Author Topic: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!  (Read 7144 times)


Offline jurgen

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #1 on: 05/04/2005 08:09 AM »
"While Shuttle bashers on various internet message boards continue to ridicule the notion that winged/lifting body vehicles have no need for the wings - a correct point in reference to the operation of a vehicle in space - Lockheed Martin explained their reasoning for continuing along the lines of a space plane."

Heh, very funny

Offline Chris Bergin

RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #2 on: 05/04/2005 08:24 AM »
Quote
jurgen - 4/5/2005  9:09 AM

"While Shuttle bashers on various internet message boards continue to ridicule the notion that winged/lifting body vehicles have no need for the wings - a correct point in reference to the operation of a vehicle in space - Lockheed Martin explained their reasoning for continuing along the lines of a space plane."

Heh, very funny

No prizes for where the inspiration for that came from ;) It's nice editing your own stuff ;)

Offline jurgen

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #3 on: 05/04/2005 08:27 AM »
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1534782.html

The popular mechanics article has some more cutaway pictures of the lockheed CEV proposal.

Offline NASA_Twix_JSC

  • Supporting FDOs since 1999
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 690
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #4 on: 05/04/2005 09:21 AM »
Great looking ship.

Offline FransonUK

  • Don't ya wish your spaceship was hot like me...don't ya
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #5 on: 05/05/2005 05:16 AM »
I was just commentating on the VentureStar thread that it's interesting how the CEV (Lockheed Martin's) is like a slim version of the body of the X-33. Seems they do have a love for this type of design. It does look great all the same.
Don't ya wish your spaceship was hot like me

Offline NASA_LaRC_SP

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #6 on: 05/07/2005 03:23 PM »
Quote
FransonUK - 5/5/2005  12:16 AM

I was just commentating on the VentureStar thread that it's interesting how the CEV (Lockheed Martin's) is like a slim version of the body of the X-33. Seems they do have a love for this type of design. It does look great all the same.

Both lifting bodies.

Offline gyro2020

  • Member
  • Posts: 62
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #7 on: 05/11/2005 03:58 AM »
Interesting story on the front page. Can Lockheed Martin get that built in time or does this give the advantage to the Boeing people on the capsule plan?

Offline SRBseparama

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #8 on: 05/11/2005 04:06 AM »
You'd have to say yes cause it would have been pretty stupid of them to even design that without an ability to get it built.

Offline realtime

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 13
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #9 on: 08/07/2005 05:44 AM »
It looks complicated to me.  Not to mention heavy.  I think it'd be far quicker to develop and qualify a simple sea-landing capsule than a lifting body, but what do I know?

Don't worry, though.  Boeing may yet find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  Check the combination parachute/rocket landing system on their capsule CEV:

http://exploration.nasa.gov/documents/reports/cer_final/Schafer.pdf


Offline JamesSpaceFlight

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CEV - LockMarts - is a WINGED lifting body!
« Reply #10 on: 08/07/2005 07:12 AM »
Hmmm. looks like 1950/60 design, can't say I rate it.

Tags: