# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Flying to space ?  (Read 813 times)

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Flying to space ?
« on: 14/06/2016 14:27:44 »
I think it is possible to fly to orbit.

Let's discuss this.

This is 37,5 times lighter in wingloading than a Boeing 747.
« Last Edit: 15/06/2016 04:51:25 by topspeed3 »

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #1 on: 15/06/2016 04:53:06 »
It is 2300 kg empty and loaded weight is 12500 kg the Delta V is sufficient after the solar flight phase is over at 25 km altitude.

I figure this would be moderatly cheap way to travel to distant stars !

Do you find a flaw in it ?
« Last Edit: 15/06/2016 05:03:36 by topspeed3 »

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #2 on: 16/06/2016 22:43:00 »
TAke off speed fully laden on earth is 77.3 km/h and landing speed on Mars is 89 km/h almost empty of the 8 ton fuel.

#### PmbPhy

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2760
• Thanked: 38 times
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #3 on: 17/06/2016 04:38:13 »
I think it is possible to fly to orbit.

Let's discuss this.

This is 37,5 times lighter in wingloading than a Boeing 747.
It's impossible to "fly" into space with a plane in the manner in which you're speaking. Such a craft simply cannot attain orbital speed which is anywhere from 15,430 mph to 17,450 mph. To do this you have to get outside the Earth's atmosphere and if you do that then there's no air to give the wings on a plane any lift during the ascent phase. If you try to orbit lower where there is air then your plane will burn up due to the extreme heat which develops due to the friction between the surface of the craft and the atmosphere.

If it was possible then it would have been done already. Those boys at NASA are the Jet Propulsion Laboratory are very smart.

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #4 on: 17/06/2016 06:23:14 »
I think it is possible to fly to orbit.

Let's discuss this.

This is 37,5 times lighter in wingloading than a Boeing 747.
It's impossible to "fly" into space with a plane in the manner in which you're speaking. Such a craft simply cannot attain orbital speed which is anywhere from 15,430 mph to 17,450 mph. To do this you have to get outside the Earth's atmosphere and if you do that then there's no air to give the wings on a plane any lift during the ascent phase. If you try to orbit lower where there is air then your plane will burn up due to the extreme heat which develops due to the friction between the surface of the craft and the atmosphere.

If it was possible then it would have been done already. Those boys at NASA are the Jet Propulsion Laboratory are very smart.

I have no doubt that the boys at JPL are smart.

There is a window in going to space that hasn't apparently been discovered yet.

Going as slow as possible through the heating zone ( you know this..below 80 km and above Mach 10 ? ) can only be done with an aeroplane...of very lite nature.

See the SS1 files...it went Mach 3.09 at 65 km altitude..hardly heating at all.
« Last Edit: 17/06/2016 06:27:45 by topspeed3 »

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #5 on: 17/06/2016 12:59:07 »
For instance the heating starts to occur rapidly at 80 km when the shuttle came in at M29.
This craft can go through this part of the region ( the heating zone ) at M8-M9 speed.....flying on its wings.
The improved aerodynamics and solar cell efficiency makes this happen at very very low wingloading..later at 130-150 km altitude the craft can push the pedal to the metal...as the air ends ( no pressure readings ) and the craft is very lite due to the used mass of the propellant.

The air at 80-150 is very loose..hardly viscosity left and this is why two people have gone in free fall beyond Mach 1 at 30-40 km altitude...it is a whole new ball game up there for lite winged craft with lotsa punch. This has never been tried before...never ever !

#### PmbPhy

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2760
• Thanked: 38 times
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #6 on: 18/06/2016 17:04:56 »
Quote from: topspeed3
There is a window in going to space that hasn't apparently been discovered yet.

Going as slow as possible through the heating zone ( you know this..below 80 km and above Mach 10 ? ) can only be done with an aeroplane...of very lite nature.
You're quite wrong. Such a vehicle has already been designed, built, launched and safely recovered that went above the Earth's atmosphere. It was done by The Spaceship Company, a California-based company owned by Virgin Galactic. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceShipTwo

The problem here is that you made the claim that a plane could be put into orbit. Right now it's pretty clear that you may not have a solid understanding of what it means for a spacecraft to be in orbit. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit

And you simply cannot go to the stars with such a craft. It would take literally thousands of years to make such a flight.

Being above the Earth's atmosphere is not considered to be in orbit. Being in orbit means to be placed in a circular orbit above the Earth's atmosphere. Once you've reached a height which is outside the Earth's atmosphere it can no longer fly like a plane because there is no lift. Once at that altitude you have to accelerate the craft to 17,000 mph. That's why it takes massive rocket engines to accomplish this. It requires a huge amount of work to accelerate an object to those speeds. It's not possible to do that with an airplane. Outside the Earth's atmosphere air breathing craft can't work. For one thing they need air to work, which there isn't any. Another reason is that there can be no lift because wings require air for lift. The tiny rocket engines you show on your little plane are not realistic. They have to be huge to do that kind of work. We're not talking about something like Mach 10. We're talking about just short of Mach 25!

Play around with the rocket equation and you'll find out the real parameters required to put a craft into orbit. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equation

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #7 on: 18/06/2016 20:19:43 »
Quote from: topspeed3
There is a window in going to space that hasn't apparently been discovered yet.

