RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,254
Posts: 5,348,940
Members: 24,614
Currently online: 543
Newest member: robyn

TrekToday headlines

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

IDW Publishing Comic Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 20 2013, 11:04 PM   #1
publiusr
Commodore
 
DARPA Spaceplane

More here:
http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Rele...013/09/17.aspx
[COLOR=#006699]http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=21462[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#006699]http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=21403[/COLOR]


Hope it doesn't end like this
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=12737
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 03:58 PM   #2
JustAFriend
Commodore
 
Location: South Florida, USA
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

Sad thing is we could have had the capability in 1963.

Boeing_X-20_Dyna-Soar



Instread Congress wanted to pretend that there was no military involment in the space programs.
JustAFriend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 05:20 PM   #3
sojourner
Vice Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

Dyna-soar was to be launched on top of a rocket, so no, not really the same thing.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 08:31 PM   #4
gturner
Admiral
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

It also had a rather unfortunate name.

Of course, the reason for lifting wings is probably so the Air Force didn't have to depend on the Navy to pluck their capsule out of the ocean.
gturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 09:08 PM   #5
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

Sounds a bit like these

British Aerospace's HOTOL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOTOL

Skylon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_Engines_Skylon

The Rockwell X-30

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_X-30
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 01:18 AM   #6
sojourner
Vice Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

HOTOL begat Skylon.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 01:37 AM   #7
JustAFriend
Commodore
 
Location: South Florida, USA
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

sojourner wrote: View Post
Dyna-soar was to be launched on top of a rocket, so no, not really the same thing.
So you don't think they would have developed further after 1963??
So we would have had the DARPA plane in 1985 instead of 2015....

JustAFriend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 04:07 PM   #8
sojourner
Vice Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

JustAFriend wrote: View Post
sojourner wrote: View Post
Dyna-soar was to be launched on top of a rocket, so no, not really the same thing.
So you don't think they would have developed further after 1963??
So we would have had the DARPA plane in 1985 instead of 2015....

It's a different thing entirely. Dyna-soar is merely a change in re-entry method. It was Nothing close to development of a single stage to orbit craft. The only real advances it had over capsules of the day is re-usability and landing accuracy.


And to answer the question more directly in your first post. No we wouldn't have had that "capability" in 1963 for the reasons stated above. As to whether it would have been further developed after 1963 and reached "spaceplane" status by 1985, well that's not really what you were talking about in your first post is it?
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 04:53 PM   #9
gturner
Admiral
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

Well, it also points up one of the issues with government space flight, which is that when you're thinking in government mode, having two different flight vehicles with almost identical capabilities (two military guys in orbit) doesn't make sense, so one program is inevitably axed as redundant and duplicative waste.
gturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 29 2013, 09:21 PM   #10
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: DARPA Spaceplane

That wasn't done with the EELVs though--we still have both of those--at least until the RD-180s run out...
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.