Jump to content

The Space Review: you have done orbital refueling, but have you considered 'sub'orbital refueling?


DDE

Recommended Posts

Now to build and test in KSP...

You'd need planes trimmed to lift off automatically at a certain speed so you could get them off the ground together. Then it would be a matter of choosing pre-set trim action groups so they would essentially fly themselves into a suborbital parabola.

I really like the idea of dumping precooled oxidizer into the intake of a COTS fighter jet engine in order to squeeze out extra performance. Wouldn't be as efficient as SABRE but would be considerably cheaper, easier to achieve, and more robust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hms_warrior said:

Maybe i am reading this wrong but...isn't that just a complicated way of Crossfeed? With Planes instead of Falcon Heavy?

Yes, if you imaging cross feed on an reusable falcon heavy, you will drop the boosters a bit earlier but the core will be fully fueled at this point. 

The problem with suborbital refueling is the short time you have to do it. It will require you to fly pretty much in formation up to suborbital. 
I would also have the tanker and orbital plane of different design since the tanker don't have to handle orbital reentry. but has to have the tanker systems. 

if you go for an spaceplane route this makes some sense. 
You would want to do mid air refueling after takeoff anyway as your landing gears and engines don't need to designed to take off with full load. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/7/2020 at 12:35 PM, magnemoe said:

You would want to do mid air refueling after takeoff anyway as your landing gears and engines don't need to designed to take off with full load. 

And SR-71 actually leaked a lot until it had heated up by going supersonic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Dale Christopher said:

This seems to introduce much more risk and complexity than simply staging a single craft. 

Agree, not sure about the math here but I think that if the carrier plane carrying the orbital plane it would not be much worse than carrying only its fuel. Now you can drop the atmospheric engines and the air intakes on the orbital one also you can further slim down the wheel, also the wheels does not need to be raised. You also has the option to replace the spaceplane with an disposable second stage to carry heavier payload. 
You also avoid doing docking and refueling in an hurry. It still makes sense to refuel the carrier plane before it goes supersonic and start climbing. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...