From Wikipedia:
Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from X-20 Dyna-Soar)
X-20 Dyna-Soar
Artist's impression of the X-20 during re-entry
Country
United States
Contract award
24 October 1957 – 10 December 1963
Status
Canceled just after spacecraft construction had begun
First flight
Not built
proposed for 1 January 1966
Last flight
multi-orbit, crew of 1
proposed for 1 March 1968
Number of missions
10 missions planned
The X-20 Dyna-Soar ("Dynamic Soarer") was a United States Air Force (USAF) program to develop a spaceplane that could be used for a variety of military missions, including reconnaissance, bombing, space rescue, satellite maintenance, and sabotage of enemy satellites. The program ran from 24 October 1957 to 10 December 1963, cost US$660 million ($4.73 billion today[1]), and was cancelled just after spacecraft construction had begun.
Other spacecraft under development at the time, such as Mercury or Vostok, were based on space capsules which returned on ballistic re-entry profiles. Dyna-Soar was much more like the much later Space Shuttle; it could not only be boosted and travel to distant targets at the speed of an intercontinental ballistic missile, it was designed to glide to earth like an airplane under the control of the pilot. It could land at an airfield, rather than simply falling to earth and landing with a parachute. Dyna-Soar could also reach earth orbit, like Mercury or Gemini.[2]
These characteristics made Dyna-Soar far more advanced in concept than the other human spaceflight missions of the period. The much larger Shuttle would also be boosted into orbit by large rockets for launch, and the final design would also pick delta wings for controlled landings, but it (and the Soviet Buran) would not fly until decades after the X-20 cancellation.
Background
Artist's impression of the X-20 after test flight
The development of Dyna Soar can be traced back to Eugen Sänger's Silbervogel, a German bomber project of World War II.[3] The concept was to create a rocket-powered bomber that could travel vast distances by gliding to its target after being boosted to high speed (>5.5 km/s) and high altitude (50–150 km) by A-4 or A-9 rocket engines.[3]
Essentially, these rocket engines would place the vehicle onto an exoatmospheric intercontinental ballistic missile-like trajectory and then fall away. However, when the vehicle reentered the atmosphere, instead of fully reentering, bleeding off its speed and landing, the vehicle would use its wings and some of its speed to generate lift and bounce the vehicle back into space again. This would repeat until the speed was low enough that the pilot of the vehicle would need to pick a landing spot and glide the vehicle to a landing. This use of hypersonic atmospheric lift meant that the vehicle could greatly extend its range over a ballistic trajectory using the same engines.[3]
Such boost-glide systems could potentially strike at targets anywhere in the world (so called "antipodal bombers") at hypersonic speeds, be very difficult to intercept, and the aircraft itself could be small and lightly armed, compared to a typical heavy bomber. In addition, a boost-glide aircraft may be recoverable, acting as a manned bomber, or as an unmanned non-recoverable missile.
Following World War II, many German scientists were taken to the United States by the Office of Strategic Services's "Operation Paperclip". Among them was Dr. Walter Dornberger, the former head of Germany's wartime rocket program, who had detailed knowledge of the Silbervogel project. [4]Working for Bell, he attempted to create interest in a boost-glide system in the USAF, and elsewhere. This resulted in the USAF requesting a number of feasibility and design studies — carried out by Bell, Boeing, Convair, Douglas, Martin, North American, Republic, and Lockheed — for boost-glide vehicles during the early 1950s:
Bomi (bomber missile);
Hywards (HYpersonic Weapons Research and Development Supporting system);
The Brass Bell reconnaissance vehicle; and
Rocket Bomber "Robo".[5]
Development
Boeing mock-up of X-20 Dyna-Soar
On 24 October 1957, the USAF Air Research and Development Command issued a proposal for a "Hypersonic Glide Rocket Weapon System" (Weapons System 464L): Dyna Soar. The proposal drew together the existing boost-glide proposals, as the USAF believed a single vehicle could be designed to carry out all the bombing and reconnaissance tasks intended for the separate studies, and act as successor to the X-15 research program. The Dyna-Soar program was to be conducted in three stages: a research vehicle (Dyna-Soar I), a reconnaissance vehicle (Dyna-Soar II, previously Brass Bell), and a vehicle that would add strategic bombing capability (Dyna-Soar III, previously Robo). The first glide tests for Dyna-Soar I were expected to be carried out in 1963, followed by powered flights, reaching Mach 18, the following year. A robotic glide missile was to be deployed in 1968, with the fully operational weapons system (Dyna-Soar III) expected to be deployed by 1974.
In March 1958, nine U.S. aerospace companies tendered for the Dyna-Soar contract. Of these, the field was narrowed to proposals from Bell and Boeing. Even though Bell had the advantage of six years' worth of design studies, the contract for the spaceplane was awarded to Boeing in June 1959 (by which time their original design had changed markedly and now closely resembled what Bell had submitted). In late 1961, the Titan III was eventually finalized as the launch vehicle. The Dyna-Soar was to be launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.
An artist's impression of Dyna-Soar being launched using a Titan booster.
In April 1960, seven astronauts were secretly chosen for the Dyna-Soar program. Neil Armstrong and Bill Dana left the program in the summer of 1962. On 19 September 1962, Albert Crews was added to the Dyna-Soar program and the names of the six Dyna-Soar astronauts were announced to the public:
Neil Armstrong (NASA) 1960–1962
Albert H. Crews, Jr. (Air Force) 1962–1963
Bill Dana (NASA) 1960–1962
Henry C. Gordon (Air Force) 1960–63
Pete Knight (Air Force) 1960–1963
Russell L. Rogers (Air Force) 1960–1963
Milt Thompson (NASA) 1960–1963
James W. Wood (Air Force) 1960–1963
By the end of 1962, Dyna-Soar had been designated "X-20", the booster (to be used in the Dyna Soar I drop-tests) successfully fired, and the USAF had held an "unveiling" ceremony for the X-20 in Las Vegas.[citation needed]
Problems
Besides the funding issues that often accompany research efforts, the Dyna-Soar program suffered from two major problems: uncertainty over the booster to be used to send the craft into orbit, and a lack of a clear goal for the project.
Many different boosters were proposed to launch Dyna-Soar into orbit. The original USAF proposal suggested LOX/JP-4, fluorine-ammonia, fluorine-hydrazine, or RMI (X-15) engines. Boeing, the principal contractor, favored an Atlas-Centaur combination, but eventually the Air Force stipulated a Titan, as suggested by failed competitor Martin. However, the Titan I would not be powerful enough to launch the five-ton X-20 into orbit.
The Titan II and Titan III boosters could launch Dyna-Soar into Earth orbit, as could the Saturn C-1 (later renamed the Saturn I), and all were proposed with various upper-stage and booster combinations. While the Titan IIIC was eventually chosen to send Dyna-Soar into space, the vacillations over the launch system delayed the project as it complicated planning.
The original intention for Dyna-Soar, outlined in the Weapons System 464L proposal, called for a project combining aeronautical research with weapons system development. Many questioned whether the USAF should have a manned space program, when that was the primary domain of NASA. However, it was frequently emphasized by the Air Force that, unlike the NASA programs, Dyna-Soar allowed for controlled re-entry, and this was where the main effort in the X-20 program was placed. On 19 January 1963 the Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, directed the Air Force to undertake a study to determine whether Gemini or Dyna-Soar was the more feasible approach to a space-based weapon system. In the middle of March 1963, after receiving the study, Secretary McNamara "stated that the Air Force had been placing too much emphasis on controlled re-entry when it did not have any real objectives for orbital flight".[6] This was seen as a reversal of the Secretary's earlier position on the Dyna-Soar program. Dyna-Soar was also an expensive program that would not launch a manned mission until the mid-1960s at the earliest. This high cost and questionable usefulness made it hard for the Air Force to justify the program. Eventually, the X-20 Dyna-Soar program was canceled on 10 December 1963.[citation needed]
On the day that X-20 was canceled, the Air Force announced another program, the Manned Orbiting Laboratory, a spin-off of Gemini, but this program was also eventually canceled.
Another black program ISINGLASS which was to be airlaunched from a B-52 bomber was evaluated, and some engine work was done, however this eventually was cancelled also.[7]
Description
Artist's impression of the X-20 on landing approach at Edwards Air Force Base
The overall design of the X-20 Dyna-Soar was outlined in March 1960. It had a low-wing delta shape, with winglets for control rather than a more conventional tail. The framework of the craft was to be made from the René 41 "super alloy", as were the upper surface panels. The bottom surface was to be made from molybdenum sheets placed over insulated René 41, while the nose-cone was to be made from graphite with zirconia rods.
Due to the changing requirements, various forms of the Dyna-Soar were designed, but all variants shared the same basic shape and layout. A single pilot sat at the front, while an equipment bay was situated behind. This bay contained either data-collection equipment, weapons, reconnaissance equipment, or (in the X-20X "shuttle space vehicle") a four-man mid-deck.
After the equipment bay was the transition-stage rocket engine, which was used to maneuver the craft in orbit or fired during launch as part of an abort. This trans-stage would be jettisoned before descent into the atmosphere. While falling through the atmosphere an opaque heat shield would protect the window at the front of the craft. This heat shield would then be jettisoned after aerobraking so the pilot could see, and safely land.
A drawing in Space/Aeronautics magazine from before the project's cancellation depicts the craft dipping down into the atmosphere, skimming the surface, to change its orbital inclination. It would then fire its rocket to resume orbit. This would be a unique ability for a spacecraft, for the laws of celestial mechanics mean it requires an enormous expenditure of energy for a rocket to change its orbital inclination once it has reached orbit. Hence the Dyna-Soar could have had a military capacity of being launched into one orbit and rendezvousing with a satellite, even if the target were to expend all its propellant in changing its orbit. Acceleration forces on the pilot, however, would be severe in such a maneuver.
Unlike the later Space Shuttle, Dyna-Soar did not have wheels on its undercarriage as it was thought the rubber would burn during re-entry. Instead Goodyear developed retractable wire-brush skis made of the same René 41 alloy as the airframe.
