Reusable spaceplane demonstrator completes 5 test flights in 3 daysBy David SzondyAugust 31, 2021Dawn Aerospace has successfully completed five test flights of its uncrewed Mk-II Aurora suborbital spaceplane in the skies over Glentanner Aerodrome on New Zealand’s South Island. The flights were conducted by the New Zealand-Dutch space transportation company from July 28 to 30, 2021 at altitudes of up to 3,400 feet (1,036 m), with the prototype airframe fitted with surrogate jet engines.
Finally some other NSF member got aware of Dawn Aerospace and started a topic. I think they are progressing very well on several developments. Possibly I'll share more info on request.
They don't look much different that Radian. I'm not seeing anything very substantial here either.
Radian has no hardware, while Dawn has small scale prototypes. Radian is trying to build a crewed vehicle, while Dawn's goal is an uncrewed smallsat launcher. Radian wants to build an SSTO, and Dawn is only trying for a two-stage design. They aren't really comparable at all.
Quote from: JEF_300 on 08/21/2022 02:13 amRadian has no hardware, while Dawn has small scale prototypes. Radian is trying to build a crewed vehicle, while Dawn's goal is an uncrewed smallsat launcher. Radian wants to build an SSTO, and Dawn is only trying for a two-stage design. They aren't really comparable at all.I'll admit that was a little harsh. They have complete flight hardwareRadian has been conducting test firings at Brereton airport for some time, but that's about all. I'm just very weary of a company that shows videos with no humans in shot (for scale) and a flight time of less than 2 minutes. There website says it's 4.8m long (IE just shy of 16 feet) and HTP/Kero. With an empty weight of 75Kg and GTOW of 280Kg thats a structural fraction of 26.7% and a stated goal of M3 to give microgravity of 180secs at above 100Km IE space.That potentially opens up the market for academic institutions and businesses that want sounding rocket type access with on-demand availablility. If they sell this as a turn-key package that will be a paradign shift in the industry from solid fuel expendable sounding rockets.Beyond that the Cp/Cm shift over the Mach range will be tough with an engine in the tail. The Mark III is supposed to be 18000Kg and a 250Kg to LEO. That's a payload fraction of 1.38%. Not what you'd expect from a TSTO with an expendable US. This suggests eithera) It'll be a TSTO and the US will be 1)Cost optimised IE Heavy, expendable or 2)Recoverable and reusable. orb) They are going to extend the Mark II into a full SSTO.
MK2 is suborbital only vehicle.
MK3 will be expendable 2nd stage with HTOHL booster ie rocket spaceplane. Mass fractions are about right for this RLV, given boosters extra dry mass due to wings and need to RTLS.
Electron is 2.3% as ELV.
Video is first rocket powered flight of MK2 which is quite an achievement especially as its an automous rocket plane built on shoestring budget. Over next few months they should slowly increase altitude.
Radian has been conducting test firings at Brereton airport for some time, but that's about all.
More than 3 decades since REL laid out in Spaceflight why Skylon had the engine positions it did and what happens if you try to operate with rear-mounted engines over a large Mach range and it seems that yet another spaceplane startup is going to ignore them.
I didn't know that. Awesome
The website says that the Mk-II's max speed is "Mach 3+". That's SR-71 territory. Difficult, but plenty achievable, particularly when using a rocket rather than an advanced jet engine. A rear engine will be just fine for the Mk-II. Mk-III is trickier, since first stage typically go much faster (Mach 10 for F9, Mach 16 for Atlas V). I guess it's possible that they intend for the Mk-III to be more of a pop-up rocket, like the crazy and inefficient proposals that have been discussed for making New Shepard a smallsat launcher. In the end I'm not too worried about it, because the Mk-III isn't what they're working on right now. Perhaps when they start actually working on it, they will discover that they have to redesign it to have centrally mounted engines, but that is a problem for later.
Quote from: JEF_300 on 08/22/2022 04:29 amI didn't know that. AwesomeYes. They are not entirely powerpoint engineering.Quote from: JEF_300The website says that the Mk-II's max speed is "Mach 3+". That's SR-71 territory. Difficult, but plenty achievable, particularly when using a rocket rather than an advanced jet engine. A rear engine will be just fine for the Mk-II. Mk-III is trickier, since first stage typically go much faster (Mach 10 for F9, Mach 16 for Atlas V). I guess it's possible that they intend for the Mk-III to be more of a pop-up rocket, like the crazy and inefficient proposals that have been discussed for making New Shepard a smallsat launcher. In the end I'm not too worried about it, because the Mk-III isn't what they're working on right now. Perhaps when they start actually working on it, they will discover that they have to redesign it to have centrally mounted engines, but that is a problem for later.Yes that's pretty much what I expect them to do. It puts them back at square one in design terms however. What Mark II teaches them about the flying characteristics of the vehicle is unlikely to transfer to their new Mark III designI'm not sure what it's made of. If it's CFRC then without serious TPS their operating limits will not be far above M3 anyway.
The heat loads for suborbital plane shouldn't be that high, see Virgin SpaceShip2.
Pushing toward 40 flights, averaging just under 1 a week now.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/21/2022 10:39 amOMG I knew it was small but it's actually tinyIt's teeny tiny. That moment at the end surrounding the vehicle was a real LOL moment. I thought it was an airport, but actually, I think it's a road.This has put a real smile on my face. Both very serious and utterly hilarious at the same time. That said GNC and flight dynamics issues dont really scale (except when they get worse), so there's a lot to be said to solving issues with them at the smallest possible scale, before you scale up, so the control systems are rock solid. If they couldn't get it flying well at this scale they'd be doomed when they scale up. I'll wish them well with their test plan.
