A demonstrator for the SSTO launcher with combined cycle propulsion

Abstract

Space launch systems of the 20th century are still regarded as both costly and unsafe. They have never acquired the reliability of commercial aircraft and they cannot abort from lift-off to mid-mission without massive losses. Most types of launchers are sacrificed after launch, and both hardware and environmental costs are significant. The cost of the launcher itself dominates this operation as it is the first, last and only time it flies. The user pays for the entire vehicle. For commercial aircraft operations, the frequency of flight and the lifespan of the aircraft means that the individual passenger pays about £6 for the cost of the aircraft per flight and the remainder is for fuel and operations. For commercial space launch to become both routine and economic, the need is to achieve the reliability, the sustained operation over a long lifespan, and the easy refurbishment of commercial aircraft. In seeking this solution, design studies have accepted that the ballistic missile launch may give way to either vertical or horizontal take-off aircraft using airbreathing propulsion up to a high flight Mach number and rockets thereafter. This paper examines the factors that shape the choice of airbreathing engines and airframe characteristics for SSTO space launchers, transatmospheric vehicles, boost-glide intercontinental range vehicles, and an associated demonstrator vehicle.