DOCSLIB.ORG

Why and Whither Hypersonics Research in the US Air Force

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Why and Whither Hypersonics Research in the US Air Force United States Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Report on Why and Whither Hypersonics Research in the US Air Force SAB-TR-00-03 December 2000 Cleared for Open Publication This report is a product of the United States Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Committee on Why and Whither Hypersonics Research in the US Air Force. Statements, opinions, recommendations, and conclusions contained in this report are those of the committee and do not necessarily represent the official position of the US Air Force or the Department of Defense. United States Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Report on Why and Whither Hypersonics Research in the US Air Force SAB-TR-00-03 December 2000 Cleared for Open Publication (This Page Intentionally Left Blank) ii Foreword This report summarizes the deliberations and conclusions of the 2000 Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) study on Why and Whither Hypersonics Research in the US Air Force. In this study the committee describes the operational requirements of a hypersonic system and presents a research program for air breathing hypersonics to meet the operational requirements. We define a program resulting in an operational air breathing hypersonic space launch system in about 2025. This program includes several exit ramps and potential options. The exit ramps would lead to either an operational rocket-based reusable launch system or continuation of the expendable course the Air Force is currently on. A Red Team Panel was part of the study team and provides alternatives to the air breathing hypersonic systems to meet the operational requirements. The study results represent an outstanding collaboration between the scientific and operational communities and among government, industry, and academia. The Study committee wishes to thank the many individuals who contributed to the deliberations and the report, as listed in Appendix A. In addition to Scientific Advisory Board members, many ad hoc members devoted their time. The team would also like to thank all the organizations that gave presentations to our panel and hosted us as listed in Appendix D. The Air Force Academy provided outstanding technical writers—Capt Susan Hastings, Capt David Jablonski, and Capt Matthew Murdough— who provided fantastic support in preparing this report. Lt Col Dan Heale from the Air Force Research Laboratory served as an outstanding executive officer for the Investment Panel as well as provided a liaison role with Air Force Materiel Command. The Study committee would like to recognize the SAB Secretariat and support staff, in particular Maj Doug Amon, and the ANSER team, especially Ms Kristin Lynch, who provided invaluable administrative and logistical assistance in pulling together the myriad of inputs into this final report. Their efforts are greatly appreciated. Finally, this report reflects the collective judgment of the SAB and hence is not to be viewed as the official position of the United States Air Force. Dr. Ronald P. Fuchs Study Chairman September 2000 iii (This Page Intentionally Left Blank) iv Executive Summary Since the 1960s, the Air Force has had operational hypersonic systems in the form of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), launch vehicles, and reentry vehicles. This report addresses another type of hypersonic system, the sustained-flight hypersonic systems characterized by airbreathing hypersonic propulsion systems. The Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) was asked to assess the operational utility of such systems. To ensure that the usual unbridled enthusiasm the SAB has for new technology did not overwhelm the results, the study incorporated its own red team to identify and assess alternatives. This report is a consensus of the entire study team’s recommendations. While the Air Force has always had enthusiasm for higher speed, airbreathing hypersonic flight efforts have suffered from a series of fits and starts over the past 40 years. During the same time, hypersonic efforts for ICBMs, reentry vehicles, and launch vehicles have prospered. Why is this so? The primary reason is probably that the efforts for airbreathing hypersonics have focused on getting somewhere in less time, and a clear requirement making essential use of such a time advantage has not been established. This has resulted in great difficulty in determining a valid operational concept because 1. The hypersonic system concepts were often complex and took more time to get ready for flight than subsonic systems, thus minimizing the speed advantage. 2. The hypersonic system concepts were usually extremely expensive to develop and acquire, thus calling into question the cost-effectiveness of timely response. 