Search results for query: isinglass

I know I'm a bit late, but do you (or anyone) have anything more on this late 1970s vehicle? It sounds like Isinglass revisited some ten years later?

...I couldn't find anything actually ISINGLASS-related like in Dyno's post. But here's brief #4. It's got some stuff from one of Professor C's earlier presentations tossed in. http://research.nianet.org/~grossman/Fundamentals/Hypersonic%20Systems%20Integration/4-HEI%20SysIntegration.pdf

Quellish, I agree. My post is based on the CIA/NRO planning document that states that FY69 there was to be three test ISINGLASS aircraft with seven rocket engines and the initiation of production of eight operational aircraft for deployment in FY71 with sixteen rocket engines. If you assume...

...that even with efforts to get things declassified there are long delays: one 1960s-era hypersonic vehicle program (apparently manned) was ISINGLASS. Decently intact declassified information on this program appeared in 2010 (although there was some release in 2006 also). But rest assured...

...for a drop from a B-52, I hear ya! For this idea to work I'm expecting that the pylon latches never see more than 53,000 lbs even after the ISINGLASS is fully fuelled. In other words, the pylon is designed so that the ISINGLASS is flying on the pylon and generating enough lift for 60% of its...

...designs had air-started SSMEs because the booster assumed takeoff alone - the SSME (indirect) ancestor was the XLR-129: RHEINBERRY / ISINGLASS engine tested at components level circa 1969. As ISINGLASS was to be dropped X-15 style, from a B-52 wing pylon, XLR-129 was air-startable. End...

The interview is covered in that thread.

Weren't the 122, 176 & 192 all McDonnell? Remember that the unmanned boost glide vehicle related to ISINGLASS was the (Y variant?) Model 122, which spanned from 1957 through to mid-sixties (and a little beyond?) edit: late-sixties, including the Alpha-Draco (B) & BGRV (E). Model No. 192 was...

Even ISINGLASS seems to have fallen down in part on IR vulnerability analysis. It's a recurring theme; you can find papers from the 80's on IR tracking of transatmospheric vehicles. Detecting and tracking the much more modest SR-72 via a small sat constellation equipped with some basic MWIR...

...the original source for that slide? It looks a bit like a HiFiRe variant, but on closer look doesn't match any known ones (wings in particular). Also it looks like it has a rocket nozzle in the rear. Isinglass revisited? On the left is clearly the Lockheed HSSW and on the right the Lockheed FRV.

I'm growing old. Plus I tend to mix McDonnell and Douglas, since they merged 15 years before I came to that world: I grew up in the 1980's / 90's so I have difficulty imagining the two as separate entities.

There were ground test articles - that was covered in the P&W book - but probably nothing more. It would be very interesting though if some of the modifications to B-52H 60-0036 and 61-0021 to support TAGBOARD predated the TAGBOARD program. Unlikely though

...control surfaces are shown. Still, it looks close enough to the MDC IGV, so that one gets my vote. The fuselage and V-tail are nearly identical, while the wing planform and profile appear a bit more refined on the model. Until proven otherwise, Isinglass it is... Thank you all for participating.

...text seems very well-researched, the pictures and drawings are excellent. I won't spoil it for you though I have finally seen what Projects ISINGLASS and Rheinberry look likeand I won't bother anyone on here anymore about it. The book is definitely all that and a bag of chips. GET IT NOW...

Bouncing off this old post. That "study" was... FISH / KINGFISH, in 1959. Losing competitor to A-12. Convair waited four more years (1963, which also matches the time needed for Lockheed to fly the A-12: April 1962.) then tried their chance again. Clearly they hoped to kick Lockheed's rear end...

I was wondering the same question... X-15A2 was 52 000 pounds but some of the S-104 concepts are 90 000 and 97000 pounds, nearly twice as much ! Can a B-52 wing pylon - and wing root ! - support such a huge weight without breaking ? plus the asymmetry ? Even a B-52D "big belly" carried *only*...

...of the reasons why SR-71 & A-12 never flew over USSR (along political reasons). With a nuclear warhead it also slained early iterations of ISINGLASS. Convair came to the NRO in 1963 looking for their revenge on A-12 and saying " Mach 3.4 and 95 000 feet ? meh. Pussies. We can do 110 000 ft...

The closest thing to an actual Aurora (that you don't mentioned) is the Lockheed-Martin X-24C NHFRF of the late 70's. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/us-lifting-bodies-studies-start-asset-prime-fdl-x-24-etc.722/

Size comparison of various McDonnell Douglas hypersonic aircraft designs: - (F-4E Phantom II for scale) - Model 192 ISINGLASS Mach 20 boost-glide reconnaissance aircraft variant from circa 1966 - Mach 6 GIUK Gap Interceptor circa 1971 - MD-2001 "Orient Express" Mach 4.5 hypersonic passenger...

Ah it was the "Remember that the unmanned boost glide vehicle related to ISINGLASS was the (Y variant?) Model 122, which spanned from 1957 through to mid-sixties (and a little beyond?) edit: late-sixties, including the Alpha-Draco (B) & BGRV (E)." part I was prompting :)