If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Aviation Web)   So you think hybrid engines are for tree-hugging pansies? Here's one that can travel at 3,500 mph and put you into low orbit   (avweb.com) divider line 42
    More: Cool, orbits, hybrid cars, space planes, Sabres, Reaction Engines, orbital flight  
•       •       •

2449 clicks; posted to Geek » on 17 Jul 2013 at 10:09 PM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



42 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-17 10:17:43 PM
Low Earth orbit at 3,500 mph? I think not.
 
2013-07-17 10:28:59 PM
Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?

Because I'm fairly certain a jet-rocket engine isn't getting good gas mileage and wouldn't be down with the tree-hugging crowd.

// now, if you develop some sort of electric engine that can launch things into space, I would be impressed, because I'm fairly certain that would also mean flying cars.
 
2013-07-17 10:32:20 PM
Huh? The Saturn V as well as many other rockets have used Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, only byproduct is heat, energy and water so how is this better?
 
2013-07-17 10:32:22 PM
I wish him all kinds of luck, but Skylon's been in progress almost as long as Moller's flying car. Like Whittle before him, Bond has never gotten much of a break from the British government, which should have been working harder to get this thing going all along.
 
2013-07-17 10:32:26 PM

dukeblue219: Low Earth orbit at 3,500 mph? I think not.


Lets just say it puts you on the doorstep of space.


The hybrid mode replaces the first stage of a rocket in theory. So you don't have to store all the oxidizer you'd need to make a hundred thousand feet before launching into orbit.

/of course, normal first stages are usualy less complex.
/but being reusable would be a massive money saver.
 
2013-07-17 10:36:23 PM

lordargent: Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?

Because I'm fairly certain a jet-rocket engine isn't getting good gas mileage and wouldn't be down with the tree-hugging crowd.

// now, if you develop some sort of electric engine that can launch things into space, I would be impressed, because I'm fairly certain that would also mean flying cars.


Spindizzies?
 
2013-07-17 10:45:06 PM
Boojum2k: Spindizzies?

I just want to move a car, not a planet.
 
2013-07-17 10:48:00 PM

Science_Guy_3.14159: Huh? The Saturn V as well as many other rockets have used Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, only byproduct is heat, energy and water so how is this better?



Theoretically a craft that takes off like a plane, flies up really high and then switches to rockets to launch itself in to space has many advantages.
1. It's a reusable craft so you don't have to build a new one every time you need to go to space, you just land and refuel it like other planes.
2. It uses far less energy to get into space which means much more cargo capacity and much less fuel.
3. You're able to make an inherently much safer craft as it's not essentially an absolutely enormous bomb with a tiny capsule on top which needs to stay balanced all the way to space.
4. The greater ease of getting in to space means you should also be able to turn the craft around and send it back in to space much much faster - ridiculously faster then when compared to expendable rockets like the Saturn V.
5. All those factors could add up to a truly massive reduction in cost for putting each pound of payload into space...

Of course the devil is in the details... Of course the first ones will be clunky, and we'll learn from them and gradually make better ones just like everything else. Scaled Composites' SpaceShipOne is a clever but relatively crude spaceplane. It worked marvelously, and got people in to space cheaper then ever before. The follow up is supposed to perform even better...
 
2013-07-17 10:48:30 PM

lordargent: Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?


It's a cromulent use of the word. It works as an air-breathing jet engine in the lower atmosphere and as a rocket engine to reach orbit. The benefit is that it doesn't have to lift as much oxidizer up from the ground because it only burns liquid hydrogen in the jet mode.
 
2013-07-17 10:54:27 PM

Any Pie Left: I wish him all kinds of luck, but Skylon's been in progress almost as long as Moller's flying car. Like Whittle before him, Bond has never gotten much of a break from the British government, which should have been working harder to get this thing going all along.


The UK has had a long history of not giving a crap about human spaceflight. Unmanned spaceflight they care about a lot, even have a very vibrant space industry that they build anything from cube satellites to engines for NASA missions. The UK has even described Major Tim Peake, the first man who will fly into space of British origin without becoming an American to fly as being an European Space Agency astronaut that just happened to be from Britain. So good luck with that.
 
2013-07-17 10:57:08 PM

lordargent: Boojum2k: Spindizzies?

I just want to move a car, not a planet.


Aw come on, we could move cities.
 
2013-07-17 10:58:15 PM
So... Dan Dare Not?
 
2013-07-17 11:11:30 PM
Yeah...different hybrid. That being said, in an electric/ICE hybrid system, the ICE is the weak part.
 
2013-07-17 11:33:58 PM
Ivo Shandor: It's a cromulent use of the word.

I was referring to the submitters connotation that "Hybrid" == something for tree-hugging pansies and applying it to a JET-ROCKET ENGINE which is the very incarnation of MORE POWER.

www.bobgarontraining.com
 
2013-07-17 11:58:23 PM
"Half a yellow will put you into orbit."
"Real rocket man!"
"Could put you in the zone."
 
2013-07-18 12:25:23 AM
Wake me when it can fire a pound of bacon into the asteroid belt.
 
2013-07-18 12:36:48 AM
Bond. Alan Bond.

All of you missed that?
 
2013-07-18 12:37:39 AM

lordargent: Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?

Because I'm fairly certain a jet-rocket engine isn't getting good gas mileage and wouldn't be down with the tree-hugging crowd.

// now, if you develop some sort of electric engine that can launch things into space, I would be impressed, because I'm fairly certain that would also mean flying cars.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hybrid

Huh?
 
2013-07-18 12:45:54 AM

mongbiohazard: Science_Guy_3.14159: Huh? The Saturn V as well as many other rockets have used Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, only byproduct is heat, energy and water so how is this better?


Theoretically a craft that takes off like a plane, flies up really high and then switches to rockets to launch itself in to space has many advantages.
1. It's a reusable craft so you don't have to build a new one every time you need to go to space, you just land and refuel it like other planes.
2. It uses far less energy to get into space which means much more cargo capacity and much less fuel.
3. You're able to make an inherently much safer craft as it's not essentially an absolutely enormous bomb with a tiny capsule on top which needs to stay balanced all the way to space.
4. The greater ease of getting in to space means you should also be able to turn the craft around and send it back in to space much much faster - ridiculously faster then when compared to expendable rockets like the Saturn V.
5. All those factors could add up to a truly massive reduction in cost for putting each pound of payload into space...

Of course the devil is in the details... Of course the first ones will be clunky, and we'll learn from them and gradually make better ones just like everything else. Scaled Composites' SpaceShipOne is a clever but relatively crude spaceplane. It worked marvelously, and got people in to space cheaper then ever before. The follow up is supposed to perform even better...


Isn't that everything they told us the space shuttle would be?
 
2013-07-18 02:00:14 AM
Personally, I love this design, and really hope they make it work. It just seems so much like something Brains would have designed for Mr. Tracy.

/Thunderbirds are Go!
 
2013-07-18 02:09:55 AM

dukeblue219: Low Earth orbit at 3,500 mph? I think not.


You can make it into space at 10 mph if you can keep engine thrust going long enough.

You seem to be thinking ballistically - one big push and coast.

Velocity needed to orbit does change with the altitude of the orbit, does it not? LEO orbits tend to run around 90 minutes per orbit, IIRC, whereas geosync takes 24 hrs (obviously).

Point is, if you can keep the engines firing, you can go as slow as you like, and not having to carry oxidizer for the first part does a lot to help with that.
 
2013-07-18 02:15:00 AM
I read that as "tree hugging penises" at first.

Completly different mental image
 
2013-07-18 02:15:01 AM
And it runs on used cooking oil!
 
2013-07-18 02:19:51 AM
British inventor Alan Bond....
He must come before Quincy Bond because James was just a stupid agent.
 
2013-07-18 03:39:44 AM

CigaretteSmokingMan: mongbiohazard: Science_Guy_3.14159: Huh? The Saturn V as well as many other rockets have used Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, only byproduct is heat, energy and water so how is this better?


Theoretically a craft that takes off like a plane, flies up really high and then switches to rockets to launch itself in to space has many advantages.
1. It's a reusable craft so you don't have to build a new one every time you need to go to space, you just land and refuel it like other planes.
2. It uses far less energy to get into space which means much more cargo capacity and much less fuel.
3. You're able to make an inherently much safer craft as it's not essentially an absolutely enormous bomb with a tiny capsule on top which needs to stay balanced all the way to space.
4. The greater ease of getting in to space means you should also be able to turn the craft around and send it back in to space much much faster - ridiculously faster then when compared to expendable rockets like the Saturn V.
5. All those factors could add up to a truly massive reduction in cost for putting each pound of payload into space...

