Skylon spaceplane engine concept achieves key milestone

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20510112

The UK company developing an engine for a new type of spaceplane says it has successfully demonstrated the power unit's enabling technology.
...
"We completed the programme by getting down to -150C, running for 10 minutes," said Mr Bond. "We've demonstrated that the pre-cooler is behaving absolutely as predicted."

markfla

you'd have to wonder what the likes of elon Musk and the guys at scaled think of this? could blow them out of the water...total game changer on the face of it. exciting stuff.

Capt'n Midnight

They are looking for £250million for the next stage of development. Which is a lot less than the individual launch cost for some systems.


Other interesting way a different team were looking at of getting single stage to orbit is use a taker to top up with hydrogen peroxide. But peroxide is really nasty stuff.

Tomk1

The UK government is currently assessing what its involvement should be in the next phase of Skylon/Sabre, but David Willetts, the science minister, was keen on Wednesday to add his personal support to the project: "The engine being developed by Reaction Engines is a potential game-changer in terms of space technology," he said.

"This successful testing validates the assessment made of the engine concept by the UK Space Agency back in 2010 and is yet another example of the UK's world class space industry. It would be a fantastic achievement if we could one day use this home-grown technology for our own commercial space launches."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20510112
Hopefully Alan Bond will tell them were to keep their "involvement"

However, in 1988, the Conservative government withdrew funding, and the development programme was terminated.[6] Following this major setback, Alan Bond decided to set up his own company, Reaction Engines Limited, with the hope of continuing development with private funding

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)

The original Engine patent was classified top-secret not even the ESA had access to it, taking 20 years to reinvent. Reaction Engines Limited shouldn't take any funding from the UK-gov, the assorted history of any involvment in the UK-space industry by government has been disastrous, inventing great concepts but no will/foresite to carried them forward. 50's Mark1 plane developed dropped n' given the US. 60's build a rocket to lanch satellites, after 1st successfully lanch scrap it. 80's develop an engine for a spaceplane/shuttle then burry it. The UK-goverments' commitment for the space/science-industry is a non-joke.
Hope Alan Bond will get backers, I would assume an engine like this would be of interest to Virgin & spaceX.

AugustusMinimus

Read about Skylon for years but I thought it was nothing but a pipedream, similar to the Venture Star.

Even if Skylon is never built, they have quite a bit of work done on the SABRE engine which will be used for other applications.

One question must be asked though. I can think of massive Jet engine manufacturers. Rolls Royce, Pratt and Whitney, GE. Why did none of these try to develope such a jet engine. Why didn't the US government throw money at the development of this engine. It all seems a bit crazy that the USA would turn down the opportunity to launch to LEO at such a low cost.

Capt'n Midnight

Perhaps the Aurora uses such an engine



The Americans have a saying "it it works it's obsolete". They like to reinvent stuff, perhaps it's a "not invented here" obsession.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9633v6U0wo

1957 Fairey Rotodyne . Unlike the V-22 Osprey it can autorotate

F35C Lightning II Did it's first carrier trials last year.
The P1127 (Harrier prototype) had it's first flight in 1960

And remember Sputnik ?
The R7 launcher is still in use by the Russians and ESA
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/11/arianespace-soyuz-st-launch-pleiades-1b/



If you believe the CT people the Iraqi supergun was about cheap satellite launches rather than as a weapon (it would have been really impractical to aim and an easy target)

AugustusMinimus

Seriously though. Skylon in its current design is expected to put payload into LEO for only $650 per KG. This is a crazily low price and I can't see how Space X can compete with this if it actually works.

nokia69

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Seriously though. Skylon in its current design is expected to put payload into LEO for only $650 per KG. This is a crazily low price and I can't see how Space X can compete with this if it actually works.

spaceX are working on their own ideas to lower prices

I hope skylon works but for now spaceX are ahead, their grasshopper is going well so far and I think it will result in a reuseable falcon 9 and heavy

Capt'n Midnight

Actually Soyuz is way ahead. Development costs spread over 750 launches. The price they are charging the Americans is because they now have a monopoly on non-Chinese man rated launchers.

The problem with the shuttle was that it cost more to refurbish the reusable bits than it cost to buy a disposable launcher.


Separation of stages can be dangerous , which is one reason why a single stage to orbit is desirable.

For humans rocket launches will be around for quite a while, space elevators mean you'll get fried by the radiation in the Van Allen belts and most of the other exotic launchers use very high g levels.

AugustusMinimus

Surely though the possibility of a space elevator is years off. 50 years at the very minimum surely ?

On human launches to LEO. Surely if Skylon is a success, we will eventually see a maned launcher based on Skylon technology. I've read it has a failure rate which is 100 times better than current man-rated launch technology.

BULLER

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This thing as serious promise. I've been avidly following both Reaction Engines and SpaceX since before they made breakthroughs and successful flights. Some very negative people on these forums. What they are doing with their respective budgets is remarkable.
They are both the real deal.

Funny thing is that RE could eventually put SpaceX under threat! Lower the price to LEO and the solar system is unlocked.

ThatDrGuy

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Surely though the possibility of a space elevator is years off. 50 years at the very minimum surely ?

On human launches to LEO. Surely if Skylon is a success, we will eventually see a maned launcher based on Skylon technology. I've read it has a failure rate which is 100 times better than current man-rated launch technology.

Its easy to have a low launch failure rate when you have never launched....

Rubecula

I remember when it was called HOTOL. It is a terrible pity it wasn't pushed more back then. But I think it would still only be a little ahead of where we are now.

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

Capt'n Midnight

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Surely though the possibility of a space elevator is years off. 50 years at the very minimum surely ?

needs exotic materials,

a Lunar elevator could be built with present day materials and a single Saturn V / Energia launcher could get it there.

[quoteOn human launches to LEO. Surely if Skylon is a success, we will eventually see a maned launcher based on Skylon technology. I've read it has a failure rate which is 100 times better than current man-rated launch technology.[/QUOTE]Soyuz is the launcher to beat when it comes to statistics. It's like helicopter pilot insurance, they reckon that after 1,000 hours you've probably experienced/survived most normal risks.

AugustusMinimus

How many more years do you imagine it will take before a space elevator can be built ?

I'd imagine it won't be a single thread. I'd imagine it will be a giant loop with one side doing the lifting and the other side returning the carriage which crawls up the wire.

Would a graphene or carbon nanotube structure be strong enough ?

Capt'n Midnight

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

How many more years do you imagine it will take before a space elevator can be built ?

I'd imagine it won't be a single thread. I'd imagine it will be a giant loop with one side doing the lifting and the other side returning the carriage which crawls up the wire.

Would a graphene or carbon nanotube structure be strong enough ?

There are different variations, using a web to avoid micro meteor damage was patented


or if you had a long enough thread, way beyond GEO you can get escape velocity and so pull stuff up continuously , using mirrors and electric propulsion would help too

nokia69

none of us will ever see a space elevator, its a great idea but its years away

BULLER

Space elevators are a long, long way away.

(no pun intended :P )