Boeing TAV - was this speculation or a serious concept?

[The Artist]

Back in 1985 Aviation Week ran a piece of Boeing art with an article on a White House Aeronautics policy. The art depicted what I took to be a transport TAV in Boeing house colors. This attachment is a drawing I did when I saw that article and I'm posting it here to support my question. Does anyone know if the painting was from a serious design study, or was this simply a "gee, wouldn't it be great if we could build something like this" picture?

Thanks,
Mike

 

[Steve Pace]

There was a Trans Atmospheric Vehicle (TAV) program once but I don't know if Boeing was a participant - although it probably was.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Back in 1985 Aviation Week ran a piece of Boeing art with an article on a White House Aeronautics policy. The art depicted what I took to be a transport TAV in Boeing house colors. This attachment is a drawing I did when I saw that article and I'm posting it here to support my question. Does anyone know if the painting was from a serious design study, or was this simply a "gee, wouldn't it be great if we could build something like this" picture?

Given that the majority of the fuselage was taken up not by propellant tanks but by a passenger section with airliner-style windows, my assumption has always been that it was pure propaganda, with minimal basis in engineering.

 

[hole in the ground]

Given that the majority of the fuselage was taken up not by propellant tanks but by a passenger section with airliner-style windows, my assumption has always been that it was pure propaganda, with minimal basis in engineering.

Really? It looks to me to be pretty similar in proportion to the Space Shuttle. They have simply changed out the payload bay for cabin space, admittedly the windows are a little optimistic but SS2 has shown that they arent beyond the realms of possibility.

 

[archipeppe]

Really? It looks to me to be pretty similar in proportion to the Space Shuttle. They have simply changed out the payload bay for cabin space, admittedly the windows are a little optimistic but SS2 has shown that they arent beyond the realms of possibility.

Yes, but SS2 is not designed to go on orbit and it never going hypersonic as well....

 

[hole in the ground]

Ah ok, I wasnt aware that SS2s reentry was slower than the Space Shuttles. All of the 'graphics' that I have seen suggest a pretty similar 'fiery' reentry.

 

[archipeppe]

Ah ok, I wasnt aware that SS2s reentry was slower than the Space Shuttles. All of the 'graphics' that I have seen suggest a pretty similar 'fiery' reentry.

Probably is only to add some "dramatic" effect on it.
In reality SS2 could reach more or less 1,2 Km/sec, while the Space Shuttle make its re-entry well above 7 Km/sec.
It' s easy to see the HUGE difference in terms of Aerothermodynamics effects between the two space vehicles...

 

[Stargazer]

Re-entry has been described (by Branson I think) as extremely smooth... It had better be. You don't pay millions of dollars for a half-hour ride just to be messed up on the way back...

 

[shockonlip]

Ah ok, I wasnt aware that SS2s reentry was slower than the Space Shuttles. All of the 'graphics' that I have seen suggest a pretty similar 'fiery' reentry.

Probably is only to add some "dramatic" effect on it.
In reality SS2 could reach more or less 1,2 Km/sec, while the Space Shuttle make its re-entry well above 7 Km/sec.
It' s easy to see the HUGE difference in terms of Aerothermodynamics effects between the two space vehicles...

A small point, if SS2 reaches 2 Km/sec, that is roughly 6000 ft/sec which is roughly Mach 6, which is hypersonic.

 

[archipeppe]

A small point, if SS2 reaches 2 Km/sec, that is roughly 6000 ft/sec which is roughly Mach 6, which is hypersonic.

I don't beleve in it.
The SS2, as like SS1, is pretty conventional aircraft in terms of material (even if it is made mostly by composites), it could bear - with little protection - Mach 3+ terminal velocity, that is high supersonic, but for sure it couldn't do so with an hypersonic Mach 6.

For comparison you could look the structure of the North American X-15 that was designed, by since, to face hypersonic speed and its associated thermal loads.

 

[mz]

You only have enough kinetic energy in a 100 km hop for v=sqrt(2gx)=sqrt(2*9.81*100000)=1.4 km/s, that's about Mach 4.5. And the velocity would be that after a 100 km free fall. The vehicle is going to experience some deceleration already at lower speeds higher in the atmosphere.

Still, you could do a lot of hypersonic testing by renting an external space on the vehicle...

 

[Orionblamblam]

Given that the majority of the fuselage was taken up not by propellant tanks but by a passenger section with airliner-style windows, my assumption has always been that it was pure propaganda, with minimal basis in engineering.

Really? It looks to me to be pretty similar in proportion to the Space Shuttle.

The TAV program designed vehicles that, while not generally being SSTOs, were designed to be as reusable and as operational as possible, which generally meant no expendable stages. Thus the upper-stage spaceplanes needed to have a lot of propulsive capability on their own. Which meant that the vast bulk of their internal volume was taken up with propellant tanks.

