This comment has received too many negative votesshow
If this technology is representative of the next generation of unlimited racers, I won't be watching. Without props? Like watching paint dry. Boorring!!
When we Brits built rockets, we used this idea but added Kerosene to burn with the large ammount of free Oxygen generated by the catalysed reaction. More thrust is created but maybe the designers of this system want to reduce weight, by ditching the extra complexity. Look up our Black Arrow rocket to see more footage.
It's more a case that they are inefficient in terms of their performance rather than any consideration being given to wastefulness of resources. Rockets can fly faster and provide a lot of power but as a power source in an oxygen rich atmosphere they aren't as efficient as gas turbines, the weight of the fuel required to transport a given payload is far lower for a turbofan as used on conventional airliners than the fuel weight required for rocket motors.
It's cool and everything, but hardly cutting edge. Hydrogen peroxide rockets have been around since the 1930's if not earlier. They're very simple monofuel rockets. They were used on Mercury spacecraft but have since been replaced by more advanced rockets in spaceflight.
a) it's got nothing to do with NASA, it was funded by XCOR aerospace without any NASA funds
b) it doesn't run on peroxide, it uses LOX/kero
c) Rutan (Scaled composites) didn't have anything to do with it, XCOR took a Rutan plane that they already had that was missing an engine and retrofitted twin rocket engines to it
d) they did get Dick Rutan (brother of Burt Rutan) to test pilot it though, but it wasn't developed *by* him.
Whats the range and top speed on this thing. Compare to Jim Bede's BD 5 microjet with a top speed of 325 mph and a range of 300+ miles how would the two aircraft rate. See I want to build one that is non air breathing so that I can fly it into space and back to earth again. I would like to have it as small as the BD 5. It would be nice to have something like a BD 5 become a personal transport, one could fly to work, maybe fly to the moon or the International Space Station and back.
Unfortunately, this video pretty much demonstrates its maximum flight duration. Hard to compare this with the turbine BD-5 (apples nd oranges). BTW the BD-5's performance numbers tend to be quite exaggerated. Overall, a standard LongEZ is superior to the Bede jet in every way except top speed. This single-seat rocket EZ has greater speed and climb, but at the expense of everything else (ESPECIALLY range). Sorry, no chance of a spaceship version without "Unobtainium". Still, great job!!
very cool. but if the engine isn't as fuel efficent as a conventional jet engine or better, then you will never see it on our commercial planes because of the fat guy that sits on the top of the airline is to greedy.
These experiments are being carried out with the intention of validating a practical alternative powerplant for the next generation of unlimited racing aircraft. They aren't performed with the intention of developing passenger aircraft propulsion. A lightweight racing aircraft powered by a rocket motor can devote a relatively large portion of its payload to fuel, airliners are bereft of this luxury!
The engines run on alcohol and liquid oxygen, not hydrogen peroxide. XCOR is not run by either Dick or Burt Rutan. XCOR is not part of Scaled Composites. We are competitors.
The EZ-Rocket is based on a fiberglass kit plane. We removed the piston engine and replaced it with two 400-lb thrust LOX/alcohol engines designed, built and tested by XCOR.
The plane is not a design for the next generation of Reno Racers.
very awesome. Are you combusting the Hydrogen from the peroxide or using an aluminum reaction? Also I didn't hear any thrust when you landed it, are you running out of fuel and gliding in? At any rate looks like you are having a BLAST! AWESOME WORK AND VIDEO!! Thanks for posting it.
Yes. The Me-163 used a bi-propellant engine with 80% H2O2 oxidizer and a mixture of methanol and other fuels. It was a dangerous plane to fly - read Wikipedia.
The EZ Rocket is based on a modified Long-Easy that was built in standard form with a reciprocating engine. It is standard GRP (Glass Reinforced Plastic) construction. While there is some Carbon Fiber in it, it is mostly aircraft grade "fiberglass." I don't remember the original owners name, but he then donated it to XCor Corporation for this proof-of-concept conversion. XCor then installed two of their 400 Lbs thrust Alcohol+LOX rocket engines into the airframe.
Hydrogen Peroxide = H202; it's probably either a monopropellant being catalyzed by silver or platinum, or a bipropellant using kerosene or some other cheap hydrocarbon fuel.
How does that thing stop?
StarFoxAutobot 3 months ago
Reno air racers? Like they will ever have them again.
Zoomer30 5 months ago
Amazing how consistant the exhaust flames are!
handiest1 6 months ago
Really, was this an amateur gay porn trailer?
IASOU2005 7 months ago
More homosexual music. :/
MrDesolate1 8 months ago
change the title , you have been corrected
3habaneros 9 months ago
Been waiting 4 years to see a rocket racing league race.
Seeing as the first race was scheduled for oct2008 I wonder if it will ever truely get off the ground?
Love the plane.
growingupisoptional 1 year ago
No peroxide was used, only liquid oxygen, isopropyl alcohol, and helium.
380zeaiclies 1 year ago
Cool. But what's with the high school band music? ;-)
RCAvhstape 1 year ago
Rutan you ROCK . . et !
jakazza 1 year ago
the germans did this 70 years ago with their jet rocket
thomasuras 2 years ago
@thomasuras , was that the me163 komet?
hybridpyrotech 1 year ago
Is this JUST Hydrogen Peroxide powering this plane? There is no Kerosene injection?
Alembic25 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If this technology is representative of the next generation of unlimited racers, I won't be watching. Without props? Like watching paint dry. Boorring!!
Z1Z2Z5Z4 2 years ago
Sounds bloody dangerous!
af4k 2 years ago
wow thats a long eazy with moter removed -__-
FlameYoshi1 2 years ago
how high could this fly to?
josephdupont 2 years ago
depends on the size of the fuel tank, and pressure flask, and how thick the catalyst in the reaction chamber is...
louswire 2 years ago
When we Brits built rockets, we used this idea but added Kerosene to burn with the large ammount of free Oxygen generated by the catalysed reaction. More thrust is created but maybe the designers of this system want to reduce weight, by ditching the extra complexity. Look up our Black Arrow rocket to see more footage.
Alembic25 2 years ago
¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ǝɯosǝʍɐ sı sıɥʇ
sanyo240 2 years ago
It's more a case that they are inefficient in terms of their performance rather than any consideration being given to wastefulness of resources. Rockets can fly faster and provide a lot of power but as a power source in an oxygen rich atmosphere they aren't as efficient as gas turbines, the weight of the fuel required to transport a given payload is far lower for a turbofan as used on conventional airliners than the fuel weight required for rocket motors.
pete2778 2 years ago
It's cool and everything, but hardly cutting edge. Hydrogen peroxide rockets have been around since the 1930's if not earlier. They're very simple monofuel rockets. They were used on Mercury spacecraft but have since been replaced by more advanced rockets in spaceflight.
DrBuzz0 2 years ago
The Germans already did this in 1944...
defc0n005 3 years ago
LOL. There's a few problems with the explanation:
a) it's got nothing to do with NASA, it was funded by XCOR aerospace without any NASA funds
b) it doesn't run on peroxide, it uses LOX/kero
c) Rutan (Scaled composites) didn't have anything to do with it, XCOR took a Rutan plane that they already had that was missing an engine and retrofitted twin rocket engines to it
d) they did get Dick Rutan (brother of Burt Rutan) to test pilot it though, but it wasn't developed *by* him.
wolfekeeper 3 years ago
Is the cylinder under the plane the tank or the
jet motor of the flying-machine?
And how much of the sound can be heard from within , decibels ?
Nice plane! - -How do the extra frontal fins affect the flight?
Key2Be 3 years ago
Look at the small flames from the back of the plane, they indicate that the cylinder is a fuel tank.
As for the front fins, I think they are for added stability in the absence of a tail.
icefox00 3 years ago
Also doubles as the ultimate welding torch
kirkmach32 3 years ago
ooo Ive been in the hills in the background =D. THe exhaust on that looks wierd in flight.
ITSAJARED 3 years ago
Well whatever its running on its Awsome.
I always wanted a long EZ. Plan on getting one. However now i want that rocket one.
I am begging santa. But im not sure he will come threw.
adam3176 3 years ago
hmmmmmmmm 1:23 shock diamonds
cornflakes002 3 years ago
Whats the range and top speed on this thing. Compare to Jim Bede's BD 5 microjet with a top speed of 325 mph and a range of 300+ miles how would the two aircraft rate. See I want to build one that is non air breathing so that I can fly it into space and back to earth again. I would like to have it as small as the BD 5. It would be nice to have something like a BD 5 become a personal transport, one could fly to work, maybe fly to the moon or the International Space Station and back.
