Spaceshipone in the space race

Well, it heavily depends on the starting velocities much more than the height. In fact it could be detrimental, because a craft higher up would have to accelerate harder to reach orbital velocity, than one lower down.

Personally I've always thought space plane using a multi-mode Jet/Air-augmented Rocket/Rocket powerplant and an Aerospike nozzle would be the best bet for an efficient launch platform. The Jet engines push the craft to say mach 1-2 relatively efficently (Jets can have a specific impulse in excess of 6000, while the best you can get out of a rocket is 250). As you gain height and speed the AAR takes over, getting about double the ISp of a rocket, with the rocket making the final boost.

This engine concept sounds much like the engine proposed for the HOTOL spaceplane proposal of the 1980's to me, although if you're using 1950's technology, could a extension of the powerplant proposal for the F-103 fighter have worked just as well...?
(The F-103 used a conventional Turbojet engine with afterburner. However the afterburner was designed in such a manner, that given enough speed & altitude, the turbojet could be set to idle, & the afterburner would then act as a ramjet taking the F-103 to Mach 3...).
 
This engine concept sounds much like the engine proposed for the HOTOL spaceplane proposal of the 1980's to me, although if you're using 1950's technology, could a extension of the powerplant proposal for the F-103 fighter have worked just as well...?
(The F-103 used a conventional Turbojet engine with afterburner. However the afterburner was designed in such a manner, that given enough speed & altitude, the turbojet could be set to idle, & the afterburner would then act as a ramjet taking the F-103 to Mach 3...).
HOTOL was a Ram-Jet-Rocket I think, but it was a similar idea. It was an elegant way to get into space, and IMHO would have been a far more efficient and cheaper launch platform than anything we have today. Shame it died on it's arse for lack of founding, but that was the British government of the time, backward looking and insular.

The F-103 thing does sound interesting. If you make it capable of shutting off the turbines completely you could perhaps graft an Air-Augmented rocket on to it. Then close off the air intakes and you'd have yourself a standard rocket.
 
Well, it heavily depends on the starting velocities much more than the height. In fact it could be detrimental, because a craft higher up would have to accelerate harder to reach orbital velocity, than one lower down.

Personally I've always thought space plane using a multi-mode Jet/Air-augmented Rocket/Rocket powerplant and an Aerospike nozzle would be the best bet for an efficient launch platform. The Jet engines push the craft to say mach 1-2 relatively efficently (Jets can have a specific impulse in excess of 6000, while the best you can get out of a rocket is 250). As you gain height and speed the AAR takes over, getting about double the ISp of a rocket, with the rocket making the final boost.
HOTOL was a Ram-Jet-Rocket I think, but it was a similar idea. It was an elegant way to get into space, and IMHO would have been a far more efficient and cheaper launch platform than anything we have today. Shame it died on it's arse for lack of founding, but that was the British government of the time, backward looking and insular.

The F-103 thing does sound interesting. If you make it capable of shutting off the turbines completely you could perhaps graft an Air-Augmented rocket on to it. Then close off the air intakes and you'd have yourself a standard rocket.

Also sounds like the more recent HOTOL-type proposal, Skylon.
 
Top