Author Topic: Rocket Company DH-1 (Read 10334 times)

AndyMc · « **on:** 02/23/2006 12:18 pm »

Recently I built a prototype model for the Orbiter Flight simulator http://www.orbitersim.com , of the two stage to orbit, (essentially a boosted SSTO) Rocket Company DH-1 as outlined in the book The Rocket Company by Patrick J.G. Stiennon and David M. Hoerr. http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/SpecialTopics/RocketCom/titlePage.html

Since then the add-on has been developed further by Mark Patton to a level where most of the novel features of the DH-1 are working, and further development continues.
See: http://orbithangar.com/searchid.cfm?ID=2137

I have uploaded the development notes produced by Bruce Irving (FlyingSinger) to my site, and thought I'd share them with the knowledgable members of this forum to get their opinion. This pdf outlines the flight profile - http://www.aovi93.dsl.pipex.com/pdfs/Orbiter%20Developer%20Notes%20v1a%20for%20the%20DH-1.pdf

Since an SSTO launcher seems to be a extreemly difficult proposition given current technology, would not a two stage to orbit, completely re-useable system like this be worth a look?

As for the Orbiter models; orbit of the second stage is acheived with about 2% of the main fuel remaining for the de-orbit burn. The launched payload to orbit is 2000kg, not including the single Astronaut.

nacnud · « **Reply #1 on:** 02/23/2006 12:42 pm »

Nice one! I found that book very interesting, shame it's no longer available online.

So is the simulation good enough to say whether this vehicle could work as advertised?

AndyMc · « **Reply #2 on:** 02/23/2006 01:03 pm »

Quote

nacnud - 23/2/2006 7:42 AM

Nice one! I found that book very interesting, shame it's no longer available online.

So is the simulation good enough to say whether this vehicle could work as advertised?

Using the figures from the book, it works, but I have no information how they were derived. Figures for engine ISP are known, but as for the mass of the structure, jet engines and other miscellaneous equipment I have no idea if the figures given are 'real', just have to trust the author on this I guess.

The first stage performance has improved with the latest model by Mark Paton, over my initial prototype model, but he is using a different module for the stage, so that's something I will have to check out with him.

Getting the first stage booster back to base is difficult at the moment as it lacks an autopilot for the task, and you have to fly the second stage to orbit very carefully to keep some fuel remaining for de-orbit. Trying to do 2 things at once, switching between both craft makes it quite difficult. There are also some Orbiter/Module issues that make it harder too. The add-on will install straight into Orbiter without needing any additional downloads, and has a read-me file explaining what's required.

The author of the book is taking an interest in the project and recently mentiond it at the end of an interview on the subject on the space review.
http://thespacereview.com/article/540/1 Part 1
http://thespacereview.com/article/543/1 - Part 2 (Obiter add-on mentioned here).

Tap-Sa · « **Reply #3 on:** 02/23/2006 04:47 pm »

Quote

nacnud - 23/2/2006 3:42 PM

Nice one! I found that book very interesting, shame it's no longer available online.

Hmm, not even on waybackmachine? Oh well, I guess gotta cough up the money and get the hard print. That book and MER pics really got my interests back to space stuff. IMO the DH-1 is a best and most realistic depiction of true lowcost RLV, blows away many 'real' concepts.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #4 on:** 02/24/2006 01:39 pm »

I really need to find some space time to play Orbiter some more.

AndyMc · « **Reply #5 on:** 03/15/2006 08:52 am »

An update on this: Mark Paton, has uploaded the final(ish) version of the DH-1 to Orbithangar: Links are on this page, http://www.aovi93.dsl.pipex.com/rocket_co_dh1.htm
as is some essential information regarding installing an auto-pilot MFD to make it function correctly.

There are a number of work-arounds, (see included documentation) due to the limitations with the script based config files that assign the various parameters of the launcher. The launch sequence is particularly novel. There is a good chance that a dedicated dll module will be programmed in the future, which will further improve the conceptualisation.

BTW, the patent for this launch concept is currently owned by Kistler, who are now part owned by Rocketplane. The book quotes a Billion U.S. to develop the DH-1; any takers?

Tap-Sa · « **Reply #6 on:** 03/15/2006 12:35 pm »

Quote

AndyMc - 15/3/2006 11:52 AM

BTW, the patent for this launch concept is currently owned by Kistler, who are now part owned by Rocketplane.

It's easy to circumvent, Kistler patent is speaks of SSTO and 'Launch Assist Platform'. Declare the real life DH-1 as TSTO

Another Kistler patent cover K-1 TSTO but the pop-back maneuver involves reversing horisontal speed, different from DH-1 simple up&down.

I wonder if either patent would actually hold up in court, feels like there's plenty of prior (conceptual) art for both.

publiusr · « **Reply #7 on:** 03/15/2006 06:49 pm »

Nice artwork if nothing else.

AndyMc · « **Reply #8 on:** 03/15/2006 09:23 pm »

Quote

publiusr - 15/3/2006 1:49 PM

Nice artwork if nothing else.

How do you mean?

publiusr · « **Reply #9 on:** 03/23/2006 07:12 pm »

it's not as if it will actualy be built. The problem with space privitazation is that investors can say no--and will say no more than they say yes. Investors want to make money--all else be hanged. That means EXXON will always get more interest than starry eyed space start-ups.

I am of the opinion that the alt.spacers have done damage to spaceflight by making promises and undermining NASA while offering no replacement. The Space Libertarian movement will therefore cause more harm than good.

Rxke · « **Reply #10 on:** 03/30/2006 04:53 pm »

SpaceX might deliver; XCOR is doing well, financially, by 'merely' supplying engines to more highprofile AltSpacers, and I know of at least one other one that will deliver. (leaving out suborbital

But you're right, 90% of the Alt.Space community is regarded as being crackpots (some deservedly so)
It's early days, though, and according to some people, even despite the failed launch of the Falcon, business is starting to sit up and take notice. Of course, it's extremely high-risk investment we're talking about here, so only dreamers and investors that can afford to take some risks will jump in.
And giving the flight-regimen of DH-1, it could be built even smaller, for 'fringe' payloads, weighting a couple of kilograms. Microsats, meteology in the 'dead zone' (between meteo-balloons and orbital, as a sounder on steroids, use the 1st stage for it, second for something else); military recon, even, it would be cheaper than the 'mystery' spaceplane and get the same results, heck, and why not: parcel delivery.
as a test-platform for the 'big guys' even: testhardware that can be launched w/o leadtime, making it possible to do lots of tests for the same price of a classical launcher etc. etc.

Bluesky, I know, but a flight-regimen as depicted in The Rocket Company would make spaceflight a totally different thing from what it is today, so there must be possibilities, given the fact that it is already possible to make a profit in this industry today with current launchers.