Getting some serious SpaceShipTwo (+WhiteKnightTwo) vibes from this. As well as Orbital's Pegasus.
Oh, I get it now, because Paul G. Allen helped on SpaceShipOne.
Oh, I get it now, because Paul G. Allen helped on SpaceShipOne.
Last edited:
This reminds me of a very interesting US Air Force air-launcher study that I read a while back. It mentioned super White Knight style carrier aircraft and SpaceX liquid rockets, among others. I'll try to find it...
Found it! (pdf)
Sure looks like fun.
Though, 30,000 feet and cruising speed is a drop in the bucket compared to orbital speed, it hardly seems worth the effort compared to regular launch.
I think it's much more about the atmosphere and its pressure.
By the way, you could "launch" from a point 2000 miles south of the US, so even if you assemble the rocket+aircraft at the Cape you could launch from a latitude comparable to Kourou, another few percent more payload.
Those were my thoughts as well, Ark. The main advantage of such a system are: 1) ability to travel to optimal global launch position for desired inclination; and 2) perhaps see lower facility costs by not requiring a fixed dedicated vertical launch complex.
I also don't see how such a system will provide much benefit over traditional methods at this point, or make it significantly easier to increase launch rates and ultimately lower launch costs.
DARPA wants this type of airlaunch system but for small payloads, ca. 100 pounds:
Curiously they also expect it to fly by 2015. For launches this small it might work to use a WhiteKnight1 or WhiteKnight2 for the carrier aircraft, and Falcon 1 or Falcon 1e for the rocket.
The video does not show it, but I know that they were talking about a 5 engine rocket by spacex. Does this mean that Falcon 5 is re-born?
But, still, 30,000 feet is reached in what, the first 20 seconds of burn time? It can't be worth R&D for a whole carrier vehicle just to save 20 seconds of fuel.
By the way, you could "launch" from a point 2000 miles south of the US, so even if you assemble the rocket+aircraft at the Cape you could launch from a latitude comparable to Kourou, another few percent more payload.
So how exactly is this different from more classical air-launch concepts? Appart from that it doesn't look nearly as cool, and that I don't quite see how that plane could do anything that a third stage couldn't do a lot better. It can't get very high for launch, and it can't reach significant velocities to help with orbital insertion...
Oh yes, why not use Falcon 1e? Great option... except for the fact that it has a payload of 1010 kilograms, not 40-50...
It also can't fit on a WhiteKnight Two, which has a payload of 17 000 kg (F1e has a mass of over 35 tons).
Seems like there is enough problems in this to stop it from actually happening. This is an feeling of mine, not backed up by numbers or deep knowledge of the sciences at play in a concept like this. So don't argue me on on it.
But, still, 30,000 feet is reached in what, the first 20 seconds of burn time? It can't be worth R&D for a whole carrier vehicle just to save 20 seconds of fuel.
By flying for 1300 nautical miles at a heading of 116 degrees (you still have to avoid islands), you end up at a launch 'site' at a latitude of roughly 17 degrees. While that would obviously boost payload somewhat, it isn't really comparable to Kourou.
It's not so much about the 20 seconds of fuel. If you launch at surface pressure, you'll have to make compromises in engine design to get enough thrust at lift-off. This makes the engines less efficient at lower pressure.
Land based sites have many restrictions on launch azimuth.
The company announced they have already acquired two 747s to become the opening hardware for this system.
Stratolaunch’s carrier aircraft, built by Scaled Composites, weighs more than 1.2 million pounds and has a wingspan of 385 feet. Using six 747 engines, the carrier aircraft will be the largest aircraft ever constructed.
So that should save some money. They aren't building the aircraft from scratch.