 

[shockonlip]

A small point, if SS2 reaches 2 Km/sec, that is roughly 6000 ft/sec which is roughly Mach 6, which is hypersonic.

I don't beleve in it.
The SS2, as like SS1, is pretty conventional aircraft in terms of material (even if it is made mostly by composites), it could bear - with little protection - Mach 3+ terminal velocity, that is high supersonic, but for sure it couldn't do so with an hypersonic Mach 6.

For comparison you could look the structure of the North American X-15 that was designed, by since, to face hypersonic speed and its associated thermal loads.

Well you're the one who wrote: "In reality SS2 could reach more or less 1,2 Km/sec, ...".

I read your "1,2 Km/sec" as "1 to 2 Km/sec". If that's what you meant, then 2 Km/sec is greater than 6000 ft/sec
which is over Mach 6 (ignoring temp effects).

If you actually meant 1.2 Km/sec, then that is close to 4000 fps which is closer to Mach 4.
That seems to work out with what mz calculated as well.

So which was it?

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

There the whole issue of that little mass-fraction to think about.

 

[archipeppe]

So which was it?

Oh-oh.... in Italy 1,2 is equal to 1.2 in USA.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.....

 

[shockonlip]

I'm sorry I didn't know that too!

Great Italy!!

Home of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ducatti, Pagani, and the great Antonio Ferri !!

 

[Stargazer]

So which was it?

Oh-oh.... in Italy 1,2 is equal to 1.2 in USA.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.....

Not just in Italy, but in France too. I believe it's another case of Latin vs. Anglo-Saxon. "1,250" for us means "1.250" for you, and "1.250" means "1,250" for you. Confusing, right?

 

[Antonio]

I believe it's another case of Latin vs. Anglo-Saxon

Also in Spain, but use of Anglo-Saxon notation is progressively prefered.

 

[Stargazer]

I'm sorry I didn't know that too!

Great Italy!!

Home of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ducatti, Pagani, and the great Antonio Ferri !!

I personally would have added Sophia Loren, Gina Lollobrigida to that list...
Not to mention all the great filmmakers such as Visconti, Fellini, Pasolini, Zefirelli, and so forth...
And the singers? Pavarotti, Remondi... Zucchero... LOL

Sorry for going totally off-topic!!!

 

[The Artist]

Seeing this thread take off prompted me to go digging for the original image that I did that drawing from. (I don't have the best filing system - things get moved around depending on what I did with them last.) The rest of the article does not really address this design as it is about a White House policy Paper.

I had a feeling that this was a pie in the sky image because I remember thinking that there wasn't enough room for the engines and associated plumbing. Still, I thought it would be nice if a 3-view drawing turned up.

Thanks for your comments.
Mike

 

[shockonlip]

I'm sorry I didn't know that too!

Great Italy!!

Home of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Ducatti, Pagani, and the great Antonio Ferri !!

I personally would have added Sophia Loren, Gina Lollobrigida to that list...
Not to mention all the great filmmakers such as Visconti, Fellini, Pasolini, Zefirelli, and so forth...
And the singers? Pavarotti, Remondi... Zucchero... LOL

Sorry for going totally off-topic!!!

I agree as well.

But right now archipeppe is shaking his head and making gestures at me because I
mispelled Ducati as Ducatti. I apologize! This is especially bad as I have a Ducati.
I can only think it was caused by recently typing Bugatti too many times!

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

That concept reminds me of some sort of X-Prize entry.

 

[archipeppe]

But right now archipeppe is shaking his head and making gestures at me because I
mispelled Ducati as Ducatti. I apologize! This is especially bad as I have a Ducati.
I can only think it was caused by recently typing Bugatti too many times!

Don't worry, doesn't it matter.
I'm accustomed with the fact that foreign people tend to interpretate the single T or P as double, like archipeppe that could be archipepe as well....

Anyway that drawing also remind me more a suborbital aircraft, like SS2 and so on, than a real orbital vehicle.
It seems to be a melting by a Space Shuttle and a McDonnell Douglas MD 80.

 

[Triton]

From DefenseImagery.mil:

An artist's concept of a transatmospheric vehicle (TAV) above the earth.

Photo courtesy of Boeing Co.
Photographer's Name: BOEING CO. Location: UNKNOWN
Date Shot: 1/9/1985 Date Posted: unknown VIRIN: DF-ST-85-11980

Source:
http://defenseimagery.mil/imagery.html#a=search&s=artist%27s%20concept&t=0&p=9&guid=fcfa5a96602c298ef5e7d56aa2ffdb3bf7e733e1

 

[Orionblamblam]

Photo courtesy of Boeing Co.

Due to the magic of mergers and aquisitions, that is actualy a McDonnell-Douglas design, not originally Boeing.

 

[dannydale]

Needs moar FDL-7.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Needs a full report on the Toss-Back Booster concept, is what it neeeds.