Of course the devil is in the details... Of course the first ones will be clunky, and we'll learn from them and gradually make better ones just like everything else. Scaled Composites' SpaceShipOne is a clever but relatively crude spaceplane. It worked marvelously, and got people in to space cheaper then ever before. The follow up is supposed to perform even better...

Isn't that everything they told us the space shuttle would be?


Indeed. Shuttle was a fully reusable jet-rocket two-stage design until Nixon's beancounters got their hands on it. See the Wired blog "Beyond Apollo" for a concise history of how we got the designed-by-a-committee kludge that killed 14 astronauts and set the USA space program back 30 years.

/Hell, even Orbiter on top of the S-1C was a better idea than what they came up with
//Bitter? Hell yes. Last Saturn V launch happened when I was 1 year old
///Dumb bureaucrats
 
2013-07-18 03:42:31 AM

CigaretteSmokingMan: mongbiohazard: Science_Guy_3.14159: Huh? The Saturn V as well as many other rockets have used Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, only byproduct is heat, energy and water so how is this better?


Theoretically a craft that takes off like a plane, flies up really high and then switches to rockets to launch itself in to space has many advantages.
1. It's a reusable craft so you don't have to build a new one every time you need to go to space, you just land and refuel it like other planes.
2. It uses far less energy to get into space which means much more cargo capacity and much less fuel.
3. You're able to make an inherently much safer craft as it's not essentially an absolutely enormous bomb with a tiny capsule on top which needs to stay balanced all the way to space.
4. The greater ease of getting in to space means you should also be able to turn the craft around and send it back in to space much much faster - ridiculously faster then when compared to expendable rockets like the Saturn V.
5. All those factors could add up to a truly massive reduction in cost for putting each pound of payload into space...

Of course the devil is in the details... Of course the first ones will be clunky, and we'll learn from them and gradually make better ones just like everything else. Scaled Composites' SpaceShipOne is a clever but relatively crude spaceplane. It worked marvelously, and got people in to space cheaper then ever before. The follow up is supposed to perform even better...

Isn't that everything they told us the space shuttle would be?


No, the shuttle used traditional rocketry to get into space.  The shuttle itself was reusable but the need to serve both NASA and the military led to a design that wasn't really all that good.
 
2013-07-18 04:41:10 AM

Science_Guy_3.14159: Huh? The Saturn V as well as many other rockets have used Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, only byproduct is heat, energy and water so how is this better?


A jet engine gets the oxygen component of its fuel from the air, meaning said oxygen component isn't in the engine itself, meaning the engine is lighter, meaning it goes further on less energy.

I guess I could break it down further, but I think you've got it from there.

lordargent: Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?

Because I'm fairly certain a jet-rocket engine isn't getting good gas mileage and wouldn't be down with the tree-hugging crowd.

// now, if you develop some sort of electric engine that can launch things into space, I would be impressed, because I'm fairly certain that would also mean flying cars.


Hybrid means a blend of two or more varieties, in this case a rocket engine and a jet engine.

And, yeah, it probably gets pretty good fuel miles for a rocket, or it should in principle.
 
2013-07-18 05:22:50 AM
Jim_Callahan: Hybrid means a blend of two or more varieties, in this case a rocket engine and a jet engine.

I'm well aware of the definition of "hybrid".

To me, it seems like the submitter thinks that "hybrid engine" is a synonym for "underpowered and environmentally friendly".
 
2013-07-18 06:26:53 AM
Hybrid, biatch that is OLD news.

DS1 is a solar powered zero-impact drive.
http://science1.nasa.gov/missions/deep-space-1/
 
2013-07-18 06:28:09 AM
www.avweb.com

Looks bent
 
2013-07-18 06:48:38 AM

lordargent: Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?

Because I'm fairly certain a jet-rocket engine isn't getting good gas mileage and wouldn't be down with the tree-hugging crowd.

// now, if you develop some sort of electric engine that can launch things into space, I would be impressed, because I'm fairly certain that would also mean flying cars.


You think the nimby is bad with nuclear power now, wait until you try to build a starship powered by a matter antimatter reaction.
 
