McDonnell-Douglas Hypersonic projects from the 60s and 70s
KJ_Lesnick
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 February 2008
- Messages
- 1,042
- Reaction score
- 97
Isn't the XLR-129 that incredibly powerful rocket that all it's tooling and drawings were destroyed after the fact that had an obscenely high chamber pressure?
- Joined
- 1 April 2006
- Messages
- 11,031
- Reaction score
- 8,372
What for Sergey Brin invented Google?
"The Air Force has something called the XLR-129 – it’s in a book that one of the Pratt & Whitney
guys wrote that you can buy from the Society of Automotive Engineers library. The XLR-129 had
about 580,000 pounds of thrust from a LOX-hydrogen engine and 3,500 psi chamber pressure.
It was fired 40 times without any overhaul, and it was brought up to full-power in about 3.5
months – whereas the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) took about 38 months to come up to
full-power.
This very same XLR-129 engine was donated to NASA when the Air Force got out of the space-
race. The plans, the engine, and everything related to it were destroyed, and the last sentence in
that chapter in Pratt’s book says, “NASA destroyed all of this because they didn’t want to
embarrass their present engine contractor.”
There are plenty declassified contractor's documentation on XLR-129 at http://stinet.dtic.mil/
"The Air Force has something called the XLR-129 – it’s in a book that one of the Pratt & Whitney
guys wrote that you can buy from the Society of Automotive Engineers library. The XLR-129 had
about 580,000 pounds of thrust from a LOX-hydrogen engine and 3,500 psi chamber pressure.
It was fired 40 times without any overhaul, and it was brought up to full-power in about 3.5
months – whereas the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) took about 38 months to come up to
full-power.
This very same XLR-129 engine was donated to NASA when the Air Force got out of the space-
race. The plans, the engine, and everything related to it were destroyed, and the last sentence in
that chapter in Pratt’s book says, “NASA destroyed all of this because they didn’t want to
embarrass their present engine contractor.”
There are plenty declassified contractor's documentation on XLR-129 at http://stinet.dtic.mil/
airrocket
Dreams To Reality
I think would deserve to rest at 'Postwar Secret Projects' as they are not Aurora fantasies but actual concepts
They we're tech demo's not full on strike RECCE most would fly hypersonic for only a few minutes. Notice how large the inlets are sized compared to the rest of the vehicle. These vehicles had short range allowing just enough time to gather data on propulsion, TPS etc... MCD had a very well thought-out step-by-step progression for hypersonic development. Their lifting body/TOSS back booster MOL service plan was the most comprehensive TSTO VTOHL scheme I've ever seen. Based on high flight rate RLV’s it would be the prefect blueprint for a modern private enterprise LEO RLV CATS program. I would post pics however it is not mine to distribute publicly. Perhaps that information is out there buried in some old Air force DOD reports.
They we're tech demo's not full on strike RECCE most would fly hypersonic for only a few minutes. Notice how large the inlets are sized compared to the rest of the vehicle. These vehicles had short range allowing just enough time to gather data on propulsion, TPS etc... MCD had a very well thought-out step-by-step progression for hypersonic development. Their lifting body/TOSS back booster MOL service plan was the most comprehensive TSTO VTOHL scheme I've ever seen. Based on high flight rate RLV’s it would be the prefect blueprint for a modern private enterprise LEO RLV CATS program. I would post pics however it is not mine to distribute publicly. Perhaps that information is out there buried in some old Air force DOD reports.
- Joined
- 1 April 2006
- Messages
- 11,031
- Reaction score
- 8,372
flateric said:
Interesting that while quite recent Paul Czysz paper describes this photo as MD Astronautics hypersonic glide vehicle, Mark Wade's Astronautix identifies it as USAF/DARPA/General Dynamics/Martin Marietta HGV (Hypersonic Glide Vehicle). As I understand, BTW, only very lazy didn't work on HGVs in 1980s - Aurora book mentions classified Lockheed HGV as well.
