Seems similar to what Stoke Space is trying with the second stage of their reusable rocket - a ring of combustion chambers around a regeneratively cooled heatshield. Very cool!
4:27 - unless the rocket burn was all the way to the water line, cutting the engines off at what, 80-100 meters above water, would have spelled a disaster for the vehicle (smashing a hollow structure of 10-15 masses of space shuttle into a pond at g=9.81m/s^2). Awesome vid though ! 👍
Seeing the Solar Power Stations been built in your videos make me wonder what if the original version of the ISS was built with it's dual keel, solar thermal generators and orbital hangar for repairing satellites.
@@Aexorzist That was the plan they would of had a space tug called the OTV (Orbital Transfer Vehicle) to bring satellites to the space station and back to their orbits.
@@mr-huggy Still doesn't make sense. You need literally tons of fuel to change orbital inclination or altitude. It's way cheaper to just get a rocket into the right orbit from the start.
You're not talking about ISS, you're talking about Space Station Freedom, of which 70 or so percent later was combined with Russia's Mir-2 modules to form ISS.
@@Aexorzist It isn't THAT bad, if you're willing to take the time and you have the right kind of propulsion. The original Space Shuttle concept had a reusable upper stage that the orbiter would rendezvous with, dock the satellite or other payload and the stage would do the rest.
That "diamond ring" effect is cool. I've been fascinated by these "what if" proposed vehicles for decades, and it is wonderful to see you bring them almost to life.
When I was a teenager I fell in love with this SSTO/VTVL design. It was going to be the cheap way to industrialize Space and launch the Nuclear/Plasma spaceships which were going to colonize the Solar System.
Won't be long, actually since the rocket engines are still getting way better, with SpaceX Raptor and RS-25 being the American stand-outs, powerful for their sizes, so that's something that's now achievable, essentially.
SSTO designs and especially an SSTR are quite inefficient in terms of propellant weight and payload weight ratio. Its much better to just do it SpaceX style.
@TobeWilsonNetwork Damn. It's been around for quite a while now! It was first available to RUclips premium subscribers in August 2022 and then everybody in October 2022
@TobeWilsonNetwork You can also press and hold the screen to x2 fast forward, and double tap the left or right side of the screen to skip backward or forward by an amount specified in your settings. Go to settings --> general --> double-tap to seek, and you can choose between 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, or 60 seconds.
Another fantastic video, Hazegrayart. I'm wracking my brains to think of an SSTO you haven't covered yet. Hyperion possibly, or if you want some other spacecraft that launches up a ramp the Space Ark from When World's Collide maybe. Anything you do is a treat.
It would make a lot of sense to use a truncated plug afterbody for the aerospike effect. The Douglas "ROMBUS" and the Boeing AMLLV were similarly sized SSTO boosters that proposed it. I believe they planned water cooled heat shield: It circulates water to carry heat away and vents it underneath for na boundary layer to keep the worst heating away. By such a time, they wouldn't be using the "Golden Goose" overly-expensive Shuttle for on-orbit assembly.
Superb video about an insane concept. Insane not because of the enormous payload, the advertised 4 day turnover time or the propulsive landing, but because of having "SSTO" and "Low cost" in the same title sentence.
This channel must have merch! I'd buy T-shirts and coffee mugs with these images on them. In fact, I'd buy a calendar of nothing but "SSTOs That Might Have Been"! Posters! Coasters! Art books! I'd be happpy to support whatever HGA wants to do. Some day they'll be able to take the designs here and 3D print them to make them actually fly...
And people said the N1 first stage with its 30 engines was overcomplicated. Can you even imagine the complexity of a Boeing-built vertically-landing SSTO with 48 ENGINES, firing THROUGH a heat shield??? The pipework alone would be maddening!
I'm really intrigued by the chonkers like this and the SERV, they solve a huge part of the reentry heat shield problem as well as the LH2 tank problem by their inherent design. With a (forward) aerospike, much the the aerodynamic issues with their size up to Max-Q become a minor issue. Seems with a bit more modern simulation and tweaking they could be quite viable.
all was perfect, however the final splash down dropping from 50 + meters in the water without any sign of retro propulsive braking would would have destroyed the spacecraft no matter how sturdy.. i would have imagined the propulsors shutting down only meters above the waterline
The final splashdown does not make much sense to me: if you can do propulsive braking like what you show in the video, you can touch down on land and save the bottom of the craft (heatshield, nozzles, etc...) from water contact.
