|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The Rocket Motor of the Future Breathes Air Like a Jet Engine
"The two men arrived at the airfield before dawn to set up the test stand for a
prototype of their air-breathing rocket engine, a new kind of propulsion system that is a cross between a rocket motor and a jet engine. They call their unholy creation Fenris, and Davis believes that it’s the only way to make getting to space cheap enough for the rest of us. While a conventional rocket engine must carry giant tanks of fuel and oxidizer on its journey to space, an air-breathing rocket motor pulls most of its oxidizer directly from the atmosphere. This means that an air-breathing rocket can lift more stuff with less propellant and drastically lower the cost of space access—at least in theory. The idea to combine the efficiency of a jet engine with the power of a rocket motor isn’t new, but historically these systems have only been combined in stages. Virgin Galactic and Virgin Orbit, for example, use jet aircraft to carry conventional rockets several miles into the atmosphere before releasing them for the final leg of the journey to space. In other cases, the order is reversed. The fastest aircraft ever flown, NASA’s X-43, used a rocket engine to provide an initial boost before an air-breathing hypersonic jet engine—known as a scramjet— took over and accelerated the vehicle to 7,300 mph, nearly 10 times the speed of sound. But if these staged systems could be rolled up into one engine, the huge efficiency gains would dramatically lower the cost of getting to space. “The holy grail is a single-stage-to-orbit vehicle where you just take off from a runway, fly into space, and come back and reuse the system,” says Christopher Goyne, director of the University of Virginia’s Aerospace Research Laboratory and an expert in hypersonic flight." See: https://www.wired.com/story/the-rock...-a-jet-engine/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The Rocket Motor of the Future Breathes Air Like a Jet Engine
It took forever for this article to finally getting around to mentioning
the technological leader, the Sabre engine from Reaction Engines. Almost no mention of how a "Fenris" engine works. You have to follow the link "Fenris" which takes you to a non-patent office page of what appears to be a patent application, but isn't? It does look different in fundamental design from the Sabre. But the lead illustration in the Wired article is the Reaction Engine's Sabre engine not the Fenris. I wouldn't be too happy with that if I were from Reaction Engines. I haven't had time yet to study the Fenris, so I have no clue as to how it works and in what ways it is different from a Sabre engine. As Henry Spencer points out (again and again) LOX is cheap and plentiful. These air breathing designs are optimizing for the wrong part of the problem. You'd have to get enormous reuse out of these systems to compete with a single Falcon Heavy launch. And once Starship becomes fully operational, well, maybe they could launch Skylons out the cargo bay. I wish these designs good luck from an engineering prospective I think they are very interesting. Will they ever compete against traditional two stage rockets? It could be the Stanley Steamer vs. the Gasoline Engine all over again. I suspect these systems have a much better future as quick deploy crewed military vehicles rather than cargo lifters. There just isn't enough oomph there. And don't forget Starship in its two stage version is also fully reusable w/o the technical complications of a bleeding edge engine. BTW if you an basing your fuel around the hyper hard to handle liquid hydrogen in order to make the Reaction Engine work at all, you are really really up against the fuel density issue. Or as Ben Rich called them, Wide-Bodied Dogs.... Dave |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The Rocket Motor of the Future Breathes Air Like a Jet Engine
Hi all,
As a long time observer of the Sci.Space.* groups, and of the space and aerospace industry I'm have become tempted to call Scram jets and other air-breathing solutions (including Sir Richard's noble attempts out in the US Midwest) as SCAM-jets. They're a neat way to keep engineers and scientists funded, but highly unlikely to ever produce an actual useful product. See NASA X-33 program, and possibly Orion and SLS as examples of this. They all demand incredible technologies and enormous flight rates just to make them look even vaguely economical. AS David Spain pointed out, that Henry Spencer regularly points out, LOX is cheap, and TSTO operations and technology is relatively well understood. Now the heat exchanger tech that Reaction Engines Sabre is supposed to use is incredible. Someone stated that it had basically shrunk the technology and machinery that used occupy an entire (large) building into a shipping container. But its still nowhere near light enough, or efficient enough to actually supply the Sabre's thirst for oxidizer. And the sticky question remains: if you've cooled and compressed enough atmospheric oxygen to power your upper and out-of-atmosphere flight phase what did you do with the other 80% of the atmosphere you processed. Note if you are turning atmospheric Oxygen into LOX you can't avoid producing Liquid nitrogen on the way. You make LOX by compressing and cooling. Unfortunately LN always happens before LOX because N2 liquidifies at higher temperature and lower pressure than O2. Back on terra-firma the LN generated from LOX production is shipped off to the dozens (if not hundreds) of different industries that use it for making useful products, or cooling stuff down real fast or real low. On your way to LEO you have to ditch it, and that is just WAY TO MUCH WASTE ENERGY being thrown away. Of cause if you could find a method to turn the O2 and N2 into one of the nitrous oxides and use that as an oxider instead... That might be interesting, and fun to watch from a minimum safe distance. And the technology, if light enough and efficient enough to go into an aerospace vehicle would be a very welcome addition to all sorts of manufacturing here on earth. REgards Frank |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ROCKET MOTOR 2.2LBS THRUST | kiloowatt | History | 1 | September 20th 13 02:21 AM |
Need help with a rocket motor ID | Dave Kearton | History | 9 | February 4th 07 08:15 PM |
The Mechanical Rocket Motor. I | Robert Clark | Policy | 9 | September 28th 06 06:45 PM |
The Mechanical Rocket Motor. I | Robert Clark | Astronomy Misc | 8 | September 28th 06 06:45 PM |
Nexus Rocket Engine Test Successful; 10 Times More Thrust Than Deep Space 1 Engine and Lasts 3 Times Longer (10 years) | [email protected] | Technology | 5 | December 30th 03 07:44 PM |