Sep 152013
 

DARPA has a VTOL program. Some fellers at Boeing-Philadelphia had an idea for a VTOL aircraft. So… they spent three days designing a subscale prototype, and two weeks building it.

[youtube 8N3RlaVYDdM]

It flies, if rather wobbly. Further tinkerage with the computer  control system should clear that right up..

Three days. Think of it… not months and months of committee meetings and never ending analysis paralysis. Just design something that, while not being perfect, is good enough.

Interestingly, the same technologies (computers) that helped them design and fly the “Phantom Swift” this quickly are responsible in no small part for the aerospace industry grinding to a halt in recent decades. In the 1950’s and before, if you wanted to test an idea, you built it. Then stuck it in a wind tunnel, or launched it with a sounding rocket, or dropped it from a plane, or stuck an engine and an adrenaline junkie in it and actually flew it. But once computer aided design and analysis came on the scene, rather than spend lots of money building, flying and crashing, engineers spent lots of money designing and redesigning and reredesigning and rereredesigning until eventually the whole program got cancelled.

 Posted by at 11:43 am
Sep 152013
 

During the heady days of the late 1970’s/early 1980’s Solar Power Satellite program, a number of fairly large launch vehicles were designed to haul the vast amounts of material needed in orbit. One that received a fair amount of press was a Boeing single stage to orbit design. Basically shaped like a Mercury capsule, this design became known as “Big Onion.” It’s unclear exactly how it got that name, and by whom; no official Boeing model number is known for it.

big onion

The Big Onion and the other heavy lifters of the time were not as powerful as the Post-Saturn vehicles studied a decade earlier. Where the earlier designs had million-pound payloads, “Big Onion” and its ilk topped out at around half a million. The purpose was low cost transport of vast quantities of material, not the largest possible payload in one shot.

 Posted by at 8:46 am
Sep 142013
 

Finally got around to creating web pages specifically for the US Bomber Projects publications:

http://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/bomproj.htm

and

http://up-ship.com/blog/Book/bomproj.htm

You can order all of them from either of those pages. And feel free to do so… sales for #3 and #4 are half what they were for #1 and #2. Can’t help but see that as an unfortunate sign. Did the customer base go stale that fast? Hmmm…

Anyway, here are two illustrations from #4… the Lockheed-Martin FALCON Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle and the Lockheed nuclear powered cruise missile carrier from the 1970’s.

Pages from USBP04 Pages from USBP04-2

 Posted by at 12:41 am
Sep 122013
 

A Boeing artists impression of a 747 modified to launch ICBMs (probably Minuteman IIIs). Dates from 1974. Missile load appears to be at least 4. Given how far aft the missiles are dropped, there would likely be an impressive pitch even upon drop.

From an old ebay auction.

mc-747 a

mc-747 b

 Posted by at 8:23 am
Sep 112013
 

Issue number 4 of US Bomber Projects is now available (for background, see HERE). This issue includes:

McDonnell System 464L: McDonnell’s entry into the initial Dyna Soar contest, 1958
Lockheed-Martin Falcon: A recent design for an unmanned hypersonic global range bomber
Lockheed Senior Peg: Lockheed’s competitor to the Northrop B-2
Boeing Mobile Missile Carrier: A giant hydrogen fueled amphibian
Boeing Model 701-273-4: A very asymmetrical supersonic predecessor to the B-59
Lockheed Cruise Missile Carrier: A large nuclear-powered cargo plane converted to carry 90 cruise missiles
Boeing Model 462-5: A six-turboprop B-52 ancestor
Martin Model 223-4: A twin-fuselage design on the road to the B-48

USBP#04 can be downloaded as a PDF file for only $4:

——–

———
usbp04ad

 Posted by at 7:26 pm
Sep 112013
 

Issue number 3 of US Bomber Projects is now available (for background, see HERE). This issue includes:

  • Rockwell D 645-4A: A compact stealthy flying wing
  • Lockheed System 464L: Lockheed’s entry into the initial Dyna Soar program, 1958
  • Convair Mach 4 “Rollover:” A Mach 4 seaplane with a unique approach
  • Boeing Model 701-273-3: An asymmetrical supersonic precursor to the B-59
  • Boeing HSCT Model 1080-854: A late 1980’s missile carrier derivative of a commercial supersonic transport
  • Martin Model 223-3: A canard antecedent to the B-48
  • Boeing Model 462: A large six-turboprop ancestor of the B-52

USBP#03 can be downloaded as a PDF file for only $4:

——–

———

usbp03ad

 Posted by at 7:26 pm
Sep 102013
 

An admittedly rather awful-quality CAD diagram of the “Dual Keel” space station configuration as studied by NASA sometime in the late 1980’s. This drawing is noteworthy for sowing what appears to be a very large parabolic antenna, probably a radio antenna or radar dish (seems far too large to be the reflector for a solar power system).

Scanned from a slide at the NASA HQ historical archive.

 Posted by at 12:17 am
Sep 082013
 

The pneumonia well and truly kicked my ass. I’m well into recovery, but it screwed up my lung function but good, with a result being that I not only have exciting coughing fits for no readily apparent reason, but I also seem to have really low blood oxy levels. Damn near passed out a few days ago… because I stood up. Feh. The end result of all that is that my ability to get much done, or to even give much of a damn, has been drained. I have a few projects I need to accomplish, but progress has been really, really slow.

Blogging has, perhaps obviously, turned into something of a back-burner issue. So, please to enjoy this artists impression from the 1960’s showing a Douglas concept for a small space station launched atop a Saturn S-IVb stage (not sure if Saturn Ib or V), using Gemini capsules for logistics. This came from an eBay sale sometime back (that I did not win).

morl

Several model projects, both physical and CAD, have fallen far behind. The physical ones will be most problematic… crappy lungs and solvents? Not good bedfellows.

Two projects *have* made a measure of progress… US Bomber Projects issues 03 and 04 near completion, and the sci-fi story I wrote some time ago and got promising feedback from a Published Author, has been revised into draft #5 and sent off to said author for a hopefully final and positive review. If so, I’ll send it on first to Analog, and see what happens.

USBP 03 and 04 should be out this week. If the story is accepted for publication, I actually have two followup stories partially worked up in my head involving the same characters. The three stories are quite different in plot and tone and even kinda genre. All are based on a “space opera” foundation, but one is intended as hard SF, one as a bit of comedy (with a bit of philosophy), one as a bit of horror. Ain’t sayin’ which is what. If they get published, it’ll be obvious. If they don’t, it won’t much matter.

 Posted by at 10:12 pm
Sep 042013
 

Fusion power has been about 10 years away for the last 50 years or so. Still, experts in the field have from time to time gone ahead and designed operational reactors based on then-current assumptions. One such design study was done in 1972 by staff at the Oak Ridge National Lab, reported on in early 1973. This was a 1000 megawatt commercial fusion powerplant based on the Tokamak torus-type reactor. The work was sponsored by the US Atomic Energy Commission.

A 30,000 gauss superconducting toroidal electromagnet would serve as the deuterium and tritium containment and compression field, driving up pressure and temperature to fusion levels. Neutrons spit out by the reaction would be absorbed by a thick blanket of liquid lithium; absorption of the neutrons would cause the lithium to fission and create tritium at a rate higher than tritium is consumed in fusion, thus making the system self sustaining as far as tritium. While a reactor like this, if made workable, would not have the sort of safety issues associated with fission reactors (see: Chernobyl, Fukushima), there would still be the potential issue of many tons of molten lithium. At the best of time lithium and the oxygen in air do not get along well; melt the lithium and expose it to oxygen – say, via a split weld or a broken pipe – and you’d have one spectacular magnesium-like fire that would probably reduce the entire plant (including the concrete structure) to smoldering ash.

Needless to say, no commercial powerplant like this has been built. One like it is… at least 10 years away.

 Posted by at 5:57 am