3. The timelines were fragile—that is, for a fixed range, the feasible hypersonic speed region (say Mach 5 to Mach 15) would make a difference only over a narrow window of time relative to that which is possible with high supersonic flight. For instance, as shown in Figure ES-1, for a target at 1,000 nautical miles (nm) there is only a 13-minute window where a reasonable hypersonic speed range would make any difference. If more than 20 minutes time of flight is acceptable, supersonic or subsonic speed is adequate; if less than 7 minutes is needed, Mach numbers higher than 15 would be required. 50 40 M1 M3 30 M5 20 M15 Time (min.) 13 min.min 10 0 00 0 1 300 500 700 900 ,300 500 ,700 900 1,10 1 1, 1 1, Range (nm) Figure ES-1. Hypersonic Speed Windows v 4. Most hypersonic concepts, to take advantage of their fast response, require an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance system that won’t exist for a long time. 5. Many argue that the decision timelines are so long relative to the time of flight that there is little need for hypersonic flight. (This argument presumes that the decision timeline can be shortened—there is no clear evidence that this is likely. Interestingly the same argument can be made to support hypersonics—that is, the decision makers want even longer timelines, so shorter times of flight are desirable.) So, has anything changed? Yes. The greatest change is that hypersonic flight for other than getting somewhere faster now appears to be a valid need of the Air Force. The Air Force published Vision 2020: Global Vigilance, Reach and Power stating a desire for “controlling and exploiting the full aerospace continuum.” If that vision implies frequent, routine, on-demand operations into and within space, the enabler for this vision is an affordable, responsive, reliable, robust space launch capability. Getting to orbit requires Mach 25 flight—and all speeds between 0 and Mach 25. This interpretation of the vision cannot be fulfilled within the likely Air Force investment program using expendable launch vehicles (ELVs); reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) will be necessary to make routine space operations affordable. Airbreathing hypersonic systems are one of the two concepts that show promise of allowing the realization of these capabilities— the other being rocket systems. On the other hand, if the vision simply implies doing more of the same things done today, the Air Force can probably live with ELVs indefinitely. What’s missing is a clear statement of the mission needs and operational requirements for space control, space warfighting, responsive launch, and other missions that might demand a reusable launch system. This will be a critical enabler for making the Air Force vision a reality, as hypersonics could be the next great step in the transformation of the Air Force into a completely integrated aerospace force. We recommend that Air Force Space Command develop appropriate clear statements of its requirements for space launch. These documents must be the basis for steering the investment program as described below. Until these requirements are defined, hypersonic technology programs should be monitored and funded at about their current levels, because these technologies will be required for any resulting program. However, to preclude a continuing slip in the ultimate system availability, a funding wedge for a hypersonic program should be inserted in the budget starting in 2003 or 2004. When the mission requirements and concept of operations (CONOPS) are defined, key questions will need to be answered before a decision can be made on which technologies will provide an affordable approach to satisfying these requirements. The first question is whether an RLV or expendable launch vehicle is needed. The next is what type of propulsion system should be used. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been emphasizing a rocket-based single-stage-to-orbit approach that now looks technically risky and might not result in the kind of operational capability the Air Force needs. Two-stage-to-orbit approaches have much lower technical risk, but may be more costly from both acquisition and operational standpoints. The data to make definitive decisions about these key questions and about many more do not exist, nor is there a reasonably paced program in place to provide those data. While it may seem unreasonable, short of another Apollo or Manhattan Project, we are about 25 years from an operational system enabling routine space operations for the Air Force. Furthermore, this capability is slipping away at almost 1 year per year because current levels of vi funding are insufficient to make significant progress. In addition, much of the nation’s hypersonic talent is reaching, or has passed, retirement age. In this report we define a program resulting in an operational airbreathing hypersonic space launch system in about 2025. This program includes several exit ramps and potential options. The exit ramps would lead to either an operational rocket-based reusable launch system or continuation of the expendable course the Air Force is currently on. Early-year investments are those already in the Air Force budget. This program would require annual investments of $30 million to $50 million during the latter half of the Six-Year Defense Plan, leading to a moderate-risk decision on a space launch engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) program in 2008.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Module 1: Hypersonic Atmosphere Lecture1: Characteristics of Hypersonic Atmosphere
