XCOR and the Lynx rocket

[catdlr]

Inside XCOR - Lynx Reusable Engine  | Exclusive Tour Video

Published on Feb 29, 2016
Former fighter pilot Harry van Hutlen, now Director of Flight Testing for XCOR Aerospace, takes Space.com inside the hangar / factory housing the Lynx prototype, at the Mojave Air and Spaceport in California. With a unique automotive-style engine that can restart many times a day the sub-orbital spaceplane will fly often, giving the private spaceflight company a sharp edge over the competition. --

Lynx Space Plane in Pictures: http://goo.gl/V80PEi

[QuantumG]

Seeing Jeff towards the end brought a tear to my eye.

[BrightLight]

Screen capture of the latest Lynx build - from:
http://www.space.com/32099-inside-xcor-lynx-reusable-engine-exclusive-tour-video.html

[Gliderflyer]

The February Lynx Report is also online, and it has some more detailed pictures of recent progress:  http://xcor.com/media/6340/lynx-report-feb-2016.pdf

[TruthIsStranger]

The video makes it look like they will cross the Von Karman line but fails to mention that it's only a postulated capability for a follow-on Mark II vehicle. They also emphasize the engine is easily restarted but I would think the real goal is quick turn arounds not inflight restarts. Nobody carries excess fuel around so there isn't much value in inflight restarts unless you're Blue Origin (the one competitor they failed to mention). Have they ever demonstrated multiple chambers running off a single piston pump? What would impress me is seeing all four chambers running full duration and then showing how quick they can turn it around.

Does it strike anyone else odd that some folks have screamed about the VG safety culture actually putting XCOR facilities at risk and then XCOR shows repeated videos of cold flows and hot fires occurring right next to their own hangar and fuel tanks (which apparently are sandwiched  between Northrop/Scaled hangars)?

[Robotbeat]

"Postulated capability" is not a fair assessment.

[hop]

They also emphasize the engine is easily restarted but I would think the real goal is quick turn arounds not inflight restarts. Nobody carries excess fuel around so there isn't much value in inflight restarts unless you're Blue Origin (the one competitor they failed to mention).

Having some power to adjust your approach or do a go around has a lot of benefits over being a pure low L/D glider like SS2. Even if they don't have much margin for that on operational "space" flights, being able to fly it like the EZ-Rocket should be a big benefit for development and testing.

[Gliderflyer]

Does it strike anyone else odd that some folks have screamed about the VG safety culture actually putting XCOR facilities at risk and then XCOR shows repeated videos of cold flows and hot fires occurring right next to their own hangar and fuel tanks (which apparently are sandwiched  between Northrop/Scaled hangars)?

Besides the 3N22, which is ~40 pounds of thrust, XCOR doesn't fire their engines at the hangar. They have a dedicated test site far away from people and structures for large engine hot fires.

[Lar]

This may be of interest to folks

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39706.msg1498254#msg1498254 ... thread about interviews with XCOR and VG pilots

[rocx]

I did not realise until now that XCOR is a half-Dutch company: Dutch engineers (Harry van Hulten), Dutch board members (Maarten Elshove, Michiel Mol), Dutch launch site (Curaçao), Dutch office, Dutch sponsors. I'm starting to think of our low flat nation a bit more as a space power now!

[Gliderflyer]

Press Release:
XCOR AND ULA AWARDED US AIR FORCE PROPULSION CONTRACT

Midland TX, March 9, 2016, United Launch Alliance (ULA), the nation's premier launch services provider, has awarded XCOR Aerospace with a new contract through the United States Air Force to develop an upper stage propulsion system for Vulcan, ULA's next-generation launch system.
 
Jay Gibson, President XCOR: "We are very proud of our long and ongoing relationship with ULA, and very pleased ULA has chosen XCOR as a potential upper stage engine provider. We have already begun work on the 8H21 development, and are very excited about the long term potential for XCOR to support ULA and the United States Air Force in their evolving launch efforts."
 
XCOR's 8H21 LO2/LH2 engine (25k lbf thrust) is being developed for the upper stage propulsion for ULA's Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage (ACES). Since 2008 XCOR has been working closely with ULA on a subscale 2,500 lbf thrust liquid hydrogen engine, which was successfully built and tested in 2015.
 
In 2016, XCOR began development on the full scale 25k lbf thrust liquid hydrogen engine, the 8H21, under a privately funded contract with ULA. This partnership with the Air Force will further support this engine development.
 
The 8H21 is a liquid oxygen, liquid hydrogen rocket engine that uses XCOR's proprietary piston pumps and other unique rocket engine components to deliver a low cost solution for easier access to space. The 8H21 also uses the same technology that XCOR has been developing for their own reusable engine programs, designed with forward capabilities in mind for future reusable engine development programs.