Going as slow as possible through the heating zone ( you know this..below 80 km and above Mach 10 ? ) can only be done with an aeroplane...of very lite nature.
You're quite wrong.

The problem here is that you made the claim that a plane could be put into orbit. Right now it's pretty clear that you may not have a solid understanding of what it means for a spacecraft to be in orbit.

And you simply cannot go to the stars with such a craft. It would take literally thousands of years to make such a flight.

Being above the Earth's atmosphere is not considered to be in orbit. Being in orbit means to be placed in a circular orbit above the Earth's atmosphere. Once you've reached a height which is outside the Earth's atmosphere it can no longer fly like a plane because there is no lift. Once at that altitude you have to accelerate the craft to 17,000 mph. That's why it takes massive rocket engines to accomplish this. It requires a huge amount of work to accelerate an object to those speeds. It's not possible to do that with an airplane. Outside the Earth's atmosphere air breathing craft can't work. For one thing they need air to work, which there isn't any. Another reason is that there can be no lift because wings require air for lift. The tiny rocket engines you show on your little plane are not realistic. They have to be huge to do that kind of work. We're not talking about something like Mach 10. We're talking about just short of Mach 25!

Hi  !

It is a bit difficult to argue in the internet. Since I claim something I am willing to back up my theories. Can you inform which part of the flight is impossible for a purposebuilt plane that wants to go to orbit ?

We all know Burt Rutan achievements in jettisoning rockets from aeroplanes...I don't mean that. I also know my rocketry. I have counted that the delta V is sufficient to reach the orbit. Orbit we call LEO at 200 km.

I enclose a model views of a 1/4 scale plane of the intented orbit plane. You know the altitude record for 300 kg plane class is 9180 meters by Scott Winton. If I am able to brake the Winton record with a clear margin...will you then believe...I have a point ?

All the best ! !

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #8 on: 19/06/2016 07:51:05 »
Quote from: topspeed3
There is a window in going to space that hasn't apparently been discovered yet.

And you simply cannot go to the stars with such a craft. It would take literally thousands of years to make such a flight.

I on the contrary claim that the reason we haven't yet been able to fly to distant stars like Mars is because we have made things too complicated. Burt Rutan has one aim to make it exiting like jettisoning the X-15 which btw did go to space. But the complexity and overlapping ( literally ) systems cannot be efficient. Efficiency is the key word here.

I enclose a rail launched TSTO of my design ( sketch ? ) which is reusable on most parts, but is more of a show than the real thing.

In Solar Eagle as I have presented it the aeroplane is the thing making the form...other WISE it has all the space flying systems like oms and pressurized cockpit/cabin. Lifesupport systems and EVA is easy to implement on it too as it has lotsa space packed in a lite weight but durable form. Most of all..it can land on Mars safely ( 89 km/h ). The 660 m2 of solar cells also play a vital role in a space flite to distant stars....as it can run a 20 times bigger Ion-thruster than was on board the Dawn probe ( of 1000 kg ).
« Last Edit: 19/06/2016 08:08:50 by topspeed3 »

#### jerrygg38

• Hero Member
• Posts: 742
• Thanked: 22 times
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #9 on: 21/06/2016 14:13:57 »
In order to fly into space we have to learn to overcome gravity. First we must learn what gravity is and then produce machines capable of negating it. All we have to do is produce a force of a little more than 1G. Then we will slowly lift off. If we accelerate at a force of 2G's we will build up speed fairly rapidly.
Perhaps in another hundred years once we understand gravity, we can travel to the moon in a few hours and mars in a few days. But that is for future technology.

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #10 on: 22/06/2016 19:27:38 »
In order to fly into space we have to learn to overcome gravity. First we must learn what gravity is and then produce machines capable of negating it. All we have to do is produce a force of a little more than 1G. Then we will slowly lift off. If we accelerate at a force of 2G's we will build up speed fairly rapidly.
Perhaps in another hundred years once we understand gravity, we can travel to the moon in a few hours and mars in a few days. But that is for future technology.

No we don't you just fly with lower wingloading aircraft ...it does not know it is flying fast...as the air is loose and less dense...and at 110-150 km it turns into "regular rocket" that needs OMS.
« Last Edit: 22/06/2016 19:32:08 by topspeed3 »

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying in space ?
« Reply #11 on: 28/06/2016 08:03:35 »
I have an other theory !

Once in space with aeroplane like space ship. You ought to be able to steeer it "spacedynamically " .

There are particles in space 1 / cm3 and when the elevator for instance is 70 m2...and the plane lite you ought to be able to steer it at great speed...let's say 100 km/s to 0.01 C speeds.
« Last Edit: 28/06/2016 08:05:39 by topspeed3 »

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #12 on: 02/07/2016 18:51:18 »
Here is the proof !

After flying electric much higher where Space Ship II releases the rocket this starts to fly with rocket power.

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #13 on: 02/07/2016 19:00:02 »
Flying a single piece aeroplane / rocket into orbit is 4 x more effectice than having a two piece aeroplane like White Knight / Space Ship II combo.

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #14 on: 10/07/2016 06:49:04 »
This was counted 45 km flying altitude.

#### topspeed3

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 13
##### Re: Flying to space ?
« Reply #15 on: 13/07/2016 17:55:54 »