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

Time to Think ‘Horizontal’ for Future Space Launches



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 22nd 10, 09:18 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

In article 3c9df80b-8312-426f-b362-
, says...

My system uses an inflatable thermal protection system to slow below
sonic speeds and fold away wings when gliding below the speed of
sound. A tow plane flying down-range snags the booster as it is
gliding down-range with a tow line and tows it back to the launch
center. There the booster is released. The engine re-starts at a low
thrust setting, as the booster climbs into vertical position. It then
settles down tail first, like the old tail sitters from the 1950s - on
a mobile landing platform. The wings and thermal systems retract and
the booster is readied for another launch.


This thing just keeps sounding more and more Rube Goldberg every time
you post something like this. So, it's got wings, but can't fly under
it's own power back to the launch site, so it's towed by a plane back to
the launch site where it transitions from gliding flight to powered
vertical flight where it must then perform a precision vertical landing
on a mobile landing platform.

That vertical landing on a mobile landing platform by those tail sitters
was abandoned in the 1950's for a reason. The transition from
horizontal to vertical flight was tricky, and the actual "landing" onto
those platforms was even trickier.

Jeff
--
The only decision you'll have to make is
Who goes in after the snake in the morning?
  #12  
Old September 22nd 10, 10:22 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)[_1125_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

William Mook wrote:
On Sep 22, 1:16 pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 615e349f-7cd7-47a8-bf77-86457df7ef22
@i4g2000prf.googlegroups.com, says...



Reusable boosters are smaller lighter and less costly - according to
Lockheed.


http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,220472,00.html


VTOVL is the way to go.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV


to launch significant payloads cheaply.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/35439593/S...-Satellite-GEO


Do you really have to thread-jack at every opportunity to push your
napkin drawings? No rational person here is taking you seriously.

Jeff
--
The only decision you'll have to make is
Who goes in after the snake in the morning?


Why do you care Jeff?


Because it's damn annoying and rude.

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.


  #13  
Old September 22nd 10, 10:24 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Doug Freyburger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default Time to Think ¡Horizontal¢ for Future Space Launches

Pat Flannery wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:

It's just like the mountain based rail launcher on the old puppet show
Fireball XL-5! I liked that show just as much as All Thunderbrids Are
Go.


I always wanted to see the far side of that mountain where the hundreds
of JATO booster sleds lay, rusting slowly away.


I figure the version of Cheyanne Mountain from "The Moon is a Harsh
Mistress" was on the othe side - There is no Cheyanne Mountain. "No
boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow". "This is
wrong" quote ...
  #14  
Old September 22nd 10, 11:28 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default Time to Think ‘Horizontal’ for Future Space Launches

On Sep 21, 12:46*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:

It's just like the mountain based rail launcher on the old puppet show
Fireball XL-5! *I liked that show just as much as All Thunderbrids Are
Go.


The idea of launching a rocket on rails has a long pedigree. It was
mentioned in the Venus novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs. It featured in
the movie When Worlds Collide. And then there was the German
propaganda film from 1937, "Weltraumschiff 1 Startet".

I presume this meme started with Goddard, but a quick Google search
hasn't turned up its origin just yet.

John Savard
  #15  
Old September 23rd 10, 01:04 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

On 9/22/2010 12:18 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:

That vertical landing on a mobile landing platform by those tail sitters
was abandoned in the 1950's for a reason. The transition from
horizontal to vertical flight was tricky, and the actual "landing" onto
those platforms was even trickier.


The Convair Pogo could be landed on any flat surface, but its one
vertical landing left its test pilot so spooked by the process that he
felt he was lucky to be alive, and they never tried it again.
When the French tried in in their straight-out-of-"Thunderbirds" SNECMA
Coléoptère, the result was the aircraft going out of control and the
pilot ejecting.

