Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Test Flight Of Space-Hopper Reusable Launch Vehicle 10

Posted by timothy from the clean-up-and-sell-again dept.
!splut writes: "A New Scientist article reports that Pheonix, the prototype of a new reusable space launch vehicle nicknamed the Space-Hopper, has been cleared for its first test flight. The vehicle is designed to take off horizontally and use a disposable booster to reach orbit, though the prototype will be dropped from a helicopter for the test flight. If the European Space Agency decides to continue development it could reduce the cost of launching small to medium-sized satellites, and could be ready by 2015." A better story is running at space.com.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Test Flight Of Space-Hopper Reusable Launch Vehicle More

Test Flight Of Space-Hopper Reusable Launch Vehicle

Comments Filter:
  • The chances of this succeeding sound slim to me... maybe I'm just being pessimistic, but budgets for space projects have been small lately.

    Seems that in this type of economy, interesting government-funded space and scientific projects are the first to be cut...
    • It's not a bad economic strategy. Let the US and the old Soviets develop the technology for reusable orbital systems. But then again, why did they wait this long? The article says it won't be in place until 2015!

  • Space Hoppers?! 1970s technology... (Score:4, Funny)

    by dpp ( 585742 ) on Tuesday June 25, 2002 @04:28PM (#3765208)

    But, but, but... how can a design like this [bbc.co.uk] possibly reach orbit?! :-)

  • too bad they scrubbed the building of the x-32 (or 33?) VentureStar.... would have been better

    • Re:too bad.... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by seanellis ( 302682 )
      You will have noticed that, during the big press conference when the winning design for the X-33 was announced, that the audience was basically silent except for a collective intake of breath.

      There was then much muttering about political pressure, pork barrels, etc. and the chosen X-33 design was finally dumped.

      The X-33 concept that was apparently the favorite amongst the engineering community was the vertical take-off, vertical landing "DC-Y" concept. This was a evolution of the DC-X prototype which had already been demonstrated.
      (see http://gargravarr.cc.utexas.edu/ssrt/images/ and http://members.aol.com/Nathan2go/X33.htm)

      VTVL has a big advantage over HTHL designs - all the stresses are in virtuall the same direction all the time. You can therefore make a much lighter design - especially true in a single stage to orbit design.
  • An unmanned, horizontally launching, space shuttle. Good for the European Space Agency! NASA's low-tech cost-cutting plan, the X-4000 Launch Aparatus [uncoveror.com] might be the best we can do here in the states.
  • Not "Pheonix". :)

    (this browser OmniWeb spell checks as I type. Very nice)

Slashdot Top Deals

"How to make a million dollars: First, get a million dollars." -- Steve Martin

Close