Quote from: RanulfC on 12/29/2011 05:29 pmstrangely enough I happened across these two studies on an Air-Launched LV that just "happen" to have a really, really similar Carrier Aircraft in the Eclipse:http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19940020540_1994020540.pdfIndeed. Page 12 of chapter 1 has an uncanny diagram that perhaps most people would mistake for Allen's Stratolaunch at a glance.
strangely enough I happened across these two studies on an Air-Launched LV that just "happen" to have a really, really similar Carrier Aircraft in the Eclipse:http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19940020540_1994020540.pdf
Alternate/Informaton question on engine cost;I seem to recall the RL-10 was somewhere between $10 and $20 million PER engine, anyone recall if this is accurate or not?Randy
Could also be a Skylon derivative with a passenger cabin.
"The companies... are working on a spacecraft that takes off horizontally from a runway like a plane but then, tens of thousands of feet into the air, lights a booster rocket capable to taking passengers past the upper reaches of the atmosphere,"
Quote from: RanulfC on 12/29/2011 06:32 pmAlternate/Informaton question on engine cost;I seem to recall the RL-10 was somewhere between $10 and $20 million PER engine, anyone recall if this is accurate or not?Randy$10-12M was the last I heard, for 2015 deliveries.
It's even possible that stratolaunch test program would take off from near Denver, fire off the rocket over the ocean off California, then land in New Mexico or elsewhere until they've built up enough flight history to be allowed to overfly populated areas on a tower of flame. I assume that if they are deemed safe enough to fly passengers commercially and in quantity, that they would be deemed safe enough to overfly populated areas. Is that a bad assumption? Might they be able to fire the rocket somewhere above the desert in the US SW and try to thread a careful path over nearly unpopulated areas between towns until they make it above water during their test program? How much time elapses between stratolaunch takeoff and 40000 feet or so? Any guesses? Just curious how big of a portion of the inter-continental travel time climb time might be.
My WAG is about 2 hours to operational altitude.
Quote from: docmordrid on 12/30/2011 12:23 amCould also be a Skylon derivative with a passenger cabin.He talks about the companies (plural) working on this. I think skylon is just worked on by 1 company. ...unless he means Reaction Engines Limited as one of the companies.Quote from: go4mars on 12/29/2011 11:58 pm"The companies... are working on a spacecraft that takes off horizontally from a runway like a plane but then, tens of thousands of feet into the air, lights a booster rocket capable to taking passengers past the upper reaches of the atmosphere,"The discussion of the runway length and extension are more pertinent to stratolaunch as I understand it. The timing and location also make me suspicious that this is stratolaunch. Timing: 5 days before stratolaunch announcement. Skylon's been on the drawing board for 30 years. Location: Kimbal Musk lives in Boulder and Elon has connections there. Also, IIRC, the proteus was built in Colorado and Scaled Technology Works is in Colorado also (correct me if I'm wrong). Anyway, skylon is only 24 passengers vs. potentially a few hundred that might be possible with stratolaunch/F5. 24 people at a time would be very challenged economics vs. hundreds of people per flight which might have a market size big enough to be revolutionary to the average upper-middle class Joe or Jane. Not that I dislike skylon or anything. I wish the skylon people success as well! Just seems less likely to me for those reasons.
Among other things, talks about skiing in Colorado in the morning and surfing in Australia after lunch.
Huh? Skylon is likely?
Which is fine for the 0.1%, but has no practical applications for anyone else.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 12/30/2011 01:33 pmWhich is fine for the 0.1%, but has no practical applications for anyone else.Just like airplanes and cars when they were new.
Also, Denver is a bad choice for its attitude and weather
Attitude. Not altitude. The wealthy, high-tech large population base in and around Denver might be more important than physical geography.And yes, hundreds of people. If you assume no passenger stage burn, and no payload above the second second (passenger) stage, the the fuel requirements for propulsive landing would be less than 1/15th of the 1st stage fuel requirements. That leaves a lot of mass available for people, padded walls and floors for when the engines are on. Much of the rest of the time people will just float around the cabin I would guess. No chairs = less weight.
Attitude. Not altitude. The wealthy, high-tech large population base in and around Denver might be more important than physical geography.