Author Topic: SNC building test schedule for Dream Chaser – Dryden Drop Tests upcoming  (Read 84051 times)

Offline vt_hokie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Hazlet, NJ
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 436
What the heck does this have to do with anything?
Well with WK2 unavailable for widening the flight envelope how else can you get the altitude and speed you need to test its landing range?

The "Super Valkyrie"?

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13606
The "Super Valkyrie"?
I think they need an aircraft that flew some time this century.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
The "Super Valkyrie"?
I think they need an aircraft that flew some time this century.

The "Super Valkyrie", if it really exists, should be a newer airframe than most, if not all B-52s. Unfortunately, I don't think the Airforce likes the general public taking pictures of the aircraft that fly around Groom Lake, so they probably wouldn't make it available for use by a vehicle like Dream Chaser, that would be photographed during the flight tests.

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 0
I have to ask this question so, sorry. What happens if Dreamchaser cannot get a ride?

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 1022
I have to ask this question so, sorry. What happens if Dreamchaser cannot get a ride?
Damned good question.
Maybe they could do sub orbital hops on a launch vehicle. That sure would increase the cost though.
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
The "Super Valkyrie"?
I think they need an aircraft that flew some time this century.

How about just flew?

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
I have to ask this question so, sorry. What happens if Dreamchaser cannot get a ride?

Wonder if the Star Grazer L-1011 is available from Orbital, since the Pegasus don't have many missions lined up.

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
I have to ask this question so, sorry. What happens if Dreamchaser cannot get a ride?

Wonder if the Star Grazer L-1011 is available from Orbital, since the Pegasus don't have many missions lined up.

How in the world would an L-1011 be able to lift a DC? There just isn't room enough under the fuselage.

(see http://www.flickr.com/photos/orbitalsciences/7338418194/ )

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Since we are still discussing this allow me to give you another option. Jet airliners often ferry extra engines on a pylon beneath their wings. Theoretically they could adapt one under a Boeing 747 or a DC10 for example with sufficient clearance for DC... Like I keep saying there are many alternatives all that is required is “lateral thinking”...

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/200315/
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/238736/
« Last Edit: 12/28/2012 12:02 am by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13606
Since we are still discussing this allow me to give you another option. Jet airliners often ferry extra engines on a pylon beneath their wings. Theoretically they could adapt one under a Boeing 747 or a DC10 for example with sufficient clearance for DC... Like I keep saying there are many alternatives all that is required is “lateral thinking”...
Now this I did not know. I'd always figured they'd put the engine on a standard engine pod location and fly with 3 live engines (thinking further I can see this being difficult with modern 2 engine designs). Is this a design certification (IE all aircraft of a type can do it) or does it need special clearance from the relevant authorities?

The ground clearance should be adequate but the inter-pod separation?

It's something I've never seen before but I'm guessing the joker is in the paperwork. I strongly doubt you can hire an aircraft from an airline, hang DC on the pylon, run the tests and hand the aircraft back to them.

But definitely something I'll be filling in the "More common than you think" drawer.  :)
[edit]Read one of the links posted. The DC-8 hit M1.01 in a dive from 52kft to 41kft in 1961. I did not believe any big commercial jet had deliberately done this.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/200315/
Reply from Viscount724.

And in the press release for it (a bit suspicious) the implication is even that it is "routine" and they were going to ship it to a customer.  :o
http://www.dc8.org/library/supersonic/index.php

This link shows a fairly detailed description of the DC-8 flight which might be relevant should you could consider repeating it.

http://www.dc-8jet.com/0-dc8-sst-flight.htm

Skip the drop test and drop the whole aircraft?  :)
[edit]
« Last Edit: 12/28/2012 07:49 am by john smith 19 »
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline adrianwyard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1140
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 367
Intuitively, releasing DC at high speed from below a carrier aircraft - something like WK2 - sounds like the best option because this is closest to how it will begin its subsonic flight when operational. But in reality what are the downsides to high-altitude drop from helicopter?

Here's an optimistic guess on how it could work: Attach a large-ish chute to the rear hatch area (larger than the one used in the captive carry flight) to orient the craft into the airstream, and then keep it nose down after release from the copter until airspeed picks up, at which point you jettison it.

I bet a big chute could keep the helicopter's forward airspeed quite low, but wouldn't some airflow (control authority) coupled with the chute be sufficient to keep it stable as speed picks up and the aerosurfaces gain effectiveness. And it'll drop like a rock, so you'd be faster than stall-speed very quickly, and so be able to begin to pull out of the stall/dive, but my guess is the nose would be pointed straight at the ground by the time you let the chute go, and those control surfaces are not that big, so it's important to remember to start the test from a very great height!
« Last Edit: 12/28/2012 01:01 pm by adrianwyard »

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Since we are still discussing this allow me to give you another option. Jet airliners often ferry extra engines on a pylon beneath their wings. Theoretically they could adapt one under a Boeing 747 or a DC10 for example with sufficient clearance for DC... Like I keep saying there are many alternatives all that is required is “lateral thinking”...
Now this I did not know. I'd always figured they'd put the engine on a standard engine pod location and fly with 3 live engines (thinking further I can see this being difficult with modern 2 engine designs). Is this a design certification (IE all aircraft of a type can do it) or does it need special clearance from the relevant authorities?

The ground clearance should be adequate but the inter-pod separation?

It's something I've never seen before but I'm guessing the joker is in the paperwork. I strongly doubt you can hire an aircraft from an airline, hang DC on the pylon, run the tests and hand the aircraft back to them.

