Help support TMP


"The Stratolaunch" Topic


25 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Science Plus Board



297 hits since 31 May 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Mardaddy Supporting Member of TMP31 May 2017 8:06 p.m. PST

stratolaunch.com
link

Wheeled out for the first time. Nifty.

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian31 May 2017 8:41 p.m. PST

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

Personal logo Mardaddy Supporting Member of TMP31 May 2017 9:46 p.m. PST

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.

JSchutt02 Jun 2017 2:27 a.m. PST

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

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP02 Jun 2017 2:58 a.m. PST

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?

JSchutt02 Jun 2017 3:27 a.m. PST

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.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP02 Jun 2017 2:16 p.m. PST

The Spruce Goose? A wooden prop plane?

Martin from Canada02 Jun 2017 10:58 p.m. PST

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

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP03 Jun 2017 5:03 a.m. PST

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

Gunfreak Supporting Member of TMP03 Jun 2017 6:15 a.m. PST

The name made me think of this.


PaddySinclair03 Jun 2017 7:06 a.m. PST

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".

Charlie 1203 Jun 2017 4:19 p.m. PST

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.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP04 Jun 2017 4:07 a.m. PST

The name made me think of this.

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

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?

JSchutt04 Jun 2017 9:04 a.m. PST

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

Gunfreak Supporting Member of TMP04 Jun 2017 9:08 a.m. PST

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

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP04 Jun 2017 3:00 p.m. PST

Most technology that exists now will be obsolete by 2020.

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

Charlie 1205 Jun 2017 6:26 p.m. PST

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…

Charlie 1205 Jun 2017 6:32 p.m. PST

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.

Martin from Canada06 Jun 2017 4:03 a.m. PST

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.

picture

CGI Video: YouTube link

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP06 Jun 2017 12:23 p.m. PST

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

But not at LEO, surely.

Martin from Canada06 Jun 2017 12:39 p.m. PST

<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.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP06 Jun 2017 1:33 p.m. PST

Doesn't LEO start at 100 miles?

Martin from Canada06 Jun 2017 8:30 p.m. PST

Yes. Bowman watch the video I posted yesterday

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP07 Jun 2017 6:13 a.m. PST

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.

Martin from Canada07 Jun 2017 6:28 a.m. PST

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 :-)

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.