Specifications (as designed)
General characteristics
Crew: one pilot
Length: 35 ft 4 in (10.77 m)
Wingspan: 20 ft 10 in (6.34 m)
Height: 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m)
Wing area: 345 ft² (32 m²)
Empty weight: 10,395 lb (4,715 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 11,387 lb (5,165 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Martin Trans-stage rocket engine, 72,000 lbf (323 kN)
Performance
Maximum speed: 17,500 mph (28,165 km/h)
Range: earth orbit 22,000 nautical miles, (40,700 km)
Service ceiling: 530,000 ft (160 km)
Rate of climb: 100,000 ft/min (510 m/s)
Wing loading: 33 lb/ft² (161 kg/m²)
Related development
X-15
Manned Orbital Laboratory
Comparable aircraft
Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-105
BOR-4
Space Shuttle
Shuttle Buran
Hermes
EADS Phoenix
USAF Blackstar (spaceplane) — a rumored development of the DynaSoar
ASSET — a subscale reentry test vehicle designed to verify the superalloy heatshield of the DynaSoar.
Boeing X-37
[edit] References
Notes
1.^ Consumer Price Index (estimate) 1800–2008. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Retrieved December 7, 2010.
2.^ "History: X-20 Dyna-Soar Space Vehicle." Boeing. Retrieved: 24 September 2010.
3.^ a b c Duffy 2004, p. 124.
4.^ Dornberger 1956, pp. 19–37.
5.^ Neufeld 1995, pp. 19, 33, 55.
6.^ Geiger 1963, pp. 349–405.
7.^ "The U-2's intended successor: Project OXCART, 1956-1968." Central Intelligence Agency,31 December 1968, p. 49. Retrieved: 10 August 2010.
Bibliography
Air Force Systems Command. "Structure Description Report". Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System, 1961. pp. 145–189.
Caidin, Martin. Wings into Space: The History and Future of Winged Space Flight. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., 1964.
Dornberger, Walter R. "The Rocket-Propelled Commercial Airliner". Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System, Research Report No 135.. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Institute of Technology, 1956.
Duffy, James P. Target: America, Hitler's Plan to Attack the United States. Santa Barbara, California: Praeger, 2004. ISBN 0-275-96684-4.
Geiger, Clarence J. History of the X-20A Dyna-Soar. Vol. 1: AFSC Historical Publications Series 63-50-I, Document ID ASD-TR-63-50-I. Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio: Aeronautical Systems Division Information Office, 1963.
Godwin, Robert, ed. Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System. Burlington, ON: Apogee Books, 2003. ISBN 1-896522-95-5.
Houchin, Roy. U.S. Hypersonic Research and Development: The Rise and Fall of Dyna-Soar, 1944–1963. New York: Routledge, 2006. ISBN 0-415-36281-4.
Neufeld, Michael J. The Rocket and the Reich: Peenemünde and the Coming of the Ballistic Missile Era. New York: The Free Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0674776500.
Strathy, Charlton G. (1957). "Weapon System 464L Abbreviated Development Plan". Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System, pp. 38–75.
********************************************************
ASSET, or Aerothermodynamic Elastic Structural Systems Environmental Tests was an experimental US space project involving the testing of an unmanned sub-scale reentry vehicle.
Development and Testing
Begun in 1960, ASSET was originally designed to verify the superalloy heat shield of the X-20 Dyna-Soar prior to full-scale manned flights. The vehicle's biconic shape and low delta wing were intended to represent Dyna-Soar's forward nose section, where the aerodynamic heating would be the most intense; in excess of an estimated 4,000 °F at the nose cap. Following the X-20 program's cancellation in December 1963, completed ASSET vehicles were used in reentry heating and structural investigations with hopes that data gathered would be useful for the development of future space vehicles, such as the Space Shuttle.[citation needed]
Built by McDonnell, each vehicle was launched on a suborbital trajectory from Cape Canaveral's Pad 17B at speeds of up to 6,000 m/s before making a water landing in the South Atlantic near Ascension Island. Originally, a Scout launch vehicle had been planned for the tests, but this was changed after a large surplus of Thor and Thor-Delta missiles (returned from deployment in the United Kingdom) became available.[citation needed]
Of the six vehicles built, only one was successfully recovered and is currently on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.
Flights
Mission
Launch Date
Apogee
Max. Speed
Result
Disposition
ASSET 1
September 18, 1963
62 km
4,906 m/s
Survived reentry; floatation equipment malfunctioned, preventing planned recovery.
Sunk in Atlantic.
ASSET 2
March 24, 1964
55 km
Launch vehicle upper stage malfunction; vehicle self-destruct mechanism activated post-separation. Mission failed.
Destroyed.
ASSET 3
July 22, 1964
71 km
5,500 m/s
Survived reentry; all mission goals met.
Recovered 12 hours after launch. Preserved.
ASSET 4
October 28, 1964
50 km
4,000 m/s
Survived reentry; all mission goals met; recovery not planned.
Sunk in Atlantic.
ASSET 5
December 9, 1964
53 km
4,000 m/s
Survived reentry; all mission goals met; recovery not planned.
Sunk in Atlantic.
ASSET 6
February 23, 1965
70 km
6,000 m/s
Survived reentry; floatation equipment malfunctioned, preventing planned recovery.
Sunk in Atlantic.
Specifications
ASSET 3-view
This aircraft article is missing some (or all) of its specifications. If you have a source, you can help Wikipedia by adding them.
General characteristics
Crew: None
Length: 5.74 ft (1.75 m)
Wingspan: 4.57 ft (1.39 m)
Height: 2.73 ft (0.83 m)
Loaded weight: 1,190 lb (540 kg)
Powerplant: × Hydrogen-peroxide reaction control thrusters
Performance
Maximum speed: Mach 25
Range: 2,700 miles (4345.2288 km)
Service ceiling: 50 miles (80.4672 km)
Hypersonic L/D Ratio: 1:1
Related content
Comparable Aircraft
Molniya BOR-4
Martin-Marietta X-23 PRIME
Winged Gemini
In the mid-1960s, McDonnell proposed a variant of the Gemini capsule which retained the original spacecraft's internal subsystems and crew compartment, but dispensed with the tail-first ballistic reentry, parachute recovery and water landing.
Instead, the vehicle would be heavily modified externally into an ASSET-like lifting-reentry configuration. Post-reentry, a pair of stowed swing-wings would be deployed, giving the spacecraft sufficient L/D to make a piloted glide landing on a concrete runway using a skid-type landing gear (reinstated from the planned, but cancelled paraglider landing system), much like today's Space Shuttle.
According to Mark Wade's Encyclopedia Astronautica, the intent seems to have been to field a manned military spaceplane at a minimal cost following the cancellation of the Dyna-Soar program.
ASSET mounted on a Thor launcher
********************************************************
Winged Gemini
From astronautix.com:
American manned spaceplane. Study 1966. Winged Gemini was the most radical modification of the basic Gemini reentry module ever considered.
Drawing on the results of the ASSET subscale winged reentry vehicle program, McDonnell proposed a version of the spacecraft using the same internal systems but capable of a piloted runway landing. It seems the design may have also been part of a covert Air Force program to field a military manned spacecraft at minimum cost.
The spacecraft was designed for launch by the standard Titan 2 Gemini Launch Vehicle. Unlike the ballistic Gemini, winged Gemini was not designed to maneuver in orbit (launch on a Titan 3A or 3C with a transtage would be required for that capability). Separation from the launch vehicle was made by 2 x 260 kgf solid motors; attitude control in orbit was provided by 8 x 45 kgf bipropellant thrusters at the base of the vehicle; retrofire was initiated by 5 x 1165 kgf solid rocket motors.
Giuseppe De Chiara points out:
...recently I was involved in a cycle of lectures, concerning manned spacecraft configuration, at the Aerospace Engineering Dept. of the University of Naples..analyzing Gemini family.I found that the drawing of the Winged Gemini in your page (credited Glen Swanson) is completely wrong. This drawing is clearly taken by the Flight Manual of the Gemini .and modified with the addition of a mid-line sleek triangular wing and "subsystem interconnection" (??!!) on the bottom.
As you said Winged Gemini was derived from the experience gained by the ASSET programme. If you analyze the ASSET drawings you will find a bi-conic re-entry spacecraft with a low cranked arrow wing. Interestingly if scale-up the ASSET layout drawings you will match exactly Winged Gemini configuration (as portrayed in the other drawings).
These considerations put a new light on the ASSET (AEV and ASV) programme - it seems clear that ASSET was never a subscale model of the X 20. In fact, there are a lot of configurational differences between the two vehicles, the former being a bi-conic shape with a very reduced wing without a vertical stabilizer, the latter was a "classic" hypersonic >75° degree delta wing with . two huge vertical stabilizers. It's also clear that the performances of the two vehicles (especially re-entry footprint crossrange) were completely different.
This leads (me) to think that ASSET could be a completely different spacecraft configuration later adopted by the hybrid Gemini capsule to increase its re-entry performance. The whole project was managed by Mc Donnell, which built both vehicles, under the cover of USAF funds (I always wondered why, if ASSET was a subscale model of X-20, why was it built by Mc Donnell, and not by Boeing, as prime contractor of the Dyna Soar project......?).
Following this train of thought it seems that the USAF (after cancellation of the X 20), continued to seek to have a small, and even cheaper, spaceplane obtained by the merging of the ASSET configuration and a Gemini spaceframe. Such a vehicle could be launched by a Titan II directly from a ICBM silo at Vandenberg AFB, in space interception mission with a highly secret profile.
Another strange element of Winged Gemini is its connection with the Icarus manned spacecraft portrayed in the 1969 film Planet of the Apes. Art Director William Creber has said that the design was a melding of Winged Gemini and DynaSoar - "it was what NASA was doing at the time". But the Winged Gemini configuration did not surface to public view, so far as was known, until it was publicized on this web site in 1998. Did Weber have contacts in the Air Force or aerospace industry who passed him artist's concepts of the concept? The Icarus was immensely sleeker than the Winged Gemini design (and more reminiscent of the bogus NASA drawing). It was striking, memorable, and has drawn a cult following over the years (as attested by the web sites in the references below).