But definitely something I'll be filling in the "More common than you think" drawer.  :)
[edit]Read one of the links posted. The DC-8 hit M1.01 in a dive from 52kft to 41kft in 1961. I did not believe any big commercial jet had deliberately done this.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/200315/
Reply from Viscount724.

And in the press release for it (a bit suspicious) the implication is even that it is "routine" and they were going to ship it to a customer.  :o
http://www.dc8.org/library/supersonic/index.php

This link shows a fairly detailed description of the DC-8 flight which might be relevant should you could consider repeating it.

http://www.dc-8jet.com/0-dc8-sst-flight.htm

Skip the drop test and drop the whole aircraft?  :)
[edit]

I don’t want to take this OT but if you are interested in engine out discussion there is more to read here:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/308222/

When it comes to using an airliner for a DC drop test there is no need to take one out of service. There are loads of these sitting out in the desert for long term storage that can be leased or purchased if the wish to and modified. Since these flights are going to be over an experimental flight test range with no paying passengers, the normal airliner regs don’t need to be complied with. Conceivably you could remove one engine from a 747, lightly load it with fuel and use the pylon to carry and drop DC from it with modifications... No need for high Mach numbers to drop DC...
« Last Edit: 12/28/2012 01:23 pm by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Since we are still discussing this allow me to give you another option. Jet airliners often ferry extra engines on a pylon beneath their wings. Theoretically they could adapt one under a Boeing 747 or a DC10 for example with sufficient clearance for DC... Like I keep saying there are many alternatives all that is required is “lateral thinking”...
Now this I did not know. I'd always figured they'd put the engine on a standard engine pod location and fly with 3 live engines (thinking further I can see this being difficult with modern 2 engine designs). Is this a design certification (IE all aircraft of a type can do it) or does it need special clearance from the relevant authorities?

The ground clearance should be adequate but the inter-pod separation?

It's something I've never seen before but I'm guessing the joker is in the paperwork. I strongly doubt you can hire an aircraft from an airline, hang DC on the pylon, run the tests and hand the aircraft back to them.

But definitely something I'll be filling in the "More common than you think" drawer.  :)
[edit]Read one of the links posted. The DC-8 hit M1.01 in a dive from 52kft to 41kft in 1961. I did not believe any big commercial jet had deliberately done this.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/200315/
Reply from Viscount724.

And in the press release for it (a bit suspicious) the implication is even that it is "routine" and they were going to ship it to a customer.  :o
http://www.dc8.org/library/supersonic/index.php

This link shows a fairly detailed description of the DC-8 flight which might be relevant should you could consider repeating it.

http://www.dc-8jet.com/0-dc8-sst-flight.htm

Skip the drop test and drop the whole aircraft?  :)
[edit]

I don’t want to take this OT but if you are interested in engine out discussion there is more to read here:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/308222/

When it comes to using an airliner for a DC drop test there is no need to take one out of service. There are loads of these sitting out in the desert for long term storage that can be leased or purchased if the wish to and modified. Since these flights are going to be over an experimental flight test range with no paying passengers, the normal airliner regs don’t need to be complied with. Conceivably you could remove one engine from a 747, lightly load it with fuel and use the pylon to carry and drop DC from it with modifications... No need for high Mach numbers to drop DC...


What is the size of the DC compared to the standard Rolls Royce or GE Jet Engine ? Is there enough clearance if the DC is connected to a standard engine pylon ? I was thinking that the DC needed something with the wings mounted up high, like the B-52 so there was enough ground clearance. If any 4-engine jumbo jet will do, that makes it easier. I assume a standard 747 or equivalent AirBus craft has the lift capability to handle a 10-15 ton craft attached to the wing.

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 1022
Where is Stratolaunch on the modifications to their carrier aircraft? It would certainly be large enough to handle a Dreamchaser.
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 0
Based on what I'm hearing, it looks like there will be no drop test until late 2013- 2014. It takes time to adapt out a system and look at all possibilities. 

Offline adrianwyard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1140
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 367
Based on what I'm hearing, it looks like there will be no drop test until late 2013- 2014. It takes time to adapt out a system and look at all possibilities. 

Attaching a jettisonable parachute to DC's tail, and dropping from high altitude by helicopter doesn't sound like the sort of thing that would take till late 2013, or does it?

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Based on what I'm hearing, it looks like there will be no drop test until late 2013- 2014. It takes time to adapt out a system and look at all possibilities. 

Attaching a jettisonable parachute to DC's tail, and dropping from high altitude by helicopter doesn't sound like the sort of thing that would take till late 2013, or does it?

There are definately some low altitude / low speed tests they can do with the helicopter, including the first free-flight and landing tests.

Offline adrianwyard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1140
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 367
I think so. But if that's the case, what test(s) will a helicopter be insufficient for?

Based on what I'm hearing, it looks like there will be no drop test until late 2013- 2014. It takes time to adapt out a system and look at all possibilities. 

Attaching a jettisonable parachute to DC's tail, and dropping from high altitude by helicopter doesn't sound like the sort of thing that would take till late 2013, or does it?

There are definately some low altitude / low speed tests they can do with the helicopter, including the first free-flight and landing tests.


Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13606
Where is Stratolaunch on the modifications to their carrier aircraft? It would certainly be large enough to handle a Dreamchaser.
A long way from even being constructed.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Keep in mind folks that we are talking about two different series of flight tests. Low altitude unmanned flight tests with “autoland” and high altitude manned flight tests in the schedule.

Here are the performance specs for the Skycrane.

http://www.sikorskyarchives.com/S-64_Product_History%20modX.php

« Last Edit: 12/28/2012 05:35 pm by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0