Thanks
krichekkkk 4 years ago
i like the way you think.
datzfast 3 years ago
Unfortunately, this video pretty much demonstrates its maximum flight duration. Hard to compare this with the turbine BD-5 (apples nd oranges). BTW the BD-5's performance numbers tend to be quite exaggerated. Overall, a standard LongEZ is superior to the Bede jet in every way except top speed. This single-seat rocket EZ has greater speed and climb, but at the expense of everything else (ESPECIALLY range). Sorry, no chance of a spaceship version without "Unobtainium". Still, great job!!
patrickrameau 3 years ago
unobtanium lol, so true ;)
SmiertSpionem 3 years ago
I was the crew chief and engine designer for the XCOR Ez-Rocket. Let me correct some misinformation-
1) No peroxide was used, only liquid oxygen, isopropyl alcohol, and helium.
2) While Dick Rutan flew for us, his brother Burt had nothing to do with the project. Burt did design the airframe 20 years earlier.
3) Scaled Composites is our neighbor but had nothing to do with the project.
4) It was developed in 2001, retired in 2002, and flew in 2005 at the Xprize Cup.
rocketplumber 4 years ago 14
i met dick rutan 2o years ago in an oklahoma shopping mall. we talked for about an hour.
he was sanding on an aircraft just like the one
in this video. he was diong promotion work
scaled composites was the company.
datzfast 3 years ago
Wow, Very cool, yet very dangerous, with all the compressed gasses, that things like a bomb lol
killroy7777 4 years ago
Take off is way heavier and scarier than prop or jet planes. Once the fuel starts to bet burned up it gets lighter and easier to control.
SmiertSpionem 3 years ago 2
Actually thats a bipropellant liquid oxygen alcohol rocket same fuels the German V2 used.
Membrane556 4 years ago 2
Hydrogen Peroxide as rocket fuel is old as rocketry itself. It is not used widely, because H2O2 cannot be controled as savely as other fuels.
scmcg 4 years ago
very cool. but if the engine isn't as fuel efficent as a conventional jet engine or better, then you will never see it on our commercial planes because of the fat guy that sits on the top of the airline is to greedy.
drabshadspads 4 years ago
These experiments are being carried out with the intention of validating a practical alternative powerplant for the next generation of unlimited racing aircraft. They aren't performed with the intention of developing passenger aircraft propulsion. A lightweight racing aircraft powered by a rocket motor can devote a relatively large portion of its payload to fuel, airliners are bereft of this luxury!
pete2778 2 years ago
sheer brilliance.. can someone please mail me the audio track name and creators please.
nutellajunkie 4 years ago
The engines run on alcohol and liquid oxygen, not hydrogen peroxide. XCOR is not run by either Dick or Burt Rutan. XCOR is not part of Scaled Composites. We are competitors.
The EZ-Rocket is based on a fiberglass kit plane. We removed the piston engine and replaced it with two 400-lb thrust LOX/alcohol engines designed, built and tested by XCOR.
The plane is not a design for the next generation of Reno Racers.
rocketshadow 4 years ago
very awesome. Are you combusting the Hydrogen from the peroxide or using an aluminum reaction? Also I didn't hear any thrust when you landed it, are you running out of fuel and gliding in? At any rate looks like you are having a BLAST! AWESOME WORK AND VIDEO!! Thanks for posting it.
72jamminjimmy 4 years ago
Didn't the Germans in WWII use a similar fuel in thier rocket fighter plane.
261madmike 4 years ago
Yes. The Me-163 used a bi-propellant engine with 80% H2O2 oxidizer and a mixture of methanol and other fuels. It was a dangerous plane to fly - read Wikipedia.
Florhusband 4 years ago
TOTALLY COOL!
eternalexpansion 4 years ago
The EZ Rocket is based on a modified Long-Easy that was built in standard form with a reciprocating engine. It is standard GRP (Glass Reinforced Plastic) construction. While there is some Carbon Fiber in it, it is mostly aircraft grade "fiberglass." I don't remember the original owners name, but he then donated it to XCor Corporation for this proof-of-concept conversion. XCor then installed two of their 400 Lbs thrust Alcohol+LOX rocket engines into the airframe.
seacube3 4 years ago
I gotta get me one of THESE!
Tpklmale 4 years ago
...so HHO gas is grabbing airplanes too... great thing, really.
samoht1977 4 years ago
Hydrogen Peroxide = H202; it's probably either a monopropellant being catalyzed by silver or platinum, or a bipropellant using kerosene or some other cheap hydrocarbon fuel.
superhakujin 4 years ago
Top Speed
Fastcars56 4 years ago
cool
magnetichaze 4 years ago
Great vehicle...
I always love rutan's this vari viggen...
Best light civil aeroplane ever-made!
TolgaSAN 5 years ago