Photo at Astronautix obviously was taken by Bill Sweetman during his visit to Air Force Association Show in 1987.
http://astronautix.com/craft/hgv.htm
Attachments
- Joined
- 17 October 2006
- Messages
- 2,354
- Reaction score
- 988
- Joined
- 17 October 2006
- Messages
- 2,354
- Reaction score
- 988
Except that pic was taken in an office somewhere, not in the big convention-space beneath the Marriott in DC...
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
I have identified the photo of what`s dubbed the GIUK Gap interceptor. I had already seen that photo since several years ago, but the article from professor Paul Czysz at Antigravity.com now shows a drawing of the same vehicle: Mach 6 liquid methane fueled aircraft project.
The photo shows the model inside the Arnold`s wind test tunnel.
The photo shows the model inside the Arnold`s wind test tunnel.
Attachments
- Joined
- 1 April 2006
- Messages
- 11,031
- Reaction score
- 8,372
Stephane, welcome onboard and thanks for wonderful stuff!
Would you mind if we will move this thread to McDonnell Douglas hypersonic thread?
BTW, Mr.Czysz is not far away=)
Would you mind if we will move this thread to McDonnell Douglas hypersonic thread?
BTW, Mr.Czysz is not far away=)
Last edited by a moderator:
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
flateric said:
Hi Flateric, thank you,
actually i think this project is maybe part of HEDI (High Endoatmospheric Defense Interceptor), early 1990`s.
I am looking into it. I already emailed Professor Czysz, but not too sure if he will answer that one.
Actually i might have a hard time finding my thread again if it gets blended into another earlier thread (i had no idea there was a MDD hypersonic thread). In fact, i think that the FDL family of lifting bodies would deserve a thread of their own, since there are just so many versions of them (i keep finding more and more) and it is such a rich family (i think the X-20 probably have its own thread here, pls correct me if i am wrong).
If we find more info, and it if it is indeed HEDI, we might have an HEDI thread, but i suspect the HEDI would be one very good candidate for the projects that were possibly (i don`t say it is) related to whatever they name Aurora now. Anyway, since i know the Aurora drawing for the Bill Sweetman book was heavily influenced by input from Professor Czysz, no surprise there since this is also an MDD design from the same time period.
I want to find out more about the inlet system of that particular design, it does not use the front fuselage as a compression ramp, which is a bit strange for something going Mach 6. Have to check more.
I have other findings about other hypersonic programs that i will post in the future.
shockonlip
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 January 2008
- Messages
- 605
- Reaction score
- 49
Desert Dawn said:
If you don't use the forebody for compression, you could still put a compression surface inside the
engine module, but it makes the engine module longer as it is now not just an isolator/combustor/nozzle,
but a inlet, isolator, combustor, nozzle. If it's subsonic combustion, then no isolator. And there could be
good reasons for putting it in the module if you want to play around with different modules.
Depending on which picture you're talking about, if it is the Czysz (there are NO VOWELS IN THIS GUYS LAST NAME!!)
Mach 6 Interceptor drawing you posted (thanks for that by the way), you can see a possible compression ramp
in the front of the engine module. There may be an internal compression function as well.
This must have been a pretty exciting time at MCDD when they were designing these things!!
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
shockonlip said:
Hi, thank you Shockonlip, yes, that engine module is pretty long so it makes sense and i know about internal compression as well, i don't know what specific type of engines this particular aircraft would have used, there are just so many cycles they could have used, so it is sure that influenced that particular engine modules design. If we knew more about the engines, we could figure out why. We cannot see it too well but i would bet there is no expansion ramp on this particular aircraft design. I think it is maybe using variable nozzles.
Flateric, i think we can move this one to the MDD aircraft thread, i don't think we will learn a lot more about that one, but i was just told this would have been about the size of an F-111. I will have another picture coming (not the same aicraft, but same project nonetheless).
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
![Mach%204[1].5%20WB.jpg](/data/attachments/24/24969-3d7dbb66332f66c58e4605400f225cfa.jpg)
KJ_Lesnick
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 February 2008
- Messages
- 1,042
- Reaction score
- 97
Not to perseverate here, but the writing of the "Aneutronic fusion" system.
Was that conceived during the 1950's or 1960's, or was that conceived and developed later on? Also was the document that depicts this an old document or a recently printed document or a recently made copy that depicts an old design?
KJ
Was that conceived during the 1950's or 1960's, or was that conceived and developed later on? Also was the document that depicts this an old document or a recently printed document or a recently made copy that depicts an old design?
KJ
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
KJ_Lesnick said:
Hi JK,
This is not related to these two aircrafts, that was refering to another portion of his interview for an unrelated subject. I will stick to the wind test tunnel aircraft model and the GIUK Gap interceptor.
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
Well, never say never...
I thought i would not find anything else on the GIUK Gap interceptor, but here i just found two more drawings of it two days ago in my old documents (2 versions of it):
(and i apologize for the sideway picture, Photobucket page said : In Maintenance... could not do better than that for now. I'll correct that later).
I thought i would not find anything else on the GIUK Gap interceptor, but here i just found two more drawings of it two days ago in my old documents (2 versions of it):
(and i apologize for the sideway picture, Photobucket page said : In Maintenance... could not do better than that for now. I'll correct that later).
Attachments
- Joined
- 29 September 2006
- Messages
- 1,692
- Reaction score
- 1,172
overscan said:
Shouldn't that kind of discussion be in the Bar or at "Above Top Secret"?
A quick search on Aneutronic Fusion reveals that it requires temperatures ten times higher than that required by the current favoured Fusion Power reaction: Deuterium/Tritium.
- Joined
- 29 September 2006
- Messages
- 1,692
- Reaction score
- 1,172
KJ_Lesnick said:
First reference to Aneutronic Fusion in google scholar is in 1984: "The LOTRIT reactor, an example" - <i>L HIBALL</i> - Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research, 1984
Desert Dawn
ACCESS: Confidential
And looks like i was right: no expension ramp on the rear fuselage of the GIUK Gap interceptor.
- Joined
- 13 June 2007
- Messages
- 2,099
- Reaction score
- 2,698
Hi All -
I've been scanning some McAir advanced concepts artwork from the Greater St. Louis Aviation Museum archives and some of the images match up to what Overscan posted on #36 and the referenced XLR-129 powered hypersonic. Thanks to Scott L for guiding me in the right direction and making the match up.
Enjoy the Day! Mark
I've been scanning some McAir advanced concepts artwork from the Greater St. Louis Aviation Museum archives and some of the images match up to what Overscan posted on #36 and the referenced XLR-129 powered hypersonic. Thanks to Scott L for guiding me in the right direction and making the match up.
Enjoy the Day! Mark
Attachments
- Joined
- 6 August 2007
- Messages
- 3,344
- Reaction score
- 3,463
Mark Nankivil said:
Very cool! I am very interested in the aircraft in the first 2 images as one of the late Rutan RASCAL MIPPC vehicle designs was a nearly identical configuration. I've seen some of the previous posts that detail the aircraft and am very interested. Sadly, I have not re-found the images I had seen of this particular Rutan design, which was a significant divergence from the other public MPV concepts.
XP67_Moonbat
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 16 January 2008
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 459
Thanks Mark!
Awesome find.
But a couple of questions.
Is the third picture related to PROJECT RHEINBERRY?
Picture 3 is what Bill Rose depicts as the "Aerospaceplane project from the early 70's". According to his book "SP: Military Space Technology", this was supposed to be a revival of Rheinberry using airbreathing propulsion.
