X-37 revived again?

[jschaef5]

Looks like the air force is pushing forward with the X-37 vehicle. Seems like something NASA should never have given up on. I seem to see a growing trend with the airforce picking up on old NASA projects that get cancled due to budget issues and having to fund the shuttle/"a replacement" for the shuttle.<br /><br /><br />http://www.space.com/news/061117_x27b_otv.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

"I seem to see a growing trend with the airforce picking up on old NASA projects that get cancled due to budget issues and having to fund the shuttle/"a replacement" for the shuttle. "<br /><br />Maybe.<br /><br />Recall that the exciting DOD 'hybrid launch vehicle' project was cancelled shortly after it was first announced!<br /><br />For those of you who aren't familiar, the HLV was a project seemingly aimed at the basic EELV mission, spysats to LEO. The basic design was a reusable 1st stage winged flyback booster, vertically launched and horizontal landing, combined with an expendable solid propellant 2nd stage.

 

[earth_bound_misfit]

"We need a thumb's up emote..."<br /><br />I agree!<br />Good news this, hopefully the AF can follow it right through. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>

 

[propforce]

<font color="yellow">Recall that the exciting DOD 'hybrid launch vehicle' project was cancelled shortly after it was first announced! </font><br /><br /><br />Ironically the initial Air Force's HLV program was also called "ARES" (Advanced REusable Space launch) <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[propforce]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Looks like the air force is pushing forward with the X-37 vehicle. Seems like something NASA should never have given up on. I seem to see a growing trend with the airforce picking up on old NASA projects that get cancled due to budget issues and having to fund the shuttle/"a replacement" for the shuttle. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Actually in this case, it was NASA that picked up the originally Air Force's concept, the X-37, and is now giving back to the Air Force <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />NASA needs all the money it can get as they're teaching the MSFC boys on how to design a launch vehicle. They need a lot of money set aside to fund many "experimental" flight test vehicles. Last I've heard, they tried to called Werner Von Braun from beyond to ask about some rocket design how-to's. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

"Ironically the initial Air Force's HLV program was also called "ARES" (Advanced REusable Space launch)"<br /><br />That's funny.<br /><br />No doubt the 'HLV' acronym caused confusion too since it's the same acronym as the one used for a Heavy Launch Vehicle! I ran into this problem when I tried google to find the story about the HLV cancellation and kept running into stories about heavy lift vehicles. You don't by chance have a handy reference do you? I would really like to provide a link to that story.

 

[christine16]

where can we see new pictures of it?

 

[serak_the_preparer]

<i>Last I've heard, they tried to called Werner Von Braun from beyond to ask about some rocket design how-to's. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /></i><br /><br />Did Werner answer with something to the effect of, 'Advice, what advice do you need? You transferred the technology to NASA so they could work on it for awhile using their budget, you let them take it only so far and no farther, then you took it back? Sounds like you know what you are doing!'?<br /><br />Though I jest, this is a rumor I picked up somewhere: that the tech transfer was strictly so NASA could do some of the legwork for the Air Force - Goldin, black world projects, etc. Bordering on conspiracy theory territory, I realize, but I don't think it's totally out of bounds either. I notice you wrote, 'NASA...picked up the originally Air Force's concept, the X-37, and is now giving back to the Air Force,' and followed it with a <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />. Are the two of us anywhere near the same page?<br /><br />So who do you think will see more success with their respective vehicles? USAF or NASA?<br /><br />However all that may be, though, it will be good to know that all that work, money, time and talent was not wasted, after all. Go, Air Force!

 

[baktothemoon]

X-37, which one was that again? Was that the space station lifeboat, SSTO shuttle replacement, or what?

 

[lampblack]

Google is your friend. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-37 <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

I think the planform of the X-37 is very interesting.<br /><br />Very unlike the large double-delta wing and single stabilizer of the Space Shuttle, the X-37 has a small central wing and a butterfly twin-tail. The aerodynamic heritage of the X-37 is closer to the X-15 than the Shuttle.<br /><br />Subsonic handling and landing performance of the X-37 should be superior to the Shuttle. Hypersonic reentry crossrange of the X-37 should be inferior to the Shuttle, but so what. I wonder what Faget who's original shuttle design used a small straight wing instead of a delta wing would have to say?

