Misplaced Pages

#403596

41-434: Reusable Launch Vehicle may refer to : Ahron Shaik of ECE-1 is RunDi 2nd Reusable Launch Vehicle program of NASA (including X-33), from 1994, major part of Space Launch Initiative RLV Technology Demonstration Programme of Indian Space Research Organisation to develop multiple reusable space launch vehicle. Reusable launch vehicles in general Topics referred to by

82-476: A missile launch control center . With the introduction of the Soviet UR-100 and the U.S. Titan II missile series, underground silos changed in the 1960s. Both missile series introduced the use of hypergolic propellant , which could be stored in the missiles, allowing for rapid launches. Both countries' liquid-fueled missile systems were moved into underground silos. The introduction of solid fuel systems, in

123-426: A second strike capability in a nuclear war. North Korea built a missile silo complex south of Paektu Mountain . The silos are reportedly designed for mid- to long-range missiles, but it is not clear if all of them are operational. Iran has silo-based weapons, having built a system of underground missile silos to protect missiles from detection and (above-ground) launch facilities from aerial destruction. It

164-560: A Phase II contract to develop the X-33 as a demonstrator vehicle was awarded to Lockheed Martin in 1996. At the same time Orbital Sciences was awarded a contract to develop the X-34 , an air-launched hypersonic research vehicle. The goals of the RLV program were: $ 1 billion was spent through 1999 with about 80 percent coming from NASA and additional money contributed by the industry partners. The goal

205-548: A day were to be fuelled, prepared and rolled just outdoors of the facility's concrete casing, launched from either of two outdoor launch pads in rapid sequence against London and southern England. A similar-purpose but less-developed facility, the Blockhaus d'Eperlecques , had also been built, some 14.4 kilometers (8.9 miles) north-northwest of La Coupole, and closer to intended targets in southeastern England. Following repeated heavy bombing by Allied forces during Operation Crossbow ,

246-430: A design using liquid oxygen/hydrogen bell engines based on its vertical takeoff and landing DC-XA test vehicle. It would have used a single SSME for the main propulsion system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= Launch facility The structures typically have the missile some distance below ground, protected by a large " blast door " on top. They are usually connected, physically and/or electronically, to

287-448: A liquid-hydrogen tank made of carbon-fiber composite material that had demonstrated the ability for repeated fuelings and simulated launch cycles. Northrop Grumman concluded that these successful tests have enabled the development and refinement of new manufacturing processes that will allow the company to build large composite tanks without an autoclave ; and design and engineering development of conformal fuel tanks appropriate for use on

328-609: A next-generation, commercially operated reusable launch vehicle . The X-33 would flight-test a range of technologies that NASA believed it needed for single-stage-to-orbit reusable launch vehicles (SSTO RLVs), such as metallic thermal protection systems , composite cryogenic fuel tanks for liquid hydrogen , the aerospike engine , autonomous (uncrewed) flight control, rapid flight turn-around times through streamlined operations, and its lifting body aerodynamics . Failures of its 21-meter wingspan and multi-lobed, composite-material fuel tank during pressure testing ultimately led to

369-550: A partner were convicted, in the largest lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) manufacturing case in history, of conspiracy to manufacture large quantities of LSD in a decommissioned SM-65 Atlas missile silo (548-7) near Wamego, Kansas . The Titan I missile used a similar silo basing of the fourth Atlas version. LGM-25C Titan II (deactivated) ICBMs were in a one ICBM launch control center (LCC) with one LF configuration (1 × 1). Titan missiles (both I and II) were located near their command and control operations personnel. Access to

410-638: A runway at the end of its mission. Initial sub-orbital test flights were planned from Edwards AFB to Dugway Proving Grounds southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah . Once those test flights were completed, further flight tests were to be conducted from Edwards AFB to Malmstrom AFB in Great Falls, Montana , to gather more complete data on aircraft heating and engine performance at higher speeds and altitudes. On July 2, 1996, NASA selected Lockheed Martin Skunk Works of Palmdale, California , to design, build, and test

451-546: A single-stage-to-orbit vehicle. Five companies expressed interest and proposed concepts. Of those five Lockheed Martin, Rockwell and McDonnell Douglas were selected for workup into more detailed proposals. Rockwell proposed a Space Shuttle -derived design. It would have used one Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) and two RL-10 -5A engines. In a subsequent full-scale system to reach orbit Rockwell planned to use six Rocketdyne RS-2100 engines. McDonnell Douglas featured

SECTION 10

#1732851347404

492-427: A squadron. Three squadrons make up a wing. Measures were taken such that if any one LCC was disabled, a separate LCC within the squadron would take control of its ten ICBMs. The LGM-30 LFs and LCCs are separated by several miles, connected only electronically. This distance ensures that a nuclear attack could only disable a very small number of ICBMs, leaving the rest capable of being launched immediately. Dense Pack

533-456: Is different from Wikidata All article disambiguation pages All disambiguation pages Reusable Launch Vehicle program The Lockheed Martin X-33 was a proposed uncrewed, sub-scale technology demonstrator suborbital spaceplane that was developed for a period in the 1990s. The X-33 was a technology demonstrator for the VentureStar orbital spaceplane, which was planned to be

574-417: Is the earliest known precursor to modern underground missile silos still in existence. It was built by the forces of Nazi Germany in northern Occupied France , between 1943 and 1944, to serve as a launch base for V-2 rockets . The facility was designed with an immense concrete dome to store a large stockpile of V-2s, warheads and fuel, and was intended to launch V-2s on an industrial scale. Dozens of missiles

615-494: The 1960s several surface based erector launcher pads for Thor IRBMs were installed but were removed just a few years later when Blue Steel carrying V bombers came into service. Russia has silo-based weapons. The Strategic Rocket Forces of the Russian Federation (RVSN RF) (Strategic Missile Troops) controls Russia's land-based inter-continental ballistic missiles. France built missile silos for S-2 and S-3 IRBM on

656-554: The Albion Plateau. They were in service from 1971 to 1996. China has silo-based weapons, but is now concentrating development on expanding its submarine and road-capable mobile weapons, especially for tunnel networks. Two silos fields appear to be under construction. India uses silos for a few of its long-range ballistic missile arsenal and storage, but most of its systems are road mobile capable. Pakistan has built hard and deeply buried storage and launch facilities to retain

697-811: The Germans were unable to complete construction of the works and the complex never entered service. The United Kingdom conducted post-war investigations , determining that it was "an assembly site for long projectiles most conveniently handled and prepared in a vertical position". The British idea of an underground missile silo was adopted and developed by the United States for missile launch facilities for its intercontinental ballistic missiles. Most silos were based in Colorado , Nebraska , North Dakota , South Dakota , Missouri , Montana , Wyoming and other western states. There were three main reasons behind this siting: reducing

738-1082: The Midwest, away from populated areas. Many were built in Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota. The U.S. spent considerable effort and funds in the 1970s and 1980s designing a replacement, but none of the new and complex system designs were ever produced. The United States has many silo-based warheads in service, however, they have lowered their number to around 1800 and have transferred most of their missiles to nuclear submarines and are focusing on more advanced conventional weapons. Today they are still used, although many have been decommissioned and hazardous materials removed. The increase of decommissioned missile silos has led governments to sell some of them to private individuals. Some buyers convert them into unique homes , advanced safe rooms , or use them for other purposes. They are popular sites of urban exploration . The Atlas missiles used four different storage and launching methods. In 2000 William Leonard Pickard and

779-575: The US Army established the Corps of Engineers Ballistic Missile Construction Office (CEBMCO), an independent organization under the Chief of Engineers , to supervise construction". This newly established organization was able to produce Minutemen Launch silos at an extremely fast rate of ~1.8 per day from 1961 to 1966 where they built a total of 1,000 Minuteman missile silos. The United States built many missile silos in

