Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Waspie_Dwarf

Dream Chaser Achieves Successful Free Flight

20 posts in this topic

SNC’s Dream Chaser Achieves Successful Free Flight at NASA Armstrong

Quote

Sierra Nevada Corp.’s Dream Chaser spacecraft underwent a successful free-flight test on November 11, 2017 at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. The test verified and validated the performance of the Dream Chaser in the critical final approach and landing phase of flight, meeting expected models for a future return from the International Space Station.

arrow3.gif  Read More: NASA

 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Impressive...

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

glidings the easy part, heck even a well made paper airplane can do it, the question is weather it can function in space

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

21 minutes ago, _KB_ said:

glidings the easy part, heck even a well made paper airplane can do it,

When you can get your paper airplane to make an automatic, precision landing on a runway after being dropped from an altitude of 8000 feet then I will agree with you.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
typo.
7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

37 minutes ago, _KB_ said:

glidings the easy part, heck even a well made paper airplane can do it, the question is weather it can function in space

If you are questioning if gliding is possible in space, you are in a very weak position to evaluate space flight technology issues in general.

Edited by toast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

56 minutes ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

When you can get your paper airplane to make an automatic, precision landing on a runway after being dropped from an altitude of 8000 feet then I will agree with you.

 

34 minutes ago, toast said:

If you are questioning if gliding is possible in space, you are in a very weak position to evaluate space flight technology issues in general.

all im saying is that getting it to glide is the easy part, the real problem with this kind of stuff is making sure that ALL its functions function as they need to in space, like making something that can be dropped from 8000 feet and that glides safely is so easy that i could do it with the junk in my garage (my grandpa was an engineer so to be fair there's some pretty high tech junk and i'm studying IT at university currently so programming it shouldn't be too hard for me), like really i'm pretty sure they thought you enough to build a automatic high precision glider in high school, making a glider is far less difficult than building a functioning space craft

Edited by _KB_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

21 minutes ago, _KB_ said:

 

all im saying is that getting it to glide is the easy part, the real problem with this kind of stuff is making sure that ALL its functions function as they need to in space, like making something that can be dropped from 8000 feet and that glides safely is so easy that i could do it with the junk in my garage (my grandpa was an engineer so to be fair there's some pretty high tech junk and i'm studying IT at university currently so programming it shouldn't be too hard for me), like really i'm pretty sure they thought you enough to build a automatic high precision glider in high school, making a glider is far less difficult than building a functioning space craft

An ordinary glider only have to be light enough to glide under normal conditions, while the Dream Chaser have to do it after going through reentry from space.

You don't think there is a tiny bit of difference between building an ordinary glider and one that have to endure extreme temperatures during reentry ?

The fact that you don't seem to get that difference leads me to believe that you have either not really thought this through, or that you are maybe not as smart as you think you are................ possibly both.

Edited by Noteverythingisaconspiracy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

IT's the final product or a test demonstrator for testing the glide to the ground?

Edited by Jon the frog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look kind of small for talking payloads into space.  It a larger version on the way? 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Grandpa Greenman said:

Look kind of small for talking payloads into space.  It a larger version on the way? 

 

It's bigger than you think.

It's big enough to take 4 astronauts or 5 metric tonnes of payload to the ISS. This compares favorably with the SpaceX dragon which can transport 4 astronauts or 6 metric tonnes.

Where Dream Chaser has the advantage is that a runway landing is much smoother than an ocean splash down and time critical samples can be retrieved almost immediately. 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know what's the stalling speed of this bird, probably quite high ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the next step a full space launch , orbit and re-entry if no design changes are required?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

An ordinary glider only have to be light enough to glide under normal conditions, while the Dream Chaser have to do it after going through reentry from space.

You don't think there is a tiny bit of difference between building an ordinary glider and one that have to endure extreme temperatures during reentry ?

The fact that you don't seem to get that difference leads me to believe that you have either not really thought this through, or that you are maybe not as smart as you think you are................ possibly both.

No i have, like i said, highschool physics... and math, lots of math, but as long as you just have a computer do the math then my computer can have the needed data ready in 2 max 3 days (it's not that it takes more than a couple hours for it to do the calculations but it'd just take me a couple days to make the code) or i could sketch up some rough designs that should function just fine after a little fine tuning right now, though i cant be sure of in which direction they went so i can't be certain that my solution is the same as theirs but regardless it's not even a weeks worth of work to figure it out, anyway arguing will get us nowhere unless you feel like loaning out a rocket to me so i could make a prototype for a glider and see if it works then we can just agree to disagree, i think it's a pretty easy thing to accomplish, you that it's not, both are just opinions, the only way to prove them is to put them to the test which would be difficult for a number of reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 hours ago, _KB_ said:

No i have, like i said, highschool physics... and math, lots of math,

High school! Are we supposed to be impressed? Regardless, your education level is irrelevant when you have totally failed the grasp the problem, as you, rather spectacularly, have.

