Dream Chaser

[Mr Shifty]

Just completed captive-carry testing; soon will be doing drop-flight tests and concrete runway landings:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/130823091211.htm

[Scotius]

One thing for sure - Dream Chaser would be an excellent reuseable space-taxi.

[Trux]

One thing for sure - Dream Chaser would be an excellent reuseable space-taxi.

A taxi that requires a launch of an Atlas V?

[zekes]

that would be neat... we need reusable again...

[BostLabs]

that would be neat... we need reusable again...

Yes. No offense or our Russian friends, but we need to get back into the drivers seat.

[deadshot462]

I am hopeful of this project. It reminds of the cancelled "ISS Escape" ship that was planned a long time ago.

[Nibb31]

that would be neat... we need reusable again...

Reusable for the sake of reusable is pointless. If your requirement is to provide the cheapest service, then reusable is not always the best solution.

[jamieadd]

I think the dream chaser could also be used as a low g re-entry system for experiments conducted on the ISS that need to be examined on earth but I can't remember where i read that or if it was reliable.

[Nibb31]

Maybe for one or two very fragile experiments that fit in a suitcase, but I doubt that it is a real requirement.

Most experiments are packaged in standard ISPR racks to facilitate installation on the ISS. Dream Chaser (or any of the crewed vehicles) cannot return ISPRs because they can't fit through the new docking ports (APAS/NDS/LIDS/SIMAC or whatever the latest acronym for them is this week).

Dragon cargo is the only vehicle that can bring back ISPRs because it berths with a CBM, which is big enough to allow the ISPRs to fit. The Orbital Cygnus and the HTV, which also berth to a CBM, can take ISPRs to the station but can't return them obviously.

There are currently 3 candidate vehicles for CCDev: Dragon v2, CST-100, and Dream Chaser, plus 2 for the cargo program: Dragon and Cygnus (in addition to HTV and Progress). That's a lot of vehicles for a service that is only going to last 5 years. At some point, Congress is going to force NASA to downselect to one crew vehicle and one cargo vehicle.

Unfortunately, Dream Chaser being the latest on schedule and less proven of all the commercial vehicles, is bound to be the first one to go. Boeing and SpaceX simply have a more reliable track record with more reliable designs and more flight-readiness.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Nibb31

[hugix]

I hope that SN isn't just chasing a dream...

[ModZero]

It's alive! (the vehicle, not the thread)

[fredinno]

On 8/23/2013 at 0:01 PM, zekes said:

that would be neat... we need reusable again...

CST-100 and Dragon are reusable too.

On 8/24/2013 at 5:15 PM, deadshot462 said:

I am hopeful of this project. It reminds of the cancelled "ISS Escape" ship that was planned a long time ago.

That's because it is based off one of them, the HL-20, to be exact.

On 8/25/2013 at 1:08 PM, hugix said:

I hope that SN isn't just chasing a dream...

That's why it's called dream chaser .

[Nibb31]

39 minutes ago, fredinno said:

That's because it is based off one of them, the HL-20, to be exact.

Both DreamChaser and the CRV were based on the HL20, which was based on the Russian BOR spaceplane.

[fredinno]

5 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Both DreamChaser and the CRV were based on the HL20, which was based on the Russian BOR spaceplane.

Wasn't HL-20 the CRV?

Either way, the Prometheus by Orbital Sciences also used the HL-20 as a basic design. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_%28spacecraft%29

I wonder why X-38 was never proposed to be revived by anyone for CCDev...

[Nibb31]

Nope, the CRV was X-38 (or rather X-38 was to become the CRV). The CRV was only an emergency lifeboat that would be taken to the station in the Shuttle's payload bay and would stay attached to the station until needed. It wasn't to be launched manned. The X-38 flew several glide tests before being cancelled.

HL20 was an early 90's paper study for a crew transfer vehicle that predated CRV and would have launched on top of a rocket with a crew like DC. No hardware was built.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Nibb31

[fredinno]

6 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

Nope, the CRV was X-38 (or rather X-38 was to become the CRV). The CRV was only an emergency lifeboat that would be taken to the station in the Shuttle's payload bay and would stay attached to the station until needed. It wasn't to be launched manned. The X-38 flew several glide tests before being cancelled.

HL20 was an early 90's paper study for a crew transfer vehicle that predated CRV and would have launched on top of a rocket with a crew like DC. No hardware was built.

HL-20 was considered as a CRV of sorts:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Return_Vehicle#HL-20_PLS

 

And that still doesn't answer why nobody bothered to propose an X-38-Derived vehicle, especially since it went beyond HL-20 in development and could launch on a normal ELV.