edit: not trying to be cryptic, I'd saved it from a page (attached below ) from I think an appropriation or some such document from Hathi a while back and was stupid enough not to make a note of which one, but even so it seems to be incongruous with the text of the page.
A bit better version of the companion painting to the above one. Also this is the correct orientation based on the signature at bottom right. Seems to be the same Horonzar who painted the MD-2001 Orient Express.
And specifically the Rocketdyne division as stated in the flyer it seems, looks like it could be an evolution of this? In any case different from the airplane side proposal, don't remember I would have seen this variant previously.
Stainless steel wind tunnel model with yellow tape on the edges of the wings and verticals. The model has a display stand.This is a hypersonic wind tunnel model of the NASP configuration instrumented with temperature and pressure sensors for thermal protection studies.
The reason: Ramon L. Chase papers. He noticed that if you shift from scramjet to rocket later and later (Mach 8, Mach 12, Mach 18 or just go scramjet all the way to orbit) then the atmospheric trajectory's drag makes the delta-v to orbit explode.
For all-rocket SSTOs, it is usually 30 000 ft/s. But for scramjet vehicles, he had values starting at 35 000 ft/s and going as far as 60 000 ft/s ! Doubling the delta-v to orbit, WDF.
This is another absurd side of Tony Dupont concept.
And three shots of the 1989 NASA design of NASP, in the form of a very large scale-model at the 1989 Paris Air Show, at Le Bourget Airport in France. These three images come as a courtesy from former Dutch spaceflight journalist Piet Smolders. He recently donated a large part of his personal archives to the NRM museum. Probably a lot of images, for a lot of subjects, will be appearing in the NRM online photo archive in the coming months. With some stuff also popping up here.
And three shots of the 1989 NASA design of NASP, in the form of a very large scale-model at the 1989 Paris Air Show, at Le Bourget Airport in France. These three images come as a courtesy from former Dutch spaceflight journalist Piet Smolders. He recently donated a large part of his personal archives to the NRM museum. Probably a lot of images, for a lot of subjects, will be appearing in the NRM online photo archive in the coming months. With some stuff also popping up here.
Uncommon and sleek 1:50 scale solid model of the Rockwell X-30 NASP (National Aero-Space Plane) originally built by Micro West of Orange, California, for McDonnell Douglas. The model measures approximately 34.5″ in length with a wingspan of 9″, and is mounted atop a wooden Retro Rocket-style base measuring 14″ x 10″ x 1″ to a height of 12″. This is an early design of the X-30 with the sharp needle nose. The model is a solid resin casting with scribed lines for detail. In fine condition, with some slight scuffs and trivial lifting to black primer near wings. Micro West was known for its high quality and craftsmanship.
Mixed materials on Lucite base, Micro West, late 1980s, wingspan 4-inches, fuselage 13 3/4-inches, 5-inches tall, base labeled "X-30 National Aero-Space Plane / Rockwell International." The Rockwell X-30 was an advanced technology demonstrator project for the National Aero-Space Plane (NASP)...
Regarding HALO (Hypersonic Air Launch Option, also seen High Altitude Launch Option) as a phased approach to the X-30's technological development, Curtiss Peebles essay on the X-43 addresses the HALO concept, reproduced here:
Small-Scale Hypersonic Vehicles (HALO)
Despite the rejection of an incremental development approach for NASP, various subscale proposals were still made over the years. The most ambitious was the hypersonic air-launch option (HALO). This was a Dryden proposal for a piloted vehicle launched from the back of an SR-71. The HALO concept and the flight plan reflected Dryden’s experiences with rocket planes since the late 1940s. The influence of Dryden’s past was apparent in the HALO’s planned mission profile, which was similar to that of the X-15 of the 1960s. The profile called for the SR-71/HALO to take off from Edwards and fly to the Boise, Idaho, area. The launch would be made at Mach 3 and 70,000 feet. The HALO would be boosted to test speeds – from Mach 8 to Mach 10 – by a liquid hydrogen-fueled RL-10 rocket engine. The nose of the vehicle was detachable, so the ramp angle of the inlet could be altered according to the tests being made. Different modular scramjet engine designs would be fitted to the HALO’s underside. The engines would be tested during a two-minute cruise at test conditions. During this period, the scramjet’s response to variations in the angle of attack and sideslip, as well the effects of different yaw, pitch, and roll rates. The results from each of the scramjet designs could then be compared. Once the speed run was completed, the HALO would pitch up to reduce dynamic pressure and heating on the vehicle. The HALO would glide south across Utah, then make a sweeping turn across California before landing back at Edwards. The goal was to show that scramjets could operate at varying conditions, could avoid unstarts, and could operate while maneuvering. In addition, the profile would test different injector designs. Data on the physics of hypersonic flight, such as the real gas, catalytic, and boundary layer effects would be collected, and the thermal protection system also would be tested. About 50 to 100 flights would be made during the program. To keep costs down, off-the-shelf equipment such as actuators, landing gear systems, and the pilot’s ejection seat would be used. The RL-10 rocket engine was well proven and very reliable as evidenced from its use in the Centaur upper stage. Costs to build the HALO were very roughly estimated by Dryden engineers at around $300 million. To refine this further, Ben Rich of Lockheed’s Skunk Works was asked by Dryden managers to review the HALO design, assess its feasibility, and provide a cost estimate for the vehicle. Rich viewed the vehicle as technically feasible, including the Mach 3 separation from the SR-71. Dryden engineers were shocked, however, when he gave a cost estimate of $1 billion to build the HALO. Rich explained that this was because anything worth doing usually cost this much, with most of the money going to satisfying the bureaucracy.
NASP personnel added to the cost problems when they estimated that the scramjet modules would also cost $1 billion. As the modules were of relatively simple design, with fixed geometry inlets, injectors, and exhaust nozzles, there were suspicions among Dryden personnel that the cost estimate was an effort to kill the HALO project, and thus eliminate a NASP program competitor. There were also problems within NASA regarding the HALO. Dryden’s proposal had been developed with assistance of engineers at Ames Research Center. (At that time, Dryden was not an independent center, but rather a “research facility” managed by Ames.) An approach was made to Langley engineers to refine the HALO design. This was as much for political reasons as for anything related to engineering. The project would never be approved by NASA Headquarters unless it had Langley’s backing, and Langley managers found much to dislike about the HALO. Their reservations included launch from a SR-71, the fact that the HALO would be a manned vehicle, and the proposed aircraft’s large size. In an attempt to win Langley’s approval, Ames engineers redesigned the vehicle to take into account these objections. The SR-71 launch option was retained, but the vehicle was now smaller, unmanned, and renamed theHALO II. Their efforts, however, were to no avail. Langley and NASA Headquarters would not back the project. At the other end of the scale from the HALO were proposals for small-scale hypersonic experiments to be launched by the Pegasus booster. These concepts were explored by Dryden engineers Dr. Kenneth W. Iliff and Henry Arnaiz. The Pegasus booster would be available soon, and it had a substantial performance capability. A large vehicle with deployable scramjet experiments could reach speeds between Mach 10 and 15. There was a wide range of proposed vehicles that could be used to test inlet performance, boundary layer transitions, shock impingement heating, and advanced thermal protection systems. They also would provide aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic data. The resulting flight data could be used to verify the ground tests and CFD codes were accurate. Between the HALO and the Pegasus-launched vehicles, the entire hypersonic flight region could be explored. None of these ideas were funded, however, for several reasons. Beyond the doubts about the accuracy of subscale tests, NASP supporters claimed that the physics of hypersonic flight was completely understood and such tests were therefore unneeded. Wind-tunnel researchers took exactly the opposite position, believing that unless subscale flight tests were done at very precise, defined conditions the resulting data would not be useful.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