2013-07-18 08:15:43 AM
Do people still think that about Hybrids? Some hybrid versions of cars are faster their normal counterparts.  My wife's company car is a Ford Fusion hybrid and that thing is great, quiet, good pickup, fewer stops and dirty gas stations.

Unless you have a sport scar there is little reason not to have a hybrid (aside from cost of course), and even that is changing.
 
2013-07-18 08:32:00 AM

lordargent: Did we change the legitimate definitions of "Hybrid" or something?


Yes, it has been corrupted into something to do with environmentalism instead of the real meaning which is

Noun : A thing made by combining two different elements.
 
2013-07-18 08:36:37 AM
I know it is not a realistic simulation but the logic is sound. In KSP changing from a hydrogen/oxidiser first stage to a jet first stage saves you around 70% of your weight and 50% of your costs even if you throw the stage away after use. If you reuse the jet stage then your costs will be that much lower.
 
2013-07-18 08:40:42 AM
Man, SABRE is a really cool idea but the plumbing is so overcomplicated in the effort to squeeze out as much efficiency as possible. I get visions of exploding Soviet moon-rockets when I think about how complex that thing's internal arrangement is. Rocket engines don't like it when complex plumbing systems develop harmonic imbalances.
 
2013-07-18 09:38:40 AM

dready zim: I know it is not a realistic simulation but the logic is sound. In KSP changing from a hydrogen/oxidiser first stage to a jet first stage saves you around 70% of your weight and 50% of your costs even if you throw the stage away after use. If you reuse the jet stage then your costs will be that much lower.


KSP does a fair job of it.
If you start in thinner air then you have less resistance and your engine nozzles can be optimized for lower pressures and higher efficiency. Using an airplane as the "launch pad" (what Stradolaunch is doing) saves you money and gives you your choice of launch sites. The theory is sound.

What KSP doesn't simulate is the mechanical complexity of making high altitude, high speed, hybrid engines. It does a moderate job of showing the trouble from trying to launch from air that's barely thick enough to support the carrier aircraft.

The SpaceX method, Grasshopper, is to build a reusable first stage with traditional engines.   At this point the cost of fuel is a very minor part of launch expenses and you save on weight and part count by making a carrier that doesn't have to be half aircraft.
A rocket base can also lift a much larger and more awkward vehicle.
So, at present, I'm outsourcing my kerbal program to the SpaceX method.

/This engine sounds promising, but I'm not convinced its worth the trouble of going hybrid just to cover the first few miles.
 
2013-07-18 09:58:03 AM
Wake me when they come up with a hybrid pickup truck that can tow a 14,000 pound load without shiatting the bed.
 
2013-07-18 10:00:32 AM

way south: /This engine sounds promising, but I'm not convinced its worth the trouble of going hybrid just to cover the first few miles.


Luddite. Columbus' first computer at Kitty Hawk only had three bytes of luddite memory. It's arrogant to think that we know everything about materials science. There might be new elements hiding with complex or imaginary atomic mass. The species, space, the death asteroid.
 
2013-07-18 11:45:31 AM
A jet/rocket hybrid space plane is not restricted to taking off from only ideal spots (why Cape Canaveral and Wallops Island are what they are now) and doesn't even need a specialized facility beyond something capable of fueling up liquid fuel rockets.  Also the first 100,000 ft is the most expensive in fuel.  That's one stage of the rocket you cut out to get to orbit if you start the rocket motors from 100k rather than 0.
 
2013-07-18 12:00:38 PM
For tree hugging pansies? Subby is forgetting something

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-07-18 04:04:51 PM

Bravo Two: Wake me when they come up with a hybrid pickup truck that can tow a 14,000 pound load without shiatting the bed.


So you can commute 15 miles each way to work in it, carry 14,000 pounds once every 8 months or so?
 
2013-07-18 04:47:44 PM

serial_crusher: Bravo Two: Wake me when they come up with a hybrid pickup truck that can tow a 14,000 pound load without shiatting the bed.

So you can commute 15 miles each way to work in it, carry 14,000 pounds once every 8 months or so?


To be fair: If not for all the safety standards and environmental regulations, you could probably afford to have two cars. One for each specialization.
Many small cars from the seventies and eighties got better mileage than most hybrids do now.

/Speaking as a truck owner, I have to fill the bed with assorted crap at least every week or so.
/Some people buy the wrong vehicle for their needs simply cause they want it, but its a free country.
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report