(I'm not going to hate on Mr. Rose. While his books are informative, his info does sometimes seem a bit dubious. Canadian Arrow's SpaceShip One taking the X-Prize, anybody? And considering SP: M.S.T. didn't have a bibliography, you have to wonder.)
Also, could the plane in picture 4 be related to the beast at the start of this thread? :
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5512.0.html
Moonbat
Awesome find.
But a couple of questions.
Is the third picture related to PROJECT RHEINBERRY?
Picture 3 is what Bill Rose depicts as the "Aerospaceplane project from the early 70's". According to his book "SP: Military Space Technology", this was supposed to be a revival of Rheinberry using airbreathing propulsion.
(I'm not going to hate on Mr. Rose. While his books are informative, his info does sometimes seem a bit dubious. Canadian Arrow's SpaceShip One taking the X-Prize, anybody? And considering SP: M.S.T. didn't have a bibliography, you have to wonder.)
Also, could the plane in picture 4 be related to the beast at the start of this thread? :
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5512.0.html
Moonbat
shockonlip
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 January 2008
- Messages
- 605
- Reaction score
- 49
I'll ditto that! Thanks for the post Mark!!
Love these hypersonic concepts!!
Love these hypersonic concepts!!
You have mixed and matched several different projects from 1956 to 1972. NOTE None of the McDonnell Aircraft Engineering or McDonnell Missile Engineering Divisions ever designed a hypersonic wing-body glider except as a strawman to destroy. Bill Sweetman did NOT take the XLR-129 powered glider that is from the top of a file cabinet at McDonnell St. Louis, circa 1958. I'll have to make a note of the different pictures and tell you what they are. Included in your pictures are a USAF Mach 6 rocket accelerated SLBM interceptor launched from a C-5 circa 1974, a USAF Mach 4.5 turboramjet interceptor circa 1972, a USAF Mach 6 turboramjet interceptor circa 1972, a XLR-129 powered hypersonic glider with a 25,000 nautical mile glide range circa 1958 and others. If I can ever figure out how to paste pictures can give you a snapshot of the best hypersonic design team from 1956 to 1972, with Lockheed as a very close competitor.
- Joined
- 27 December 2005
- Messages
- 16,888
- Reaction score
- 21,589
Due to the forum having being hacked by uploading a malicous file disguised as a jpg image, we now require users make 5 posts before they have the ability to post a picture. You have only made 4 posts so far which is why you don't have this ability.
I have now manually given you the right to post images immediately.
You attach an image by clicking "Browse" button near "Attach" below the message entry box on a new post and selecting the image from your computer. To add more pictures click on (more attachments) next to the browse button to add multiple attachment lines.
Any image file format is OK, with the filesize up to 512kb. If the file is bigger than this, you can email it to me and I will resize and post it.
I have now manually given you the right to post images immediately.
You attach an image by clicking "Browse" button near "Attach" below the message entry box on a new post and selecting the image from your computer. To add more pictures click on (more attachments) next to the browse button to add multiple attachment lines.
Any image file format is OK, with the filesize up to 512kb. If the file is bigger than this, you can email it to me and I will resize and post it.
Tuomasn
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 5 January 2006
- Messages
- 467
- Reaction score
- 297
The third pic in Mark's post seems to have been taken in the same wind tunnel (maybe even around the same timefame) as the first picture here: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6422.msg53388.html#msg53388, though they appear to be different designs.
I wonder if the mods could perhaps rearrange these threads (I think "Desert Dawn" agreed to it here http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6422.msg53944.html#msg53944) (and maybe clean up the "aneutronic fusion" stuff :
).