Characteristics
Crew Size: 2. Habitable Volume: 2.55 m3. Spacecraft delta v: 100 m/s (320 ft/sec).
Gross mass: 3,200 kg (7,000 lb).
Unfuelled mass: 3,075 kg (6,779 lb).
Height: 4.47 m (14.66 ft).
Span: 3.81 m (12.49 ft).
Thrust: 57.13 kN (12,844 lbf).
Specific impulse: 255 s.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Countries •USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also •Gemini The Gusmobile could have conquered space - faster, better cheaper. An endless number of Gemini derivatives would have performed tasks in earth orbit, and flown around and landed on the moon. Could the US have won the moon and space station races at a fraction of the expense? Browse through the many might-have-been Geminis! More...
•Low earth orbit
•Manned
•Spaceplane
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Launch Vehicles •Titan American orbital launch vehicle. The Titan launch vehicle family was developed by the United States Air Force to meet its medium lift requirements in the 1960's. The designs finally put into production were derived from the Titan II ICBM. Titan outlived the competing NASA Saturn I launch vehicle and the Space Shuttle for military launches. It was finally replaced by the USAF's EELV boosters, the Atlas V and Delta IV. Although conceived as a low-cost, quick-reaction system, Titan was not successful as a commercial launch vehicle. Air Force requirements growth over the years drove its costs up - the Ariane using similar technology provided lower-cost access to space. More...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Manufacturers and Agencies •NASA American agency overseeing development of rockets and spacecraft. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, USA, USA. More...
•McDonnell American manufacturer of spacecraft. McDonnell, St Louis, USA. More...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Propellants •Solid Solid rocket propellants differ from liquid propellants in that the oxidiser and fuel are embedded or bound together in a solid compound that is cast into the rocket motor casing. They began with black powder rockets in medieval times, progressed through double base propellants in the early 1900's, and finally achieved high performance as composite propellants from the 1940's. Composite motors were developed to a high degree of perfection in the United States in the 1950's and 1960's. In Russia, due to a lack of technical leadership and rail handling problems, serious use of composite propellants did not begin until the 1960's, and then primarily for military rockets. More...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliography
•Advanced Gemini Spacecraft, Briefing, McDonnell Douglas, ca. 1967. •Broad, Phil, Planet of the Apes and its Spaceship, Web Address when accessed: http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/ApesShip/PofA01.html.
•Broad, Phil, Last Flight of the Icarus, Web Address when accessed: http://www.goingfaster.com/icarus/index2.html.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini Images
Icarus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Top view of Winged Gemini, the most radical modification proposed. Drawing on the results of the ASSET subscale winged re-entry vehicle program, McDonnell proposed a version of the spacecraft using the same internal systems but capable of a piloted runway landing. The spacecraft was designed for launch by the standard Titan 2 Gemini Launch Vehicle.
Credit: McDonnell Douglas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Rear view of Winged Gemini, the most radical modification proposed. The Gemini propulsion systems contained in the basic Gemini retrograde and equipment modules would be repackaged within the jettisonable adapter section of the spacecraft. Five instead of four re-entry rockets were required for retrofire due to the increased mass of the return vehicle. Swing wings would be deployed after re-entry to allow for a runway landing.
Credit: McDonnell Douglas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Side view of the Winged Gemini.
Credit: McDonnell Douglas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Drawing uncovered by Glen Swanson at NASA in 2000. It is substantially different from the configuration portrayed in NASA documents of the 1960's. Was this part of a cover-up of the true configuration of the spacecraft? Or a 1990's hoax?
Credit: Glen Swanson
Spacecraft: Winged Gemini.
The most radical modification of the basic Gemini reentry module ever proposed. Drawing on the results of the ASSET subscale winged reentry vehicle program, McDonnell proposed a version of the spacecraft using the same internal systems but capable of a piloted runway landing. The spacecraft was designed for launch by the standard Titan 2 Gemini Launch Vehicle. Unlike the ballistic Gemini, winged Gemini was not designed to maneuver in orbit (launch on a Titan 3A or 3C with a transtage would be required for that capability). Separation from the launch vehicle was made by 2 x 260 kgf solid motors; attitude control in orbit was provided by 8 x 45 kgf bipropellant thrusters at the base of the vehicle; retrofire was initiated by 5 x 1165 kgf solid rocket motors.
********************************************************
Boeing X-37
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
X-37
X-37B being prepared for launch
Role
Spaceplane
National origin
United States
Manufacturer
Boeing
First flight
7 April 2006 (drop test);
22 April – 3 December 2010 (first spaceflight)
Status
Development and testing, one spaceflight completed
Primary users
NASA/DARPA (X-37A)
USAF (X-37B)
Number built
2
Developed from
Boeing X-40
The Boeing X-37 (also known as the Orbital Test Vehicle) is an American unmanned vertical-takeoff, horizontal-landing (VTHL) spaceplane. The X-37 is operated by the United States Air Force for orbital spaceflight missions intended to demonstrate reusable space technologies.[1] It is a reusable robotic spaceplane that is a 120% scaled derivative of the X-40A.
The X-37 began as a NASA project in 1999, then was transferred to the U.S. Department of Defense in 2004. It had its first flight as a drop test on 7 April 2006, at Edwards Air Force Base. The spaceplane's first orbital mission, USA-212 was launched on 22 April 2010 using an Atlas V rocket. Its return to Earth on 3 December 2010 was the first test of the vehicle's heat shield and hypersonic aerodynamic handling. A second X-37B was launched on 5 March 2011 with the mission designation USA-226.
Development
In 1999 NASA selected Boeing Integrated Defense Systems to design and develop the vehicle, built by the California branch of Boeing's Phantom Works. Over a four-year period NASA contributed $109 million, the US Air Force $16 million, and Boeing $67 million to the project. In late 2002 a new $301 million contract was awarded to Boeing in the framework of NASA's Space Launch Initiative.[2]
The X-37 was transferred from NASA to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) on 13 September 2004.[3] The program has become a classified project, although it is not known whether DARPA will maintain this status for the project. NASA's spaceflight program may be centered around the Crew Exploration Vehicle, while DARPA will promote the X-37 as part of the independent space policy that the US Department of Defense has pursued since the Challenger disaster.
The X-37 was originally designed to be carried into orbit in the Space Shuttle cargo bay, but underwent redesign for launch on a Delta IV or comparable rocket after it was determined that a shuttle flight would be uneconomical.[4] The X-37's aerodynamic design was derived from the Space Shuttle, hence the X-37 has a similar lift-to-drag ratio, and a lower cross range at high altitudes and Mach numbers than DARPA's Hypersonic Technology Vehicle.[5]
As part of its Space Support mission goals, X-37 was designed to rendezvous with friendly satellites to refuel them, or to replace failed solar arrays using a robotic arm. Its payload could also support Space Control (Defensive Counter-Space, Offensive Counter-Space), Force Enhancement and Force Application.[6] An early requirement for the spacecraft called for a delta-v of 7,000 mph (3.1 km/s) to change its orbit.[7]
Glide tests
The vehicle that was used as an atmospheric drop test glider had no propulsion system. Instead of an operational vehicle's payload bay doors it had an enclosed and reinforced upper fuselage structure to allow it to be mated with a mothership. In September 2004 DARPA announced that for its initial atmospheric drop tests the X-37 would be launched from the Scaled Composites White Knight, a high-altitude research aircraft.[8]
On 21 June 2005 the X-37 completed a captive-carry flight underneath the White Knight from Mojave Spaceport, Mojave, California.[9] Through the second half of 2005, the X-37 underwent structural upgrades including reinforcement of the nose wheel supports. Further captive-carry flight tests and the first drop test were expected mid-February 2006. The X-37's public debut was scheduled for its first free flight on 10 March 2006, but was canceled due to an Arctic storm.[10] The next attempt at flight on 15 March 2006 was canceled due to high winds.[10]
On 24 March 2006, the X-37 flew, but a data link failure prevented the free flight and the vehicle returned to the ground still attached to its White Knight carrier. On 7 April 2006, the X-37 made its first free glide flight. During landing, the vehicle overran the runway and it sustained minor damage.[11]
Following an extended downtime while the vehicle was repaired, the program moved from Mojave to Air Force Plant 42 (KPMD) in Palmdale, California for the remainder of the flight test program. White Knight continued to be based at Mojave, but would ferry over to Plant 42 when flights were scheduled. Five additional flights were performed,[12] two of which resulted in X-37 releases with successful landings. These free flights occurred on 18 August 2006 and 26 September 2006.[13]
X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle
X-37 spacecraft, artist's rendering from 1999
