Aug 202011
A NASA-Langley video (early/mid 1990’s) describing the HL-20 Personnel Launch System lifting body.
[youtube J5i2DS9bzkM]
Additionally, a 2011 NASA-Langley video discussing the HL-20 and the Sierra Nevada “Dream Chaser,” which is designed off of the HL-20:
[youtube dhAYlWdEC64]
10 Responses to “HL-20 video”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
the HL-20 was one of the biggest and most expensive NASA failures, that costed over $5 billion without ever fly once in space and deleted since too expensive, seriously flawed and very dangerous for the astronauts – it wasn’t designed to be launched atop an Atlas V nor to land on a runway like a Shuttle (since not even has the space for the landing gears) also, the internal space of the cabin for the astronauts is less than that of a coffin – it’s really incredible (and a clear sign of desperation) that now NASA believes that, this failed vehicle, can become the new Space Shuttle and wants to fund the development of the HL-20-derived Dreamchaser-mockup with hundreds millions of dollars!
Gaetano,
Still pulling numbers and information out of thin air as usual. You know there’s a reason why you’re banned from commenting at almost all moderated aerospace-related sites – you’re a rather incompetent comments troll. At least Windy tries to use some logic and facts.
Why don’t you go back to spamming AvWeek where they don’t moderate their comments.
“[do] You know there’s a reason why you’re banned from commenting at almost all moderated aerospace-related sites [?]”
yes, I know why
because, both old.space and new.space companies, have lots o money and receive lots of billion$ from NASA for their trash, but, they only need few cents of their money to fund (without appear directly) some american and british (“independent”) space forums and blogs, “sponsorize” the existing space forums and blogs, that, nearly immediately, ban, from the forum (using as an excuse the “spam” or the “trolling”) ALL the users that post critics related to the big-companies’ business (it’s happened to me in USA, UK, France and Germany, especially when is born the, now completely DEAD, Direct Launcher project/business/LOBBY) or (well) pay several crews of professional web-PR-guys that regularly reads all space forums and blogs that “indipendently” ( 🙂 🙂 🙂 ) supports the companies that pay their salaries (or in which they work) and post LOTS and TONS of insults against all the people that post critics, or have doubts, or ask (disliked) questions, about these companies, their hardware and their business
> it wasn’t designed to be launched atop an Atlas V
Not surprising, since the Atlas V didn’t exist at the time.
> or to land on a runway like a Shuttle (since not even has the space for the landing gears)
Errr, yes, it did.
> the internal space of the cabin for the astronauts is less than that of a coffin
Ummm… not even close to accurate.
Why all the negative comments, G.M.? Trolling can’t pay that well…I hear Sierra Nevada is hiring knowledgeable professionals.
it’s NOT Sierra Nevada, but the HL-20 design, that is old, bad and flawed, the worse point to start from
personally, I do believe that a (reusable and low cost) mini-Shuttle is the best way to carry astronauts to/from LEO
that’s why, from the end of 2005 on uplink.space, I’ve very often advocated this choice
unfortunately, spend money to revive a bad, failed (and, just ten years less older than Space Shuttle) project like the HL-20 is the worst way to reach this goal
I do believe that, a good Shuttle replacement, must be designed from scratch, no matter if it needs more money or more time, than try to revive the HL-20 zombie
please note also that the HL-20/DREAMchaser NOT EVEN HAS A LAS, so, the risk to lose MANY crews is the SAME or HIGHER than with the Shuttle!
I notice they didn’t mention that the design wasn’t based on the HL-10 anywhere near as much as it was based on the unmanned Soviet BOR-4 lifting body that was photographed during ocean recovery by a Australian P-3 Orion. The photos were used to build a model of the BOR-4, which was tested in a US wind tunnel, which showed it had good flying characteristics and the ability to reenter inside of its own shockwave, cutting down airframe heating:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/bor4.htm
BOR-4 itself was a outgrowth of the Spiral space fighter design’s aerodynamics:
http://www.buran.ru/htm/str126.htm
If Spiral was influenced by any of the US lifting body designs is a good question; it looks sort of like the HL-10, with a bit of X-24A thrown in.
The circle turns, does it not…
Ah yes, the trapped in the elevator scene… one of favorite moments in the entire series. 😀
Seriously, it would be fun to track down when Spiral got started versus our lifting bodies.
The Soviets had quite a few aerospaceplane designs, I suspect a lot of which probably started after we got serious about Dyna-Soar.
This odd thing sounds like some sort of garbled description of their postwar interest in the German Antipodal Bomber project:
http://books.google.com/books?id=JFQEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA28&dq=from+continent+to+continent&hl=en&ei=omxRTueEKOKJsQKXsan1Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=from%20continent%20to%20continent&f=false
It also has some aspects of the Burya intercontinental cruise missile about it, like the side mounted boosters.
It also showed up in the books about missiles of the time, described as the “T-4A” winged version of the “T-4” missile:
http://astheysawit.com/6785-1958-rockets-and-guided-missiles.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=1958-rockets-and-guided-missiles
(Scroll down to the Soviet Union section)
When my brother was in OCS in the late 1960’s, they saw a training film that had this thing in it; that would be fun to track down on YouTube.
If SLS actually does fly, perhaps we will see HL-42 fly instead:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/hl42.htm
“…because of its larger dimensions, the heating expected on the nose and fin leading edges was expected to be less severe than on HL-20. The centre-of-gravity of the vehicle with payload in or out was within the flyable range based on the extensive HL-20 aerodynamic data base. The large cross-range capability of HL-42 permitted multiple daily landing opportunities at the launch site, or every orbit landing opportunities if five landing sites were selected from the current list of available Shuttle landing sites.”
The elevator scene was my favorite too. Instead of helping Londo when he channels trek about putting differences aside and working together, it was always..”No..”
Londo: “I hate my life”
G’Kar: “Me too.”
Londo: “Shut up!”