Quote from: Asteroza on 07/05/2016 12:59 amI wonder if that might be a backdoor war to fund the nacelle test vehicle? In the same vein as other marginally militarily useful vehicles like the X-37...I hope that was a Freudian slip! We don't need any more wars to achieve political aims.That said, the original proposed NTV had identical twin-engine configuration as Skylon, just with a shorter Sears-Haack body. I'm not sure how useful the BAE configuration would be for testing either the nacelle nor SABRE, given the stated purpose of Mach 5 "rapid response" cruise, not orbital launch.
I wonder if that might be a backdoor war to fund the nacelle test vehicle? In the same vein as other marginally militarily useful vehicles like the X-37...
Quote from: Hankelow8 on 07/04/2016 05:24 pmIf BAC do intend to use SABRE as shown in the video as an atmospheric vehicle , I was under the impression LAPCAT was the design best suited to this form of flight, is SABRE capable of prolonged flight in the atmosphere ?.REL are developing SABRE as a booster engine not a sustainer, however they don't say this is SABRE (the article only says "along the lines of"). At Mach 5-6, I can't see why they would want any of the rocket engine aspects of SABRE.Nitpick - they haven't been called BAC since 1977.
If BAC do intend to use SABRE as shown in the video as an atmospheric vehicle , I was under the impression LAPCAT was the design best suited to this form of flight, is SABRE capable of prolonged flight in the atmosphere ?.
IMVHO If they concentrate on LAPCAT rather than Skylon it is a very mad move - kinetic friction born out of a hours long cruise at Mach 5 is much more complicated than reaching orbit. And noise will be a problem, as will integration into airports and ATC. Seriously - go for skylon !
Thanks for bringing me back to present day (freudian slip).It does look very much like "British Aerospace" are concentrating on the military aspects of SABRE/LAPCAT designs, great shame if Skylon is frozen out, but I still think the concept in 20 years will be what drives down cost even further with even greater reliability from the skylon type design.
I don't think there's any suggestion of that. They seem to have done some design work for a vehicle that is (I assume) a lot smaller than LAPCAT since there is no need to carry passengers. Possibly the engine might bear some slight comparison with the one proposed for lapcat.
I remember Alan Bond talking about some sort of military consulting or other work, quite some time ago) and when asked more, he said something like: "well you know - it's always about small pointy things zooming around" or words to that effect. QuoteBond has mentioned that he has worked on problems of "National Defense." There is one area that countries have studied continuously in high speed flight and that's in respect to warhead reentry. In the UK that would have been the "Chevaline" project. I watched that film recently about the US ambassador/representative to Libya. One can imagine how useful it would have been for them to receive reconnaissance/other support very quickly.
Bond has mentioned that he has worked on problems of "National Defense." There is one area that countries have studied continuously in high speed flight and that's in respect to warhead reentry. In the UK that would have been the "Chevaline" project.
ESA will be at Farmborough 11-17th July in the Hall 3 "Space Zone." Tuesday the 12th is "Space Day.http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Exhibitions/FIA_2016/ESA_at_FIA_2016_-_Programme_of_key_eventsNot especially 1130-1200"Signature of the contract for the continued development of the SABRE - Synergetic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine - Phase 3B programme, "If I'm reading this right then 3a is complete.
Quote from: john smith 19 on 07/08/2016 01:23 pmESA will be at Farmborough 11-17th July in the Hall 3 "Space Zone." Tuesday the 12th is "Space Day.http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Exhibitions/FIA_2016/ESA_at_FIA_2016_-_Programme_of_key_eventsNot especially 1130-1200"Signature of the contract for the continued development of the SABRE - Synergetic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine - Phase 3B programme, "If I'm reading this right then 3a is complete. Phase 3A is the final design of the ground test engine? Phase 3B would be the construction of that engine?Phase 3C would be ground testing that engine and resolving any technological problems they encounter?
They aren't called that either. It's BAe Systems.
It's BAe Systems. And their nearest counterpart is neither Boeing or even ULA, it's LM.
Quote from: john smith 19 on 07/08/2016 01:14 pmIt's BAe Systems. And their nearest counterpart is neither Boeing or even ULA, it's LM. Even that's not a terribly good comparison. BAE haven't made a whole new aircraft in 20 years or more (excluding drones). I don't doubt that BAE can develop the engine, but I do doubt their ability to build a Skylon.
The only area BAE might not have all of the in house know how or knowledge that can be brought in from other companies, is how to construct a heat shield that is capable of withstanding multiple reentries and other technologies in that area. Reaction Engines have done some work on this but I'm pretty certain if Skylon went ahead a tonne more work would have to be done on those areas before construction of the vehicle could begin.
A tweet from REL states "We've strengthened our management team and opened a US Office".https://twitter.com/ReactionEngines/status/752487279814406144link to their news updatehttp://www.reactionengines.co.uk/news_11jul2016.html