    NPTEL –Aerospace Module 1: Hypersonic Atmosphere Lecture1: Characteristics of Hypersonic Atmosphere 1.1 Introduction Hypersonic flight has special traits, some of which are seen in every hypersonic flight. Presence of these particular features during a flight is highly dependant on type of trajectory, configuration etc. In short it is the mission requirement which decides the nature of hypersonic atmosphere encountered by the flight vehicle. Some missions are designed for high deceleration in outer atmosphere during reentry. Hence, those flight vehicles experience longer flight duration at high angle of attacks due to which blunt nosed configuration are generally preferred for such aircrafts. On the contrary, some missions are centered on low flight duration with major deceleration closer to earth surface hence these vehicles have sharp nose and low angle of attack flights. Reentry flight path of hypersonic vehicle is thus governed by the parameters called as ballistic parameter and lifting parameter. These parameters are obtained by applying momentum conservation equation in the direction of the flight path and normal to it. Velocity-altitude map of the flight is thus made from the knowledge of these governing flight parameters, weight and surface area. Ballistic parameter is considered for non lifting reentry flights like flight path of Apollo capsule, however lifting parameter is considered for lifting reentry trajectories like that of space shuttle. Therefore hypersonic flight vehicles are classified in four different types based on the design constraints imposed from mission specifications. 1. Reentry Vehicles (RV): These vehicles are typically launched using rocket propulsion system. Reentry of these vehicles is controlled by control surfaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Earth Atmospheric Entry for Mars Sample Return Missions
    NASA/TP–2006-213486 Notes on Earth Atmospheric Entry for Mars Sample Return Missions Thomas Rivell Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California September 2006 The NASA STI Program Office . in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected advancement of aeronautics and space science. The papers from scientific and technical confer- NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) ences, symposia, seminars, or other meetings Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA sponsored or cosponsored by NASA. maintain this important role. • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, technical, The NASA STI Program Office is operated by or historical information from NASA programs, Langley Research Center, the Lead Center for projects, and missions, often concerned with NASA’s scientific and technical information. The subjects having substantial public interest. NASA STI Program Office provides access to the NASA STI Database, the largest collection of • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- aeronautical and space science STI in the world. language translations of foreign scientific and The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission. mechanism for disseminating the results of its research and development activities. These results Specialized services that complement the STI are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating Series, which includes the following report types: custom thesauri, building customized databases, organizing and publishing research results . even • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of providing videos. completed research or a major significant phase of research that present the results of NASA For more information about the NASA STI programs and include extensive data or theoreti- Program Office, see the following: cal analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Performances of a Small Hypersonic Airplane (Hyplane)
    Politecnico di Torino Porto Institutional Repository [Proceeding] PERFORMANCES OF A SMALL HYPERSONIC AIRPLANE (HYPLANE) Original Citation: Savino R.; Russo G.; D’Oriano V.; Visone M.; Battipede M.; Gili P. (2014). PERFORMANCES OF A SMALL HYPERSONIC AIRPLANE (HYPLANE). In: 65th International Astronautical Congress„ Toronto, Canada, 29 September - 3 October 2014. pp. 1-13 Availability: This version is available at : http://porto.polito.it/2591763/ since: February 2015 Publisher: International Astronautical Federation (IAF) Terms of use: This article is made available under terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Article ("Public - All rights reserved") , as described at http://porto.polito.it/terms_and_conditions. html Porto, the institutional repository of the