On 17 November 2006 the U.S. Air Force announced it would develop the X-37B from the NASA X-37A. The Air Force version is designated X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV). The OTV program builds on industry and government investments by DARPA, NASA and the Air Force. The X-37B effort will be led by the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, and includes partnerships with NASA and the Air Force Research Laboratory. Boeing is the prime contractor for the OTV program.[14][15][16] The X-37B can remain in orbit for up to 270 days at a time.[17]
The Secretary of the Air Force states the OTV program will focus on "risk reduction, experimentation, and operational concept development for reusable space vehicle technologies, in support of long-term developmental space objectives."[14]
The X-37B was originally scheduled for launch in the payload bay of the Space Shuttle, but following the Columbia accident, it was transferred to a Delta II 7920. It was subsequently transferred to a shrouded configuration on the Atlas V following concerns over the unshrouded spacecraft's aerodynamic properties during launch.[18] Following their missions, X-37B spacecraft are to land on a runway at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, with Edwards Air Force Base as an alternate site.[19][20]
Manufacturing on the second X-37B, OTV-2 was underway in 2010;[21] it was completed and was first launched in March 2011.[22]
Design
The X-37 Orbital Test Vehicle is a reusable robotic spaceplane. It is a derivative of X-40 and 120% larger. The OTV has a length of over 29 feet (8.8 m) and features two angled tail fins.[23]
The X-37 is expected to operate in a velocity range of up to Mach 25 on reentry. Among the technologies to be demonstrated with the X-37 are improved thermal protection systems, avionics, the autonomous guidance system and an advanced airframe.[4] The vehicle is powered by a Rocketdyne AR2-3 engine.[24] The AR2-3 was the human-rated rocket powerplant for the dual-power NF-104A astronaut training vehicle and was given a new flight certification for use on the X-37 with hydrogen peroxide/JP-8 propellants.[25] The X-37B now uses a hydrazine monopropellant rocket.[26]
The X-37 has a payload bay available for experiments and other space payloads. It features thermal protection systems that are improved from previous generations of spacecraft.[6] The thermal protection system uses improved silica ceramic tiles.[26]
Operational history
OTV-1 sits on the runway at Vandenberg AFB after landing
The first orbital flight of OTV-1, the first X-37B, with a mission name of USA-212, was launched on an Atlas V rocket at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida on 22 April 2010, at 23:58 GMT. The spacecraft was placed into low Earth orbit for testing.[15]
While the U.S. Air Force revealed few orbital details after the first X-37B was successfully placed in orbit due to the secretive nature of the mission, amateur astronomers claimed to have identified the experimental spacecraft in orbit and shared their findings. A worldwide network of amateur astronomers reported that on 22 May it was in an inclination of 39.99 degrees, circling the Earth once every 90 minutes in an orbit 249 by 262 miles (401 by 422 km).[27][28] The amateur sky watchers reported the spacecraft's track went over North Korea, Afghanistan, and other trouble spots. They reported that the spacecraft passed over the same given spot on Earth every four days, and operated at an altitude of 255 miles (410 km), which is typical for a military surveillance satellite.[29]
Personnel inspect OTV-1, the first X-37B, after its return
The U.S. Air Force announced on 30 November 2010 that the X-37 would return for a landing during the 3–6 December timeframe.[30][31] As scheduled, OTV-1 de-orbited, reentered Earth's atmosphere, and landed at Vandenberg AFB on 3 December 2010, at 1:16 PST (09:16 UTC).[32][33][34] The X-37B had a tire blowout during landing and sustained minor damage to its underside.[21]
A second X-37B mission, designated USA-226,[35] was launched aboard an Atlas V rocket, on 5 March 2011.[36] The mission was classified and described by the US military as to test out new space technologies.[37]
[edit] Controversy
In April 2010, the China Daily newspaper wrote that the X-37B program raised concerns about an arms race in space.[38] The Xinhua News Agency took a more moderate tone in questioning if the secretive program might lead to weapons in space.[39] Tom Burghardt wrote for Spacedaily.com that the X-37B could be used as a spy satellite or to deliver weapons from space.[40] The Pentagon has denied claims that the X-37B's mission supports the development of space-based weapons.[40]
[edit] Specifications
[edit] X-37B
Data from USAF,[1][6] Boeing,[41] Air & Space Magazine[42] Physorg.com,[43]
General characteristics
Crew: None
Length: 29 ft 3 in (8.9 m)
Wingspan: 14 ft 11 in (4.5 m)
Height: 9 ft 6 in (2.9 m)
Loaded weight: 11,000 lb (4,990 kg)
Power: Gallium arsenide solar cells with lithium-ion batteries[1]
Payload Bay: 7 × 4 ft (2.1 × 1.2 m)[33]
Performance
Orbital speed: 17,500 mph (28,200 km/h)
Orbit: Low Earth orbit
Orbital time: Up to 270 days[44]
[edit] See also
DARPA Falcon Project
Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar - the US Air Force's previous spaceplane, was canceled in the 1960s.
Related development
Boeing X-40
Comparable aircraft
Avatar (rocket)
Orbital Sciences X-34
[edit] References
Notes
1.^ a b c "Factsheet: X-37 Orbital Test Vehicle". US Air Force, 14 April 2010
2.^ "X-37 Technology Demonstrator: Blazing the trail for the next generation of space transportation systems". NASA, September 2003. Retrieved: 23 April 2010.
3.^ Berger, Brian. "NASA Transfers X-37 Project to DARPA". Space.com, 15 September 2004.
4.^ a b Yenne 2005, p. 277.
5.^ "Air Force Bloggers Roundtable: Air Force set to launch first X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle". Department of Defense, 20 April 2010. Retrieved: 23 April 2010.
6.^ a b c Jameson, Major Austin D., USAF. "X-37 Space Vehicle: Starting a New Age in Space Control?" dtic.mil, April 2001.
7.^ "X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle". everything2.com. Retrieved: 8 December 2010.
8.^ Berger, Brian. "DARPA takes on space plane project". MSNBC, 16 September 2004.
9.^ David, Leonard. "White Knight carries X-37 aloft". CNN, 23 May 2005
10.^ a b "Mojave web log entries". mojaveweblog.com 23 April 2010. Retrieved: 4 June 2006.
11.^ David, Leonard. "X-37 Flies At Mojave But Encounters Landing Problems". Space.com, 7 April 2006.
12.^ Source of flights: mission markings posted on side of White Knight
13.^ "X-37 Test Flight B-Roll (No Audio)". US Air Force via YouTube.com, 22 April 2010.
14.^ a b David, Leonard. "U.S. Air Force Pushes For Orbital Test Vehicle." Space.com, 17 November 2006. Retrieved: 17 November 2006.
15.^ a b Clark, Stephen. "Atlas rocket delivers Air Force spaceplane to orbit". Spaceflight Now, 22 April 2010.
16.^ Clark, Stephen. "Air Force spaceplane is an odd bird with a twisted past". Spaceflight Now, 2 April 2010. Retrieved: 3 April 2010.
17.^ Clark, Stephen. "Air Force X-37B spaceplane arrives in Florida for launch". Spaceflight Now, 25 February 2010. Retrieved: 3 March 2010.
18.^ Krebs, Gunter. "X-37B". Gunter's Space Page. Retrieved: 5 August 2008.
19.^ Covault, Craig. "USAF To Launch First Spaceplane Demonstrator". Aviation Week and Space Technology, 3 August 2008.
20.^ "Unmanned US spacecraft returns after 7-month trip". Associated Press story via Yahoo News, 3 December 2010.
21.^ a b Norris, Guy. "Second X-37B Prepared For Launch". Aviation Week, 7 December 2010.
22.^ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1363673/Second-secret-space-shuttle-blasts-orbit--does-actually-there.html
23.^ Miller 2001, p. 377.
24.^ "Boeing X-37 Technology Demonstrator, USA". airforce-technology.com. Retrieved: 6 December 2010.
25.^ Hebert, Bartt. "Peroxide (H2O2) Test Programs, AR2-3 Flight Certification". SDC Operations, NASA Engineering and Test Directorate, 24 July 2009.
26.^ a b "Mr. Gary Payton, Under Secretary of the Air Force for Space Programs, Media Teleconference (Pentagon), X-37B Launch". Defense.gov, 20 April 2010. Retrieved: 3 December 2010.
27.^ David, Leonard. "Secret X-37B Space Plane Spotted by Amateur Skywatchers". space.com, 22 May 2010.
28.^ "Amateur astronomers unravel X37-B orbit, say likely use for deploying spy satellites". news.com.au, 24 May 2010.
29.^ "Surveillance Is Suspected as Spacecraft’s Main Role". New York Times on-line, 21 May 2010. Retrieved: 22 May 2010.
30.^ "Preparations underway for first landing of X-37B". U.S. Air Force, 30 November 2010
31.^ "USAF X-37B Landing Slated for Dec. 3-6". Aviation Week, 30 November 2010. Retrieved: 1 December 2010.
32.^ Clark, Stephen. "Home again: U.S. military space plane returns to Earth". Spaceflight Now, 3 December 2010. Retrieved: 3 December 2010.
33.^ a b "X-37B Completes 220-Day Mission". Aviation Week, 6 December 2010. Retrieved: 7 December 2010.
34.^ "X-37B US military spaceplane returns to Earth". BBC, 3 December 2010. Retrieved: 3 December 2010.
35.^ http://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=37375
36.^ LA Times (retrieved 5 March 2011)
37.^ Wall, Mike, "Secretive X-37B Space Plane Launches on New Mystery Mission", Yahoo! News, 5 March 2011; retrieved 7 March 2011.
38.^ Dingding, Xin. "US spacecraft sparks arms race concerns". China Daily, 24 April 2010. Retrieved: 15 July 2010
39.^ Xiang, Zhang. "U.S. military launches unmanned 'space plane'." Xinhua News Agency, 23 April 2010. Retrieved: 15 July 2010.
40.^ a b "The Militarization of Outer Space: The Pentagon's Space Warriors". Spacedaily.com, 11 May 2010.
41.^ "X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle". Boeing. Retrieved: 6 December 2010
42.^ Klesius, Michael. "Space Shuttle Jr." Air & Space Magazine, 1 January 2010.
43.^ Antczak, John for Associated Press. "Air Force to launch robotic winged space plane". Physorg.com, 3 April 2010.
44.^ Evans, Michael. "Launch of secret US space ship masks even more secret launch of new weapon". The Times, 24 April 2010. Retrieved: 25 April 2010.
Bibliography
Bentley, Matthew A. Spaceplanes: From Airport to Spaceport. New York: Springer, 2008. ISBN 978-0-387-76509-9.
Gump, David P. Space Enterprise: Beyond NASA. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1989. ISBN 978-0-275-93314-2.
Miller, Jay. The X-Planes: X-1 to X-45. Hinckley, UK: Midland, 2001. ISBN 1-85780-109-1.
Yenne, Bill. The Story of the Boeing Company. Minneapolis, MN: Zenith Press, 2005. ISBN 978-0-7603-2333-5.
Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from X-20 Dyna-Soar)
X-20 Dyna-Soar
Artist's impression of the X-20 during re-entry
Country
United States
Contract award
24 October 1957 – 10 December 1963
Status
Canceled just after spacecraft construction had begun
First flight
Not built
proposed for 1 January 1966
Last flight
multi-orbit, crew of 1
proposed for 1 March 1968
Number of missions
10 missions planned
The X-20 Dyna-Soar ("Dynamic Soarer") was a United States Air Force (USAF) program to develop a spaceplane that could be used for a variety of military missions, including reconnaissance, bombing, space rescue, satellite maintenance, and sabotage of enemy satellites. The program ran from 24 October 1957 to 10 December 1963, cost US$660 million ($4.73 billion today[1]), and was cancelled just after spacecraft construction had begun.
Other spacecraft under development at the time, such as Mercury or Vostok, were based on space capsules which returned on ballistic re-entry profiles. Dyna-Soar was much more like the much later Space Shuttle; it could not only be boosted and travel to distant targets at the speed of an intercontinental ballistic missile, it was designed to glide to earth like an airplane under the control of the pilot. It could land at an airfield, rather than simply falling to earth and landing with a parachute. Dyna-Soar could also reach earth orbit, like Mercury or Gemini.[2]
These characteristics made Dyna-Soar far more advanced in concept than the other human spaceflight missions of the period. The much larger Shuttle would also be boosted into orbit by large rockets for launch, and the final design would also pick delta wings for controlled landings, but it (and the Soviet Buran) would not fly until decades after the X-20 cancellation.
Background
Artist's impression of the X-20 after test flight
The development of Dyna Soar can be traced back to Eugen Sänger's Silbervogel, a German bomber project of World War II.[3] The concept was to create a rocket-powered bomber that could travel vast distances by gliding to its target after being boosted to high speed (>5.5 km/s) and high altitude (50–150 km) by A-4 or A-9 rocket engines.[3]
Essentially, these rocket engines would place the vehicle onto an exoatmospheric intercontinental ballistic missile-like trajectory and then fall away. However, when the vehicle reentered the atmosphere, instead of fully reentering, bleeding off its speed and landing, the vehicle would use its wings and some of its speed to generate lift and bounce the vehicle back into space again. This would repeat until the speed was low enough that the pilot of the vehicle would need to pick a landing spot and glide the vehicle to a landing. This use of hypersonic atmospheric lift meant that the vehicle could greatly extend its range over a ballistic trajectory using the same engines.[3]
Such boost-glide systems could potentially strike at targets anywhere in the world (so called "antipodal bombers") at hypersonic speeds, be very difficult to intercept, and the aircraft itself could be small and lightly armed, compared to a typical heavy bomber. In addition, a boost-glide aircraft may be recoverable, acting as a manned bomber, or as an unmanned non-recoverable missile.
Following World War II, many German scientists were taken to the United States by the Office of Strategic Services's "Operation Paperclip". Among them was Dr. Walter Dornberger, the former head of Germany's wartime rocket program, who had detailed knowledge of the Silbervogel project. [4]Working for Bell, he attempted to create interest in a boost-glide system in the USAF, and elsewhere. This resulted in the USAF requesting a number of feasibility and design studies — carried out by Bell, Boeing, Convair, Douglas, Martin, North American, Republic, and Lockheed — for boost-glide vehicles during the early 1950s:
Bomi (bomber missile);
Hywards (HYpersonic Weapons Research and Development Supporting system);
The Brass Bell reconnaissance vehicle; and
Rocket Bomber "Robo".[5]
Development
Boeing mock-up of X-20 Dyna-Soar
On 24 October 1957, the USAF Air Research and Development Command issued a proposal for a "Hypersonic Glide Rocket Weapon System" (Weapons System 464L): Dyna Soar. The proposal drew together the existing boost-glide proposals, as the USAF believed a single vehicle could be designed to carry out all the bombing and reconnaissance tasks intended for the separate studies, and act as successor to the X-15 research program. The Dyna-Soar program was to be conducted in three stages: a research vehicle (Dyna-Soar I), a reconnaissance vehicle (Dyna-Soar II, previously Brass Bell), and a vehicle that would add strategic bombing capability (Dyna-Soar III, previously Robo). The first glide tests for Dyna-Soar I were expected to be carried out in 1963, followed by powered flights, reaching Mach 18, the following year. A robotic glide missile was to be deployed in 1968, with the fully operational weapons system (Dyna-Soar III) expected to be deployed by 1974.
In March 1958, nine U.S. aerospace companies tendered for the Dyna-Soar contract. Of these, the field was narrowed to proposals from Bell and Boeing. Even though Bell had the advantage of six years' worth of design studies, the contract for the spaceplane was awarded to Boeing in June 1959 (by which time their original design had changed markedly and now closely resembled what Bell had submitted). In late 1961, the Titan III was eventually finalized as the launch vehicle. The Dyna-Soar was to be launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.
An artist's impression of Dyna-Soar being launched using a Titan booster.
In April 1960, seven astronauts were secretly chosen for the Dyna-Soar program. Neil Armstrong and Bill Dana left the program in the summer of 1962. On 19 September 1962, Albert Crews was added to the Dyna-Soar program and the names of the six Dyna-Soar astronauts were announced to the public:
Neil Armstrong (NASA) 1960–1962
Albert H. Crews, Jr. (Air Force) 1962–1963
Bill Dana (NASA) 1960–1962
Henry C. Gordon (Air Force) 1960–63
Pete Knight (Air Force) 1960–1963
Russell L. Rogers (Air Force) 1960–1963
Milt Thompson (NASA) 1960–1963
James W. Wood (Air Force) 1960–1963
By the end of 1962, Dyna-Soar had been designated "X-20", the booster (to be used in the Dyna Soar I drop-tests) successfully fired, and the USAF had held an "unveiling" ceremony for the X-20 in Las Vegas.[citation needed]
Problems
Besides the funding issues that often accompany research efforts, the Dyna-Soar program suffered from two major problems: uncertainty over the booster to be used to send the craft into orbit, and a lack of a clear goal for the project.
Many different boosters were proposed to launch Dyna-Soar into orbit. The original USAF proposal suggested LOX/JP-4, fluorine-ammonia, fluorine-hydrazine, or RMI (X-15) engines. Boeing, the principal contractor, favored an Atlas-Centaur combination, but eventually the Air Force stipulated a Titan, as suggested by failed competitor Martin. However, the Titan I would not be powerful enough to launch the five-ton X-20 into orbit.
The Titan II and Titan III boosters could launch Dyna-Soar into Earth orbit, as could the Saturn C-1 (later renamed the Saturn I), and all were proposed with various upper-stage and booster combinations. While the Titan IIIC was eventually chosen to send Dyna-Soar into space, the vacillations over the launch system delayed the project as it complicated planning.
The original intention for Dyna-Soar, outlined in the Weapons System 464L proposal, called for a project combining aeronautical research with weapons system development. Many questioned whether the USAF should have a manned space program, when that was the primary domain of NASA. However, it was frequently emphasized by the Air Force that, unlike the NASA programs, Dyna-Soar allowed for controlled re-entry, and this was where the main effort in the X-20 program was placed. On 19 January 1963 the Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, directed the Air Force to undertake a study to determine whether Gemini or Dyna-Soar was the more feasible approach to a space-based weapon system. In the middle of March 1963, after receiving the study, Secretary McNamara "stated that the Air Force had been placing too much emphasis on controlled re-entry when it did not have any real objectives for orbital flight".[6] This was seen as a reversal of the Secretary's earlier position on the Dyna-Soar program. Dyna-Soar was also an expensive program that would not launch a manned mission until the mid-1960s at the earliest. This high cost and questionable usefulness made it hard for the Air Force to justify the program. Eventually, the X-20 Dyna-Soar program was canceled on 10 December 1963.[citation needed]
On the day that X-20 was canceled, the Air Force announced another program, the Manned Orbiting Laboratory, a spin-off of Gemini, but this program was also eventually canceled.
Another black program ISINGLASS which was to be airlaunched from a B-52 bomber was evaluated, and some engine work was done, however this eventually was cancelled also.[7]
Description
Artist's impression of the X-20 on landing approach at Edwards Air Force Base
The overall design of the X-20 Dyna-Soar was outlined in March 1960. It had a low-wing delta shape, with winglets for control rather than a more conventional tail. The framework of the craft was to be made from the René 41 "super alloy", as were the upper surface panels. The bottom surface was to be made from molybdenum sheets placed over insulated René 41, while the nose-cone was to be made from graphite with zirconia rods.
Due to the changing requirements, various forms of the Dyna-Soar were designed, but all variants shared the same basic shape and layout. A single pilot sat at the front, while an equipment bay was situated behind. This bay contained either data-collection equipment, weapons, reconnaissance equipment, or (in the X-20X "shuttle space vehicle") a four-man mid-deck.
After the equipment bay was the transition-stage rocket engine, which was used to maneuver the craft in orbit or fired during launch as part of an abort. This trans-stage would be jettisoned before descent into the atmosphere. While falling through the atmosphere an opaque heat shield would protect the window at the front of the craft. This heat shield would then be jettisoned after aerobraking so the pilot could see, and safely land.
A drawing in Space/Aeronautics magazine from before the project's cancellation depicts the craft dipping down into the atmosphere, skimming the surface, to change its orbital inclination. It would then fire its rocket to resume orbit. This would be a unique ability for a spacecraft, for the laws of celestial mechanics mean it requires an enormous expenditure of energy for a rocket to change its orbital inclination once it has reached orbit. Hence the Dyna-Soar could have had a military capacity of being launched into one orbit and rendezvousing with a satellite, even if the target were to expend all its propellant in changing its orbit. Acceleration forces on the pilot, however, would be severe in such a maneuver.
Unlike the later Space Shuttle, Dyna-Soar did not have wheels on its undercarriage as it was thought the rubber would burn during re-entry. Instead Goodyear developed retractable wire-brush skis made of the same René 41 alloy as the airframe.