The approach and landing tests are more than a test of whether the vehicle can glide, they are a test of the automated systems which will allow this vehicle to de-orbit, re-enter, fly to the landing area and make a precision landing on a runway. I'd like to see you design a vehicle that can do all that using only high school maths. They already know the vehicle can glide.

7 hours ago, _KB_ said:

 so i could make a prototype for a glider and see if it works then we can just agree to disagree,

This statemnet alone proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not understand the issues. You go ahead and design a glider and I will show you a vehicle that will fail spectacularly to achieve what the Dream Chaser is designed to do. When your glider hits the top of the atmosphere at Mach 25 the first thing that will happen is that the wings will either be ripped of or will burn off. After that it is not so much a glider as a meteor.

Gliders are almost, but not quite, entirely the wrong shape for a re-entry vehicle. Vehicles like the Dream Chaser, the space shuttle and the X-37B are compromises. They have to be able to re-enter the atmosphere like a capsule but glide like a winged vehicle. They do this by producing most of their lift not with the wings that a conventional aircraft/glider would have, but by the shape of the body of the vehicle. This is why they are called lifting-bodies.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
typo.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, _KB_ said:

No i have, like i said, highschool physics... and math, lots of math, but as long as you just have a computer do the math then my computer can have the needed data ready in 2 max 3 days (it's not that it takes more than a couple hours for it to do the calculations but it'd just take me a couple days to make the code) or i could sketch up some rough designs that should function just fine after a little fine tuning right now, though i cant be sure of in which direction they went so i can't be certain that my solution is the same as theirs but regardless it's not even a weeks worth of work to figure it out, anyway arguing will get us nowhere unless you feel like loaning out a rocket to me so i could make a prototype for a glider and see if it works then we can just agree to disagree, i think it's a pretty easy thing to accomplish, you that it's not, both are just opinions, the only way to prove them is to put them to the test which would be difficult for a number of reasons

So you can do in 2 days what it has taken others years to achieve?

You better get in touch with the team!  Genius :) 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, _KB_ said:

No i have, like i said, highschool physics... and math, lots of math, but as long as you just have a computer do the math then my computer can have the needed data ready in 2 max 3 days (it's not that it takes more than a couple hours for it to do the calculations but it'd just take me a couple days to make the code) or i could sketch up some rough designs that should function just fine after a little fine tuning right now, though i cant be sure of in which direction they went so i can't be certain that my solution is the same as theirs but regardless it's not even a weeks worth of work to figure it out, anyway arguing will get us nowhere unless you feel like loaning out a rocket to me so i could make a prototype for a glider and see if it works then we can just agree to disagree, i think it's a pretty easy thing to accomplish, you that it's not, both are just opinions, the only way to prove them is to put them to the test which would be difficult for a number of reasons

Have you considered contacting companies like Ariane Space, United Launch Alliance or Spaxe-X ? They must be willing to pay a fortune to hire someone of you amazing talent.

Sergei Korolev and Wernher von Braun were just amateurs compared to you, afterall they spend years perfecting thier designs, instead of just days like you.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Sergei Korolev and Wernher von Braun were just amateurs compared to you, afterall they spend years perfecting thier designs, instead of just days like you.

You have forgotten Burt Rutan, Kelly Johnson, Artjom Mikojan and Michail Gurewitsch. You know, the idiots who claimed to have some knowledge about aerodynamics and such stuff. Ridiculous individuals, compared to ...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jon the frog said:

IT's the final product or a test demonstrator for testing the glide to the ground?

This is a light test article (FTA) so not actually planned for it to go into space. It will lack a heat shield and the life support, docking mechanism and other components necessary for an actual space mission. In that way it is similar the the space shuttle Enterprise which under took approach and landing tests (ALT) in the 1977.

 

7 hours ago, paperdyer said:

Is the next step a full space launch , orbit and re-entry if no design changes are required?

If NASA agrees with Sierra Nevada Corp, that this flight was a success then no further flight tests will be carried out, SNC will then concentrate on building the first of the cargo versions of the spacecraft. That differs slightly from this version. It has folding wings so that it can fit into the protective fairing of a launch vehicle. Unlike the crewed version, which is designed specifically to be launched by Atlas V, the cargo version can be launched by Atlas v, Ariane 5 or Falcon 9.

Originally there were plans for more ALTs with this vehicle, including landings in a simulated launch abort scenario. Since the crewed version is currently not preceding to production SNC will place this vehicle in storage. Should they proceed with the crewed version in future it will resume the ALT programme.

First launch of the cargo version is scheduled for 2020.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Thread cleaned -

Let's keep things on-topic please.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.