A kerosene-fueled X-33 as a single stage to orbit vehicle.
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Everything has its own Aether
Next: Fine Particle Physics and the Mathison-Trenite Life Energy Fluctuation Meter (LEF Meter) PART FOUR - {FPP 20090913-draft-V1.0-p4}
From: Robert Clark on 9 Dec 2009 04:06 On Dec 8, 9:50 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 28, 11:24 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > ... > > > Now this British company claims their patented process allows > > composite construction both for the chassis frame and the body panels > > at low cost for a passenger car to be introduced next year: > > > Axon announces affordable, 100mpg, carbon-composite passenger car. > > "Axon has gone simply for an uncomplicated 500cc engine in a low- > > weight body, which replaces the traditional heavy steel or aluminium > > frame with recycled carbon fibre composites - as strong as steel but > > only around 40% as heavy. Extensive use of carbon materials through > > Axons cars makes a massive impact on the power-to-weight ratio, > > meaning they can get acceptable overall performance using a much > > smaller, lighter and more frugal engine. > > "The lightness and strength of carbon fibre have been well-known for > > decades - its been cost thats prevented this wonder-material from > > popping up all over the automotive world, restricting it to top-end > > specials and aftermarket goodies. But its here that Axon claim to > > have made a breakthrough."http://www.transport20.com/uncategorized/axon-announces-affordable-10... > > > Because of the rate at which the costs of carbon composite production > > is decreasing, I argue the production cost for a reusable SSTO using > > carbon composite construction, because the lighter weight in materials > > required, will soon be comparable to that of an expendable rocket > > using standard, heavy construction materials. And it is already now > > economically feasible due to lower per use costs of a reusable > > vehicle. > > Video of SpaceShipTwo assembly, showing the all-composite > construction, including the structural members: > > SpaceShipTwo Assembly.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8XaJbwwT68 > At the beginning they are also moving around the engine which also looks to be composite. The *overwhelmingly* key question about the possibility of a reusable SSTO is whether or not it could be made light enough. I'm arguing it can be if made of all composite construction. This video gives further support of that argument. Bob Clark
From: Pat Flannery on 9 Dec 2009 12:08 Robert Clark wrote: > At the beginning they are also moving around the engine which also > looks to be composite. The *overwhelmingly* key question about the > possibility of a reusable SSTO is whether or not it could be made > light enough. Although it could be made of some sort of RCC with a composite outer shell, it might also be have a thin heat resistant metal internal liner with carbon composite wrapping around it to take the pressure of the combustion within it. If it was all composite, its inner surface could probably get damaged from the heat of the combustion process, meaning it would only be usable for one flight. Note that it it is heavy enough that they have to push it around on a cart rather than carrying it, and that it takes some effort to move it around, even on the cart. From the amount of pushing they are doing, it looks like it weighs between 500-1,000 pounds. The composite crew/passenger compartment halves do look very light for their size though compared to metal ones, as does the rest of the structure. It would be interesting to know how many man-hours went into making the parts and assembling them. Pat
From: Greg D. Moore (Strider) on 9 Dec 2009 14:04 Not that I doubt a reusable SSTO is possible, I'm not really sure how an air-launched (which basically makes it 2 stages) suborbital craft further that argument at all. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:04d09b77-e0ad-47cb-990b-2d26c1d6e512(a)p35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... At the beginning they are also moving around the engine which also looks to be composite. The *overwhelmingly* key question about the possibility of a reusable SSTO is whether or not it could be made light enough. I'm arguing it can be if made of all composite construction. This video gives further support of that argument. Bob Clark
From: Robert Clark on 19 Dec 2009 19:35 On Dec 9, 4:06 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Dec 8, 9:50 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Nov 28, 11:24 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Now this British company claims their patented process allows > > > composite construction both for the chassis frame and the body panels > > > at low cost for a passenger car to be introduced next year: > > > > Axon announces affordable, 100mpg, carbon-composite passenger car. > > > "Axon has gone simply for an uncomplicated 500cc engine in a low- > > > weight body, which replaces the traditional heavy steel or aluminium > > > frame with recycled carbon fibre composites - as strong as steel but > > > only around 40% as heavy. Extensive use of carbon materials through > > > Axons cars makes a massive impact on the power-to-weight ratio, > > > meaning they can get acceptable overall performance using a much > > > smaller, lighter and more frugal engine. > > > "The lightness and strength of carbon fibre have been well-known for > > > decades - its been cost thats prevented this wonder-material from > > > popping up all over the automotive world, restricting it to top-end > > > specials and aftermarket goodies. But its here that Axon claim to > > > have made a breakthrough."http://www.transport20.com/uncategorized/axon-announces-affordable-10... > > > > Because of the rate at which the costs of carbon composite production > > > is decreasing, I argue the production cost for a reusable SSTO using > > > carbon composite construction, because the lighter weight in materials > > > required, will soon be comparable to that of an expendable rocket > > > using standard, heavy construction materials. And it is already now > > > economically feasible due to lower per use costs of a reusable > > > vehicle. > > > Video of SpaceShipTwo assembly, showing the all-composite > > construction, including the structural members: > > > SpaceShipTwo Assembly.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8XaJbwwT68 > > At the beginning they are also moving around the engine which also > looks to be composite. The *overwhelmingly* key question about the > possibility of a reusable SSTO is whether or not it could be made > light enough. I'm arguing it can be if made of all composite > construction. This video gives further support of that argument. > The Air Force is researching reusable hydrocarbon-fueled first stage boosters to be used with expendable upper stages to cut the costs to space by 50%: USAF Seeks Reusable Booster Ideas. May 14, 2009 By Graham Warwick "AFRL's reference concept includes an integral all-composite airframe and tank structure that carries both internal pressure and external flight loads. The concept vehicle is powered by pump-fed liquid-oxygen/ hydrocarbon rocket engines." http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/Reuse051409.xml This article discusses wind tunnel tests of a scale-model of such a booster: AEDC team conducts first test on a reusable space plane. Posted 12/16/2009 Updated 12/16/2009 http://www.arnold.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123182588 It is interesting they are proposing an all-composite construction including propellant tanks for this reusable hydrocarbon-fueled first stage booster. As I have argued, an all-composite, hydrocarbon-fueled design would allow even a reusable single-stage-to-orbit vehicle. Bob Clark
From: BradGuth on 20 Dec 2009 20:34
Why not stick with H2O2 and propargyl alcohol, or H2O2 and cyclopropane? ~ BG |