Specifications (as designed)
General characteristics
Crew: one pilot
Length: 35 ft 4 in (10.77 m)
Wingspan: 20 ft 10 in (6.34 m)
Height: 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m)
Wing area: 345 ft² (32 m²)
Empty weight: 10,395 lb (4,715 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 11,387 lb (5,165 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Martin Trans-stage rocket engine, 72,000 lbf (323 kN)
Performance
Maximum speed: 17,500 mph (28,165 km/h)
Range: earth orbit 22,000 nautical miles, (40,700 km)
Service ceiling: 530,000 ft (160 km)
Rate of climb: 100,000 ft/min (510 m/s)
Wing loading: 33 lb/ft² (161 kg/m²)
Related development
X-15
Manned Orbital Laboratory
Comparable aircraft
Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-105
BOR-4
Space Shuttle
Shuttle Buran
Hermes
EADS Phoenix
USAF Blackstar (spaceplane) — a rumored development of the DynaSoar
ASSET — a subscale reentry test vehicle designed to verify the superalloy heatshield of the DynaSoar.
Boeing X-37
[edit] References
Notes
1.^ Consumer Price Index (estimate) 1800–2008. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Retrieved December 7, 2010.
2.^ "History: X-20 Dyna-Soar Space Vehicle." Boeing. Retrieved: 24 September 2010.
3.^ a b c Duffy 2004, p. 124.
4.^ Dornberger 1956, pp. 19–37.
5.^ Neufeld 1995, pp. 19, 33, 55.
6.^ Geiger 1963, pp. 349–405.
7.^ "The U-2's intended successor: Project OXCART, 1956-1968." Central Intelligence Agency,31 December 1968, p. 49. Retrieved: 10 August 2010.
Bibliography
Air Force Systems Command. "Structure Description Report". Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System, 1961. pp. 145–189.
Caidin, Martin. Wings into Space: The History and Future of Winged Space Flight. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., 1964.
Dornberger, Walter R. "The Rocket-Propelled Commercial Airliner". Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System, Research Report No 135.. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Institute of Technology, 1956.
Duffy, James P. Target: America, Hitler's Plan to Attack the United States. Santa Barbara, California: Praeger, 2004. ISBN 0-275-96684-4.
Geiger, Clarence J. History of the X-20A Dyna-Soar. Vol. 1: AFSC Historical Publications Series 63-50-I, Document ID ASD-TR-63-50-I. Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio: Aeronautical Systems Division Information Office, 1963.
Godwin, Robert, ed. Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System. Burlington, ON: Apogee Books, 2003. ISBN 1-896522-95-5.
Houchin, Roy. U.S. Hypersonic Research and Development: The Rise and Fall of Dyna-Soar, 1944–1963. New York: Routledge, 2006. ISBN 0-415-36281-4.
Neufeld, Michael J. The Rocket and the Reich: Peenemünde and the Coming of the Ballistic Missile Era. New York: The Free Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0674776500.
Strathy, Charlton G. (1957). "Weapon System 464L Abbreviated Development Plan". Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System, pp. 38–75.
********************************************************
ASSET, or Aerothermodynamic Elastic Structural Systems Environmental Tests was an experimental US space project involving the testing of an unmanned sub-scale reentry vehicle.
Development and Testing
Begun in 1960, ASSET was originally designed to verify the superalloy heat shield of the X-20 Dyna-Soar prior to full-scale manned flights. The vehicle's biconic shape and low delta wing were intended to represent Dyna-Soar's forward nose section, where the aerodynamic heating would be the most intense; in excess of an estimated 4,000 °F at the nose cap. Following the X-20 program's cancellation in December 1963, completed ASSET vehicles were used in reentry heating and structural investigations with hopes that data gathered would be useful for the development of future space vehicles, such as the Space Shuttle.[citation needed]
Built by McDonnell, each vehicle was launched on a suborbital trajectory from Cape Canaveral's Pad 17B at speeds of up to 6,000 m/s before making a water landing in the South Atlantic near Ascension Island. Originally, a Scout launch vehicle had been planned for the tests, but this was changed after a large surplus of Thor and Thor-Delta missiles (returned from deployment in the United Kingdom) became available.[citation needed]
Of the six vehicles built, only one was successfully recovered and is currently on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.
Flights
Mission
Launch Date
Apogee
Max. Speed
Result
Disposition
ASSET 1
September 18, 1963
62 km
4,906 m/s
Survived reentry; floatation equipment malfunctioned, preventing planned recovery.
Sunk in Atlantic.
ASSET 2
March 24, 1964
55 km
Launch vehicle upper stage malfunction; vehicle self-destruct mechanism activated post-separation. Mission failed.
Destroyed.
ASSET 3
July 22, 1964
71 km
5,500 m/s
Survived reentry; all mission goals met.
Recovered 12 hours after launch. Preserved.
ASSET 4
October 28, 1964
50 km
4,000 m/s
Survived reentry; all mission goals met; recovery not planned.
Sunk in Atlantic.
ASSET 5
December 9, 1964
53 km
4,000 m/s
Survived reentry; all mission goals met; recovery not planned.
Sunk in Atlantic.
ASSET 6
February 23, 1965
70 km
6,000 m/s
Survived reentry; floatation equipment malfunctioned, preventing planned recovery.
Sunk in Atlantic.
Specifications
ASSET 3-view
This aircraft article is missing some (or all) of its specifications. If you have a source, you can help Wikipedia by adding them.
General characteristics
Crew: None
Length: 5.74 ft (1.75 m)
Wingspan: 4.57 ft (1.39 m)
Height: 2.73 ft (0.83 m)
Loaded weight: 1,190 lb (540 kg)
Powerplant: × Hydrogen-peroxide reaction control thrusters
Performance
Maximum speed: Mach 25
Range: 2,700 miles (4345.2288 km)
Service ceiling: 50 miles (80.4672 km)
Hypersonic L/D Ratio: 1:1
Related content
Comparable Aircraft
Molniya BOR-4
Martin-Marietta X-23 PRIME
Winged Gemini
In the mid-1960s, McDonnell proposed a variant of the Gemini capsule which retained the original spacecraft's internal subsystems and crew compartment, but dispensed with the tail-first ballistic reentry, parachute recovery and water landing.
Instead, the vehicle would be heavily modified externally into an ASSET-like lifting-reentry configuration. Post-reentry, a pair of stowed swing-wings would be deployed, giving the spacecraft sufficient L/D to make a piloted glide landing on a concrete runway using a skid-type landing gear (reinstated from the planned, but cancelled paraglider landing system), much like today's Space Shuttle.
According to Mark Wade's Encyclopedia Astronautica, the intent seems to have been to field a manned military spaceplane at a minimal cost following the cancellation of the Dyna-Soar program.
ASSET mounted on a Thor launcher
********************************************************
Winged Gemini
From astronautix.com:
American manned spaceplane. Study 1966. Winged Gemini was the most radical modification of the basic Gemini reentry module ever considered.
Drawing on the results of the ASSET subscale winged reentry vehicle program, McDonnell proposed a version of the spacecraft using the same internal systems but capable of a piloted runway landing. It seems the design may have also been part of a covert Air Force program to field a military manned spacecraft at minimum cost.
The spacecraft was designed for launch by the standard Titan 2 Gemini Launch Vehicle. Unlike the ballistic Gemini, winged Gemini was not designed to maneuver in orbit (launch on a Titan 3A or 3C with a transtage would be required for that capability). Separation from the launch vehicle was made by 2 x 260 kgf solid motors; attitude control in orbit was provided by 8 x 45 kgf bipropellant thrusters at the base of the vehicle; retrofire was initiated by 5 x 1165 kgf solid rocket motors.
Giuseppe De Chiara points out:
...recently I was involved in a cycle of lectures, concerning manned spacecraft configuration, at the Aerospace Engineering Dept. of the University of Naples..analyzing Gemini family.I found that the drawing of the Winged Gemini in your page (credited Glen Swanson) is completely wrong. This drawing is clearly taken by the Flight Manual of the Gemini .and modified with the addition of a mid-line sleek triangular wing and "subsystem interconnection" (??!!) on the bottom.
As you said Winged Gemini was derived from the experience gained by the ASSET programme. If you analyze the ASSET drawings you will find a bi-conic re-entry spacecraft with a low cranked arrow wing. Interestingly if scale-up the ASSET layout drawings you will match exactly Winged Gemini configuration (as portrayed in the other drawings).
These considerations put a new light on the ASSET (AEV and ASV) programme - it seems clear that ASSET was never a subscale model of the X 20. In fact, there are a lot of configurational differences between the two vehicles, the former being a bi-conic shape with a very reduced wing without a vertical stabilizer, the latter was a "classic" hypersonic >75° degree delta wing with . two huge vertical stabilizers. It's also clear that the performances of the two vehicles (especially re-entry footprint crossrange) were completely different.
This leads (me) to think that ASSET could be a completely different spacecraft configuration later adopted by the hybrid Gemini capsule to increase its re-entry performance. The whole project was managed by Mc Donnell, which built both vehicles, under the cover of USAF funds (I always wondered why, if ASSET was a subscale model of X-20, why was it built by Mc Donnell, and not by Boeing, as prime contractor of the Dyna Soar project......?).
Following this train of thought it seems that the USAF (after cancellation of the X 20), continued to seek to have a small, and even cheaper, spaceplane obtained by the merging of the ASSET configuration and a Gemini spaceframe. Such a vehicle could be launched by a Titan II directly from a ICBM silo at Vandenberg AFB, in space interception mission with a highly secret profile.
Another strange element of Winged Gemini is its connection with the Icarus manned spacecraft portrayed in the 1969 film Planet of the Apes. Art Director William Creber has said that the design was a melding of Winged Gemini and DynaSoar - "it was what NASA was doing at the time". But the Winged Gemini configuration did not surface to public view, so far as was known, until it was publicized on this web site in 1998. Did Weber have contacts in the Air Force or aerospace industry who passed him artist's concepts of the concept? The Icarus was immensely sleeker than the Winged Gemini design (and more reminiscent of the bogus NASA drawing). It was striking, memorable, and has drawn a cult following over the years (as attested by the web sites in the references below).
