned thing does is go up and come down. Orbit is a
completely different matter. People who don't understand the rocket
equation and the difference between LEO and a sounding rocket get a jazz
out of "space ship two", but they're stupid putzes.

Actually, ignorant can be fixed. *Stupid can't. *In most cases, it's easy
enough to explain that orbital velocity is so fast that you really do need a
huge amount of fuel and oxidizer to get into orbit. *The X-15 example helps
somewhat too. *The X-15 could fly high or fast, but could not do both on the
same mission. *And even the X-15's high speed flights only achieved a small
fraction of orbital velocity.

SpaceShipTwo is designed to fly high, not fast. *You need both to make it
into orbit.

Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon

As well as, as pointed out earlier, you need more than SS2 has to come
back down (safely)

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 5/12/2010 9:40 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:
"J. wrote in message
...
There was indeed a plan to strap a bunch of solid rockets to an X-15 and
put it in orbit, with a heat shield. The Powers That Be decided that
humans couldn't function under the stresses of space flight though and
went with a fully automated "capsule". Would be a different world if
the
X-15B had been flown and worked.

I've seen this X-15B many times at the museum and the ablative coating is
definitely not on the aircraft.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...eet.asp?id=556

Note the appearance of the aircraft in the "HiRes" pictures. Also note
the
drop tanks in picture #1.

First, that's an X15A--no X15B was ever built or flown.

My mistake. It's clearly X-15A-2 which was modified to carry external
tanks.

Second, there was never any plan to "drop" the auxiliary fuel tanks.

This is incorrect. Watch the video:

X-15A-2 flight video
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/mov...M-0033-08.html

When dropped from the B-52, the external tanks are clearly visible under the
X-15A-2. The latter part of the video shows the tanks being dropped,
followed by dropping the mockup-engine carried underneath. Due to the
landing gear/skid design used, I don't believe it would have been prudent to
try landing with the tanks attached.

X-15A-2 landing
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/mov...EM-0033-09.mov

And apparently they have stripped it because it was white when I saw it
many years ago.

This is true.

Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon

On 5/12/2010 5:40 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:

I've seen this X-15B many times at the museum and the ablative coating is
definitely not on the aircraft.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...eet.asp?id=556

They did manage to get the ablator off of the aircraft, it just took
around forever to do...which ruled out its re-use on any future aircraft
intended for multiple flights.
Some more photos of the aircraft with its ablative coating he
http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazin...ff_eng_x15.htm
Mercifully, a white seal coat was put over the pink ablator before the
pilots flew it, lest they be the subject of rude jokes at the officer's
club afterwards.
Oh well...at least a monkey didn't make the first flight. ;-)

Pat

In sci.space.history Robert Clark wrote:
This is for the *suborbital* XCOR flight which does cost half as
much per passenger as the two-stage Virgin Galactic system.

Do you have actual XCOR and VG cost figures or are you going by price
paid by the consumer?

rick jones
--
Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

Pat Flannery ) writes:
On 5/12/2010 5:40 AM, Jeff Findley wrote:

I've seen this X-15B many times at the museum and the ablative coating is
definitely not on the aircraft.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...eet.asp?id=556

They did manage to get the ablator off of the aircraft, it just took
around forever to do...which ruled out its re-use on any future aircraft
intended for multiple flights.

Why did they need to clean it off?

--John Park