"The Stratolaunch" Topic

stratolaunch.com
link

Wheeled out for the first time. Nifty.

If it is so big, doesn't that severely limit which airports it can launch from?

Well it has a very narrow purpose, I cannot imagine the builders are considering a wide-airport-access capability. Especially when they are specifically trying to avoid air congestion.

I hazzard to think what would happen when a long distance migratory bird gets sucked into one of it's turbines….

I hazzard to think what would happen when a long distance migratory bird gets sucked into one of it's turbines….

I'm certainly no expert but I'll guess less of an affect than with a traditional one or two engine jet. Losing an engine may not allow it to achieve LEO, but should get it back down safely.

I wonder when they are ready for the first test flight?

Hopefully more substantive than the "Sprue Goose" which came to mind immediately. The apparent need for 2 cockpits separated by the width of a cricket pitch is not reassuring.

The Spruce Goose? A wooden prop plane?

Hopefully more substantive than the "Sprue Goose" which came to mind immediately. The apparent need for 2 cockpits separated by the width of a cricket pitch is not reassuring.

Ever hear of the F-82?

link

They flew the first combat mission in Korea. Don't know what this has to do with the Stratolaunch and its perceived flaws.

The name made me think of this.

They flew the first combat mission in Korea. Don't know what this has to do with the Stratolaunch and its perceived flaws.

Presumably having redundant control systems across two hulls? If I knew I had to have two hulls on an airframe, I would put a fully functional cockpit on each, regardless of which one is actually "in charge".

The twin fuselage is merely a design choice to maximize the payload by carrying it on the open center wing structure. And a good choice, at that.

The name made me think of this.

Is that a Norwegian knock off of Rowntree's Aero chocolate bar?

The twin fuselage is merely a design choice to maximize the payload by carrying it on the open center wing structure. And a good choice, at that.

And with a payload capacity of 500,000 lbs (!), now it just has to fly! They expect to be "fully operational" by 2020, but when is the first test flight?

Most technology that exists now will be obsolete by 2020. Gotta move faster than that.

Not a nockoff. They came out almost at the same time.

Most technology that exists now will be obsolete by 2020.

You're so right. We'll have flying cars in 2 1/2 years.

Most technology that exists now will be obsolete by 2020. Gotta move faster than that.

Of course, by then we'll have anti-gravity drive and FTL… Yeah, right…

And with a payload capacity of 500,000 lbs (!), now it just has to fly!

Not all that impressive. 747 freighters are good for 300k and the AN-225 can haul 500k.

The first flight is penciled in for later this year (following the ground tests). The first sat launch is supposed to happen about 2019-2020. The launch vehicle (that takes the payload to orbit) is under development.

The carrier bird itself is not orbital (be kind of hard with air breathing engines). Its just to take the payload to high altitude. Then the launch vehicle takes over to orbit.

I remember reading about these guys in early 2010s when they announced a partnership with SpaceX to fly a falcon variant. The partnership broke up over Alan's insistance on putting chines (think X15 and SR71) on the rocket to improve atmospheric flight, and Musk not wanting them since they would impede commonality of parts with the Falcon9.

CGI Video: YouTube link

Not all that impressive. 747 freighters are good for 300k and the AN-225 can haul 500k.

But not at LEO, surely.

<But not at LEO, surely.>
Why would an air-breathing jet make it to LEO? The purpose of the mother-ship is to get to 40k feet, and thus reduce the needed fuel of the rocket by about half – and thus ease the tyranny of the rocket equation.

Doesn't LEO start at 100 miles?

Yes. Bowman watch the video I posted yesterday

Ya, I just reread my entries and they seem misleading.

Sorry Martin, I had to watch it again to see that they don't mention the height that the payload is released. I know the Concorde flew at 60,000 feet. Most jets fly around 30-35 K as that is the best compromise between not enough air to cause drag and not enough air to choke the engines. So this is designed to launch at 40,000 ft?

Also the early videos only show a single cabin.

So this is designed to launch at 40,000 ft?

That's the number I've seen bandied about since most people assume that this is a Pegasus rocket on steroids, and the Pegasus launches at 40k feet.

But what's a few thousand feet between friends :-)