Found on ebay: a piece of B&W art depicting the Saturn V. The provenance is uncertain… unknown where this art originated. There are some unusual details; the tailfins are clocked 45 degrees off, moved from the outer diameter of the engine firings to between them, an odd choice to say the least. The third stage is larger in diameter than the S-IVb with a very long interstage between the S-II and the S-IVb; this *may* indicate that the third stage was meant to be a nuclear stage, with a single NERVA engine attached to the rear of the S-N third stage. The payload is also different: it appears to be a direct lander… no LEM, the Apollo vehicle landed directly on the lunar surface.
A piece of Aerojet artwork depicting the NERVA nuclear rocket engine heading to Mars. This is almost certainly artistic license as the vehicle depicted here is a single stumpy upper stage with an aerodynamic fairing. This is mot likely a RIFT (Reactor In Flight Test) configuration, a simple expendable upper stage test configuration meant to be launched atop a Saturn V to prove out the engine.
A photo of a 1960’s Bell Helicopter concept for a high-speed tiltrotor. In this design the aircraft would operate in hover and low speed much like the V-22, but at higher speeds the prop-rotors would stop rotating and fold back to reduce drag. Forward thrust would be provided by pure jet exhaust from the convertible turboshaft engines within the fuselage.
I have uploaded high-rez scans of the color glossy photo to the 2018-08 APR Extras folder on Dropbox for APR Patrons at the $4 level and up.
If you are interested in this image and a great many other “extras” and monthly aerospace history rewards, please sign up for the APR Patreon. What else are you going to spend $4 a month on? Taxes? Bah. Invest in the APR Patreon instead.
A piece of Boeing Heavy Lift Helicopter artwork that was on ebay a while back. The XCH-62 HLH was an early 1970’s concept cancelled in ’74. The first prototype was under construction when cancelled; NASA tried to revive and finish the prototype in the 80’s, but got nowhere. The prototype was controversially turned into garbage at the US Army Aviation Museum in 2005. This was *not* a popular decision. nor was cancelling the thing in the first place; had it been built it would have had the ability to lift 22.5 tons.
This illustration shows it carrying a standard shipping container from a cargo vessel to shore. The container seems to contain fuel; it’s being used to refuel a Boeing Vertol UH-61, a design which competed against- and lost to – the Sikorsky S-60 Black Hawk.
A 1959 NASA depiction of the Ernst Stuhlinger “Umbrella” ship. This design was nuclear-electric, the electricity powering a bank of ion engines providing a trickle of high ISP thrust. The large circular “umbrella” was the radiator for the nuclear reactor, located at the far end of the “handle.” This design is a little different from the usual depiction with the crew compartment divided into two semi-toroidal segments. Normally this design is shown with a single torus with a maximum diameter much smaller than that of the radiator; here the crew compartments are shown to be relatively gigantic. I assume that this is artistic license as it also depicted the crew compartments as having *vast* circular windows in the floor. The crew compartments would spin (apparently independent of the rest of the ship) to generate some amount of artificial gravity to keep the crew healthy.
Scanned from a 35mm slide at the NASA HQ some years ago. The basic shape here (FDL-7/McDonnell Model 176) appeared on a great many McD designs for the latter half of the sixties from small one-man experimental designs on up to full Shuttle-sized craft like this one. It had both sharply swept fixed wings on the bottom and stowable high aspect ratio wings for landing up top.
…for extracting water from rocks on the moon. This dates from 1963-65 and was part of a North American Aviation study relate to post-Apollo lunar exploration… which at the time was fully expected. The LESA (Lunar exploration Systems for Apollo) program would land habitats on the moon for extended exploration; the later phases of the LESA program were expected to occur in the late 1970.s The conclusion was that solar was preferred for the earliest phases, transitioning to nuclear. Basically, either system would cook rocks till the water came out as a thin vapor, which would be collected.
In the more than fifty years since this came out, the technologies involved haven’t changed a whole lot, especially solar: it remains a mirror and sunlight. Nukes should – hopefully – have improved. So it might still be a bit of a tossup on the moon; of course, any long-term lunar exploration is going to need nukes anyway for the simple reason that two weeks of night is a *real* long time if your base is solar powered. Going further out – asteroids, outer planet moons, comets and such – the math increasingly works in nuclears favor. But then, what’s needed is power, and mirrors in microgravity can be made extremely large.
It’s an interesting report. If not for the technology and techniques described, then for the basic worldview that suggested to engineers more than half a century ago that they’d soon have to crack water out of lunar rocks.
A Study of the Feasibility of Using Nuclear Versus Solar Power in Water Extraction from Rocks.
Direct PDF download link.
Help support the APR Patreon.