820-446: The X-33 experimental vehicle for the RLV program. Lockheed Martin's design concept for the X-33 was selected over competing concepts from Rockwell International and McDonnell Douglas . Rockwell proposed a Space Shuttle -derived design, and McDonnell Douglas proposed a design based on its vertical takeoff and landing ( VTVL ) DC-XA test vehicle. The uncrewed X-33 was slated to fly 15 suborbital hops to near 75.8 km altitude. It

861-529: The X-33 would not approach airplane-like safety, the X-33 would attempt to demonstrate 0.997 reliability, or 3 mishaps out of 1,000 launches, which would be an order of magnitude more reliable than the Space Shuttle . The 15 planned experimental X-33 flights could only begin this statistical evaluation. The uncrewed craft would have been launched vertically from a specially designed facility constructed on Edwards Air Force Base, and landed horizontally ( VTHL ) on

SECTION 20

#1732851347404

902-581: The aerospike engine, NASA and Lockheed Martin hoped to test fly a craft that would demonstrate the viability of a single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) design. A spacecraft capable of reaching orbit in a single stage would not require external fuel tanks or boosters to reach low Earth orbit . Doing away with the need for "staging" with launch vehicles, such as with the Shuttle and the Apollo rockets, would lead to an inherently more reliable and safer space launch vehicle. While

943-511: The anticipated number of commercial satellite launches per year, Lockheed Martin concluded that continuing development of the X-33 privately without government support would not be profitable. In 2004 Northrop Grumman successfully built and tested a simple cylindrical composite cryogenic hydrogen tank as part of early work for the Constellation program . Through the use of the lifting body shape, composite multi-lobed liquid fuel tanks, and

984-608: The flight trajectory between the United States and the Soviet Union, since the missiles would travel north over Canada and the North Pole ; increasing the flight trajectory from SLBMs on either seaboard, giving the silos more warning time in the event of a nuclear war; and locating obvious targets as far away as possible from major population centres. They had many defense systems to keep out intruders and other defense systems to prevent destruction (see Safeguard Program ). In addition to

1025-668: The idea was never implemented. The former Soviet Union had missile silos in Russia and adjacent Soviet states during the Cold War , such as the Plokštinė missile base in Lithuania . The Main Centre for Missile Attack Warning , near Solnechnogorsk outside Moscow, was completed by the Soviet Union in 1971, and remains in use by the Russian Federation. The United Kingdom did not have any silo ICBMs. During

1066-600: The later 1960s, made the silo moving and launching even easier. The underground missile silo has remained the primary missile basing system and launch facility for land-based missiles since the 1960s. The increased accuracy of inertial guidance systems has rendered them somewhat more vulnerable than they were in the 1960s . Other than underground facilities, ballistic missiles can be launched from above-ground facilities, or can be launched from mobile platforms, e.g. transporter erector launchers , railcars , ballistic missile submarines or airplanes . The La Coupole facility

1107-465: The missile was through tunnels connecting the launch control center and launch facility. An example of this can be seen at the Titan Missile Museum , located south of Tucson, Arizona. Notable accidents: The solid fueled LGM-30 series Minuteman I, II, III, and Peacekeeper ICBM configurations consist of one LCC that controls ten LFs (1 × 10). Five LCCs and their fifty associated LFs make up

1148-508: The need for the sort of external boosters and fuel tanks used by the Space Shuttle. But, after the composite tank failed on the test stand during fueling and pressure tests, NASA came to the conclusion that the technology of the time was simply not advanced enough for such a design. While the composite tank walls themselves were lighter, the hydrogen tank shape necessary to fit inside the aerodynamic mouldline resulted in complex joints increasing

1189-491: The results to a proposed orbital vehicle. The decision to design and build the X-33 grew out of an internal NASA study titled "Access to Space". Unlike other space transport studies, "Access to Space" was to result in the design and construction of a vehicle. Based on the X-33 experience shared with NASA, Lockheed Martin hoped to make the business case for a full-scale SSTO RLV, called VentureStar , that would be developed and operated through commercial means. The intention

1230-443: The same term [REDACTED] This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title Reusable Launch Vehicle . If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reusable_Launch_Vehicle&oldid=1119453919 " Category : Disambiguation pages Hidden categories: Short description