I wonder if the mods could perhaps rearrange these threads (I think "Desert Dawn" agreed to it here http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6422.msg53944.html#msg53944) (and maybe clean up the "aneutronic fusion" stuff :
).shockonlip
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 January 2008
- Messages
- 605
- Reaction score
- 49
quellish said:
From a Paul Czysz paper in: "Scramjet Propulsion" (Cuirran and Murthy editors), Paul
discusses the McDD concept shown in the second picture:
"The resulting aircraft rather resembled the Canadian CF-106 Arrow (CF-105 actually) with very large inlets
and did not offer a significant research value with regard to fully integrated propulsion systems."
and then a little later - a very interesting observation - and RASCAL
was going in this direction, somewhat. Quoting Mr. Czysz again:
"All the afterburning turbojet/fans used in the HyFac study were conventional installations
where the airflow to the compressor increased in temperature and pressure. At about Mach
number 1.8, most compressors reach the point where the corrected speed for design efficiency
equals the machanical rotational speed limit of the compressor. At Mach numbers above this
point the mechanical speed is constant and the corrected compressor speed (N/sqrt(T/288K)
decreases. If there is a cryogenic heat exchange in the inlet between the inlet exit and
compressor entrance, then the temperature of the air entering the compressor can be kept at
that for best corrected speed, up to the Mach number limit where the heat exchanger can no
longer keep the temperature within limits. When such a turbojet is thermally integrated with a
rocket, there is no longer a transonic acceleration deficiency. This is not a classic definition of
a turbojet." I may also add, this is similar to what skylon is doing.
Were any these your possible RASCAL refs:
http://www.responsivespace.com/Papers/RS2%5CSESSION%20PAPERS%5CSESSION%208%5CLOPATA%5C8004P.pdf
http://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/1853/8372/1/AIAA-2005-3241.pdf
- Joined
- 13 June 2007
- Messages
- 2,099
- Reaction score
- 2,698
Greetings All -
A few bits of McAir artwork to go along with some of the designs being discussed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th images are similar to the USAF AMI Lockheed/McD-D design blend noted in Scott's hard drive find.
Enjoy the Day! Mark
A few bits of McAir artwork to go along with some of the designs being discussed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th images are similar to the USAF AMI Lockheed/McD-D design blend noted in Scott's hard drive find.
Enjoy the Day! Mark
Attachments
Tuomasn
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 5 January 2006
- Messages
- 467
- Reaction score
- 297
Thank you Mark for all these beautiful paintings (also on other threads). The first one in your post above was posted before in smaller resolution at http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,250.msg1492.html#msg1492, identified as a NASP design, which it is apparently not, as the paintings seem to be from the 1970's.
The second and third ones resemble the "Mach 4.5 GIUK gap interceptor" from the other thread http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6422.msg54135.html#msg54135.
The second and third ones resemble the "Mach 4.5 GIUK gap interceptor" from the other thread http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6422.msg54135.html#msg54135.
- Joined
- 13 June 2007
- Messages
- 2,099
- Reaction score
- 2,698
Thanks - I am pretty lucky to be able to scan and archive the museum's collection. The image file titles are the McD-D assigned number and the date which both are stamped on the back of the image. I need to as some point try and add to the file name the project or proposal info. That's for another time after a lot more scanning and archiving has been done
Enjoy the Day! Mark
Enjoy the Day! Mark
- Joined
- 29 September 2006
- Messages
- 1,692
- Reaction score
- 1,172
Mark Nankivil said:
Number 4 appeared in the Salamander book "Warplanes of the Future", IIRC
- Joined
- 29 September 2006
- Messages
- 1,692
- Reaction score
- 1,172
Mark Nankivil said:
The 1st and 2nd image also appeared in "Warplanes of the Future".
Anyone got the book at hand to glean any info?
XP67_Moonbat
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 16 January 2008
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 459
Similar threads
-
Really Top Secret Projects (Ben Rich remark to Jim Goodall)- Started by flateric
- Replies: 252
-
McDonnell Douglas 60s 70s swing wing military aircraft- Started by uk 75
- Replies: 1
-
-
McDonnell-Douglas Model 265 AFTI project- Started by overscan (PaulMM)
- Replies: 79
-
McDonnell Douglas MD Helicopter Projects- Started by hesham
- Replies: 41