VentureStar - back in the running!?

[shuttle_rtf]

Nothing I can do a story out of, but speaking to random peeps at Lockheed Martin and reminised about one of my favourite ships (X-33/VentureStar). I got this back via e-mail:<br /><br />"There's sure-fire movement on re-looking at the project. Not CEV-related."<br /><br />Asked for an expansion on this, but so far nothing back.<br /><br />Anyone heard anything? She was before her time with the tank issues, maybe something had moved on.<br /><br />Not sure - still to find out - if the X-33 which was being built is still at the Skunk Works.

 

[crix]

Wow, that would be quite the surprise. Maybe those tanks they had trouble with could be strengthed with a carbon nanotube blend? I'm pretty sure the technology for the lightweight tanks was the main show stopper and that could have been solved now. I remember hearing in the past how the military wanted the space shuttle because of its cross range ability... maybe they want to keep a lifter in the fleet that has that capability. Just speculating....

 

[grooble]

It'd be nice if something came from all those billions spent. I always thought a full sized venturestar would be great. What were its capabilities supposed to be? Was it just orbital?

 

[henryhallam]

Keep us posted. The Venturestar's a lovely machine.

 

[flynn]

Oh I do hope so, that one pretty ship. <br /><br />and Aerospike engines are cool. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

I've set up a thread on this on the NSF site - with a load of pictures too (Linear Aerospike Engines, X-33 being built, Engine tests etc.) - I've got some of the pad at Edwards..so I'll update as I find them - and I've linked back to this thread so everyone gets to see everybody's views. I'll update both threads.<br /><br />http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=56&posts=2

 

[shuttle_rtf]

For sure, News.<br /><br />Seems this is about the Air Force as I've been told to talk to the US Air Force Research Laboratory....wonder what they're like with media people

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Anyone know if the launch pad facility that was fully constructed at Edwards Air Force base is still there?

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Let's not confuse this.<br /><br />VentureStar is the means to the end that would be tested by the X-33 ATD.<br /><br />If there's a drive to try and get this back on, then of course it's going to be a case of picking up on the X-33 ATD.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Ugg, sounds like I'm going to have to dance on one foot, sing the Star Spangled banner backwards and then name all the episodes of "Friends" before I'm going to get any access of the PA for the US Air Force with whom I just spoke to <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Anyone know anyone of use?

 

[thermionic]

I get a bit of a thrill from the idea that there might be secret projects like x-33 going on. Maybe there really is a nuclear levitation flying disk program at Area 51!

 

[grooble]

Im sure things like the B2 and F22 are obsolete compared to the craft they have in secret

 

[nacnud]

I am not all that inpressed with the X-33, cool technology but it seems overly complex. <br /><br />Resurect the DC-X, now your talking!

 

[jurgens]

Wow, that would be awesome if they get the VentureStar program back on Track...<br /><br />Anyone have any more info on what Venture Star was supposed to be capable of?<br /><br />Anvel, the problem with the shuttle is that it costs way too much to refurbish.

 

[elguapoguano]

I was under the impression that the aluminum tanks on the Venture Star would have still been too heavy reducing the payload to orbit significantly. <br /><br />IHMO a two stage fully reusable system would be the best both economicaly and within the contraints of current technology.<br /><br />All in all the Venture Star makes a pretty drawing, but as pointed out it is pretty much limited to delivering payloads to LEO. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#ff0000"><u><em>Don't let your sig line incite a gay thread ;>)</em></u></font> </div>

 

[jurgens]

VentureStar would have the same payload weight as the Space Shuttle...<br /><br />And a Single Stage to Orbit is going to be much cheaper then a system where you have to keep on building components that you jettison.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Vastly cheaper too. 10 per cent of what it costs a customer for the Shuttle to take it uphill for you.<br /><br />Turnaround time/processing - massive reduction.<br /><br />People on the ground, less than needed for a Delta launch (don't quote me on that, but apparently so).

 

[jurgens]

yeah definetly, the thing is basically a giant fuel tank with an aerospike engine and a payload bay anyways =)<br /><br />If the air force revives the venture star project, that will imo be amazing. Just imagine The venture star would most likely be capable of perform a round trip moon--earth trip from one tank of lunar made rocket fuel! Not to mention it has deorbit capabilities, so if a mining industry does ever start up in space, Venturestar based heavy cargo derivatives could bring all the goods/materials down to earth.

 

[najab]

><i>It'd be nice if something came from all those billions spent.</i><p>Going from memory here, but I think that total spending on X-33 was about 1.3 billion.</p>

 

[najab]

><i>Vastly cheaper too. 10 per cent of what it costs a customer for the Shuttle to take it uphill for you.<br /><br />Turnaround time/processing - massive reduction.<br /><br />People on the ground, less than needed for a Delta launch</i><p>That's exactly what they said about the Shuttle, compared to the expendables at the time.</p>

 

[jurgens]

and the shuttle probablly would have had low turn around times too, if they had gotten the money they needed for the shuttle in the beginning.

 

[mattblack]

I sincerely doubt that Venturestar would be back in the running, despite it's cool shape and aerospike engines. To coin a phrase; "that Venturestar is SOOOO 1990's!!!"<br /><br />A spaceplane would be a very poor CEV and could not be used beyond earth orbit, so therefore what's the point? Lifting Bodies and wings are useless beyond earth orbit.<br /><br />Developing a special spaceplane to only visit the I.S.S? That'd be a big waste of money. No, Nasa needs to leave 'spaceplanes' to private industry and get on with modular and capsule-like technology to carry out it's exploration agenda. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[flynn]

If Venturestar does have a future it probably is in unmanned Satelite launching and retrieval, I guess there will be a lot of number crunching going on at Lockheed before they commit to anything.<br /><br />In the mean time just to get X-33 off the ground and proove the aerospike engines and automatic landing capabilities would be pretty cool. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[SpaceKiwi]

SRTF seems to think the renewed interest is independent of LockMart's CEV proposals, though you do wonder if they think there are CEV-applicable technologies in the X-33 program that are prompting them to dust things off.<br /><br />Perhaps even the whole Spaceship One/Virgin Galactic thing is making them have a re-think too? I guess the VentureStar would be overkill in that respect but the space vehicle landscape does seem to be at an important crossroads, and especially fluid at the moment. Perhaps LockMart have decided to bring all the old and unfinished toys back to the table, and just see what they have of potential use?<br /><br />Regardless, it's prompted me to climb under my desk and recover the Matchbox VentureStar model which fell off the monitor a few months back. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[flynn]

Matchbox Venture Star model, I gotta get myself one of those. <br /><br />[edit] I found this one.<br /><br />http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=419&item=6528894263&rd=1&ssPageName=WD2V<br /><br />Cool, but will girlfriend tell me off for spend the money on non-baby related goods? Can I pass it off as a Baby toy? Hmmm <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>