| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Space Forum » Lockheed Tests New Space Plane
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
|
| Author |
Message |
| Rand Simberg |
 Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 1:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 10:51:31 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
dumpster4@hotmail.com made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:
Quote: With all the concerns about possible damage to the Space
Shuttle's heat shield during launch, or damage by space
debris while in orbit, I'm surprised another spaceplane
type design is being considered.
It's not, at least not by NASA.
Quote: Note that the heat shield on Orion (as it was with Apollo)
is tucked in between the crew and service modules
for the bulk of the flight.
Is a constantly-exposed heat shield a good idea?
No, but wings are, or can be. It's called an engineering trade.
Shuttle wouldn't have to worry about having its heat shield damaged
during launch (or at least not have to worry as much) if it didn't
have an external tank above it that shed foam. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Douglas Eagleson |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 28, 8:58 am, dumpst...@hotmail.com wrote:
Quote: See:
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/04/lockheed-tests.html
Note this part:
"What's particularly interesting is that Lockheed chose the
commercial
Spaceport America for the flight test; io9 calls it the new Area 51,"
The new Area 51? Does mean all the flying saucer wreckage and
alien bodies are being moved there now? 
It is a non-lifting body type aircraft. A cheap to build idea maybe.
A wing to the rear means a canard speed for level flight can be
estimated.
If it stays less than ten thousand pounds as a return weight a
critical heat shield temeprature allows easy shielding. Plain old
titanium could be use then. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
dumpster4@hotmail.com wrote:
Quote: With all the concerns about possible damage to the Space
Shuttle's heat shield during launch, or damage by space
debris while in orbit, I'm surprised another spaceplane
type design is being considered.
It never occurred to you that such a design might have advantages over
a capsule design?
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Derek Lyons" <fairwater@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48188af7.699430328@news.supernews.com...
Quote: dumpster4@hotmail.com wrote:
With all the concerns about possible damage to the Space
Shuttle's heat shield during launch, or damage by space
debris while in orbit, I'm surprised another spaceplane
type design is being considered.
It never occurred to you that such a design might have advantages over
a capsule design?
Doncha know that a single poor design proves the entire theory is wrong?
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Rand Simberg |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:17:55 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away,
dumpster4@hotmail.com made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:
Quote: On Apr 29, 1:54 pm, fairwa...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons) wrote:
dumpst...@hotmail.com wrote:
With all the concerns about possible damage to the Space
Shuttle's heat shield during launch, or damage by space
debris while in orbit, I'm surprised another spaceplane
type design is being considered.
It never occurred to you that such a design might have advantages over
a capsule design?
After 2 Shuttle disasters, NASA's going back to capsules for now.
What's your point?
Quote: Though it looks like the Lockheed design is going to be unmanned
(even in the larger versions), which changes things with regard
to acceptable risk.
Not really. Vehicles are very expensive, particularly reusable ones.
You can't afford to build them to be unreliable. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
dumpster4@hotmail.com wrote:
Quote: On Apr 29, 1:54 pm, fairwa...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons) wrote:
dumpst...@hotmail.com wrote:
With all the concerns about possible damage to the Space
Shuttle's heat shield during launch, or damage by space
debris while in orbit, I'm surprised another spaceplane
type design is being considered.
It never occurred to you that such a design might have advantages over
a capsule design?
After 2 Shuttle disasters, NASA's going back to capsules for now.
Mostly for PR reasons, only partially related to the accidents.
Quote: Though it looks like the Lockheed design is going to be unmanned
(even in the larger versions), which changes things with regard
to acceptable risk.
It changes thing with regard to _percieved_ risk. (Unless they are
going to launch and land it from some unihabited island far out in the
Pacific.)
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 8:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: If it stays less than ten thousand pounds as a return weight a
critical heat shield temeprature allows easy shielding. Plain old
titanium could be use then.
Except for the fact that weight, except in complex relation to many
other factors, is utterly irrelevant to re-entry temperatures.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dan |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 8:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
Quote: On Apr 28, 8:58 am, dumpst...@hotmail.com wrote:
See:
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/04/lockheed-tests.html
Note this part:
"What's particularly interesting is that Lockheed chose the
commercial
Spaceport America for the flight test; io9 calls it the new Area 51,"
The new Area 51? Does mean all the flying saucer wreckage and
alien bodies are being moved there now? :)
It is a non-lifting body type aircraft. A cheap to build idea maybe.
A wing to the rear means a canard speed for level flight can be
estimated.
Not if a canard isn't part of the design.
Quote:
If it stays less than ten thousand pounds as a return weight a
critical heat shield temeprature allows easy shielding. Plain old
titanium could be use then.
Um, that would depend on drag as a function of velocity, not the
mass of the vehicle.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<dumpster4@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7a270ad7-5304-40c3-a2f7-75daca87edb4@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 29, 1:54 pm, fairwa...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons) wrote:
Quote: dumpst...@hotmail.com wrote:
With all the concerns about possible damage to the Space
Shuttle's heat shield during launch, or damage by space
debris while in orbit, I'm surprised another spaceplane
type design is being considered.
It never occurred to you that such a design might have advantages over
a capsule design?
After 2 Shuttle disasters, NASA's going back to capsules for now.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
And your point? You realize that in few flights the vaunted Soyuz has had
two disasters and in the last 11 flights 3 near disasters and several more
before that.
Capsules are not inherently better or worse than other designs.
Quote:
Though it looks like the Lockheed design is going to be unmanned
(even in the larger versions), which changes things with regard
to acceptable risk.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Derek Lyons |
| Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dan <B2431@aol.com> wrote:
Quote: Douglas Eagleson wrote:
If it stays less than ten thousand pounds as a return weight a
critical heat shield temeprature allows easy shielding. Plain old
titanium could be use then.
Um, that would depend on drag as a function of velocity, not the
mass of the vehicle.
The mass, as part of the ballistic coefficient, does indeed factor
into reentry temps (among many other things).
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Sep 07, 2008 2:52 am
|
|