Waspie_Dwarf Posted March 7, 2017 #1 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Sierra Nevada to resume Dream Chaser flight tests Quote An atmospheric test model of Sierra Nevada’s Dream Chaser space plane is being readied for tow and landing tests at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in California this spring. The partially-assembled test craft arrived at the California test site, located on Edwards Air Force Base, on Jan. 25. Technicians are adding the ship’s V-shaped tail fins and other equipment before kicking off ground and flight tests in the coming months, according to Mark Sirangelo, corporate vice president of Sierra Nevada’s space systems division. Read More: Spaceflight Now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperdyer Posted March 7, 2017 #2 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Great news! I take it from the testing outlined that we still haven't found a way to have a space vehicle enter Earth's atmosphere with fuel aboard. I understand re-entry is extremely hot, but I don't see space manned exploration within our own solar system as viable. Sure we can land on low/no gravity bodies like our Moon but if we don't land and take off in the same complete vehicle we will tend to leave "litter" where we visited. It should be easier to do this on low atmospheric bodies, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waspie_Dwarf Posted March 7, 2017 Author #3 Share Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) 21 minutes ago, paperdyer said: I take it from the testing outlined that we still haven't found a way to have a space vehicle enter Earth's atmosphere with fuel aboard. We have a way. Most spacecraft that have landed on Mars, going back to the Vikings in 1976, have entered the atmosphere with fuel on board. The question is why do you want it to have fuel on board? The shuttle proved, 36 years ago, that a glide landing is a safe and reliable landing method. Leaving fuel on-board lowers the available payload capacity and therefore improves costs. SpaceX have tested a version of the Dragon capsule which lands using rocket motors and therefore does have fuel on-board, but that does make economic sense. In the case of the Dragon it eliminates the costly recovery at sea, but in the case of a vehicle such as the Dream Chaser there is simply no justification for it. Edited March 7, 2017 by Waspie_Dwarf typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperdyer Posted March 7, 2017 #4 Share Posted March 7, 2017 I never thought about the payload. I was worried about the shuttle or other vehicle being shot at by some terrorist. Just coming in as a glider would make evading any obstacle difficult while being able to land at the designated landing strip or possibly an alternative. We get the occasional oops now with airplanes. Rare, sure, but still possible. I'm sure that if space flight becomes routine the passenger flights won't be escorted to the ground like the shuttles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waspie_Dwarf Posted March 7, 2017 Author #5 Share Posted March 7, 2017 50 minutes ago, paperdyer said: I never thought about the payload. I was worried about the shuttle or other vehicle being shot at by some terrorist. And in the real world how likely is that? How many terrorists have ever got close enough to an airport not in a war zone to shoot st the aircraft? Why will it be any different at a spaceport? What exactly are these fantasy terrorists shooting at these landing spacecraft with exactly? If it is small arms fire then the chances of them hitting a small, rapidly descending spacecraft are minimal. If they are using anti-aircraft weapons then having engines will make sod all difference anyway . The only place in the world where a returning spacecraft will need the agility of a fighter jet is in your imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waspie_Dwarf Posted March 7, 2017 Author #6 Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, paperdyer said: I'm sure that if space flight becomes routine the passenger flights won't be escorted to the ground like the shuttles. The shuttle chase planes were not there to protect the shuttles from obstacles or terrorists, they were there to film the shuttles and help the astronauts judge the distance to the ground. The shuttles would have landed perfectly well without them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Trinity Posted March 8, 2017 #7 Share Posted March 8, 2017 "but is now set to fly cargo runs to the International Space Station within the next few years"....Yeah that's chasing the dream...delivering toilet rolls and athletes foot ointment to some astronauts lol....yes yes I know I'm making jokes and they wouldn't have athletes foot etc before I get flamed haha. But no seriously, it is great to see that the flights will be resuming again and our focus on space travel is that bit more prevalent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taniwha Posted March 8, 2017 #8 Share Posted March 8, 2017 That's the future unfolding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now