Edit: Added a picture of the 5H25

[catdlr]

Inside XCOR - Lynx Reusable Engine

Published on Mar 9, 2016
Former fighter pilot Harry van Hutlen, now Director of Flight Testing for XCOR Aerospace, takes Space.com inside the hangar / factory housing the Lynx prototype, at the Mojave Air and Spaceport in California. With a unique automotive-style engine that can restart many times a day the sub-orbital spaceplane will fly often, giving the private spaceflight company a sharp edge over the competition. -- Lynx Space Plane in Pictures: http://goo.gl/V80PEi

How XCOR's Lynx Space Plane Works (Infographic): http://goo.gl/QdWaIo

Credit: Space.com / Produced and Edited by @SteveSpaleta & @DavidSkyBrody

[jongoff]

Press Release:
XCOR AND ULA AWARDED US AIR FORCE PROPULSION CONTRACT

Apparently this was the $800k for ACES in ULA's Vulcan/ACES contract. It's good to hear they're starting to work on the full-scale system. Though $800k isn't a lot of money for a project like that, so hopefully there's more potential money available down the road to keep this going. They're still the underdog on the ACES engine downselect list IMO, but if they can keep getting USAF money to match ULA's investment, their odds improve at least a little.

~Jon

[ethan829]

Press Release:
XCOR AND ULA AWARDED US AIR FORCE PROPULSION CONTRACT

Apparently this was the $800k for ACES in ULA's Vulcan/ACES contract. It's good to hear they're starting to work on the full-scale system. Though $800k isn't a lot of money for a project like that, so hopefully there's more potential money available down the road to keep this going. They're still the underdog on the ACES engine downselect list IMO, but if they can keep getting USAF money to match ULA's investment, their odds improve at least a little.

~Jon

Source on that? Tory Bruno said on reddit that it was a new, separate contract but could be mistaken.

[TrevorMonty]

Press Release:
XCOR AND ULA AWARDED US AIR FORCE PROPULSION CONTRACT

Apparently this was the $800k for ACES in ULA's Vulcan/ACES contract. It's good to hear they're starting to work on the full-scale system. Though $800k isn't a lot of money for a project like that, so hopefully there's more potential money available down the road to keep this going. They're still the underdog on the ACES engine downselect list IMO, but if they can keep getting USAF money to match ULA's investment, their odds improve at least a little.

~Jon

I don't know how serious ULA are with XCOR engine, maybe it is just means to pressure Aerojet into reducing RL10 price. Aerojet are trying to reduce its build cost with 3D printing.

[jongoff]

I don't know how serious ULA are with XCOR engine, maybe it is just means to pressure Aerojet into reducing RL10 price. Aerojet are trying to reduce its build cost with 3D printing.

The negotiating chip probably only works if XCOR is seen as a serious threat. So I'm not sure how different those two positions (serious about the XCOR engine vs just trying to haggle AJR down on the RL10) are in practice. That said even if they make something that works well, there's a real question of how they're going to build up enough flight heritage with such an engine to give customers comfortable with its reliability vs RL10. On a probably not so serious note, many years ago, when I was still at Masten, some ULA friends working this program suggested they'd give me a Centaur stage and engine for free if I could figure out how to turn it into an RLV that could rack up the flight data on the XCOR engine once it was ready.

But I think that's going to be the big hurdle for XCOR--not necessarily getting the engine to work, but being considered reliable enough that ULA can convince customers to switch to a stage powered by them instead of RL-10s. I was going to say that Blue was going to run into the same challenge with BE-3U, but at least they're going to be racking-up the flight time with the first-stage version of BE-3 over the next few years.

But first things first, XCOR needs to get a full-scale engine working at all before they can start talking about putting flight time on it.

~Jon

[jongoff]

Press Release:
XCOR AND ULA AWARDED US AIR FORCE PROPULSION CONTRACT

Apparently this was the $800k for ACES in ULA's Vulcan/ACES contract. It's good to hear they're starting to work on the full-scale system. Though $800k isn't a lot of money for a project like that, so hopefully there's more potential money available down the road to keep this going. They're still the underdog on the ACES engine downselect list IMO, but if they can keep getting USAF money to match ULA's investment, their odds improve at least a little.

~Jon

Source on that? Tory Bruno said on reddit that it was a new, separate contract but could be mistaken.

XCOR responded to my question on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/XCOR/status/707582355519594505

~Jon

[yg1968]

New board members appointed:

http://www.xcor.com/news/new-board-of-directors-and-advisory-board-members/

[Lars-J]

New board members appointed:

http://www.xcor.com/news/new-board-of-directors-and-advisory-board-members/

And with that, Jeff Greason is off the board as well. (Didn't take long) Has he left completely or is he working with XCOR in some capacity?

[Robotbeat]

In light of Jeff Greason leaving the board, this seems relevant:
"Founder-Led Companies Outperform the Rest--Here's Why"
https://hbr.org/2016/03/founder-led-companies-outperform-the-rest-heres-why

(Hello, XCOR people reading this right now.)