What will happen if Skylon succeeds?

[sojourner]

One thing I noticed on the Wikipedia page that's kind of disappoining: the design assumes the cargo bay will be mostly empty during landing. So that would seem to rule out returning much stuff to Earth.

I think there must be some incorrect information there as that would make it difficult to use the crew module they plan. Maybe try getting your information from the official Skylon website and remember that wikipedia is only as good as it's worst source.

[Idobox]

The first thing skylon would change for most people would be suborbital travel (Check the A2).

The second thing is that space based solar power would become an option.

[Mitchz95]

Question. Does the black paint have a functional purpose? Or can the Skylon be painted however the operators want, like conventional airplanes?

[skeevy]

Question. Does the black paint have a functional purpose? Or can the Skylon be painted however the operators want, like conventional airplanes?

Black paint weighs less and has a smoother surface when dry, so there's less drag as well. Grey Primer is actually just a bit better than black paint, but no one wants a space ship to look like an '89 IROC Z.

[SargeRho]

I thought it was black because of the Ceramic material used in the fuselage?

[softweir]

I assumed that was the case.

Or it may be black because nobody knows what colour it will be, and the technical artist decided black looked nice and clean and different from most concept art. In a similar vein, I can remember that a lot of early NASA-sourced shuttle concept art was pure white until a very late stage before Enterprise started being tested. It was only once the technical artists saw all those carbon-black areas that they realised the ceramic tiles only covered part of the shuttle!

[Skyler4856]

Skylon is not really designed to take a crew. Repair is difficult without a crew.

There are plans for a 30 man crew capsule, and I see no reason why a company couldn't have its own dedicated capsules

[Skyler4856]

I could see Skylon being used for small scale satellite, and basic manned exploration, while the SpaceX heavy falcon would deliver heavier cargo

[cpast]

There are plans for a 30 man crew capsule, and I see no reason why a company couldn't have its own dedicated capsules

No, there are plans for a 30 passenger capsule. Passengers are not crew, and do not control the spacecraft.

[Skyler4856]

No, there are plans for a 30 passenger capsule. Passengers are not crew, and do not control the spacecraft.

And the winner of the most pointless post ever goes to...

In all seriousness, the distinction doesn't really matter in the end, simply dock to a dedicated service spacecraft, then boom, problem solved

[Seret]

No, there are plans for a 30 passenger capsule. Passengers are not crew, and do not control the spacecraft.

Carrying passengers would also require the spacecraft to be man-rated, which is expensive and laborious. It's highly unlikely the first version of it would be man-rated, they'd need to prove the commercial case for it with unmanned payloads first. Man-rating it would come somewhat further down the track, and only if there was a business case to justify the effort.

The "passenger module" idea is somewhat speculative, not a concrete plan.

[sojourner]

It's more cost effective to man rate the vehicle from the start. See Falcon 9 VS Delta 4.

[KASASpace]

Succeeds in what? Being efficient and cheap? Or just flying? If it succeeds, then hoorah, a way to get small payloads to orbit. But the only way to make it cheap would be to increase the number of launches a year. If you want a launch a day, you need 366 vehicles (you have to count for leap years). But then you need to pay for maintenance for each one. So make maintenance easy. But then again, they thought maintenance would be fairly easy for the Space Shuttle, but they were wrong.

[Red Iron Crown]

Succeeds in what? Being efficient and cheap? Or just flying? If it succeeds, then hoorah, a way to get small payloads to orbit. But the only way to make it cheap would be to increase the number of launches a year. If you want a launch a day, you need 366 vehicles (you have to count for leap years). But then you need to pay for maintenance for each one. So make maintenance easy. But then again, they thought maintenance would be fairly easy for the Space Shuttle, but they were wrong.

Why so many? Surely the turnaround time to reuse would be less than a year.

[Ralathon]

Succeeds in what? Being efficient and cheap? Or just flying? If it succeeds, then hoorah, a way to get small payloads to orbit. But the only way to make it cheap would be to increase the number of launches a year. If you want a launch a day, you need 366 vehicles (you have to count for leap years). But then you need to pay for maintenance for each one. So make maintenance easy. But then again, they thought maintenance would be fairly easy for the Space Shuttle, but they were wrong.

Erm, the idea is that the spaceplane goes back to earth and can be reused. It really doesn't take a year per vehicle to check the heatshield and engines. I estimate a month between launches during the start when everything is new, but that can go down to as little as a week per plane when the flights become routine. You don't need a ridiculously large fleet to do a launch a day.

[cpast]

Succeeds in what? Being efficient and cheap? Or just flying? If it succeeds, then hoorah, a way to get small payloads to orbit. But the only way to make it cheap would be to increase the number of launches a year. If you want a launch a day, you need 366 vehicles (you have to count for leap years). But then you need to pay for maintenance for each one. So make maintenance easy. But then again, they thought maintenance would be fairly easy for the Space Shuttle, but they were wrong.

I've been assuming that, in this thread, "succeeds" means "succeeds at all stated goals" -- turnaround time of days, makes access to space as cheap as they claim. This thread is assuming Skylon succeeds at its goals, not whether it will or can.

[mythic_fci]

Honestly, it'd be cheaper to launch a conventional ELV like the Falcon 9 or Atlas V to deliver the amount of payload the Skylon can take to orbit than to use the Skylon. So, it'd be more expensive for the same (or worse) result.

[Sky_walker]

Honestly, it'd be cheaper to launch a conventional ELV like the Falcon 9 or Atlas V to deliver the amount of payload the Skylon can take to orbit than to use the Skylon. So, it'd be more expensive for the same (or worse) result.

Source?

Or you're just expressing your personal opinion intentionally making it look like an indisputable fact?

[Red Iron Crown]

Source?

Or you're just expressing your personal opinion intentionally making it look like an indisputable fact?

Hard to provide a source for launch costs of something that hasn't flown yet. Skylon looks good on paper, but paper is a long way from reality.

[mythic_fci]

Source?

Or you're just expressing your personal opinion intentionally making it look like an indisputable fact?

It's my opinion, and I didn't intend for it to look like a fact. Sorry if it looked like an indisputable fact

I was simply comparing what reusable spacecraft cost and will provide versus EELVs. With modern tech, it seems fruitless, but with more advanced tech, it may happen.

[sojourner]

Honestly, it'd be cheaper to launch a conventional ELV like the Falcon 9 or Atlas V to deliver the amount of payload the Skylon can take to orbit than to use the Skylon. So, it'd be more expensive for the same (or worse) result.

Nope, If Skylon works "as planned" (which I have my doubts) it will undercut ELV's severely. It would probably be cheaper than Falcon 9 Reusable as well.

[Sky_walker]

Hard to provide a source for launch costs of something that hasn't flown yet. Skylon looks good on paper, but paper is a long way from reality.

Yep. I thought so.

And Skylon is not just a paper - they already made a small-scale test of engines, and work now on a large-scale engines with ESA.

As ESA said:

the SKYLON vehicle can be realised given today's current technology and successful engine development

[cpast]

I really don't think "what if Skylon succeeds" means "will Skylon succeed?"

[Red Iron Crown]

Yep. I thought so.

And Skylon is not just a paper - they already made a small-scale test of engines, and work now on a large-scale engines with ESA.

As ESA said:

Development is ongoing, so it's not a truly paper project anymore. The cost projections are pure best case scenario, though.

[Sky_walker]

Fair enough