Space Ship I and Space Ship II and Ares

[MeteorWayne]

It's not gonna be in SB&T much longer anyway....

 

[dryson]

I am saying that Spaceship 1 and 2 have NOTHING to do with Ares. SS I and II are suborbital pleasure flights. Ares is a LEO launch booster, a completely different mission. Show me where I am wrong.

why are you playing semantics with the question? Why are you trying to twist the thread up? We all know that SSI and SS II have nothing to do with ARES.

The thread was an attempt to strike up a discussion designed to try and get people to think out side of the box and to think about different concepts like designing a launch vehicle based upon the ARES SRB that would be able to cost effectively deliver a space capable version of the SSI and SSII into LEO.

It is not mine or the rest of the forums problems if you are unable to understand the discussion or is or problem that if something you do not understand confuses you then it should be tossed into the unexplained forum just so you can toss about political science to keep people from ideas that do not fall within a norm that you think everyone should abide by.

 

[mr_mark]

As far as I know the only rocket currently capable of lifting a Dreamchaser style space plane into orbit is the Delta series. For many reasons Ares 1 is not capable of lifting Dreamchaser one of which is weight. As far as space planes based on SS1 or SS2 those designs would not work in space. The drag based reentry design of SS1 and SS2 will not work due to orbital reentry speeds. Both planes are made of carbon composite materials that also would not work. The shape of the vehicles may also not be able to take the loads necessary to achieve orbital velocity. In other words, neither model would work for orbital flight. So, really there is no further discussion. You would need a completely different design for orbital flights. Spaceships have to work according to the physical environments that they encounter. None of these planes or the Ares 1 booster meet those criteria.

 

[aphh]

So only Sierra Nevada's Dreamchaser has any chance and that is a picture and a video. There is no hardware under production for it and as far as I know there is no end date as far as build out.

Actually the Dreamchaser concept has orbited the earth already and returned successfully. As you may already know, the design is based on NASA HL-20 concept, which was fully evaluated and found to be possible to do. The NASA concept was based on Russian BOR desing, which actually flew and orbited the earth and was recovered in tact after the flight.

So Dreamchaser may exist only on paper, but the concept of lifting body has already flown in space and returned in one piece.

Here is an image of the NASA HL-20 mockup: http://dayton.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/MEDIUM ... 001923.jpg

I don't have knowledge whether it was even drop tested, but from the image you can see there is no control surfaces, so atleast that mockup is not meant to fly. I would not be surprised if this is the Dreamchaser mockup, just in different color. If you compare the NASA mockup and Dreamchaser mockup, you'll notice the front sections are identical.

 

[mr_mark]

The Dreamchaser is a really nice bird, I'm just not sure Sierra Nevada has what it takes to pull this off and in a realistic timeframe. If you think about it if Spacex and Orbital are already flying by next year cargo, I can't see how Dreamchaser can get in the game fast enough even to make a difference. I see 2020 at the earliest for this design to actually fly. By then Spacex should be flying astronauts on a regular basis. One hope I see is that Virgin Galactic could get involved and use Dreamchaser as their orbital vehicle. That's where this gets back to the original discussion. Why would Virgin Galactic need to make new orbital vehicles when they could own or lease several Dreamchasers. Just slap a Virgin Galactic logo on the thing and there you have it, Virgin Galactic orbital services.

 

[aphh]

Why would Virgin Galactic need to make new orbital vehicles when they could own or lease several Dreamchasers. Just slap a Virgin Galactic logo on the thing and there you have it, Virgin Galactic orbital services.

The Dreamchaser would have the advantage of being able to land almost anywhere on land areas where there is a runway. If the orbital hotel and tourist business was to really get going, they would need a vehicle with that capability.

It would be nice if they had Dreamchaser doing drop tests by now. Also, it would be interesting to talk to the actual NASA project manager for HL-20 from the 90ies to ask his opinion, whether NASA saw any problems with the concept.

It is my understanding that the program was cancelled because of political and financial reasons. The ESA concept, Hermes mini-shuttle, was cancelled for the exact same reason. It was determined that the ISS would not need a mini-shuttle.

If the mini-shuttle existed today, I'm sure Bigelow would have a vehicle for his customers.