A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 13th 13, 01:49 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,388
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations


Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/...abilities-iss-
missions/

The article isn't clear why NASA appears to have dismissed this Boeing
proposal, which was made shortly after the first successful test flight
of X-37B. Of course, you have to be a paying customer to see the
original Boeing presentation on "L2".

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #2  
Old March 13th 13, 02:00 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,388
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

In article ,
says...

Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/...abilities-iss-
missions/

The article isn't clear why NASA appears to have dismissed this Boeing
proposal, which was made shortly after the first successful test flight
of X-37B. Of course, you have to be a paying customer to see the
original Boeing presentation on "L2".


After searching a bit, it's easy to discover that this isn't really new
news. NasaSpaceflight.com just put out a "new" article because they
somehow acquired a copy of the Boeing presentation to NASA. But, news
articles along the same lines came out at least as early as the fall of
2011:

Boeing Studies X-37B Evolved Crew Derivative
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,237031,00.html

Secretive US X-37B Space Plane Could Evolve to Carry Astronauts (with
pics)
http://www.space.com/13230-secretive...-plane-future-
astronauts.html

Boeing Contemplates Cargo, Crewed Version of X-37B Space Plane
http://news.yahoo.com/boeing-contemp...version-x-37b-
space-235700583.html


I'm guessing the above October 2011 articles might be related to this
September 2011 paper written by Arthur C. Grantz, Boeing's Chief
Engineer, Experimental Systems Group, Boeing Space and Intelligence
Systems:

X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle and Derivatives
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2011-7315

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #3  
Old March 14th 13, 12:03 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brian Thorn[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,266
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:49:29 -0400, Jeff Findley
wrote:


Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/...abilities-iss-
missions/

The article isn't clear why NASA appears to have dismissed this Boeing
proposal,


Because it isn't needed. NASA is already funding Dragon and Cygnus for
cargo, and Boeing's official offer to NASA for commercial crew is the
CST-100. If Boeing was serious about X-37B, why did it not go that
route for Commercial Crew? Instead, it dusted off its old OSP proposal
and used that.

Brian


  #4  
Old March 14th 13, 01:39 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,388
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

In article , bthorn64
@suddenlink.net says...

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:49:29 -0400, Jeff Findley
wrote:


Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/...abilities-iss-
missions/

The article isn't clear why NASA appears to have dismissed this Boeing
proposal,


Because it isn't needed. NASA is already funding Dragon and Cygnus for
cargo, and Boeing's official offer to NASA for commercial crew is the
CST-100. If Boeing was serious about X-37B, why did it not go that
route for Commercial Crew? Instead, it dusted off its old OSP proposal
and used that.


Sounds like a case of the corporate left hand not knowing what the right
hand is doing. Either that or they thought they'd appeal to the desire
of some within NASA to have manned spacecraft which land on runways
instead of under parachutes, because "everyone" knows that an
"operational" spacecraft lands on runways instead of splashing down in
the ocean.

Thanks,
Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #5  
Old March 15th 13, 11:07 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jochem Huhmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

Jeff Findley writes:

Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/...abilities-iss-
missions/

The article isn't clear why NASA appears to have dismissed this Boeing
proposal, which was made shortly after the first successful test flight
of X-37B. Of course, you have to be a paying customer to see the
original Boeing presentation on "L2".


I think one major reason for writing this off would be that you need an
Atlas V to launch it in the first place. This is not cheap. At all.

The ability to get back the payload container (for a very small payload
compared to what you have to launch) is rather meaningless then.


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  #6  
Old March 16th 13, 12:29 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

On Mar 15, 6:07*pm, Jochem Huhmann wrote:
Jeff Findley writes:
Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/...abilities-iss-
missions/


The article isn't clear why NASA appears to have dismissed this Boeing
proposal, which was made shortly after the first successful test flight
of X-37B. *Of course, you have to be a paying customer to see the
original Boeing presentation on "L2".


I think one major reason for writing this off would be that you need an
Atlas V to launch it in the first place. This is not cheap. At all.

The ability to get back the payload container (for a very small payload
compared to what you have to launch) is rather meaningless then.