Politecnico di Torino, is provided by the University Library and the IT-Services. The aim is to enable open access to all the world. Please share with us how this access benefits you. Your story matters. (Article begins on next page) 65th International Astronautical Congress, Toronto, Canada. Copyright ©2014 by the Authors. Published by the IAF, with permission and released to the IAF to publish in all forms. IAC-14-D2.4 PERFORMANCES OF A SMALL HYPERSONIC AIRPLANE (HYPLANE) Raffaele Savino Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Naples “Federico II”, Italy Gennaro Russo Trans-Tech srl and Space Renaissance Italia, Italy Vera D’Oriano*, Michele Visone Blue Engineering, Italy Manuela Battipede, Piero Gili Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Polytechnic of Turin, Italy In the present work a preliminary performance study regarding a small hypersonic airplane named HyPlane is presented. It is designed for long duration sub-orbital space tourism missions, in the frame of the Space Renaissance (SR) Italia Space Tourism Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Modelling a Hypersonic Single Expansion Ramp Nozzle of a Hypersonic Aircraft Through Parametric Studies
    energies Article Modelling a Hypersonic Single Expansion Ramp Nozzle of a Hypersonic Aircraft through Parametric Studies Andrew Ridgway, Ashish Alex Sam * and Apostolos Pesyridis College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, London UB8 3PH, UK; [email protected] (A.R.); [email protected] (A.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +44-1895-267-901 Received: 26 September 2018; Accepted: 7 December 2018; Published: 10 December 2018 Abstract: This paper aims to contribute to developing a potential combined cycle air-breathing engine integrated into an aircraft design, capable of performing flight profiles on a commercial scale. This study specifically focuses on the single expansion ramp nozzle (SERN) and aircraft-engine integration with an emphasis on the combined cycle engine integration into the conceptual aircraft design. A parametric study using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) have been employed to analyze the sensitivity of the SERN’s performance parameters with changing geometry and operating conditions. The SERN adapted to the different operating conditions and was able to retain its performance throughout the altitude simulated. The expansion ramp shape, angle, exit area, and cowl shape influenced the thrust substantially. The internal nozzle expansion and expansion ramp had a significant effect on the lift and moment performance. An optimized SERN was assembled into a scramjet and was subject to various nozzle inflow conditions, to which combustion flow from twin strut injectors produced the best thrust performance. Side fence studies observed longer and diverging side fences to produce extra thrust compared to small and straight fences. Keywords: scramjet; single expansion ramp nozzle; hypersonic aircraft; combined cycle engines 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerodynamic Characteristics of Two Waverider-Derived Hypersonic Cruise Configurations
    NASA Technical Paper 3559 Aerodynamic Characteristics of Two Waverider-Derived Hypersonic Cruise Configurations Charles E. Cockrell, Jr., Lawrence D. Huebner, and Dennis B. Finley July 1996 NASA Technical Paper 3559 Aerodynamic Characteristics of Two Waverider-Derived Hypersonic Cruise Configurations Charles E. Cockrell, Jr. and Lawrence D. Huebner Langley Research Center • Hampton, Virginia Dennis B. Finley Lockheed-Fort Worth Company • Fort Worth, Texas National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center • Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 July 1996 Available electronically at the following URL address: http:lltechreports.larc.nasa.govlltrslitrs.html Printed copies available from the following: NASA Center for AeroSpace Information National Technical Information Service (NTIS) 800 Elkridge Landing Road 5285 Port Royal Road Linthicum Heights, MD 21090-2934 Springfield, VA 22161-2171 (301) 621-0390 (703) 487-4650 Abstract An evaluation was made of the effects of integrating the required aircraft compo- nents with hypersonic high-lift configurations known as waveriders to create hyper- sonic cruise vehicles. Previous studies suggest that waveriders offer advantages in aerodynamic performance and propulsionairframe integration (PAl) characteristics over conventional non-waverider hypersonic shapes. A wind-tunnel model was devel- oped that integrates vehicle components, including canopies, engine components, and control surfaces, with two pure waverider shapes, both conical-flow-derived wave- riders for a design Mach number of 4.0. Experimental data and limited computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solutions were obtained over a Mach number range of 1.6 to 4.63. The experimental data show the component build-up effects and the aero- dynamic characteristics of the fully integrated configurations, including control sur- face effectiveness.
