A demonstrator for the SSTO launcher with combined cycle propulsion

Abstract

Restricted accessMoreSectionsView PDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail Cite this article Czysz Paul A. 1999A demonstrator for the SSTO launcher with combined cycle propulsionPhil. Trans. R. Soc. A.3572285–2316http://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1999.0432SectionRestricted accessA demonstrator for the SSTO launcher with combined cycle propulsion Paul A. Czysz Paul A. Czysz Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Parks College of Engineering and Aviation, Saint Louis University, St Louis, MO 63103, USA Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for more papers by this author Paul A. Czysz Paul A. Czysz Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Parks College of Engineering and Aviation, Saint Louis University, St Louis, MO 63103, USA Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for more papers by this author Published:01 August 1999https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1999.0432AbstractSpace launch systems of the 20th century are still regarded as both costly and unsafe. They have never acquired the reliability of commercial aircraft and they cannot abort from lift–off to mid–mission without massive losses. Most types of launchers are sacrificed after launch, and both hardware and environmental costs are significant. The cost of the launcher itself dominates this operation as it is the first, last and only time it flies. The user pays for the entire vehicle. For commercial aircraft operations, the frequency of flight and the lifespan of the aircraft means that the individual passenger pays about 6 for the cost of the aircraft per flight and the remainder is for fuel and operations. For commercial space launch to become both routine and economic, the need is to achieve the reliability, the sustained operation over a long lifespan, and the easy refurbishment of commercial aircraft. In seeking this solution, design studies have accepted that the ballistic missile launch may give way to either vertical or horizontal take–off aircraft using airbreathing propulsion up to a high flight Mach number and rockets thereafter. This paper examines the factors that shape the choice of airbreathing engines and airframe characteristics for SSTO space launchers, transatmospheric vehicles, boost–glide intercontinental range vehicles, and an associated demonstrator vehicle. Previous ArticleNext Article VIEW FULL TEXT DOWNLOAD PDF FiguresRelatedReferencesDetailsCited by Verstraete D, Bizzarri D and Hendrick P (2014) Demonstration of Compact Air Separation Technology for In-Flight Oxygen Collection Space Launchers, Journal of Propulsion and Power, 10.2514/1.B34958, 30:1, (62-69), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2014. Czysz P, Bruno C and Kato K (2001) Interactions between propulsion systems and the configuration concepts defines the design space 10th AIAA/NAL-NASDA-ISAS International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, 10.2514/6.2001-1924, , Online publication date: 24-Apr-2001. This Issue01 August 1999Volume 357Issue 1759Theme Issue ‘Hypersonic aircraft: lifting re–entry and launch’ compiled by L. H. Townend Article InformationDOI:https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1999.0432Published by:Royal SocietyPrint ISSN:1364-503XOnline ISSN:1471-2962History: Published online01/08/1999Published in print01/08/1999 License: Citations and impact Keywordsairbreathing propulsioncombined cycle propulsionavailable energy analysisspace launcherconfiguration geometrydemonstration aircraft