Characteristics
Crew Size: 2. Habitable Volume: 2.55 m3. Spacecraft delta v: 100 m/s (320 ft/sec).
Gross mass: 3,200 kg (7,000 lb).
Unfuelled mass: 3,075 kg (6,779 lb).
Height: 4.47 m (14.66 ft).
Span: 3.81 m (12.49 ft).
Thrust: 57.13 kN (12,844 lbf).
Specific impulse: 255 s.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Countries •USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also •Gemini The Gusmobile could have conquered space - faster, better cheaper. An endless number of Gemini derivatives would have performed tasks in earth orbit, and flown around and landed on the moon. Could the US have won the moon and space station races at a fraction of the expense? Browse through the many might-have-been Geminis! More...
•Low earth orbit
•Manned
•Spaceplane
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Launch Vehicles •Titan American orbital launch vehicle. The Titan launch vehicle family was developed by the United States Air Force to meet its medium lift requirements in the 1960's. The designs finally put into production were derived from the Titan II ICBM. Titan outlived the competing NASA Saturn I launch vehicle and the Space Shuttle for military launches. It was finally replaced by the USAF's EELV boosters, the Atlas V and Delta IV. Although conceived as a low-cost, quick-reaction system, Titan was not successful as a commercial launch vehicle. Air Force requirements growth over the years drove its costs up - the Ariane using similar technology provided lower-cost access to space. More...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Manufacturers and Agencies •NASA American agency overseeing development of rockets and spacecraft. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, USA, USA. More...
•McDonnell American manufacturer of spacecraft. McDonnell, St Louis, USA. More...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Propellants •Solid Solid rocket propellants differ from liquid propellants in that the oxidiser and fuel are embedded or bound together in a solid compound that is cast into the rocket motor casing. They began with black powder rockets in medieval times, progressed through double base propellants in the early 1900's, and finally achieved high performance as composite propellants from the 1940's. Composite motors were developed to a high degree of perfection in the United States in the 1950's and 1960's. In Russia, due to a lack of technical leadership and rail handling problems, serious use of composite propellants did not begin until the 1960's, and then primarily for military rockets. More...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliography
•Advanced Gemini Spacecraft, Briefing, McDonnell Douglas, ca. 1967. •Broad, Phil, Planet of the Apes and its Spaceship, Web Address when accessed: http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/ApesShip/PofA01.html.
•Broad, Phil, Last Flight of the Icarus, Web Address when accessed: http://www.goingfaster.com/icarus/index2.html.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini Images
Icarus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Top view of Winged Gemini, the most radical modification proposed. Drawing on the results of the ASSET subscale winged re-entry vehicle program, McDonnell proposed a version of the spacecraft using the same internal systems but capable of a piloted runway landing. The spacecraft was designed for launch by the standard Titan 2 Gemini Launch Vehicle.
Credit: McDonnell Douglas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Rear view of Winged Gemini, the most radical modification proposed. The Gemini propulsion systems contained in the basic Gemini retrograde and equipment modules would be repackaged within the jettisonable adapter section of the spacecraft. Five instead of four re-entry rockets were required for retrofire due to the increased mass of the return vehicle. Swing wings would be deployed after re-entry to allow for a runway landing.
Credit: McDonnell Douglas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Side view of the Winged Gemini.
Credit: McDonnell Douglas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winged Gemini
Drawing uncovered by Glen Swanson at NASA in 2000. It is substantially different from the configuration portrayed in NASA documents of the 1960's. Was this part of a cover-up of the true configuration of the spacecraft? Or a 1990's hoax?
Credit: Glen Swanson
Spacecraft: Winged Gemini.
The most radical modification of the basic Gemini reentry module ever proposed. Drawing on the results of the ASSET subscale winged reentry vehicle program, McDonnell proposed a version of the spacecraft using the same internal systems but capable of a piloted runway landing. The spacecraft was designed for launch by the standard Titan 2 Gemini Launch Vehicle. Unlike the ballistic Gemini, winged Gemini was not designed to maneuver in orbit (launch on a Titan 3A or 3C with a transtage would be required for that capability). Separation from the launch vehicle was made by 2 x 260 kgf solid motors; attitude control in orbit was provided by 8 x 45 kgf bipropellant thrusters at the base of the vehicle; retrofire was initiated by 5 x 1165 kgf solid rocket motors.
********************************************************
Boeing X-37
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
X-37
X-37B being prepared for launch
Role
Spaceplane
National origin
United States
Manufacturer
Boeing
First flight
7 April 2006 (drop test);
22 April – 3 December 2010 (first spaceflight)
Status
Development and testing, one spaceflight completed
Primary users
NASA/DARPA (X-37A)
USAF (X-37B)
Number built
2
Developed from
Boeing X-40
The Boeing X-37 (also known as the Orbital Test Vehicle) is an American unmanned vertical-takeoff, horizontal-landing (VTHL) spaceplane. The X-37 is operated by the United States Air Force for orbital spaceflight missions intended to demonstrate reusable space technologies.[1] It is a reusable robotic spaceplane that is a 120% scaled derivative of the X-40A.
The X-37 began as a NASA project in 1999, then was transferred to the U.S. Department of Defense in 2004. It had its first flight as a drop test on 7 April 2006, at Edwards Air Force Base. The spaceplane's first orbital mission, USA-212 was launched on 22 April 2010 using an Atlas V rocket. Its return to Earth on 3 December 2010 was the first test of the vehicle's heat shield and hypersonic aerodynamic handling. A second X-37B was launched on 5 March 2011 with the mission designation USA-226.
Development
In 1999 NASA selected Boeing Integrated Defense Systems to design and develop the vehicle, built by the California branch of Boeing's Phantom Works. Over a four-year period NASA contributed $109 million, the US Air Force $16 million, and Boeing $67 million to the project. In late 2002 a new $301 million contract was awarded to Boeing in the framework of NASA's Space Launch Initiative.[2]
The X-37 was transferred from NASA to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) on 13 September 2004.[3] The program has become a classified project, although it is not known whether DARPA will maintain this status for the project. NASA's spaceflight program may be centered around the Crew Exploration Vehicle, while DARPA will promote the X-37 as part of the independent space policy that the US Department of Defense has pursued since the Challenger disaster.
The X-37 was originally designed to be carried into orbit in the Space Shuttle cargo bay, but underwent redesign for launch on a Delta IV or comparable rocket after it was determined that a shuttle flight would be uneconomical.[4] The X-37's aerodynamic design was derived from the Space Shuttle, hence the X-37 has a similar lift-to-drag ratio, and a lower cross range at high altitudes and Mach numbers than DARPA's Hypersonic Technology Vehicle.[5]
As part of its Space Support mission goals, X-37 was designed to rendezvous with friendly satellites to refuel them, or to replace failed solar arrays using a robotic arm. Its payload could also support Space Control (Defensive Counter-Space, Offensive Counter-Space), Force Enhancement and Force Application.[6] An early requirement for the spacecraft called for a delta-v of 7,000 mph (3.1 km/s) to change its orbit.[7]
Glide tests
The vehicle that was used as an atmospheric drop test glider had no propulsion system. Instead of an operational vehicle's payload bay doors it had an enclosed and reinforced upper fuselage structure to allow it to be mated with a mothership. In September 2004 DARPA announced that for its initial atmospheric drop tests the X-37 would be launched from the Scaled Composites White Knight, a high-altitude research aircraft.[8]
On 21 June 2005 the X-37 completed a captive-carry flight underneath the White Knight from Mojave Spaceport, Mojave, California.[9] Through the second half of 2005, the X-37 underwent structural upgrades including reinforcement of the nose wheel supports. Further captive-carry flight tests and the first drop test were expected mid-February 2006. The X-37's public debut was scheduled for its first free flight on 10 March 2006, but was canceled due to an Arctic storm.[10] The next attempt at flight on 15 March 2006 was canceled due to high winds.[10]
On 24 March 2006, the X-37 flew, but a data link failure prevented the free flight and the vehicle returned to the ground still attached to its White Knight carrier. On 7 April 2006, the X-37 made its first free glide flight. During landing, the vehicle overran the runway and it sustained minor damage.[11]
Following an extended downtime while the vehicle was repaired, the program moved from Mojave to Air Force Plant 42 (KPMD) in Palmdale, California for the remainder of the flight test program. White Knight continued to be based at Mojave, but would ferry over to Plant 42 when flights were scheduled. Five additional flights were performed,[12] two of which resulted in X-37 releases with successful landings. These free flights occurred on 18 August 2006 and 26 September 2006.[13]
X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle
X-37 spacecraft, artist's rendering from 1999