    [Show full text]
  • Scramjet Nozzle Design and Analysis As Applied to a Highly Integrated Hypersonic Research Airplane
    NASA TECHN'ICAL NOTE NASA D-8334 d- . ,d d K a+ 4 c/) 4 z SCRAMJET NOZZLE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS AS APPLIED TO A HIGHLY INTEGRATED HYPERSONIC RESEARCH AIRPLANE Wi'llidm J. Smull, John P. Wehher, and P. J. Johnston i Ldngley Reseurch Center Humpton, Va. 23665 / NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. c. .'NOVEMBER 1976 TECH LIBRARY KAFB, NM I Illill 111 lllll11Il1 lllll lllll lllll IIll ~~ ~~- - 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. -. ___r_- --.-= .--. NASA TN D-8334 I ~~ 4. Title and ,Subtitle 5. Report Date November 1976 7. Author(sl 8. Performing Organization Report No. William J. Small, John P. Weidner, L-11003 and P. J. Johnston . ~ ~-.. ~ 10. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Nwne and Address 505-11-31-02 NASA Langley Research Center 11. Contract or Grant No. Hampton, VA 23665 13. Type of Report and Period Covered ,. 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Note National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20546 -. I 15. Supplementary Notes -~ 16. Abstract The great potential expected from future air-breathing hypersonic aircraft systems is predicated on the assumption that the propulsion system can be effi- ciently integrated with the airframe. A study of engine-nozzle airframe inte- gration at hypersonic speeds has been conducted by using a high-speed research- aircraft concept as a focus. Recently developed techniques for analysis of scramjet-nozzle exhaust flows provide a realistic analysis of complex forces resulting from the engine-nozzle airframe coupling. Results from these studies show that by properly integrating the engine-nozzle propulsive system with the airframe, efficient, controlled and stable flight results over a wide speed range.
    [Show full text]
  • Turbojet Runs Precursor to Hypersonic Engine Heat Exchanger Tests
    Turbojet Runs Precursor to Hypersonic Engine Heat Exchanger Tests Aviation Week & Space Technology Guy Norris Tue, 2018-05-15 04:00 Advanced propulsion developer Reaction Engines is nearing its first step toward validating its novel air-breathing hybrid rocket design at hypersonic conditions by firing up a vintage General Electric J79 turbojet to act as a heat source for testing, expected later this month. The ex-military engine, formerly used in a McDonnell Douglas F-4, is a central element of Reaction’s specially developed high-temperature airflow test site, which will soon be commissioned at Front Range Airport, near Watkins, Colorado. The J79 will provide heated gas flow in excess of 1,000C (1,800F) which, together with conditioned ambient air, will be mixed to replicate inlet conditions representative of flight speeds up to and including Mach 5. The flow will verify the operability and performance of the pre-cooler heat exchanger (HTX), which is at the core of Reaction’s Sabre (synergistic air-breathing rocket engine). It is also key to extracting oxygen from the atmosphere to enable acceleration to hypersonic speed from a standing start. The HTX will chill airflow to minus 150C in less than 1/20th of a second, and pass it through a turbo- compressor and into the rocket combustion chamber where it will be burned with sub-cooled liquid hydrogen (LH) fuel. Beyond Mach 5, and at an altitude approaching 100,000 ft. the inlet will be closed and the engine will continue to operate as a closed-cycle rocket engine fueled by onboard liquid oxygen and LH.