It's a artificial fresh water landing 'pond' per the design study but testing in the early 60s showed that even exposure to salt water baths could be pretty easily handled with easy mitigation techniques. Land landing would have required substantial landing gear systems or some sort of very heavy and very expensive net landing system and water was significantly cheaper to deal with.
@@5000mahmud Clear water rinse, drying and refurbishment. In one case they simply clear water sprayed off an engine that had soaked in salt water for 48 hours, stuck it in a shed for a week then disassembled, cleaned and rebuilt the engine. Cost was about 4% of that of a new engine and it fired fine. (Granted it was an H1 not an RS25 but refurbishment/rebuild was about the same really) The Boeing study showed that simply drying and refurbishing the engine was likely to be as straightforward without the need for the fresh water rinse
I've always admired your content, but when you show the use of a ablative heat shield for reentry am I to suspend the belief that the retro rockets would survive such exposure to the high reentry temperatures? Where are the directional fins used to stabilize and guide the craft. A flat circular vehicle would tumble head over heels upon reentry given its lack of stabilization aero surfaces.
Boeing wanted to protect retro rocket either by protective doors or use watervapore to cool it. they consider that no stabilator was needed do it enormous size, the heavy engine compartment and experience of Apollo capsule that reentry and landed with out directional fins used to stabilize or guide the craft...
@@FastSloth87 Yes I've seen space capsules reentry and splashdown stages. I think I should of used the term aero thrusters as opposed to aero surfaces.
@@lebaillidessavoies3889 Note the engines 'quit' above the water? The shutdown was only one of the propellant with the other continuing to flow through the engine to cool it down. Same process as the needed 'chill down' before the engine starts.
I don't get it. So this tiny front part is the cargo bay and that HUGE conical part is the propellant tank? That would be a very unfavorable design from an aerodynamic point of view? What should be the benefits of this design?
Boeing used to think this way, thinking and doing big things, but now they don't think, they just do what they are asked to do with varying degrees of success.
Who wants to build SSPS to give energy independence and break out of scarcity of energy and resources limits? Not the government space agency who takes order from Congress who takes orders from corporate interests like oil and the military that spends far more than a space effort would cost, to fight over oil.
ROMBUS launch pad design using a special shape to direct the sound waves at lift off in a 'safe' direction. Note the canal that leads up to the launch pad? The Big Onion (and ROMBUS) would be towed into the launch pad and then raised above the water level for launch.
I have no idea why this guy has so few subscribers, no one else has such videos
Sadly they are immediately stolen and shared under different names all around tiktok insta and so on :(
novaday humies more interested in "Omg new shItPhone review" than in space technologies
Because few of humans have the brains for this kind of stuff.
@@AccAkut1987 In that case, I wouldn't mind if he watermarked his videos.
He has thousands of subscribers.
Seems similar to what Stoke Space is trying with the second stage of their reusable rocket - a ring of combustion chambers around a regeneratively cooled heatshield. Very cool!
See also SERV, plus designs from Philip Bono, and even the N1, if you omit the heatshield
¿El vehículo de Stoke space es para cargas pequeñas como electron? No encontré las especificaciones.
4:27 - unless the rocket burn was all the way to the water line, cutting the engines off at what, 80-100 meters above water, would have spelled a disaster for the vehicle (smashing a hollow structure of 10-15 masses of space shuttle into a pond at g=9.81m/s^2). Awesome vid though ! 👍
Seeing the Solar Power Stations been built in your videos make me wonder what if the original version of the ISS was built with it's dual keel, solar thermal generators and orbital hangar for repairing satellites.
You can't "repair satellites" from a space station. The energy required to go into other orbits is ludicrous.
@@Aexorzist That was the plan they would of had a space tug called the OTV (Orbital Transfer Vehicle) to bring satellites to the space station and back to their orbits.
@@mr-huggy Still doesn't make sense. You need literally tons of fuel to change orbital inclination or altitude. It's way cheaper to just get a rocket into the right orbit from the start.
You're not talking about ISS, you're talking about Space Station Freedom, of which 70 or so percent later was combined with Russia's Mir-2 modules to form ISS.