Pat
  #16  
Old September 23rd 10, 07:12 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

On Sep 22, 8:04*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 9/22/2010 12:18 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:

That vertical landing on a mobile landing platform by those tail sitters
was abandoned in the 1950's for a reason. *The transition from
horizontal to vertical flight was tricky, and the actual "landing" onto
those platforms was even trickier.


The Convair Pogo could be landed on any flat surface, but its one
vertical landing left its test pilot so spooked by the process that he
felt he was lucky to be alive, and they never tried it again.
When the French tried in in their straight-out-of-"Thunderbirds" SNECMA
Coléoptère, the result was the aircraft going out of control and the
pilot ejecting.

Pat


The tail sitting system is well defined and modern avionics and
computing obviates any concern over the legends you repeat here
without any analysis. VTOL aircraft like the Harrier had similar
teething difficulties which were addressed by improved avionics and
computer control.

  #17  
Old September 23rd 10, 07:12 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

On Sep 22, 11:57*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:
My system uses an inflatable thermal protection system to slow below
sonic speeds and fold away wings when gliding below the speed of
sound. * A tow plane flying down-range snags the booster as it is
gliding down-range with a tow line and tows it back to the launch
center. *There the booster is released. *The engine re-starts at a low
thrust setting, as the booster climbs into vertical position. *It then
settles down tail first, like the old tail sitters from the 1950s - on
a mobile landing platform. *The wings and thermal systems retract and
the booster is readied for another launch.


And all you need is a few thousand tons of unobtanium to go with your
handwavium and you'll be able to implement your crayon drawings.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine


Nonsense
  #18  
Old September 23rd 10, 07:13 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default Time to Think ?Horizontal? for Future Space Launches

On Sep 22, 5:22*pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Sep 22, 1:16 pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 615e349f-7cd7-47a8-bf77-86457df7ef22
@i4g2000prf.googlegroups.com, says...


Reusable boosters are smaller lighter and less costly - according to
Lockheed.


http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,220472,00.html


VTOVL is the way to go.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/30943696/ETDHLRLV


to launch significant payloads cheaply.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/35439593/S...-Satellite-GEO


Do you really have to thread-jack at every opportunity to push your
napkin drawings? No rational person here is taking you seriously.


Jeff
--
The only decision you'll have to make is
Who goes in after the snake in the morning?


Why do you care Jeff?


Because it's damn annoying and rude.

--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.


I agree, Jeff Pat and Fred are damn annoying and rude. My comment was
relevant to the horizontal take off and landing statement. I don't
see how that can be annoying and rude.
  #19  
Old September 23rd 10, 10:15 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Sylvia Else[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 458
Default Time to Think ‘Horizontal’ for Future Space Launches

On 22/09/2010 1:55 AM, wrote:
"Is firing a rocket from the ground straight up
into space the right way to do things?

It sure was in the 1950s and ‘60s and it
persists today. But it’s still expensive, fraught
with technical risk and dwindling into
obsolescence.

There could be an alternative on the horizon,
however, that incorporates the concepts of
railguns, scram jets and kinetic launching
into an innovative, reusable space launch
system for unmanned cargo."

See:

http://defensetech.org/2010/09/21/ti...pace-launches/



Thing is, you need a structure strong enough to tolerate the aerodynamic
forces of whatever speed the launch rail gives at its end point, but
then you need to carry that structure to up to where the second stage is
released, or orbit if you're going for SSTO.

Sylvia.
 




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
Time travel into the future Hannu Poropudas Astronomy Misc 3 July 20th 07 02:58 PM
NASA Announces Future Shuttle Launches Will Be Sudden And Without Warning rk Space Shuttle 0 January 12th 06 06:58 AM
Aliens = human time travellers from the future !!! nightbat Misc 1 December 19th 05 02:43 PM
Time to put the Space Shuttle painlessly to sleep .... and return to SPACE work that's got a future ! Alec Space Station 0 August 13th 05 08:10 PM
Time to put the Space Shuttle painlessly to sleep .... and return to SPACE work that's got a future ! Alec Space Shuttle 0 August 13th 05 08:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:25 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.