Author Topic: Sub Orbital Dream Chaser  (Read 3102 times)

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7835
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2106
  • Likes Given: 4960
Sub Orbital Dream Chaser
« on: 11/27/2014 11:47 PM »
I brought this up on the SS2 thread after the ill fated flight as an alternative means for access to space. This isnít a radical idea as it seems since the late Jim Benson of SpaceDev originally planned Dream Chaser for the exact purpose of sub orbital tourism. He had a few versions that would launch vertically by itself or with different configurations of hybrid boosters.

I suggest a version like what is being proposed for the Swiss Space System with Dream Chaser launched from the top of a converted commercial airliner. SNC would be able to utilize the existing molds and tooling for the 7 crew version and recoup some profits for the program that was originally meant for the NASA Commercial Crew competition.

Overhead windows can be provided over each seat for the expected breathtaking view of course... 8)

Original disco version... ;D


Or as the Dassault VEHRA concept...



http://www.google.com/patents/US6926226
« Last Edit: 11/28/2014 01:03 AM by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7835
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2106
  • Likes Given: 4960
Re: Sub Orbital Dream Chaser
« Reply #1 on: 11/28/2014 01:23 PM »
Just to add that this vehicle was being built to NASA's human rating standards for orbital flight which is a leverage that no other sub-orbital spacecraft can make a claim to... ;)
« Last Edit: 11/28/2014 02:28 PM by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3519
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 2076
  • Likes Given: 2412
Re: Sub Orbital Dream Chaser
« Reply #2 on: 12/21/2014 09:55 PM »
This would be a more compelling idea if orbital Dream Chaser was already complete or had won CCtCap and had the funding to be completed.

SNC's bid to complete Dream Chaser and fly it a few times under CCtCap was over $2 billion.  That includes some launch vehicles and probably some other work that wouldn't have to be done for a sub-orbital vehicle, but still it's an awful lot compared to what was spent on SpaceShipOne and even on the SpaceShipTwo/White Knight Two combination.  It's not clear that completing Dream Chaser as a sub-orbital vehicle would actually be cheaper than throwing it away and starting with a clean sheet design that can be optimized for sub-orbital tourism.

It's also not clear how much of a market there is for sub-orbital tourism.  We'll see if and when Virgin Galactic and/or XCOR get to commercial service how big the market actually is.

Tags: