interesting vid, venturestar was never intended to fly, engineers did not no this(save one),clipper was sabotaged,pete conrad died under mysterious circumstances, daniel goldman was scared,whitehouse knew little. we will never know all the details...
There is no discussion or option here, you are 1000% WRONG. Before you open your Neo-con mouth and spew excrement. Go an reflect for a moment on what just happened with the socialistic bailout of corporate American and the welfare money we give to the defense industry.
"A lack of Capitalism"?? "just liberal ranting." BTW, I am not a liberal they way you define it. Once again a Neo-con displays his emotional thinking and ignorance. Yeah, right, I'm sure we are to believe that your father worked for NASA. You obviously did not read my other posts when I said that a LACK OF COMPETITION is the cause for a failing aerospace industry. You can thank UNREGULATED CAPITALISM for that.
NASA and DoD purchase 80% of all space launch in the united states. As a consequence, contractors don't build what is commercially efficient, they build what they are told to build, which is what their biggest customer wants. In practice, their biggest customer also wants to help in the design, which drives costs up further. (See Ares I).
Because of this, highly competitive US commercial satellites (built by the launch providers) go overseas to be launched on Ariane, Sea Launch and Proton.
This was one of the coolest day of my live. I think we work 22 hour this day to get it off.The rain and winds came in the night before and sand and water every were. All most 15 years have past and still have bragging rites YA SSRT single stage rocket technalage
My father spent his career at NASA pushing SSTO. His first SSTO design was introduced in March of 1960 and was followed-up by a VTOL design in 1969. He cried tears of joy when he saw the video of this rocket. Many thanks to you my friend. RIP Dad.
For 1964 ROMBUS would have been too heavy but today it would definitely be possible with materials such as AlLi alloy and engines with efficiency and thrust to weight similar to the SSME.
The SSME has better SL ISP then the numbers Bono wanted for the plug nozzle engine 363 vs 359.
The plug nozzle still had better vac ISP. 459 vs 453.
A plug nozzle aka aerospike SSME would exceed the numbers needed.
The SASSTO for example would work just fine with a single SSME.
Rombus should be able to reach orbit with 44 SSMEs but a modern version would be lighter in structure which would bring the fuel requirements down etc probably to be equal to the same number 36 of the plug nozzle engines.
A few RL-10s or J2s would be needed for OMS.
The SSME could be boosted with TAN or "thrust argumented nozzle" could bring the number of engine units down to around 22.
A vehicle using conventional nozzle SSME's would be more like Nexus.
@Membrane556 I'm just repeating Dad's critique of Bono's work: Rombus didn't utilize thin skin pressurization as did my dad's designs- this saved lots of weight, as did other design features made possible by his knowledge of stress mechanics as chief of Nasa's stress group- and made SSTO possible in 1960. Epic fail by von braun not to recognize the viability of SSTO.
I searched for the ATV or Aerospike Test Vehicle it would make a nice project for someone like Armadillo or a similar company to try or as a small NASA project.
No, it think it was business mismanagement that killed the project( probably the military too). As for NASA having too much money...that is 180% backwards. It is amazing what NASA accomplishes with the pittance it gets from the fed. NASA is quite diverse in its projects and the fact they keep going is a testament to the engineers who cost cut designs. The fed needs to stop spending money on killing brown children thousands of miles away and put more $ into NASA.
Also, keep in mind that thanks to predatory capitalism the company that produced this fantastic space craft McDonald Douglas has been absorbed by Northrop which in turn will probably be absorbed by Lockheed or Boeing. That is probably another reason we don't have the DC-X. This country is finished folks.
No, it was Von Braun who killed this project as it existed in 1960. Von Braun wanted no competition within NASA. It was then re-presented in 1969 and shot down again- because it didn't feed the entire aerospace bureaucracy. Shuttle was chosen because it was expensive and uses many companies to build. NASA blew it.
Just going back and reading old posts- you really are misguided. The truth is right in front of you yet you ignore it. Why rant about something you know nothing about?
Yeah how so. What is in front of my face? Explain to me why free market capitalism has been destroyed in this country, and why there where over 200 aerospace companies pre WWII and now there are three-soon to be two inefficient/corrupt monstrosities. It was called predatory capitalism. Now, thanks to governor bush and Nobama its just plain fascism ie. the merger of corporations and the state. It is you who knows nothing.
@ametalhead100 YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. I WORKED @ NASA AND THE SCIENTIST WERE GREAT, YET IT WAS OBVIOUS THEY HAD NO REAL SAY AND WERE COMMANDEERED BY NON-SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE IN THE CRAZIEST MA$ONIC TRIPE, VERY UNSCIENTIFIC INDEED.