@@Aexorzist It isn't THAT bad, if you're willing to take the time and you have the right kind of propulsion. The original Space Shuttle concept had a reusable upper stage that the orbiter would rendezvous with, dock the satellite or other payload and the stage would do the rest.
That "diamond ring" effect is cool.
I've been fascinated by these "what if" proposed vehicles for decades, and it is wonderful to see you bring them almost to life.
When I was a teenager I fell in love with this SSTO/VTVL design.
It was going to be the cheap way to industrialize Space and launch the Nuclear/Plasma spaceships which were going to colonize the Solar System.
it still might happen ..... :)
Won't be long, actually since the rocket engines are still getting way better, with SpaceX Raptor and RS-25 being the American stand-outs, powerful for their sizes, so that's something that's now achievable, essentially.
@@Dr_Mario2007 the RS-25 is technically in this video
@@Dr_Mario2007 Chinese too are doing great work. We are making progress (finally...)
SSTO designs and especially an SSTR are quite inefficient in terms of propellant weight and payload weight ratio. Its much better to just do it SpaceX style.
It's so great that RUclips has a zoom feature now. I've always wanted to see the close up view of these launches, it's always zoomed out pretty far.
I was today years old when I discovered this... thanks man!
Didn’t know there was a zoom feature till you mentioned it
@TobeWilsonNetwork Damn. It's been around for quite a while now! It was first available to RUclips premium subscribers in August 2022 and then everybody in October 2022
@@_MaxHeadroom_ all the more reason to thank you, who knows if I ever would have noticed it
@TobeWilsonNetwork You can also press and hold the screen to x2 fast forward, and double tap the left or right side of the screen to skip backward or forward by an amount specified in your settings. Go to settings --> general --> double-tap to seek, and you can choose between 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, or 60 seconds.
Always an impressive feat of modeling, animation, compositing, audio, and editing. Bravo once again!
Looks a lot like Stoke Space's second stage rocket: a ring of engines on the edge of a metal heat shield.
The SPS portion was majestic, and reminiscent of 2001 A Space Odyssey. Beautiful.
This guy's channel is getting good!!!! every videos look better and better.. more and more realistic.
Another fantastic video, Hazegrayart. I'm wracking my brains to think of an SSTO you haven't covered yet. Hyperion possibly, or if you want some other spacecraft that launches up a ramp the Space Ark from When World's Collide maybe. Anything you do is a treat.
It would make a lot of sense to use a truncated plug afterbody for the aerospike effect.
The Douglas "ROMBUS" and the Boeing AMLLV were similarly sized SSTO boosters that proposed it.
I believe they planned water cooled heat shield: It circulates water to carry heat away and vents it underneath for na boundary layer to keep the worst heating away.
By such a time, they wouldn't be using the "Golden Goose" overly-expensive Shuttle for on-orbit assembly.
Superb video about an insane concept. Insane not because of the enormous payload, the advertised 4 day turnover time or the propulsive landing, but because of having "SSTO" and "Low cost" in the same title sentence.
4 Days turn-over time after a water landing would be impressive! :D
Always looking forward to the next work of art.
That reentry sequence used the ambient noise from the descending solid rocket boosters - excellent choice!
The real Christmas present is when Haze publishes a video 🥰
This channel must have merch! I'd buy T-shirts and coffee mugs with these images on them. In fact, I'd buy a calendar of nothing but "SSTOs That Might Have Been"! Posters! Coasters! Art books! I'd be happpy to support whatever HGA wants to do. Some day they'll be able to take the designs here and 3D print them to make them actually fly...
And people said the N1 first stage with its 30 engines was overcomplicated. Can you even imagine the complexity of a Boeing-built vertically-landing SSTO with 48 ENGINES, firing THROUGH a heat shield??? The pipework alone would be maddening!
Yeah AND STARSHIP HAS 33!
so basically We have to REINVENT THE HEATSHIELD
And Falcon Heavy has 27 and has flown w/o any problems 5 times.
I'm really intrigued by the chonkers like this and the SERV, they solve a huge part of the reentry heat shield problem as well as the LH2 tank problem by their inherent design. With a (forward) aerospike, much the the aerodynamic issues with their size up to Max-Q become a minor issue. Seems with a bit more modern simulation and tweaking they could be quite viable.
