The DC-3 Fully Reusable Space Shuttle early Concept

[catdlr]

The DC-3 Fully Reusable Space Shuttle early Concept

DC-3 was a fully reusable launch vehicle two-stage-to-orbit spaceplane Designed by Maxime Faget and was one of several early design proposals for the NASA Space Shuttle  at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston.

Various studies by North American Rockwell, McDonnell Douglas Astronautics and North American Aviation

Reference for animation:
A TWO-STAGE FIXED WING
SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
FINAL REPORT
Volume II Preliminary Design
Contract No. NAS 9-9204 Schedule II
by
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS ASTRONAUTICS

[spacenut]

There were several concepts like this, but NASA chose the Shuttle with solid boosters instead.  In the long run, a two stage reusable rocket or space planes would have been cheaper to operate I would think.  The booster plane especially would have cut the operating costs.  Solids cost as much new as reusable.  Then the shuttle expended the tank.  Nothing would have been expended.  The booster plane, if robust enough would have taken very little refurbishment to reuse.  The upper orbital stage might have taken about the same refurbishment as shuttle.  There would have probably been no Challenger explosion.

I'm surprised Boeing and Lockheed haven't come up with something like this.  One do the booster and one the orbiter, and let ULA operate it.   

[Jim]

I'm surprised Boeing and Lockheed haven't come up with something like this.  One do the booster and one the orbiter, and let ULA operate it.   

Development costs are too high

[Eric Hedman]

I was told by someone who was involved in the review of these early concepts that some of the astronauts were not thrilled by the manned booster concepts because of the abort scenarios that would sacrifice the crew on the booster.  He said this is why they favored unmanned boosters.

[Brovane]

There were several concepts like this, but NASA chose the Shuttle with solid boosters instead.  In the long run, a two stage reusable rocket or space planes would have been cheaper to operate I would think.  The booster plane especially would have cut the operating costs.  Solids cost as much new as reusable.  Then the shuttle expended the tank.  Nothing would have been expended.  The booster plane, if robust enough would have taken very little refurbishment to reuse.  The upper orbital stage might have taken about the same refurbishment as shuttle.  There would have probably been no Challenger explosion.

I'm surprised Boeing and Lockheed haven't come up with something like this.  One do the booster and one the orbiter, and let ULA operate it.   

While the Shuttle was flying.  There was several proposals to replace the Solid's with Liquid fly-back boosters that would land back autonomously at KSC.  I think one of the proposals even showed how long term it would save money and boost performance.  These are covered in the Jenkins books on the Shuttle.     

[Vahe231991]

Artist's renderings of the earliest concept for the DC-3 can be found at these links:
http://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/blog/?p=1254
https://up-ship.com/blog/?p=44777
http://www.astronautix.com/s/shuttledc-3.html