I suspect the Boeing vehicle might be a scale up of the X37.This actually would be sensible as the X37 should be launched early next year. It would allow them to reuse a lot of flight test data from the USAF project and from the shuttle.
Ironically it is being launched on an Atlas.
How much bigger than an X-37 would a four person OSPish vehicle be and could you launch it in a shroud to avoid some of the issues of a winged vehicle on top of an EELV?
Istanbul was Constantinople. Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople.
Quote from: Antares on 09/24/2009 01:30 amIstanbul was Constantinople. Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople.I don't think I've ever seen a reference to They Might Be Giants in a space-related discussion before, ever.
Quote from: Patchouli on 09/24/2009 04:54 amI suspect the Boeing vehicle might be a scale up of the X37.This actually would be sensible as the X37 should be launched early next year. It would allow them to reuse a lot of flight test data from the USAF project and from the shuttle.That makes no sense. Just uninformed conjecture. It would be too costly to develop and compete with the others.
I understand that a manned version of an X-37 derived vehicle would be too big for a shroud and thus cause issues with its wings. But I don't understand why the durable TPS wouldn't be scalable. I mean isn't the point of the X-37 to test key systems for use in future vehicles, including the TPS?
Quote from: kkattula on 09/24/2009 03:16 amQuote from: kkattula on 09/24/2009 03:13 amQuote from: tamarack on 09/24/2009 02:50 am...c) Any guesses for Group C?LM or ULA with SpaceDev proposing Dream Chaser on an Atlas V 402?I wish: HMX with "Phoenix Redux"I may have tilted at a few windmills in my day, but I'm not stupid.
Quote from: kkattula on 09/24/2009 03:13 amQuote from: tamarack on 09/24/2009 02:50 am...c) Any guesses for Group C?LM or ULA with SpaceDev proposing Dream Chaser on an Atlas V 402?I wish: HMX with "Phoenix Redux"
Quote from: tamarack on 09/24/2009 02:50 am...c) Any guesses for Group C?LM or ULA with SpaceDev proposing Dream Chaser on an Atlas V 402?
...c) Any guesses for Group C?
Quote from: HMXHMX on 09/24/2009 04:14 amQuote from: kkattula on 09/24/2009 03:16 amQuote from: kkattula on 09/24/2009 03:13 amQuote from: tamarack on 09/24/2009 02:50 am...c) Any guesses for Group C?LM or ULA with SpaceDev proposing Dream Chaser on an Atlas V 402?I wish: HMX with "Phoenix Redux"I may have tilted at a few windmills in my day, but I'm not stupid.So I probably shouldn't start a "NASA should just give Gary Hudson a billion dollars..." thread?
But getting back closer to topic, I really hope that Congress follows-through on the A-com suggestion to put serious money into developing commercial crew capabilities. I'd really love to see an industry where there are several competent players capable of putting people into space. I hope one of these days we'll actually get to see some of what Boeing and others have proposed.
Is there any chance Boeing proposed (again) a winged orbital space plane?http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=h_b_osp_plane_02.jpg
Quote from: sdsds on 09/23/2009 09:34 pmIs there any chance Boeing proposed (again) a winged orbital space plane?http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=h_b_osp_plane_02.jpgNope. This concept has been in work for some time.
Quote from: jongoff on 09/26/2009 05:15 amBut getting back closer to topic, I really hope that Congress follows-through on the A-com suggestion to put serious money into developing commercial crew capabilities. I'd really love to see an industry where there are several competent players capable of putting people into space. I hope one of these days we'll actually get to see some of what Boeing and others have proposed.Agree. The DoD regularly gives out multiple development contracts; F-35 and engine, Littoral Combat Ship, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, KC-X, etc. This is more expensive at first, like COTS, but the outcome is a more capable product with lower long-term costs. Even after NASA decides which vehicle to use, having 'close 2nds' available in case problems arise with the 1st choice insures NASA gets and maintains commercial LEO crew-access.