    [Show full text]
  • Science & Technology Trends 2020-2040
    Science & Technology Trends 2020-2040 Exploring the S&T Edge NATO Science & Technology Organization DISCLAIMER The research and analysis underlying this report and its conclusions were conducted by the NATO S&T Organization (STO) drawing upon the support of the Alliance’s defence S&T community, NATO Allied Command Transformation (ACT) and the NATO Communications and Information Agency (NCIA). This report does not represent the official opinion or position of NATO or individual governments, but provides considered advice to NATO and Nations’ leadership on significant S&T issues. D.F. Reding J. Eaton NATO Science & Technology Organization Office of the Chief Scientist NATO Headquarters B-1110 Brussels Belgium http:\www.sto.nato.int Distributed free of charge for informational purposes; hard copies may be obtained on request, subject to availability from the NATO Office of the Chief Scientist. The sale and reproduction of this report for commercial purposes is prohibited. Extracts may be used for bona fide educational and informational purposes subject to attribution to the NATO S&T Organization. Unless otherwise credited all non-original graphics are used under Creative Commons licensing (for original sources see https://commons.wikimedia.org and https://www.pxfuel.com/). All icon-based graphics are derived from Microsoft® Office and are used royalty-free. Copyright © NATO Science & Technology Organization, 2020 First published, March 2020 Foreword As the world Science & Tech- changes, so does nology Trends: our Alliance. 2020-2040 pro- NATO adapts. vides an assess- We continue to ment of the im- work together as pact of S&T ad- a community of vances over the like-minded na- next 20 years tions, seeking to on the Alliance.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lapcat-Mr2 Hypersonic Cruiser Concept
    THE LAPCAT-MR2 HYPERSONIC CRUISER CONCEPT J. Steelant and T. Langener* * ESA-ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ Noordwijk, Netherlands Vehicle Design, Hypersonic Flight, Combined Cycle Engine, Dual-Mode Ramjet Abstract thus bringing the elliptical combustor cross section to a circular cross-section. During Ramjet-mode, this This paper describes the MR2, a Mach 8 nozzle was used as a combustor that thermally cruise passenger vehicle, conceptually designed for choked, allowing for supersonic expansion in the antipodal flight from Brussels to Sydney in less than second nozzle. The second nozzle itself was 4 hours. This is one of the different concepts studied streamtraced from an axisymmetric isentropic within the LAPCAT II project [1]. It is an evolution expansion and truncated to a suitable length. Both of a previous vehicle, the MR1 based upon a dorsal nozzles were designed for cruise conditions. mounted engine, as a result of multiple optimization The final vehicle is shown below in Figure 1 iterations [2] leading to the MR2.4 concepts. The while specific details of the design are expanded main driver was the optimal integration of a high upon in the next section. performance propulsion unit within an aerodynamically efficient wave rider design, whilst guaranteeing sufficient volume for tankage, payload and other subsystems. Introduction The aerodynamics for the MR2 is a waverider form based upon an adapted osculating cone method enabling to construct the vehicle from the leading edge while reducing integration problems between the aerodynamics and the intake. The intake was constructed using Figure 1 MR2 Vehicle streamtracing methods from an axisymmetric inward turning compression surface and was integrated on top of the waverider in a dorsal layout.
    [Show full text]
  • Hypersonic Air Intake Design for High Performance and Starting
    Hypersonic Air Intake Design for High Performance and Starting Sannu Mölder, Evgeny Timofeev Department of Mechanical Engineering, McGill University 817 Sherbrooke St. W. Montreal, P.Q. CANADA [email protected] SUMMARY Hypersonic air intake performance is defined in terms of intake capability and efficiency. The propensity for intake flow starting is measured by the Startability Index – a parameter inversely related to capability that is shown to be a meaningful and convenient measure of the startability for a hypersonic air intake. It is shown that the basic Busemann flow is adaptable to the design of high-performance air intakes. Proper choice of the strength of the terminal shock yields high-performance, modular, intake shapes, with low internal contractions, that are capable of spontaneous starting with overboard mass spillage. Some practical designs and applications are presented. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Air-breathing aero-engines such as ramjets and scramjets, operating at supersonic and hypersonic speeds, ingest air through a converging air intake1. For both ramjets and scramjets at these speeds, convergence causes enough compression that no further mechanical compression is required before combustion. In a scramjet, the static temperature at combustor entry is high enough to cause the injected fuel to ignite spontaneously. The resulting lack of mechanical complexity, with practically no moving parts, puts the ramjet as well as the scramjet to overall advantage over the turbojet engine even at low Mach numbers where turbojet thermodynamic performance may exceed that of the ramjet/scramjet. For useful engine operation, at some flight conditions, the intake duct shape must be such that the required air mass flow in the duct is predictable, stable, properly conditioned (uniform in some sense) and thermodynamically efficient.