On 17 November 2006 the U.S. Air Force announced it would develop the X-37B from the NASA X-37A. The Air Force version is designated X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV). The OTV program builds on industry and government investments by DARPA, NASA and the Air Force. The X-37B effort will be led by the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, and includes partnerships with NASA and the Air Force Research Laboratory. Boeing is the prime contractor for the OTV program.[14][15][16] The X-37B can remain in orbit for up to 270 days at a time.[17]
The Secretary of the Air Force states the OTV program will focus on "risk reduction, experimentation, and operational concept development for reusable space vehicle technologies, in support of long-term developmental space objectives."[14]
The X-37B was originally scheduled for launch in the payload bay of the Space Shuttle, but following the Columbia accident, it was transferred to a Delta II 7920. It was subsequently transferred to a shrouded configuration on the Atlas V following concerns over the unshrouded spacecraft's aerodynamic properties during launch.[18] Following their missions, X-37B spacecraft are to land on a runway at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, with Edwards Air Force Base as an alternate site.[19][20]
Manufacturing on the second X-37B, OTV-2 was underway in 2010;[21] it was completed and was first launched in March 2011.[22]
Design
The X-37 Orbital Test Vehicle is a reusable robotic spaceplane. It is a derivative of X-40 and 120% larger. The OTV has a length of over 29 feet (8.8 m) and features two angled tail fins.[23]
The X-37 is expected to operate in a velocity range of up to Mach 25 on reentry. Among the technologies to be demonstrated with the X-37 are improved thermal protection systems, avionics, the autonomous guidance system and an advanced airframe.[4] The vehicle is powered by a Rocketdyne AR2-3 engine.[24] The AR2-3 was the human-rated rocket powerplant for the dual-power NF-104A astronaut training vehicle and was given a new flight certification for use on the X-37 with hydrogen peroxide/JP-8 propellants.[25] The X-37B now uses a hydrazine monopropellant rocket.[26]
The X-37 has a payload bay available for experiments and other space payloads. It features thermal protection systems that are improved from previous generations of spacecraft.[6] The thermal protection system uses improved silica ceramic tiles.[26]
Operational history
OTV-1 sits on the runway at Vandenberg AFB after landing
The first orbital flight of OTV-1, the first X-37B, with a mission name of USA-212, was launched on an Atlas V rocket at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida on 22 April 2010, at 23:58 GMT. The spacecraft was placed into low Earth orbit for testing.[15]
While the U.S. Air Force revealed few orbital details after the first X-37B was successfully placed in orbit due to the secretive nature of the mission, amateur astronomers claimed to have identified the experimental spacecraft in orbit and shared their findings. A worldwide network of amateur astronomers reported that on 22 May it was in an inclination of 39.99 degrees, circling the Earth once every 90 minutes in an orbit 249 by 262 miles (401 by 422 km).[27][28] The amateur sky watchers reported the spacecraft's track went over North Korea, Afghanistan, and other trouble spots. They reported that the spacecraft passed over the same given spot on Earth every four days, and operated at an altitude of 255 miles (410 km), which is typical for a military surveillance satellite.[29]
Personnel inspect OTV-1, the first X-37B, after its return
The U.S. Air Force announced on 30 November 2010 that the X-37 would return for a landing during the 3–6 December timeframe.[30][31] As scheduled, OTV-1 de-orbited, reentered Earth's atmosphere, and landed at Vandenberg AFB on 3 December 2010, at 1:16 PST (09:16 UTC).[32][33][34] The X-37B had a tire blowout during landing and sustained minor damage to its underside.[21]
A second X-37B mission, designated USA-226,[35] was launched aboard an Atlas V rocket, on 5 March 2011.[36] The mission was classified and described by the US military as to test out new space technologies.[37]
[edit] Controversy
In April 2010, the China Daily newspaper wrote that the X-37B program raised concerns about an arms race in space.[38] The Xinhua News Agency took a more moderate tone in questioning if the secretive program might lead to weapons in space.[39] Tom Burghardt wrote for Spacedaily.com that the X-37B could be used as a spy satellite or to deliver weapons from space.[40] The Pentagon has denied claims that the X-37B's mission supports the development of space-based weapons.[40]
[edit] Specifications
[edit] X-37B
Data from USAF,[1][6] Boeing,[41] Air & Space Magazine[42] Physorg.com,[43]
General characteristics
Crew: None
Length: 29 ft 3 in (8.9 m)
Wingspan: 14 ft 11 in (4.5 m)
Height: 9 ft 6 in (2.9 m)
Loaded weight: 11,000 lb (4,990 kg)
Power: Gallium arsenide solar cells with lithium-ion batteries[1]
Payload Bay: 7 × 4 ft (2.1 × 1.2 m)[33]
Performance
Orbital speed: 17,500 mph (28,200 km/h)
Orbit: Low Earth orbit
Orbital time: Up to 270 days[44]
[edit] See also
DARPA Falcon Project
Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar - the US Air Force's previous spaceplane, was canceled in the 1960s.
Related development
Boeing X-40
Comparable aircraft
Avatar (rocket)
Orbital Sciences X-34
[edit] References
Notes
1.^ a b c "Factsheet: X-37 Orbital Test Vehicle". US Air Force, 14 April 2010
2.^ "X-37 Technology Demonstrator: Blazing the trail for the next generation of space transportation systems". NASA, September 2003. Retrieved: 23 April 2010.
3.^ Berger, Brian. "NASA Transfers X-37 Project to DARPA". Space.com, 15 September 2004.
4.^ a b Yenne 2005, p. 277.
5.^ "Air Force Bloggers Roundtable: Air Force set to launch first X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle". Department of Defense, 20 April 2010. Retrieved: 23 April 2010.
6.^ a b c Jameson, Major Austin D., USAF. "X-37 Space Vehicle: Starting a New Age in Space Control?" dtic.mil, April 2001.
7.^ "X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle". everything2.com. Retrieved: 8 December 2010.
8.^ Berger, Brian. "DARPA takes on space plane project". MSNBC, 16 September 2004.
9.^ David, Leonard. "White Knight carries X-37 aloft". CNN, 23 May 2005
10.^ a b "Mojave web log entries". mojaveweblog.com 23 April 2010. Retrieved: 4 June 2006.
11.^ David, Leonard. "X-37 Flies At Mojave But Encounters Landing Problems". Space.com, 7 April 2006.
12.^ Source of flights: mission markings posted on side of White Knight
13.^ "X-37 Test Flight B-Roll (No Audio)". US Air Force via YouTube.com, 22 April 2010.
14.^ a b David, Leonard. "U.S. Air Force Pushes For Orbital Test Vehicle." Space.com, 17 November 2006. Retrieved: 17 November 2006.
15.^ a b Clark, Stephen. "Atlas rocket delivers Air Force spaceplane to orbit". Spaceflight Now, 22 April 2010.
16.^ Clark, Stephen. "Air Force spaceplane is an odd bird with a twisted past". Spaceflight Now, 2 April 2010. Retrieved: 3 April 2010.
17.^ Clark, Stephen. "Air Force X-37B spaceplane arrives in Florida for launch". Spaceflight Now, 25 February 2010. Retrieved: 3 March 2010.
18.^ Krebs, Gunter. "X-37B". Gunter's Space Page. Retrieved: 5 August 2008.
19.^ Covault, Craig. "USAF To Launch First Spaceplane Demonstrator". Aviation Week and Space Technology, 3 August 2008.
20.^ "Unmanned US spacecraft returns after 7-month trip". Associated Press story via Yahoo News, 3 December 2010.
21.^ a b Norris, Guy. "Second X-37B Prepared For Launch". Aviation Week, 7 December 2010.
22.^ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1363673/Second-secret-space-shuttle-blasts-orbit--does-actually-there.html
23.^ Miller 2001, p. 377.
24.^ "Boeing X-37 Technology Demonstrator, USA". airforce-technology.com. Retrieved: 6 December 2010.
25.^ Hebert, Bartt. "Peroxide (H2O2) Test Programs, AR2-3 Flight Certification". SDC Operations, NASA Engineering and Test Directorate, 24 July 2009.
26.^ a b "Mr. Gary Payton, Under Secretary of the Air Force for Space Programs, Media Teleconference (Pentagon), X-37B Launch". Defense.gov, 20 April 2010. Retrieved: 3 December 2010.
27.^ David, Leonard. "Secret X-37B Space Plane Spotted by Amateur Skywatchers". space.com, 22 May 2010.
28.^ "Amateur astronomers unravel X37-B orbit, say likely use for deploying spy satellites". news.com.au, 24 May 2010.
29.^ "Surveillance Is Suspected as Spacecraft’s Main Role". New York Times on-line, 21 May 2010. Retrieved: 22 May 2010.
30.^ "Preparations underway for first landing of X-37B". U.S. Air Force, 30 November 2010
31.^ "USAF X-37B Landing Slated for Dec. 3-6". Aviation Week, 30 November 2010. Retrieved: 1 December 2010.
32.^ Clark, Stephen. "Home again: U.S. military space plane returns to Earth". Spaceflight Now, 3 December 2010. Retrieved: 3 December 2010.
33.^ a b "X-37B Completes 220-Day Mission". Aviation Week, 6 December 2010. Retrieved: 7 December 2010.
34.^ "X-37B US military spaceplane returns to Earth". BBC, 3 December 2010. Retrieved: 3 December 2010.
35.^ http://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=37375
36.^ LA Times (retrieved 5 March 2011)
37.^ Wall, Mike, "Secretive X-37B Space Plane Launches on New Mystery Mission", Yahoo! News, 5 March 2011; retrieved 7 March 2011.
38.^ Dingding, Xin. "US spacecraft sparks arms race concerns". China Daily, 24 April 2010. Retrieved: 15 July 2010
39.^ Xiang, Zhang. "U.S. military launches unmanned 'space plane'." Xinhua News Agency, 23 April 2010. Retrieved: 15 July 2010.
40.^ a b "The Militarization of Outer Space: The Pentagon's Space Warriors". Spacedaily.com, 11 May 2010.
41.^ "X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle". Boeing. Retrieved: 6 December 2010
42.^ Klesius, Michael. "Space Shuttle Jr." Air & Space Magazine, 1 January 2010.
43.^ Antczak, John for Associated Press. "Air Force to launch robotic winged space plane". Physorg.com, 3 April 2010.
44.^ Evans, Michael. "Launch of secret US space ship masks even more secret launch of new weapon". The Times, 24 April 2010. Retrieved: 25 April 2010.
Bibliography
Bentley, Matthew A. Spaceplanes: From Airport to Spaceport. New York: Springer, 2008. ISBN 978-0-387-76509-9.
Gump, David P. Space Enterprise: Beyond NASA. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1989. ISBN 978-0-275-93314-2.
Miller, Jay. The X-Planes: X-1 to X-45. Hinckley, UK: Midland, 2001. ISBN 1-85780-109-1.
Yenne, Bill. The Story of the Boeing Company. Minneapolis, MN: Zenith Press, 2005. ISBN 978-0-7603-2333-5.
No comments:
Post a Comment