Sep 042014
 

Issues 09 and 10 of US Bomber Projects is now available (see HERE for the entire series). Issue #09 includes:

  • Boeing Model 464-33-0: A turboprop B-52 predecessor
  • Consolidated Army Bombardment Flying Wing: A ground attacker with an extreme mode of attack
  • GE Supersonic System 6X: A Mach 3 nuclear-powered bomber
  • Convair B/J-58: A supercuising version of the Hustler
  • Boeing model 484-2-2: AB-58 competitor
  • Northrop 464L: A blended wing/body spaceplane
  • Martin Model 223-9: a 1944 step on the road to the XB-48
  • Boeing Model 800-15A: A Mach 3.5 hydrogen fueled design of incredible range

USBP#09 can be downloaded as a PDF file for only $4:

——–

———
usbp09ad

————————

Issue #10 includes:

 

  • Boeing Model 464-34-3: A turboprop B-52 predecessor
  • Martin Model 192-5: A medium-sized flying wing
  • Republic Mach 7: a relatively small high-speed design
  • Convair WS-125A: A large nuclear powered supersonic design
  • Boeing model 484-415: A jet-powered supersonic flying boat
  • Boeing 464L: Boeings first Dyna Soar
  • Martin Model 223-10: a 1944 step on the road to the XB-48
  • Lockheed CL-1301-1: A very small VTOL ground attacker

USBP#10 can be downloaded as a PDF file for only $4:

——–

——————-

usbp10ad

 

 Posted by at 1:11 am
Sep 032014
 

US Bomber Projects issues 09 and 10 are now done, and will be available for sale just as soon as I get all the requisite website blahblah worked out. Hopefully tonight. I have issues 11 and 12 planned out, though still quite a bit of drafting to do.

The USBP series has been modestly successful (not blisteringly so, but ok, I guess…). I’m pondering doing the same format but with something other than bombers. Other concepts include:

  • US Fighter Projects
  • US Transport Projects (jetliners, cargo, civvies, SSTs, HSTs, etc.)
  • US Recon & Experimental Projects
  • US Launch Vehicle Projects
  • US Spacecraft Projects (spaceplanes, moon landers, Mars ships, etc.)
  • US Helicopter Projects

So, a few questions for commentors:

1) What did I leave out?

2) What would you most like to see? Some of these have a much bigger database to work from than others, of course.

 Posted by at 7:49 pm
Sep 012014
 

A piece of NASA art (a photo from eBay, with an attempt at correcting parallax error), likely from 1962-63, depicting current and forthcoming space launch vehicles. Of note, rather obviously, is the “Nova” launcher at far right. But also noteworthy are the “Thor Agena B” and the “Atlas Agena B,” both of which are depicted with the Agena upper stage & payloads blacked out. This could be due to security concerns over the Agena configuration… or perhaps the Agena was not yet well defined, and by blacking them out, the artist would not have to depict them (and yet they could be given an air of mystery). It would not surprise me if there is another version of this artwork with the Agenas shown clearly.

ebay 2014-07-19 12

 Posted by at 10:00 pm
Aug 292014
 

An RCA concept from some time in the 1960’s for an astronaut maneuvering unit that was to use voice controls. This would negate the need for hand controls, but it seems unlikely that 1960’s technology was quite up to the task. Image from HERE. Note that while the backpack is depicted in some detail, the Apollo spacecraft in the background is quite inaccurate and minimally detailed.

VoiceControledPropulsionBackpack

 Posted by at 11:55 pm
Aug 282014
 

In the innumerable CAD diagrams I’ve created and will – presumably – continue to create, I often include a simple human figure to provide a sense of scale. But the same figure, repeated over and over… well, that’s kinda boring. So, who has alternates? I’m looking for simple line drawings (DWG or DXF or some other vector format would be easiest, but GIF/JOG/whatever would be fine too) of human figures that would look good standing next to aircraft, spacecraft, launch vehicles, ordnance, etc. Please feel free to post pics and links on the comments.

 Posted by at 8:32 am
Aug 282014
 

I’ve posted another “PDF Review” over at the APR blog, this time on a 1967 Convair publication on the Atlas family of launch vehicles. This document was originally found on NTRS… but it doesn’t seem to exist there anymore. I’m guessing it was a victim of the March, 2013, lobotomy that NTRS underwent.

PDF Review: “Advanced Atlas Launch Vehicle Digest”

I have the full PDF file available for download over yonder. If this proves of interest and/or value, please consider participating in my Patreon campaign.

YUNoDonate “Only people who hate cats refuse to donate to the APR Patreon. You don’t hate cats… do you?”

 Posted by at 8:09 am
Aug 252014
 

Years ago when I worked at ATK on the Ares I and Ares V booster programs, I put forward an idea. It was a simple and, I thought, fairly obvious notion, based on a few facts:

1) Weight growth is generally to be avoided in space launch. However, if the weight gained is on a booster stage rather than an upper stage, the performance penalty is much reduced.

2) Not every flight would make full use of a launch vehicles potential. Given that propellant is essentially free, compared to the rest of the costs involved, it makes sense where possible to carry extra payloads if you can.

3) A secondary payload on the booster stage is, these days, of minimal interest, but would also be minimally payload-impacting

So here was my idea: on launches of the Ares V booster that did not make full use of the launch vehicles potential, carry “parasite” payloads on the solid rocket boosters. The payloads I had in mine? Paying passengers. The idea would be to put a capsule, or perhaps something akin to Space Ship One (fat fuselage with just enough wing to fly and land), on the nose of the booster. Just after booster separation, the capsules would themselves separate from the boosters.

Since they would be very distinctly sub-orbital, heating issues would be relatively trivial. Since the flight duration would be only a few minutes, onboard life support would also be minimal. As a result, the capsules could be spacious, relatively lightweight, and equipped with *big* windows.

If each booster carried a capsule, and each capsule seated ten passengers, and each passenger paid, say, $100,000, then each flight would generate an extra $2 million. Not much considering the probably $1Billion price tag of each launch, but hey… why not? Some launches could charge more, such as historically important flights to the Moon or Mars or such. How much would *you* have paid to hitch a ride alongside Apollo 11, for example?

And what would the passengers have seen? Lessee:

[youtube 2aCOyOvOw5c]

Needless to say, they didn’t think much of my idea. Grrr.

(Is this post a repeat? Maybe. Seems like I’ve yammered about this before. oh well.)

 Posted by at 12:24 pm
Aug 242014
 

A piece of artwork attributed to NASA (though I suspect perhaps it comes from Martin or United Tech) showing the Titan IIIc with a Centaur upper stage and a Viking Mars lander payload. Gotta love good old fashioned paintings. Sure a computer rendered version would be more accurate, but actual paintings have a little extra something.

titan

This has been cropped and rotated from the diagonal data-hog original.

 Posted by at 5:33 pm