I just came across this. So far I’ve failed to get it to admit to actually having *anything; no search term or combination of search terms results in any hits. But perhaps it is new; perhaps it’s a work in progress… or perhaps all the good stuff is behind some AF firewall. Dunno. But I thought y’all might find it of interest… and if anyone has any success with it, let me know how and with what.
https://efoia.milcloud.mil/(S(vovixi10c1twlmkm50inkazg))/App/ReadingRoom.aspx
Just a thought. If someone were to take a model of the CVN-65 USS Enterprise nuclear powered aircraft carrier and modify it with the Douglas “Ithacus Jr.” rocket transport as in the concept art below, what should go along with it? The art depicts the Enterprise modified with a bow extension, two movable “VABs,” and two of the rocket transports (an aft extension is implied but not visible). The flight deck is shown as deserted, which is reasonable under the circumstances… with those VABs, most of the flight deck would be unavailable for takeoffs and landings. Only the angled deck would seem to provide some functionality there.
The concept dates from 1964. If a model was made, it would probably tend to represent a time frame from the mid 1970’s onwards. What should be on the deck in that case, to help dress it up (it seems like it’d be kinda bland without some other things populating the deck)? A few things seem reasonable:
Boeing Heavy Lift Helicopter:
A VTOL C-130:
Convair 200 VTOL fighter:
Lockheed CL-1090 (or similar) passenger compound helicopter:
Anything else to consider?
A ca. 1964 Boeing rendering of an HL-10-derived spaceplane in orbit. Numerous companies – Boeing, McDonnell, Lockheed, Northrop, etc. – contemplated the development of a logistics spaceplane based on the HL-10. The spaceplane itself would, rather like the X-20 Dyna Soar, have been minimally functional in space; most of the propulsion and power would have come from the attached adapter module. The conical adapter would have also carried the bulk of the vehicles payload to be delivered to orbit, and would be used to provide a de-orbit burn for the spaceplane. The adapter would therefore burn up on re-entry, leaving the lifting body to glide to a runway landing. The spaceplane itself would be crammed full of astronauts and the life support they’d need; there would generally be little capacity for anything else, certainly not payload going back downhill. This was fine, though, as there were few enough payloads other than humans that made sense to send *back* down the gravity well.
Huh. This got by me… Virgin doesn’t seem to be as media-savvy as SpaceX.
It’s a nice-looking launch. But what it looked like to me was less the launch of a space vehicle, but the launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile: with the 747 reaching the end of its passenger carrying life, perhaps the USAF should buy a few thousand of them and modify them into missile carriers for a new generation of air-mobile, air-launched long range nuclear strike system. I’m sure the Harris administration will get right on that.
Starts at about 2:06:58.
This would have been a *fantastic* test… in about 1984. Splice it into “Wonder Woman 1984,” and it would have fit right in. But nearly 40 years later, it just looks like an antique. It’s like firing up an F-104 Starfighter: impressive in its way, but no longer top of the line.
A piece of concept art depicting the AMROC Industrial Launch Vehicle 1, circa 1987. AMROC specialized in hybrid launch vehicles, and the privately funded and developed ILV was no different. What the vehicle looks like is a liquid propellant core vehicle with a bunch of solid rocket strap-on boosters… but what it actually is is a core made up of liquid oxygen tanks, surrounded by clusters of solid fuel motors. The motors were fed LOX from the core, firings together to create a sort of plug nozzle using the aft end of the propellant tank to react against (though it appears the bulk of the expansion took place within individual nozzles). When the first stage motors burned out, the whole thing fell off as a single stage. The vehicle had four stages; stages 2,3 and 4 were made of different solid motors around a common liquid tank core. The whole stack was 82 feet long. It was supposed to have been able to deliver 1800 kilograms to a 200 km orbit from KSC, or 1350 kg to 200 km polar orbit from Vandenberg; a little over 1400 kg to a 1000 km KSC orbit or about 1050 kg to a 1000 km polar orbit. First launch attempt was to be in the latter half of 1988… that didn’t happen.
Snerk. NASA actually thinks there will be Artemis moon missions.
NASA is targeting a two-hour test window that opens at 5 p.m. EST Saturday, Jan. 16, for the hot fire test of NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket core stage at the agency’s Stennis Space Center near Bay St. Louis, Mississippi. Live coverage will begin at 4:20 p.m. on NASA Television and the agency’s website, followed by a post-test briefing approximately two hours after the test concludes.
So NASA is planning on a static fire of the core of the Space Launch System. OK, fine, if about a decade-plus behind schedule and maybe a couple dozen billion dollars over budget. But the article goes into WokeMath in order to ramp up the excitement:
UMMMMM….
The core of the SLS has four RS-25 engines, thrust 418 klbf each, totaling 1,672,000 lbf. The Saturn V had five F-1 engines, each with a thrust of 1,522 klbf each for a total of 7,610,000 lbf.
I’m not sure I agree with LiveScience’s math. But then, 2+2=4 is racist, so maybe 1.672 is greater than 7.610 these days.
I communicated with Dennis Jenkins today. “Space Shuttle: Developing an Icon 1972-2013” had one single printing, there will be no more… and that one printing is finally nearly sold out. It is still available at the original retail price of $170. But once it’s sold out, the secondary market will be the only place to get it and the price will skyrocket… it’s already $228 to $448 on abebooks, a single $364 copy on ebay. Hell it might even be a good investment for resale. This three-volume set is a remarkable work and is worth every penny. Make sure to get a copy before the Green New Deal kicks in and it becomes difficult to ship things!
Just released, the December 2020 rewards for APR Patrons and Subscribers. Included this month:
Diagram: a large format diagram of a Lockheed cruise missile. The designation of the missile is not given, but this looks like a SCAD design.
Document 1: Consolidated Class VB Carrier Based Bomber, from 1946
Document2: “Economic Aspects of a Reusable Single Stage To Orbit Vehicle,” a paper by Phil Bono on the ROOST launch vehicle from 1963
Document 3: “Shuttle Derived Vehicles,” a NASA-MSFC briefing to General Abrahamson from 1984
CAD Diagram: XSM-64A Navaho, the configuration that would have been built as an operational vehicle had the program gone forward
If this sort of thing is of interest, sign up either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program.