 

[scottb50]

The only problem is it wouldn't fit on any existing or proposed launcher even at it's current size and configuration. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[docm]

Before SpaceDev took on the HL-20 design for Dream Chaser their site showed it as an X-37 sidesaddle on a triple hybrid, not unlike their current renderings;<br /><br />http://www.spacedev.com/newsite/images/dc1.jpg <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

"The only problem is it [X-37?] wouldn't fit on any existing or proposed launcher even at it's current size and configuration."<br /><br />Well that must be an awful shock to the USAF since they plan to send it up via an Atlas V.<br /><br />"The first orbital test flight of the OTV is planned for fiscal year 2008, with a launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on an Atlas V launch vehicle."<br /><br />http://www.space.com/news/061117_x27b_otv.html<br /><br />Funny how the dimensions of the X-37 easily fit within the 5m payload fairing of an Atlas V.<br /><br />Specifications (Boeing X-37)<br /><br />* Length: 27 ft 6 in (8.38 m)<br />* Wingspan: 15 ft 0 in (4.57 m)<br />* Height: ft in ( m)<br />* Wing area: ft©˜ ( m©˜)<br />* Empty: lb ( kg)<br />* Loaded: 12,000 lb (5,450 kg)<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-37#Specifications_.28Boeing_X-37.29<br />  <br /><br /><br />

 

[propforce]

<font color="yellow">You don't by chance have a handy reference do you? I would really like to provide a link to that story. </font><br /><br />Hi G&R,<br /><br />I'll see if I can get you a link on Monday.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[propforce]

<font color="yellow">Are the two of us anywhere near the same page? </font><br /><br />Your "rumor" source is very good <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />But I can't neither confirm nor deny anything close to black. You know, once you go black.... <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[propforce]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>So who do you think will see more success with their respective vehicles? USAF or NASA? <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />USAF guys are clearly much more pleasant to work for, as oppose to the NASA guys. USAF is more "mission driven", e.g., as long as you get your jobs done, they'll respect you and leave you alone to do your job. This as oppose to NASA guys' "hey I don't understand why you do things this way... can you write me a memo and teach... ummm... explain in details how do you derive this equation?" "Yes Sir, Mr. NASA. May I suggest the book by Sutton called "Rocket Propulsion Element" (an undergraduate textbook) ?"<br /><br />NASA programs takes at least 3X as long and 10x MORE expensive then USAF programs, for obvious reasons.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[propforce]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p> (... Scottb50...) "The only problem is it [X-37?] wouldn't fit on any existing or proposed launcher even at it's current size and configuration." <br /><br />Well that must be an awful shock to the USAF since they plan to send it up via an Atlas V. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[halman]

gunsandrockets,<br /><br />What would be the total liftoff weight of the X-37 and the Atlas V? Is this an orbital insertion mission, or a suborbital? If the X-37 were to be scaled up to be a manned vehicle, how much would it weigh empty?<br /><br />I am just curious, and it is a lot easier to ask on this forum than to try to dig up all these answers on my own. (Yeah, I am lazy, I know. But it boosts my post count, don'tcha know?)<br /><br />Thanks! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[gunsandrockets]

"No, the Orbiter delta wing gives a better cross range."<br /><br />Well, duh! That is EXACTLY what I already said! Reread my sentence. The very sentence you quoted me on. Sheesh!

 

[gunsandrockets]

"I am just curious, and it is a lot easier to ask on this forum than to try to dig up all these answers on my own. (Yeah, I am lazy, I know. But it boosts my post count, don'tcha know?)"<br /><br />Dude. There's lazy and then there is lazy! Some of your questions are already answered by posts in this thread or links in this thread.<br /><br /><br />"If the X-37 were to be scaled up to be a manned vehicle, how much would it weigh empty?"<br /><br />Yikes. Too many conditions apply to provide an answer. What is your manned X-37 supposed to do? Is it a manned orbiter? Is it a manned 1st stage flyback vehicle? How many crew? How much cargo (if any)? All these questions must be answered first.<br /><br />If a manned vehicle based on the X-37 was made the equivalent to the old X-20 Dynasoar, a one man orbital spacecraft, it's possible it wouldn't be any larger than the existing X-37. <br /><br />Keep in mind the current X-37 weighs 50% more than the old Gemini spacecraft. <br /><br />

 

[kane007]

Like this!

 

[CalliArcale]

There's no such bird as a manned X-37. It would be a fundamentally different vehicle then. The whole point of X-37 is to be able to do its work autonomously -- hopefully getting the benefits of a Shuttle-like system without the enormous cost of a manned space program.<br /><br />This isn't an X-37 revival. It's just the next step in a program that's actually been ticking along pretty well. They've been doing drop tests using Scaled's lovely White Knight. I know a guy who was lucky enough to witness some of those tests. I have made sure he knows just how jealous I am. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[propforce]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>They've been doing drop tests using Scaled's lovely White Knight. I know a guy who was lucky enough to witness some of those tests. I have made sure he knows just how jealous I am. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />You should. Afterall, one of your boxes is onboard the ALTV <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

Yup. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> That was of course what my buddy was working on. It's apparently in a very hard-to-reach spot. But it meant he got to climb around underneath White Knight, so he certainly didn't mind the awkwardness. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>