Because NASA has been mismanaged, financially gutted and corporatized. America is a fading republic that has no leverage over industry anymore. These are some of the reasons why we cannot innovate or build anything decent without costing trillions of dollars. Prior to WWII there where approximately 200 aerospace contractors. Now there are only three. Predatory capitalism and and an unimaginative culture at its finest.
You're completely wrong about NASA. It failed because of a lack of capitalism- no competition. Big government doesn't work. Your socialistic views are fine but have nothing to do with the truth- just liberal ranting.
@Membrane556 NASA only likes things 'they' think of, or that involve science that is not developed, is unproven, or requires them to invade another country and fund...that don't make them look silly, and that do not compete with things they are already developing.
i don't belive this project was abandonded i saw what looked like the same craft, crash during a landing, one of the land legs went out and it blew up, i can't belive this craft was working in 93, i didn't hear about this craft until about 5 years ago...
Perferct test flight. To this day no other rocket has all the features of this marvel. The flight control software alone was a break through. If memory serves, i believe Burt Rutan actually made the outer shell of this 1/3rd scale test craft. Why was this, most promising technology abandoned?
This video is missing its sound track - "Where the streets have no name" by U2.
spaceandgames 3 months ago
I Think it has somekind of conection with Cash Landrum Case.
wraithsin1 2 years ago
interesting vid, venturestar was never intended to fly, engineers did not no this(save one),clipper was sabotaged,pete conrad died under mysterious circumstances, daniel goldman was scared,whitehouse knew little. we will never know all the details...
im ok with that now.
sammair 2 years ago
updated model crashed near Kokomo...saw it on UFO Hunters
Granny worked up the papers for Quayles insurance claim.
john99501 2 years ago
There is no discussion or option here, you are 1000% WRONG. Before you open your Neo-con mouth and spew excrement. Go an reflect for a moment on what just happened with the socialistic bailout of corporate American and the welfare money we give to the defense industry.
biped19 3 years ago
"A lack of Capitalism"?? "just liberal ranting." BTW, I am not a liberal they way you define it. Once again a Neo-con displays his emotional thinking and ignorance. Yeah, right, I'm sure we are to believe that your father worked for NASA. You obviously did not read my other posts when I said that a LACK OF COMPETITION is the cause for a failing aerospace industry. You can thank UNREGULATED CAPITALISM for that.
biped19 3 years ago
NASA and DoD purchase 80% of all space launch in the united states. As a consequence, contractors don't build what is commercially efficient, they build what they are told to build, which is what their biggest customer wants. In practice, their biggest customer also wants to help in the design, which drives costs up further. (See Ares I).
Because of this, highly competitive US commercial satellites (built by the launch providers) go overseas to be launched on Ariane, Sea Launch and Proton.
ChrisInAStrangeLand 2 years ago
Is amazon a military supercomputer? Because the Blue Origin flight in 2006 is a reborn DC-X.
mhasvin 3 years ago
This was one of the coolest day of my live. I think we work 22 hour this day to get it off.The rain and winds came in the night before and sand and water every were. All most 15 years have past and still have bragging rites YA SSRT single stage rocket technalage
mnovratil 3 years ago
My father spent his career at NASA pushing SSTO. His first SSTO design was introduced in March of 1960 and was followed-up by a VTOL design in 1969. He cried tears of joy when he saw the video of this rocket. Many thanks to you my friend. RIP Dad.
tdetko 3 years ago 7
The ROMBUS concept ?
That was a good concept along with the SASSTO much better then this Ares junk they're trying to hawk now.
Project Selena makes project Constellation look like the joke it is.
Good news I think we'll see another DC-X and even DC-Y just not from NASA.
Instead it'll probably come from a company like Blue Origin or Armadillo.
Membrane556 2 years ago
@Membrane556 Not the ROMBUS. ROMBUS was designed too heavy. search George Detko, ATV
tdetko 1 year ago
@tdetko
For 1964 ROMBUS would have been too heavy but today it would definitely be possible with materials such as AlLi alloy and engines with efficiency and thrust to weight similar to the SSME.
The SSME has better SL ISP then the numbers Bono wanted for the plug nozzle engine 363 vs 359.
The plug nozzle still had better vac ISP. 459 vs 453.
A plug nozzle aka aerospike SSME would exceed the numbers needed.
The SASSTO for example would work just fine with a single SSME.
Membrane556 9 months ago
@Membrane556
500 char limit
Rombus should be able to reach orbit with 44 SSMEs but a modern version would be lighter in structure which would bring the fuel requirements down etc probably to be equal to the same number 36 of the plug nozzle engines.
