Author Topic: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread  (Read 121725 times)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6192
  • Liked: 1185
  • Australia
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #300 on: 06/30/2012 12:55 AM »
No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.

The point of it is vertical landing.. which they're not doing anymore.

It's still a great way to test the vehicle before flight, but it's overkill for just that.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19555
  • Liked: 1885
  • Minnesota
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #301 on: 06/30/2012 05:00 AM »
No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.

The point of it is vertical landing.. which they're not doing anymore.

It's still a great way to test the vehicle before flight, but it's overkill for just that.

I don't see why it's overkill. A great idea as you said, IMHO.

And they certainly plan on returning to vertical landing, according to what they've said.

Separating the vertical landing problem from the suborbital, supersonic, Karman-line-breaking problem and solving them individually before solving them at the same time makes a lot of sense to me. Or, it at very least seems like a perfectly valid approach to overcoming the hurdle of doing both at the same time. They plan on doing recovery/reuse. In fact, I believe they're even using the same physical engine--with modifications--that came from Stig-A which ended up using the shovel recovery method (was supposed to be parachute recovery ;)). Yeah, they overbuilt that engine a bit. ;)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6192
  • Liked: 1185
  • Australia
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #302 on: 06/30/2012 05:20 AM »
And they certainly plan on returning to vertical landing, according to what they've said.

When? Everything public I've heard in the last year says they're not. At NSRC they made the official comment that their suborbital tourism vehicle won't be vertical landing.
« Last Edit: 06/30/2012 02:23 PM by QuantumG »
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2480
  • Liked: 5
  • Melbourne, Australia
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #303 on: 06/30/2012 12:08 PM »
No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.

The point of it is vertical landing.. which they're not doing anymore.

It's still a great way to test the vehicle before flight, but it's overkill for just that.


Umm, most single engine, long skinny rockets manage to stay vertical on launch. Until they start their gravity turns.  Keeping the rocket pointed in the right direction is kind of important. ;)

The big difference here is doing it while maintaining a steady T/W of 1.
« Last Edit: 06/30/2012 12:09 PM by kkattula »

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Liked: 197
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #304 on: 07/05/2012 04:34 PM »
In vertical landing of an actual spacecraft fuel is critical; one really can't hover for extended periods as the DC-X did without burning a lot of fuel. To minimize gravity losses on a vertical landing the engines would have to be fired at the last second to decelerate just before touchdown. It might be a little too dramatic for the average tourist. With a gliding approach or a parachute the descent is a bit slower.

Offline Moe Grills

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 682
  • Liked: 12
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #305 on: 07/05/2012 09:29 PM »
   I see it coming to pass.
John Carmack surely has conceived of and and made a computer graphics design for a cluster of STIGs to be used to launch a manned space vehicle to a 100 km altitude.
It seems a logical progression from the single STIG sounding rocket to an occupied suborbital space-vehicle using clusters of them to get up there.

  As for a paying passenger/pilot?
I wonder if John has thought outside the box and arranged for the possibility that some brave and rich person would be willing to be a 'test-pilot' on one of his future spacecraft?
  Instead of John paying for a test-pilot, the reverse is possible; it would be profitable for someone with money and guts to pay him for the privilege of going up to 100km in his craft.
 
« Last Edit: 07/05/2012 09:33 PM by Moe Grills »

Offline Space Junkie

  • Member
  • Posts: 83
  • Liked: 5
  • IL, USA
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #306 on: 07/05/2012 09:57 PM »
  As for a paying passenger/pilot?
I wonder if John has thought outside the box and arranged for the possibility that some brave and rich person would be willing to be a 'test-pilot' on one of his future spacecraft?
  Instead of John paying for a test-pilot, the reverse is possible; it would be profitable for someone with money and guts to pay him for the privilege of going up to 100km in his craft.
Maybe. But it seems like a huge complication for a tight group like Armadillo to bring an 'outsider' in to fly on an experimental launch.

