A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Some thoughts etc



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 28th 14, 09:36 AM posted to sci.space.station
Brian Gaff[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 58
Default Some thoughts etc

So what is the x37 actually for? Obviously someone thinks a winged
spacecraft is needed as development presumably cost more initially than some
form of tin can with a heat shield.
Can this craft carry people perhaps in the future?
Question 2. I noticed the other day that they are having issues with the
Stereo behind spacecraft, ie, its not talking to anyone since a reconfig. It
is I think in one of the resonant points in an orbit around the sun so it
can keep on station very easily. I'd have thought that if Nasa wanted to
really do a deep space mission, they could go to one of these where there
could be all sorts of space rocks trapped.


Lastly, noting that Nasa has decided on two crew transport craft of the tin
can variety, what of the one with wings being developed? Will they get any
money

Brian
--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active


  #2  
Old October 28th 14, 11:06 AM posted to sci.space.station
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default Some thoughts etc

In article , says...

So what is the x37 actually for? Obviously someone thinks a winged
spacecraft is needed as development presumably cost more initially than some
form of tin can with a heat shield.


It's the Air Force. Of course it's going to land on a runway, as that's
the only "proper" way to recover an aircraft. ;-)

Can this craft carry people perhaps in the future?


Not this version, but perhaps a follow-on that's a bit bigger.
Obviously it will need all of the equipment needed for life support.
But that step would not be unlike Dragon 1.0 to Dragon 2.0.

Lastly, noting that Nasa has decided on two crew transport
craft of the tin can variety, what of the one with wings
being developed? Will they get any money


SNC's Dream Chaser lost the last round of competition. They're
continuing work with the contract they already had (for the previous
round of funding). They're also protesting the decision, but so far
have not been making any real traction (i.e. they were unsuccessful in
getting an injunction against NASA paying the winners to continue their
work for the next phase).

Lots of articles about this online.

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 October 29th 14, 04:47 AM posted to sci.space.station
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default Some thoughts etc

Yes cos after all its got to take longer to develop the winged approach than
to use the tin can approach. I often marvel on how humans survive re entry
in the tin cans. The Soyuz looks like a blackened mess after landing most of
the time I gather, due to the ablative stuff sticking to the outside.

As for any of the private ones flying soon, Not convinced. Boiing should be
in front I'd imagine as they are part of the in crowd.
Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

So what is the x37 actually for? Obviously someone thinks a winged
spacecraft is needed as development presumably cost more initially than
some
form of tin can with a heat shield.


It's the Air Force. Of course it's going to land on a runway, as that's
the only "proper" way to recover an aircraft. ;-)

Can this craft carry people perhaps in the future?


Not this version, but perhaps a follow-on that's a bit bigger.
Obviously it will need all of the equipment needed for life support.
But that step would not be unlike Dragon 1.0 to Dragon 2.0.

Lastly, noting that Nasa has decided on two crew transport
craft of the tin can variety, what of the one with wings
being developed? Will they get any money


SNC's Dream Chaser lost the last round of competition. They're
continuing work with the contract they already had (for the previous
round of funding). They're also protesting the decision, but so far
have not been making any real traction (i.e. they were unsuccessful in
getting an injunction against NASA paying the winners to continue their
work for the next phase).

Lots of articles about this online.

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



  #4  
Old October 29th 14, 11:25 AM posted to sci.space.station
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default Some thoughts etc

In article ,
says...

Yes cos after all its got to take longer to develop the winged approach than
to use the tin can approach. I often marvel on how humans survive re entry
in the tin cans. The Soyuz looks like a blackened mess after landing most of
the time I gather, due to the ablative stuff sticking to the outside.

As for any of the private ones flying soon, Not convinced. Boiing should be
in front I'd imagine as they are part of the in crowd.


Boeing is "in front" in terms of typical government oversight
(paperwork, ground testing, and etc.). But, what capsule has Boeing
flown to orbit and back recently? How long has it been since Boeing has
had this sort of "real world" experience? Boeing has done some
building, a bit of testing, and virtually no flying of CST-100.

SpaceX is clearly in front when it comes to actually flying recoverable
capsules. In the case of SpaceX, Dragon 2 is built on the very recent,
ongoing, experience of Dragon 1. This is the sort of corporate culture
which can be called "Build a little, test a little, fly a little".
SpaceX has been doing all three with Dragon 1.

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 October 30th 14, 04:01 AM posted to sci.space.station
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default Some thoughts etc



"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

Yes cos after all its got to take longer to develop the winged approach
than
to use the tin can approach. I often marvel on how humans survive re
entry
in the tin cans. The Soyuz looks like a blackened mess after landing most
of
the time I gather, due to the ablative stuff sticking to the outside.

As for any of the private ones flying soon, Not convinced. Boiing should
be
in front I'd imagine as they are part of the in crowd.


Boeing is "in front" in terms of typical government oversight
(paperwork, ground testing, and etc.). But, what capsule has Boeing
flown to orbit and back recently? How long has it been since Boeing has
had this sort of "real world" experience? Boeing has done some
building, a bit of testing, and virtually no flying of CST-100.

SpaceX is clearly in front when it comes to actually flying recoverable
capsules. In the case of SpaceX, Dragon 2 is built on the very recent,
ongoing, experience of Dragon 1. This is the sort of corporate culture
which can be called "Build a little, test a little, fly a little".
SpaceX has been doing all three with Dragon 1.


I look at it this way. If there were some sort of super-critical emergency
where you absolutely had to get someone to orbit (or back) tomorrow, one
could call up SpaceX, say "Unload the next Dragon, toss a lawn chair in
there and give me a couple of compressed air tanks and let me fly". Risky,
sure, but you've got a capsule you know is airtight (at least to some
degree) and that has made it to orbit and landed several times.

Boeing, not so much.



Jeff


--
Greg D. Moore
http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

 




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
Thoughts on the universe micky Amateur Astronomy 0 February 3rd 07 11:17 PM
My Hubble Thoughts Greg Kuperberg Policy 49 February 14th 05 08:07 PM
* Leonardo Thoughts. Double-A Misc 1 February 1st 05 07:04 PM
More thoughts on photons The Postman Misc 5 January 13th 05 02:14 AM
Thoughts please Roger Hembury UK Astronomy 2 January 10th 05 05:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:33 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.