This would be perfect application for the Rocketdyne Aerospike
Too complex and unknown. Better a truncated plug nozzle.
all was perfect, however the final splash down dropping from 50 + meters in the water without any sign of retro propulsive braking would would have destroyed the spacecraft no matter how sturdy.. i would have imagined the propulsors shutting down only meters above the waterline
You left out the giant badminton racquet.
AWESOME! Just need a bigger splash! 😁👍👍🇺🇸
The final splashdown does not make much sense to me: if you can do propulsive braking like what you show in the video, you can touch down on land and save the bottom of the craft (heatshield, nozzles, etc...) from water contact.
Maybe it's a fresh water pool thus avoiding salt water damage? Something so big would require a massive landing system, which would only add weight.
It's a artificial fresh water landing 'pond' per the design study but testing in the early 60s showed that even exposure to salt water baths could be pretty easily handled with easy mitigation techniques. Land landing would have required substantial landing gear systems or some sort of very heavy and very expensive net landing system and water was significantly cheaper to deal with.
@@randycampbell6307 Thanks, sounds better this way...
@@randycampbell6307 What were the mitigation techniques?
@@5000mahmud Clear water rinse, drying and refurbishment. In one case they simply clear water sprayed off an engine that had soaked in salt water for 48 hours, stuck it in a shed for a week then disassembled, cleaned and rebuilt the engine. Cost was about 4% of that of a new engine and it fired fine. (Granted it was an H1 not an RS25 but refurbishment/rebuild was about the same really) The Boeing study showed that simply drying and refurbishing the engine was likely to be as straightforward without the need for the fresh water rinse
Amazing as always and another vehicle I never heard of before, really interesting!
Massive shuttlecock isn't real it can't hurt you
Massive shuttlecock:
Actually concept of Stoke space company is similar to this in many ways but much better because it is realistic concept
at this point im starting to think they just slap a ton of engines onto a random shape and call it a day
No random shape.
That landing burn would have been brutal. I'm assuming that this would be unmanned?
I wonder about the thermal shock of to the engines hitting the water so soon after firing.
A good, old fashioned Water Landing!!! I like it!
This is incredible, as always. So many engines! People are concerned with 33 nowadays.
Beautiful!
…but…
What was the scheme for getting the thing out of the swimming pool and back on dry land? I mean, the thing is hu.u.u.ge!
Talented work!
Can't help feeling that something that hot would have a rather more dramatic landing in water!
I wonder how many gators would die during those splashdowns, that lake is full of them. Beautiful animation as always!
スペースシャトルと並んだ所でその大きさに驚いた
Boeing and "Low Cost"! Right up there with "Military Intelligence" 🤪🤦
Love your work BTW - thanks so much ⭐⭐⭐
Well, it is the same Boeing that made the 737 and 747. So why not?
@@HalNordmann I wasn't really that serious - didn't mean to Intertubes Comments feather ruffle 🙂
Or “heavy lift vehicle” and SSTO.
@@HalNordmann you forgot the Starliner. Right on budget, just not Nasa’s budget. Not to mention the Max. The 747 and 707 was from the old Boeing
We can build an even bigger Onion. We might want to go for some shallots instead though. Super tight feedback animation on the re-entry.
That was spectacular!
amazing work. the refraction effects were cool.
What a beautiful animation. Let us know when there is real one. I really likes our beautiful planet up there in spaces without any space junks.
Excellent video and sound fx.👍
outstanding as always...except that bit there at the end with the splash. sorry, but that needs work.
A flying shower head. Amazing
OOOOOhhh I loke the attention to detail.. like the HOT gasses from the very bottom of the plume!! NICE!!
FANTASTIC AS ALWAYS 🏆
Without narration it's difficult to figure out why and what. Low cost is an insane tag.
Nice touch there with the SPS. Somerhing like this would be peefect for lifting segments into orbit.
Looks like a giant boilerplate Mercury capsule.
I've always admired your content, but when you show the use of a ablative heat shield for reentry am I to suspend the belief that the retro rockets would survive such exposure to the high reentry temperatures? Where are the directional fins used to stabilize and guide the craft. A flat circular vehicle would tumble head over heels upon reentry given its lack of stabilization aero surfaces.
Boeing wanted to protect retro rocket either by protective doors or use watervapore to cool it.
they consider that no stabilator was needed do it enormous size, the heavy engine compartment
and experience of Apollo capsule that reentry and landed with out directional fins used to stabilize or guide the craft...