I'm not sure the choice of test pilot matters much though. Liability aside, the bad PR from a suborbital spaceflight death would be catastrophic regardless of who it is.

It might be worse if a paying customer died rather than a company test pilot, but only slightly.

Offline aero

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1882
  • Liked: 193
  • 92111
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #307 on: 07/05/2012 11:35 PM »
I'm sure test pilots must be licensed by the FAA, and that the FAA permits for the test flight vehicle require licensed test pilots. Something so blatant and public as using an unlicensed vehicle for commercial purposes would surely bring the hammer down.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
  • Liked: 68
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #308 on: 07/26/2012 07:05 PM »
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6838
  • Liked: 68
  • South coast of England
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #309 on: 07/26/2012 07:14 PM »
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

What type of licence?  For operational flights or for test flights?

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3220
  • Liked: 261
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #310 on: 07/26/2012 07:51 PM »
Operational.

Quote
“The Operator Launch License enables Armadillo Aerospace to launch payloads for revenue service” said Milburn. “The inaugural flight of STIG B scheduled for this summer is carrying two revenue payloads, one for Vega Space and the other for the University of Purdue, and, if successful, this will qualify the STIG vehicles for NASA’s Flight Opportunities Program.”

full PR
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Confusador

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Liked: 8
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #311 on: 07/27/2012 12:59 AM »
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

What type of licence?  For operational flights or for test flights?

It's an Operator Launch License, because they're carrying a commercial payload, but as it's the first flight of Stig-B I don't think you can really call it anything other than a test flight.

Reports are that they have it planned for 25-26 Aug.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3220
  • Liked: 261
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #312 on: 07/27/2012 01:06 AM »
More details posted by Doug Messier here
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/07/26/more-details-on-armadillos-faa-launch-license/

a launch a month ambition. That'd be nice to see, if they actually follow through on their plans for a change
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Online AnalogMan

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
  • Liked: 166
  • Cambridge, UK

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8569
  • Liked: 148
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #314 on: 07/28/2012 06:24 PM »
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

Big, big news, if its a launch operator's license.


Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19555
  • Liked: 1885
  • Minnesota
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #315 on: 07/28/2012 08:26 PM »
Also shows options for the multi-stage (orbital?) Stigs.

The largest looks like it should be capable of orbital flights, if they can shave enough weight off the center stage and make incremental performance improvements elsewhere.

Just as likely, it's merely a power-point "what if" with an orbital system being something different (or further on the back-burner than this makes it look).

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/07/26/armadillo-aerospace-gets-launch-license-for-reusable-stig-b/

The Stig-III doesn't appear to be orbital-capable (not enough stages or the right staging ratio for a pressure-fed to get orbital), more like a high-suborbital like a traditional multi-stage sounding rocket but serving also as a platform for testing staging techniques (something I don't think they've done before).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4914
  • Liked: 684
  • Louisville, CO
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #316 on: 07/28/2012 09:11 PM »
Also it came out at NewSpace that Ben Brockert recently left AA.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3220
  • Liked: 261
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #317 on: 08/11/2012 09:41 PM »
I was trawling NTRS for recent LOX/Methane propulsion related materials , and ran across this, i dont think ive seen it posted elsewhere
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090032801_2009026914.pdf


( Was actually surprised to see how much has been done and much data is there for the Aerojet, ATK/XCOR, Norhtrop/Grumman, PWR RS-18, KTE etc LOX/methane thrusters in all shapes and sizes ranging from 5 to 7500lbf . There is even a very detailed pdf test report publicly available on jsc server from Aerojet tests that is clearly marked as ITAR sensitive .. )
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2401
  • Liked: 32
  • Australia
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #318 on: 08/12/2012 05:23 AM »
Dead link.

Either the server is down or it's been removed.

This is why it's good to attach.

Offline zt

  • Member
  • Posts: 68
  • Liked: 2
Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
« Reply #319 on: 08/12/2012 07:42 AM »
works for me

Tags: