TSTO
spaceplanes
introduction
Until now
apart from the STS space shuttle almost every space program is
based around vertically launched expendable rockets. These not
only are very expensive but they also are very difficult to operate,
in most circumstances a long preparation period of days, even
months is needed for a successful launch.
It is a widely spread belief that the ideal vehicle would be a
system that could take off like a conventional airliner, reach
high altitude and place its cargo in to orbit and later land also
as a conventional airliner. Such a system would combine the operational
agility of common aircraft with very low operating cost because
it would be almost totally reusable. However the previous concept
(single stage to orbit - SSTO) would require a huge amount of
thrust potential from the engines and so it is quite a leap from
the availiable technology at the time being.
The following projects are two stage to orbit (TSTO) vehicles
that consist from a carrier aircraft and a -smaller- orbital vehicle.
The first is a presentation of a patent application by Boeing
in two variations of a tsto system, the second is a XB-70 derived
project known as Blackstar and the third is the short-lived rascal
project of DARPA.
Boeing Horizontal-takeoff
transatmospheric launch system
This part of the present article is based on a patent application
filed by Boeing in 1989 (US 4,802,639).This system is described
in two variations, the one with an orbital vehicle that uses a
liquid fuel rocket engine and the other with an orbiter using
a scramjet. The carrier mothership is similar in both derivatives.
The carrier
is quite a large aircraft, it houses 8 jet engines and a liquid
propellant rocket engine. The fuel tanks for the rocket engine
are placed in the front part of the fuselage and the tanks for
the jet engines are inside the wings. The jet engines are housed
in two quad sets under the wings and the patent refers to a GE
F101 as a proposed engine. It is worth mentioning that the 2.2
mach B-1B bomber uses only 4 of these jet engines. The single
rocket engine is placed at the upper rear end of the fuselage
and it is an SSME of Rocketdyne as used in the Space Shuttle.
This engine uses liquid oxygen and hydrogene and is also fully
throttlable.
Between the two jet engine housings there is a large cavity in
the fuselage where the orbital vehicle is carried conformaly.
This cavity is big enough in order almost the entire orbiter to
fit in. Thus it is very easy during the assembly on the ground
to roll the orbiter underneath the carrier by using its own landing
gear.

The
orbital vehicle is a winged aircraft with its own propulsion system
and landing gear, as already mentioned. It also uses an SSME engine
and it has a cargo bay between the two main fuel tanks inside
the fuselage. For orbital and re-entry manoeveurs it also has
4 smaller rocket engines in the aft part of the fuselage.

Flight Profile
The two aircraft connected together are jointly take off horizontally
as a conventional airliner by using only the 8 jet engines of
the carrier.

When reaching an altitude of 30.000ft and a velocity of 0.85 mach
the two rocket engines are activated..
One very crucial point of the design is the interconnection between
the rocket propellant tanks of the carrier and the orbiter. The
fuel line is using firstly the carrier tanks to feed both vehicle's
rocket engines and when it is time for the orbiter to detach it
has a completely full tank.

The separation between the two vehicles occurs at 103.000ft and
a velocity of 3,3mach. To initiate the process the carrier reduces
its thrust to create a thrust differential between itself and
the orbiter. The latter rolls out following the circular path
that the two supporting struts dictates. The connecting rods in
the orbiters upper surface are constructed in a way to sustain
no force when the strut angle is almost 90 degrees or more. So
when the orbiter rolls out low and front enough it is released
automatically from the mothership and resumes ascending to orbit
with its tanks full of proppelant.

The carrier mothership continues to ascend by its momentum and
it reaches a maximum altitude of 127.000ft with an airspeed dropped
at 2.84 mach and then it starts to descend in order to land as
a conventional airplane.
The orbiter ascends until it enters to orbit. After it accomplish
its mission, it performs a re-entry manoeuver by using its auxiliary
rocket engines and by following a high-drag flight profile it
is entering the earths atmosphere sailing while reducing its airspeed
(similarly to the space shuttle orbiter) until it finally lands
horizontally.
Scramjet version.
In this derivative of Boeing's proposal the carrier is identical
with the version already described but it has two SSME engines
in the back.
The orbiter is also a winged aircraft but with a scramjet engine
instead of a rocket. The scramjet uses the atmosphere's oxygen
as oxidizer so the aircraft needs only tanks for fuel. It also
has an auxiliary rocket engine for orbital manoeuvers.

The flight profile is quite different because of the scramjet
which needs to be inside the atmosphere in order to function properly.
The two vehicles jointed take off using only the jet engines and
again at 30.000ft and 0,85 mach the two rocket engines are ignited.
When reaching 80.000ft and 2,5 mach the scramjet is starting to
produce thrust and with the 2 rocket engines the joint aircrafts
reach a velocity of 3,3 mach at only 90.000ft (the other version
needs to climb at 103.000ft to reach that speed). At this altitude
and speed the separation process is initiated and it is the same
as described above.

After the separation the carrier heads for landing. The orbiter
needs to remain below 40 miles of altitude because of the scramjet,
so it accelerates to reach a velocity in excess of the required
25.700ft/s. When reaching the upper boundaries of the atmosphere
the orbiter is moving at 26.200ft/s and while the scramjet shuts
down due to lack of oxygen the orbiter uses its momentum to ascent
at an altitude of almost 100 miles and enter to orbit. In this
stage it also uses the auxiliary rocket engine to sustain orbit
and to manoeuvre in space. After it accomplishes its task it re-enters
the earth's atmosphere and sails to landing.
conclusions for both versions
This system is very flexible, both vehicles are completely reusable
and need minimal pre-launch preparations before or after their
flight. It can place cargo or people into orbit in short notice
and repeat the same task in a very short period of time. No complex
ground establishment or equipment is needed in contrast with the
space shuttle or other vertically launched rockets which requires
a lot of ground gear and personnel to support their launch and
landing. There isn't also the handicap of the optimum equatorial
launch coordinates that most rockets are facing. The system can
transit to a place close to equator by using its jet engines and
launch the orbiter with a minimum penalty in rocket fuel consumption.
Apart from the scramjet engine which is still in early experimental
developpement stage almost the entire technology that this project
needs is not only operational but almost 25 years in use (the
F101 and SSME engines for example). Though this proposal never
reached production or early developpement stage (officially at
least) some of its core design elements seems to derive or being
used in the -unofficially named- Blackstar system.
Blackstar
This system is presented in a recent article of Aviation Week
& Space technology and has a lot of similarities not only
to Boeings TSTO described above but also to the XB-70 'Valkyrie'
experimental trisonic bomber. The later was designed by North
American Aviation which later -as Rockwell- merged with Boeing.
The information about Blackstar are blurry and of course unofficial.
Its action is mostly placed in the 90s and the system consist
from the carrier aircraft named SR-3 and the orbiter named XOV
from 'experimental orbital vehicle'.

The carrier aircraft has many similarities with the XB-70 bomber.
It is possible that not only the equipment and infrastructure
for producing the XB-70 but also the 3rd unfinished XB-70 prototype
was used as well for the developpement of the SR-3.
The main external difference is at the wingtips. The XB-70 used
a revolutionary movable at almost 90 degrees angle delta wingtips
which produced a substantial amount of lift due to compression
of the flow. The SR-3 has instead simple winglets which are quite
large and stabilise the aircraft instead of the conventional vertical
tails of XB-70.This diffirence is probably dued to the lower maximum
speed of the SR-3 which rendered the XB-70 layout useless.
SR-3 used at least four turbojets (possibly six General Electric
YJ-93-3 like XB-70). The engines were placed in two groups leaving
a cavity between them where the orbital vehicle nested confrontally.
The XOV has a length of about 180-200ft which is approximately
the length of XB-70's engine bay.

While XB-70 used a wing made from composites with a honeycomb
core, SR-3's were constructed more conventionally from aluminium
with a simpler structure due to a smaller maximum airspeed of
2 mach (instead of XB-70's 3.3+ mach) which stresses a lot less
both thermally and structurally the wing and frame.
In the front there are two canard wings which are reported to
be seen both inclined front or rear. It is believed that the canards
could alter the sweep angle (from front sweep to rear) to compensate
for the change of the relative distance between the centre of
gravity and the centre of aerodynamic pressure when the XOV is
released.
XOV
The orbiter is a lifting body with small blended wings. It has
dropped winglets possibly to take advantage of compression lift
as -in quite larger scale- did the original XB-70. Its fuselage
was constructed from advanced composite materials with a sandwich
honeycomb core and it has a length of 97.5ft. There probably was
a smaller, possibly unmanned, version also.
The vertical stabiliser was quite thick and was also the connecting
strut with the carrier aircraft.ας στήριξης με το SR-3.
XOV used very advanced rocket engines, not only they had aerospike
nozzles, but they used a boron based gel as fuel. This gel is
much denser and has a lot more specific energy when burned than
conventional fuels. The XOV used four aerospike rocket engines
with 2D nozzles which were developed before the XRS-2200 that
the X-33 would use if evolved to be operational. Additionally
there was also a small rocket engine in the base of the vertical
stabiliser (right above the 4 main engines) which probably was
used for orbital and re-entry manoeveurs.
XOV's landing gear was a combination of wheels and skis.

There are very few information or even speculations about the
flight profile of the Blackstar system. XB-70 has a maximum operational
altitude of 75.000ft so it is possible that SR-3 reached this
altitude with a maximum airspeed of 2 mach before releasing the
XOV. Then the SR-3 was heading for landing while the XOV reached
orbit and performing its task before re-enter the atmosphere and
land also.
The orbiter was transported from the landing site with the use
of modified C-5B military cargo aircraft. These heavily modified
C-5s had a wider fuselage (+8ft), internal changes in the cargo
bay and a stronger landing gear.
The Blackstar system had a lot of novelties but it was based in
tried and tested technology. It probably performed several missions
in total secrecy (there are rumours for the existence of quite
a few XOVs) and its technology while not readily avaliable exist
as a know how for future designs.
DARPA - RASCAL
The RASCAL (Responsive Access Small cargo Affordable Launch) is
smaller than the 3 systems described above and also it isn't totally
reusable.It is though very similar in concept. It consists of
a carrier aircraft and an expendable small rocket as a second
stage.

The RASCAL was a project initiated by DARPA and Scaled was to
build the main carrier aircraft. Allied Aerospace was to install
and integrate the propulsion system while the overhaul management
was awarded to Space Launch. Although it was cancelled it has
already reached early development.
The fuselage was 89ft long and the wingspan was 81ft with a wing
area of 2700sq.ft. Cargo bay was 42ft long and the aircraft's
gross weight was 80.000lb with a maximum of 16.000lb of cargo.

The aircraft used four turbofan engines, with the P&W F100
as proposed (also used in the F-15/F16 fighters). Its main novelty
was the MIPCC system in the engine which made the system feasable.
The second stage was an expendable 2 stage rocket with solid propellant
or hybrid propulsion.
Flight profile.
The aircraft reaches 3.1 mach at 63.000ft and with a steep climb
ascends to 200.000ft while decelerating to 1.2 mach. At this point
it launches the rocket to place its cargo into orbit
During the entire flight path the lateral forces never exceed
4g while the longitude forces remain under 5g, in order to stress
the cargo no more than a vertically launched rocket.
Rascal's main advantage is its operational flexibility, it can
be used anytime and re-launched again in 24 hours after its mission.
remarks:

The projects that were presented in this article although
cancelled or even at the verge of science fiction indicates that
with the current (or even 30 year old!) technology we can have
easy, safe and cheap (especially if mass produced) access to space.
Today apart from the partially reusable space shuttle we are using
expensive, unsafe and difficult to operate expendable rockets.
Maybe the day that access to orbit will be almost as easy as using
an airliner isn't very far.
comment
this article
register at robotpig.net/forum

© robotpig.net - All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced, reprinted or republished without written permission