    [Show full text]
  • Reusable Launch Systems Aerospace
    Nov, 2010 DEPARTMENT OF REUSABLE LAUNCH SYSTEMS AEROSPACE ENGINEERING Soumik Bose Keshav Kishore Anand Indian Institute Of Technology, Kharagpur 1 INTRODUCTION A hundred years ago, on December 17, 1903, Wilbur and Orville Wright successfully achieved a piloted, powered flight. Though the Wright Flyer I flew only 10 ft off the ground for 12 seconds, traveling a mere 120 ft, the aeronautical technology it demonstrated paved the way for passenger air transportation. Man had finally made it to the air. The Wright brother’s plane of 1903 led to the development of aircrafts such as the WWII Spitfire, and others. In 1926 the first passenger plane flew holiday makers from American mainland to Havana and Bahamas. In 23 years the world had moved from a plane that flew 120 ft and similar planes that only a chosen few could fly, to one that can carry many passengers. In October 1957, man entered the space age. Russia sent the first satellite, the Sputnik, and in April 1961, Yuri Gagarin became the first man on space. In the years since Russia and United States has sent many air force pilots and a fewer scientists, engineers and others. But even after almost 50 years, the number of people who has been to space is close to 500. The people are losing interest in seeing a chosen few going to space and the budgets to space research is diminishing. The space industry now makes money by taking satellites to space. But a major factor here is the cost. At present to put a single kilogram into orbit will cost you between $10000 and $20000.
    [Show full text]
  • From Leo to the Planets Using Waveriders
    AlAA, 99-4803 From Leo. to th.e Planets Using Waveriders ‘. A. D. McRonald,J1 E. Randolph., Jet PropulsionLaboratory CaliforniaInstitute of Technology. M.‘J. Lewis Universityof Maryland E. p. Bbnfiglio,J:Longuski .- PurdueUn iversity I’ P.Kolodziej NASA-AmesResearch Center th International’ Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems arid Technologies Conference. and _ 3rd Weakly Ionized-Gases Workshop l-5. November 1’999 Norfolk, VA For permiss/on to copy or republish, contact the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA 20191 (c)l999 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautic‘s or publisher! with permission of author(s) and/or authdr(s)’ sponsoring organization. t i AIAA-99-4803 . FROM LEO TO THE PLANETS USING WAVERIDERS A. D. McRonald, J. E. Randolph Jet PropulsionLaboratory California Institute of Technology. M. J. Lewis University of Maryland E. P. Bonfiglio, J. Longuski PurdueUniversity P.Kolodziej Ames ResearchCenter ABSTRACT control surfaces, along with engines and propellant to escapefrom Earth, Other advantagesof this A revolution& interplanetary transportation techniqueover normalinterplanetary delivery methods techniqueknown as Aero-Gravity Assist (AGA) has will be discussed. beenstudied by JPL and others to enablerelatively, short trip times betweenEarth andthe other planets. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND It takes advantageof an advancedhypersonic vehicle known as a waverider that uses its high lift to fly The idea to employ the terrestrialplanets as an energy through the atmospheresof Venus and Mars to sourceusing aero-gravity-assist(AGA) maneuversto provide exceptionally large velocity changesusing significantly increasethe velocity of interplanetary gravity-assist maneuvers. The concept has been spacecraft was first discussed for the Stat-probe understudy in a joint programbetween JPL and the mission to the sun] in 1982.
    [Show full text]