* * * * Jochem

--
*"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
*longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
*- Antoine de Saint-Exupery


theres a proposed larger version of the x- 37b
  #7  
Old March 25th 13, 03:43 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

On 3/23/2013 7:25 PM, Anonymous wrote:

Most importantly, I'm convinced that no winged space plane will ever be safe
since an explosion of the booster rocket will almost certainly rip the wings
and / or tails off the mini-shuttle,
making a safe RTLS unlikely.


Umm, the USAF wasn't as convinced as you seem to be. The X-20 DynaSoar
program mounted a winged vehicle atop a Titan III.

The risk of exploding booster is easier to manage when the vehicle is at
the top of the stack instead of on the side. Don't draw too many
conclusions from the old shuttle design...

Dave



  #8  
Old March 25th 13, 08:33 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,388
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

In article , nospam@
127.0.0.1 says...

On 3/23/2013 7:25 PM, Anonymous wrote:

Most importantly, I'm convinced that no winged space plane will ever be safe
since an explosion of the booster rocket will almost certainly rip the wings
and / or tails off the mini-shuttle,
making a safe RTLS unlikely.


Umm, the USAF wasn't as convinced as you seem to be. The X-20 DynaSoar
program mounted a winged vehicle atop a Titan III.

The risk of exploding booster is easier to manage when the vehicle is at
the top of the stack instead of on the side. Don't draw too many
conclusions from the old shuttle design...


But as NASA found out with Ares I, it's not as easy as they'd like it to
be. Case rupture of a large solid, resulting in a debris cloud of
relatively large, relatively dense, relatively hot pieces of solid
propellant, is an issue to be dealt with most carefully.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #9  
Old March 25th 13, 08:47 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations

On Mar 25, 3:33*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , nospam@
127.0.0.1 says...



On 3/23/2013 7:25 PM, Anonymous wrote:


Most importantly, I'm convinced that no winged space plane will ever be safe
since an explosion of the booster rocket will almost certainly rip the wings
and / or tails off the mini-shuttle,
making a safe RTLS unlikely.


Umm, the USAF wasn't as convinced as you seem to be. The X-20 DynaSoar
program mounted a winged vehicle atop a Titan III.


The risk of exploding booster is easier to manage when the vehicle is at
the top of the stack instead of on the side. Don't draw too many
conclusions from the old shuttle design...


But as NASA found out with Ares I, it's not as easy as they'd like it to
be. *Case rupture of a large solid, resulting in a debris cloud of
relatively large, relatively dense, relatively hot pieces of solid
propellant, is an issue to be dealt with most carefully.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer


the ares problem was excess vibration which could of killed the crew
by liquifying some of their body parts like their liver and spleen....

launching humans on solids is just plain dumb..
  #10  
Old March 25th 13, 08:58 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Boeing proposes X-37B for ISS cargo/crew operations


Dave Spain wrote:
Umm, the USAF wasn't as convinced as you seem to be. The X-20 DynaSoar
program mounted a winged vehicle atop a Titan III


On 3/25/2013 3:33 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:..
But as NASA found out with Ares I, it's not as easy as they'd like
it to be. Case rupture of a large solid, resulting in a debris cloud
of relatively large, relatively dense, relatively hot pieces of solid
propellant, is an issue to be dealt with most carefully.


Interestingly enough, it was again a USAF study that pointed out that
risk. For Ares I this was a significant problem because it required that
the Orion capsule return through that field with a recovery system that
relies on nylon parachutes. Since Titan III also used strap-on solid
boosters it would be interesting to see what the recovery flight profile
of the X20 was to have been. Note one significant difference, the X-20
was a glider with a titanium skin.

Even so, I think you and I agree that for manned spaceflight, solid
rocket boosters are preferably an issue not to be dealt with at all.

Dave


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boeing pilots to crew capsule Fevric J. Glandules History 7 August 8th 11 05:46 PM
Boeing Crew Capsule Concept Damon Hill[_4_] Space Shuttle 5 February 10th 10 04:40 PM
Commercial launch of cargo but not crew [email protected] Space Station 1 August 15th 09 09:40 AM
Station Crew Unloads Cargo, Moves Robot Arm Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 March 10th 05 10:07 AM
Station Crew Unloads Cargo, Moves Robot Arm Jacques van Oene News 0 March 10th 05 10:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.