Have u seen any capsule return ever? Any of those with directional fins??
@@FastSloth87 Yes I've seen space capsules reentry and splashdown stages. I think I should of used the term aero thrusters as opposed to aero surfaces.
@@Teleflexx This concept does have reaction control thrusters, that's why it can even rotate at lift-off, those engines at the bottom don't gimbal.
Beautiful video as always. A ROMBUS launch pad? Neat, does that meant they also use the ROMBUS?
can you create a long version full apollo 11 mission from launch to landing of capsule on moon and back to earth and splashdown. please.
didn't even think for one second that this would end up being a water landing 😁- but makes sense
The process of landing the vehicle purposely in a pond is for destroying the engines to make sure they cannot be reused after?
The pond is a fresh water pond and testing showed that rocket engines are not as delicate as a lot of people think. The engines would have been fine
@@randycampbell6307 and what about the thermal shock ?
@@lebaillidessavoies3889 Note the engines 'quit' above the water? The shutdown was only one of the propellant with the other continuing to flow through the engine to cool it down. Same process as the needed 'chill down' before the engine starts.
Замечательно. Но, почему именно приводнение на воду? Можно было приземление на сушу. Хотя-бы на тот-же стартовый стол.
Perfect, as usual!
Very interesting concept..
Très jolie mais où se trouve le carbure d'interrogation
How does re-entry not melt the vector engine? Great ass video
Thanks for a very cool video! 👍🚀
Happy new year 2023 🎉
I don't get it.
So this tiny front part is the cargo bay and that HUGE conical part is the propellant tank?
That would be a very unfavorable design from an aerodynamic point of view?
What should be the benefits of this design?
Woah ... that's cool
that is *incredibly* Kerbal
Very nice! well done
Why did you let it free fall the last 10 or so meters?
That would have been a cool space vehicle.
Спасибо!
How did reentry not burn the engines?
Steam ejection.
Read description
Re-entry against the engine bells?
The insides of rocket engines are typically designed to be able to withstand high temperatures.
Boeing is the true starship!😊
Thunderbirds Are Go!
Thunderbird 5 - International Rescue's geo-stationary orbital satellite - monitors radio frequencies, 24/7, for distress signals.
Excellent
It just does not look as though all the fuel etc required could be carried in that space.
Nice cartoons ... I loved the Jetson"s show when I was a kid.
Boeing used to think this way, thinking and doing big things, but now they don't think, they just do what they are asked to do with varying degrees of success.
Is this an SSTO?
OMFG those are 3 words that should NEVER be in the same sentence together "Boeing" & "Low cost"...
Looks like a giant capsule. If it's low cost, why wasn't it made?
Who wants to build SSPS to give energy independence and break out of scarcity of energy and resources limits?
Not the government space agency who takes order from Congress who takes orders from corporate interests like oil and the military that spends far more than a space effort would cost, to fight over oil.
Colosseum as a launch pad
ROMBUS launch pad design using a special shape to direct the sound waves at lift off in a 'safe' direction. Note the canal that leads up to the launch pad? The Big Onion (and ROMBUS) would be towed into the launch pad and then raised above the water level for launch.
Hey, they put the shuttle back in service LOL
Low Cost and Boeing can't exist in the same sentence:)LOL.
It looks like Hyperion without the sled
I guess it has an unlimited fuel supply
It should have been called the Shuttlecock
AMAZINGNES!!!
It would only have restarted a few engines on landing.
Large Scale Space Solar 👍.
The fuel tank can't possibly be big enough.
Maybe if Boeing stuck with this instead of Starliner they might have had better success.
Sonic boom from that reentry tho.... yeah US law makers wouldn't go ahead with that. Shattering windows from Texas to Florida.
Haha Boeing snd low cost don't go together in the same sentence 🤣
why don't they land spacecraft in lakes instead of salt water
Lakes are harder to clear of people and ships than an open patch of ocean. (The 'problem' with the first crewed Dragon flight :) )
This was to be a man-made freshwater lake.
@@JFrazer4303 True, but it would be a freshwater lake in Florida so still a problem :) (joke)
в космосе нет звука, просто держу в курсе
Boeing better get their heads out theirr asses if they hope to complete this.
The engines crack immediately after they submerge into the water. Wrong design.
That doesn't seem so big...
*enter the Shuttle for scale*
More like an SSRT but same concept