Here’s a neat idea:
Planetary Science Institute Selects XCOR to Fly Atsa Suborbital Observatory
The Planetary Science Institute (PSI) and XCOR Aerospace have signed a Memorandum of Understanding that lays the groundwork for flying the human-operated Atsa Suborbital Observatory aboard XCOR’s Lynx spacecraft.
The Atsa project will use crewed reusable suborbital spacecraft equipped with a specially designed telescope to provide low-cost space-based observations above the contaminating atmosphere of Earth, while avoiding some operational constraints of satellite telescope systems.
The XCOR “Lynx” is a two-seat suborbital single-stage rocketplane. In its basic form it’s meant to take a single paying customer onto a suborbital “tour,” like a smaller version of the Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo. But from the beginning it has looked as if the Lynx was intended to do more than just tourism, with cargo (such as orbital upper stages) on its back. In this case, a fair-sized telescope is to be carried. Several minutes of gravity- and atmosphere-free observations should be possible per flight.
XCOR has focussed on reliable and rugged and operational, as opposed to squeezing out every last milli-erg of performance from their rocket engines. If they can do as well with the Lynx airframe, then several flights per day should be practical. The flights might allow rapid turnarounds for repeated observations, or quick changeouts of sensors and the like. Since the launch point is also the landing point, refurb of the payload shouldn’t be a problem.
I would be interested in seeing what the performance potential of the vehicle would be with *both* the telescope payload *and* a paying customer. Certainly the weight hit would be appreciable, but perhaps it would be a profitable venture to offer the passenger seat at a deep discount.
My own dumb idea: years ago I worked for Pioneer Rocketplane, which tried to develop a suborbital rocketplane. The “Pathfinder” would use two turbojets and a single rocket engine; the jets and the rocket engine burned the same kerosene-based fuel. The jets were used to launch the plane off a runway and rendezvous with a tanker aircraft, where all the liquid oxygen the rocket would need would be loaded on board. A competing concept was the Kelly design, which featured a fully-loaded spaceplane towed to altitude behind a 747. So… here’s my unfortunate thought. The Lynx launches itself onto its mission, enters, and begins its glide. It rendezvous with a tanker plane, and grabs onto a combined tow line/refueling line. While being towed, it is both refueled and re-LOXed. Upon separation, it launches itself back into space. Rinse, repeat. For this seup, I’d use a probe-and-drogue for the combined towline/kerosene refueler, with a flying boom for the LOX.
Operational nightmare? You bet!
8 Responses to “Sub-Orbital Space Telescope”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I recall recently reading about a thing like this, from the 60s. The aircraft would refuel at Mach 6. A true believer at XCOR reads your site, Scott.
> The aircraft would refuel at Mach 6
Lockheed and Douglas both studied high-mach high-altitude fueling during the ASP (AeroSpacePlane) studies in the early 1960’s. The Douglas design was the MARS, which I wrote about in APR some time back. Wind tunnel testing and whatnot showed that it was theoretically possible… but still, pretty much completely nuts.
> A true believer at XCOR reads your site, Scott.
Question is, though… a true believer of *what?*
Oh…such a nice mini-M EIS it could make as well…
I expect the Lynx to enter operations shortly after those rocket-powered racing planes that XCOR predicted several years back start competing against each other. 😀
Seems like a very expensive way to get a few minutes of astronomy. Wouldn’t it make more sense to launch doughnut shaped high-altitude balloons with telescopes in the hole? Link them with GPS sensors and whatever sensor/communications suite is necessary and you can get a fairly large baseline telescope I’d think. Computer tech should be up to the task of integrating all the images by now, and it would be a much less expensive system.
> . Wouldn’t it make more sense to launch doughnut shaped high-altitude balloons with telescopes in the hole?
There have been balloon-borne astronomical telescopes for decades. But the problem is… even though they fly *reeeeeeaaaaallly* high, they are still in the atmosphere, which means:
A: Some wind shear
B: Some wavelengths – IR, I believe – are still somewhat blocked
C: The telescope comes down wherever the hell it comes down, getting lost or mashed in the process
D: If the thing you’re wanting to look at is transitory or fast-moving (like, say, oh, I dunno, a Chinese satellite), then a balloon isn’t going to be very helpful.
D: If the thing you’re wanting to look at is transitory or fast-moving (like, say, oh, I dunno, a Chinese satellite), then a balloon isn’t going to be very helpful.
If you can look at something line of sight, shouldn’t be be able to illuminate it with a single shot laser? The engineering challenge would be getting the laser package down in size and mass.
> single shot laser?
Lasers are kinda “meh” for most actual applications, and I suspect that they’d be inappropriate for application onto the Lynx. Remember, not only do you need the big laser, you also nee the big *scope* to aim the laser.
Since one of the proposed applications of Lynx is as reusable booster for a micro-sate launcher, it should make a perfectly fine hit-to-kill anti-sat system for low altitude sats. But since sats can be tagged from jet fighters and ships, I’m uncertain if it would be worth the bother. However, the Lynx would replace the first booster stage of a ground-based ASAT system, so if Lynx is cheaper than such a booster – and, of course, all the support equipment that goes with it – then it might make sense. Since the Lynx should be readily transportable (on the back of a 707, say, or inside a C-5 or something), then it could be positioned fairly quickly as compared to a missile destroyer. If a fully-fueled ASAT Lynx could be shoved out the back end of a C-5, then there might *really* be something… *especially* of the Lynx could be snagged in flight. Given the troubles the parasite fighter programs have had over the years, I’d recommend having it grab onto a tow line. Empty, it might be towable by a corporate jet, an F-15, an F-18, a C-130…
If *that* all works, then you might end with a halfway “stealthy” ASAT system. Still, an F-15-based system would seem to probably be more practical.