1271-467: The three previously mentioned siting reasons, the US Air Force had other site requirements that were also taken into account such as, having the sites be close enough to a populace of roughly 50,000 people for community support along with making sure launch locations were far enough apart that a 10 MT detonation on or near strategic locations would not knock out other launch facilities in the area. "In 1960

Reusable Launch Vehicle - Misplaced Pages Continue

1312-399: The total mass of the composite tank to above that of an aluminum-based tank, and too heavy for an SSTO vehicle. NASA had invested $ 922 million in the project before cancellation, and Lockheed Martin a further $ 357 million. Due to changes in the space launch business—including the challenges faced by companies such as Globalstar , Teledesic , and Iridium and the resulting drop in

1353-473: The withdrawal of federal support for the program in early 2001. Lockheed Martin has conducted unrelated testing, and has had a single success after a string of failures as recently as 2009 using a 2-meter scale model. In 1994 NASA initiated the Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program. After a Phase I programme developing proposals from Rockwell International , McDonnell Douglas , and Lockheed Martin,

1394-501: Was a proposed configuration strategy for basing LGM-118 Peacekeeper ICBMs, developed under the Reagan administration, for the purpose of maximizing their survivability in case of a surprise nuclear first-strike on their silos conducted by a hostile foreign power. According to the Dense Pack strategy, a series of ten to twelve hardened silos would be grouped closely together in a line. The idea

1435-501: Was cancelled in February 2001. Construction of the prototype was some 85% assembled with 96% of the parts and the launch facility 100% complete when the program was canceled by NASA in 2001, after a long series of technical difficulties including flight instability and excess weight . In particular, the composite liquid hydrogen fuel tank failed during testing in November 1999. The tank

1476-404: Was constructed of honeycomb composite walls and internal structures to reduce its weight. A lighter tank was needed for the craft to demonstrate necessary technologies for single-stage-to-orbit operations. A hydrogen fueled SSTO craft's mass fraction requires that the weight of the vehicle without fuel be 10% of the fully fueled weight. This would allow a vehicle to fly to low Earth orbit without

1517-456: Was that rather than operate space transport systems as it has with the Space Shuttle , NASA would instead look to private industry to operate the reusable launch vehicle and NASA would purchase launch services from the commercial launch provider. Thus, the X-33 was not only about honing space flight technologies, but also about successfully demonstrating the technology required to make a commercial reusable launch vehicle possible. The VentureStar

1558-405: Was that to disable the Dense Pack, the enemy would have to launch many missiles, and the missiles would arrive at different times. The missiles arriving later would have to pass through the debris cloud of the first missile's explosion, damaging the follow-up missiles and limiting their effectiveness. The proposed Dense Pack initiative met with strong criticism in the media and in the government, and

1599-441: Was to be launched upright like a rocket and rather than having a straight flight path it would fly diagonally up for half the flight, reaching extremely high altitudes, and then for the rest of the flight glide back down to a runway. The X-33 was never intended to fly higher than an altitude of 100 km, nor faster than one-half of orbital velocity. Had any successful tests occurred, extrapolation would have been necessary to apply

1640-525: Was to be the first commercial aircraft to fly into space. The VentureStar was intended for long inter-continental flights and supposed to be in service by 2012, but this project was never funded or begun. General characteristics Performance After the cancellation in 2001, engineers were able to make a working liquid-oxygen tank from carbon-fiber composite. Tests showed that composites were feasible materials for liquid-oxygen tanks On September 7, 2004, Northrop Grumman and NASA engineers unveiled

1681-437: Was to have a first flight by March 1999, and to have the VentureStar , the operational reusable space vehicle, flying in 2006. .. to build a vehicle that takes days, not months, to turn around; dozens, not thousands, of people to operate; with launch costs that are a tenth of what they are now. Our goal is a reusable launch vehicle that will cut the cost of getting a pound of payload to orbit from $ 10,000 to $ 1,000. The program

Reusable Launch Vehicle - Misplaced Pages Continue

#403596