A few RL-10s or J2s would be needed for OMS.
The SSME could be boosted with TAN or "thrust argumented nozzle" could bring the number of engine units down to around 22.
A vehicle using conventional nozzle SSME's would be more like Nexus.
Membrane556 9 months ago
@Membrane556 I'm just repeating Dad's critique of Bono's work: Rombus didn't utilize thin skin pressurization as did my dad's designs- this saved lots of weight, as did other design features made possible by his knowledge of stress mechanics as chief of Nasa's stress group- and made SSTO possible in 1960. Epic fail by von braun not to recognize the viability of SSTO.
tdetko 9 months ago
@tdetko
I searched for the ATV or Aerospike Test Vehicle it would make a nice project for someone like Armadillo or a similar company to try or as a small NASA project.
Membrane556 9 months ago
Nasa fears one stage to orbit craft as it will kill their fat dripping budgets.And put space flight within the reach of more people.
Nasa killed this program.
ametalhead100 3 years ago
No, it think it was business mismanagement that killed the project( probably the military too). As for NASA having too much money...that is 180% backwards. It is amazing what NASA accomplishes with the pittance it gets from the fed. NASA is quite diverse in its projects and the fact they keep going is a testament to the engineers who cost cut designs. The fed needs to stop spending money on killing brown children thousands of miles away and put more $ into NASA.
biped19 3 years ago
Also, keep in mind that thanks to predatory capitalism the company that produced this fantastic space craft McDonald Douglas has been absorbed by Northrop which in turn will probably be absorbed by Lockheed or Boeing. That is probably another reason we don't have the DC-X. This country is finished folks.
biped19 3 years ago
No, it was Von Braun who killed this project as it existed in 1960. Von Braun wanted no competition within NASA. It was then re-presented in 1969 and shot down again- because it didn't feed the entire aerospace bureaucracy. Shuttle was chosen because it was expensive and uses many companies to build. NASA blew it.
tdetko 3 years ago
Just going back and reading old posts- you really are misguided. The truth is right in front of you yet you ignore it. Why rant about something you know nothing about?
tdetko 2 years ago
Yeah how so. What is in front of my face? Explain to me why free market capitalism has been destroyed in this country, and why there where over 200 aerospace companies pre WWII and now there are three-soon to be two inefficient/corrupt monstrosities. It was called predatory capitalism. Now, thanks to governor bush and Nobama its just plain fascism ie. the merger of corporations and the state. It is you who knows nothing.
biped19 2 years ago
@ametalhead100 YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. I WORKED @ NASA AND THE SCIENTIST WERE GREAT, YET IT WAS OBVIOUS THEY HAD NO REAL SAY AND WERE COMMANDEERED BY NON-SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE IN THE CRAZIEST MA$ONIC TRIPE, VERY UNSCIENTIFIC INDEED.
roboeco 6 months ago
Why in the hell is nasa not doing stuff like this any more?
Membrane556 4 years ago 2
Because NASA has been mismanaged, financially gutted and corporatized. America is a fading republic that has no leverage over industry anymore. These are some of the reasons why we cannot innovate or build anything decent without costing trillions of dollars. Prior to WWII there where approximately 200 aerospace contractors. Now there are only three. Predatory capitalism and and an unimaginative culture at its finest.
biped19 3 years ago
You're completely wrong about NASA. It failed because of a lack of capitalism- no competition. Big government doesn't work. Your socialistic views are fine but have nothing to do with the truth- just liberal ranting.
tdetko 3 years ago
@Membrane556 something called Constellation used all the money
moneyman10k 1 year ago
@Membrane556 NASA only likes things 'they' think of, or that involve science that is not developed, is unproven, or requires them to invade another country and fund...that don't make them look silly, and that do not compete with things they are already developing.
DCX-A was all of the above.
Prometheus1st 9 months ago in playlist DELTA CLIPPER
i don't belive this project was abandonded i saw what looked like the same craft, crash during a landing, one of the land legs went out and it blew up, i can't belive this craft was working in 93, i didn't hear about this craft until about 5 years ago...
Jshaw71 4 years ago 2
Perferct test flight. To this day no other rocket has all the features of this marvel. The flight control software alone was a break through. If memory serves, i believe Burt Rutan actually made the outer shell of this 1/3rd scale test craft. Why was this, most promising technology abandoned?
seneca67 4 years ago 2
It was not abandoned. It was acquired by an undisclosed group(military or private arms developers who are contracted to the military) to develop.
Stardrinkerx 4 years ago
Undisclosed? Are they at least Americans?
seneca67 4 years ago