Community > Forum > Technology & Science > Boeing TSTO

Boeing TSTO

Posted by: topspeed - Tue Nov 18, 2014 5:07 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 8 posts ] 
Boeing TSTO 
Author Message
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:14 am
Posts: 183
Post Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Tue Nov 18, 2014 5:07 pm
Did we miss this somehow here ?

http://robotpig.net/__aerospace/tsto.php?page=1

_________________
http://mesoslaunch.blogspot.fi/

http://max3fan.blogspot.com/


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 492
Location: B.O.A. UK
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:07 pm
Its not stuff I have seen before so thanks for sharing. I suspect two reasons why non of them were realised was is that:

1 they are still having troubles with scram jet design.

and more fundamentally

2 Piggy back systems tend to work better when the smaller one in on top the larger one not vice versa. :wink: :twisted:

_________________
Someone has to tilt at windmills.
So that we know what to do when the real giants come!!!!


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:14 am
Posts: 183
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Tue Nov 18, 2014 9:10 pm
Well SS1 and SS2 and SS3 are all dropped from the mother ship.


http://www.google.com/patents/US4802639


I suggested this but shuttle on top in 2003..without knowing about this concept at all.


:mrgreen:

_________________
http://mesoslaunch.blogspot.fi/

http://max3fan.blogspot.com/


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 988
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Wed Nov 19, 2014 4:08 pm
It's not a new concept.


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:14 am
Posts: 183
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:57 pm
Right Spiral and Sänger did this 45 years ago...as a project.

_________________
http://mesoslaunch.blogspot.fi/

http://max3fan.blogspot.com/


Back to top
Profile
Rocket Constructor
Rocket Constructor
avatar
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:50 am
Posts: 5
Location: Yakima, Washington, U.S. of A.
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:34 am
None of those designs rang any bells, and I am skeptical of the capabilities the article suggests. But the concept of two stage to orbit is still very valid, and is certainly attainable with existing technology. One of the greatest advantages of not launching straight up is the avoidance of super-high-performance engines. Liquid hydrogen is a horrible substance to work with, as it is very difficult to handle, and evaporates rapidly.

By launching from the back of a carrier wing at, say, 50,000 feet, we don't need huge amounts of thrust. And what fuel we burn is accelerating the orbiter, not fighting the pull of gravity. There would be some drag, as lift would be created by the wing, but relatively small losses in comparison to launching vertically.

Something which struck me about all of those proposals was the conventional designs of the carrier aircraft. Large fuselages, swept wings, these are not the kinds of aircraft which will be needed, they are merely exotic looking versions of the SST or the XB-70. We are going to be putting about 3 million pounds in the air when we launch the stack, in order to put 20,000 pounds in orbit at 250 miles using a totally reusable launch system.

There is not a runway on Earth which could handle that load, and an undercarriage big enough would weigh tons. Instead, I suggest we launch the stack from a track or rail that incorporates a linear motor, a catapult. This way, the carrier wing can be accelerated to take-off speed using external power, while having a means of aborting a take-off.


Back to top
Profile
Rocket Constructor
Rocket Constructor
avatar
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:50 am
Posts: 5
Location: Yakima, Washington, U.S. of A.
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Wed Feb 25, 2015 3:35 am
For some reason, I find it hard to believe that Boeing would have put this idea forward. Their experience with large aircraft would cause them to avoid having a spacecraft slung underneath the carrier wing, because of the height requirement involved in straddling the spacecraft. This would result in an excessively heavy undercarriage.

_________________
My God, it's full of stars!


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 988
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: Boeing TSTO   Posted on: Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:31 am
The orbiter is carried between the engine pods and it looks like both craft's gear are used for takeoff.

But this is just another paper project. It is routine for corporations to file patents for about everything they think up or work on, just in case sometime in the future someone might make it work. Often in Boeing et. al.'s case, your tax dollars directly pays for it too. 1989 was around the time when a lot of "Star Wars" and "space plane" money was being thrown around.


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


© 2015 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use