Jump to content

How excited should I be about Skylon?

Crook

By Crook
in Science & Spaceflight

 Share

Recommended Posts

Crook

Crook

Posted
Posted

As the title says. On the one hand, there are the stories of funding from the British government and the ESA (admittedly, only a small fraction of the total project cost), and the successful engine tests. On the other, the very long list of previous cancelled SSTOs, many of which ran for years before they finally died. So, where does Skylon fit? Are we likely to see it become operational?

Apologies if this has been covered before.

Crook

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kryten

Kryten

Posted
Posted

SSTOs are dependent on very high launch rates, which are dependent on very high demand for relatively small satellites. Venturestar and it's ilk were proposed when 'big LEO' projects like Iridium, Teledesic and Globalstar were generating a lot of potential demand, and failed when they did. Skylon is now going to be dependent on new projects in the same sector, like the WorldVue system; if the sector succeeds, it may succeed, but if it collapses like it did last time, they haven't got a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crook

Crook

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Does competition actually drive the creation of alternatives? I know it did during the Space Race, but these days competition seems non-existent. After retiring the Shuttle, US astronauts just rented Soyuz, for example. If Falcon works, I'd imagine the ESA would just pay up and borrow it. Is there something I'm missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nibb31

Nibb31

Posted
Posted

Apologies if this has been covered before.

It has. Plenty of times.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86244-What-will-happen-if-Skylon-succeeds

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/72850-Skylon-may-fly-this-year-first-SSTO-spaceplane

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65742-Why-is-skylon-unmanned

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/63293-Lift-vs-Weight-tradeoff-on-Skylon-style-spaceplane

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/50187-Will-Skylon-ever-fly

Can a mod please merge this thread with one of the other ones so that we don't have to go through the same arguments all over again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crook

Crook

Posted
  • Author
Posted

My mistake. The search function turned up the latest thread, which I thought was more of a 'If it works, what then?' rather than a 'Is the project likely to reach its goals?'. Looks like I missed the other threads, so please merge/lock this - as you say, it'll bring nothing new to the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nuke

Nuke

Posted
Posted (edited)

last i checked there was no news (last update was back in may). which seems fishy because they used to be doing regular news about engine tests. they may just be actually building the scale model engine, which might explain the lack of updates.

Edited by Nuke
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sgt_flyer

sgt_flyer

Posted
Posted

Yeah - the real interesting thing with skylon is the engine technology :) once those are perfected and shows to be reliable, they'll be able to also make tests with the scimitar variant of the engine. - if they follow airplane kind of business model, (they build the thing, then sell it to companes exploiting it) - then combining sales of the hypersonic planes + the spaceplane might offset the high devellopment costs a little.

The rest of skylon's technology is quite doable with current tech. (Though they'll may need a bit of help for the hull and tanks materials)

The engine's precooler itself is already an astounding leap forward in technology (and maybe the most important breakthrough they needed for the engine - current precooler tech being wayyy too heavy and ineffective compared to this one)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magnemoe

magnemoe

Posted
Posted
But will it actually run on the ground so it can take off?

The precooler seems to rely on having a large amount of air available to feed the saber engine, not a problem when it's in flight but at zero airspeed...

I don't think it needs the precooler at all at lower speeds.

Part of the problem in hypersonic speed is that you have to compress the thin air and slow it down so the engine can work with it.

This generates lots of heat who the precooler handle.

This is not a problem below mach 2 and the rapier is not an ramjet but have fans so takeoff should be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shynung

shynung

Posted
Posted
But will it actually run on the ground so it can take off?

The precooler seems to rely on having a large amount of air available to feed the saber engine, not a problem when it's in flight but at zero airspeed...

There's a turbocompressor right behind the precooler. At takeoff, this will generate a low-pressure region between it and the precooler, sucking in the immediate atmosphere as a result.

Though, I think we should be concerned more about REL's current condition. They don't have any factories able to mass-produce these kinds of engines, nor have they announced who will make the engines for them.:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nuke

Nuke

Posted
Posted

they have about a third of the funds neccisary to build their reduced scale engine. im not sure how reduced. i think i remember hearing 1/4 scale, but i cant site that. im pretty sure that facility wise they are good for this part of the development process. they dont need a factory to build prototype engines, just a machine shop (which im pretty sure they have if they managed to build their precoolers already).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nibb31

Nibb31

Posted
Posted

Alright then, no thread merging then... I suppose we'll have to debunk Skylon all over again for the umpteenth time... *sigh*

REL doesn't have the resources, the industrial base, the logistics, the infrastructure, or the business model to pull off Skylon. All the figures they have communicated are either hugely optimistic with no margin for underperformance, or unrealistic, especially in terms of their market expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
softweir

softweir

Posted
Posted (edited)

I hate to agree, but I have to agree: I am very sceptical about it happening.

Now, if REL took their heads out of the "it must be a spaceplane" place they are in, then they could make a fortune by licencing their heat-exchanger IP for other applications. There are numerous applications where a very high-efficiency heat exchanger can save energy and money: not household applications, but very large industrial applications.

There's a turbocompressor right behind the precooler. At takeoff, this will generate a low-pressure region between it and the precooler, sucking in the immediate atmosphere as a result.

It does: and that also is new, untried tech. They envisage using two counter-rotating compressor fans with no stators. Nobody has tried anything like it for a supersonic engine, and they have yet to prove it will work as well as they hope.

Edited by softweir
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...