Delta Clipper

1
Delta Clipper

• To Boldly Go

2
A presentation by

• Jason Moore
• Ashraf Shaikh

3
How do we get there now?

• Space Shuttle
• Partially reusable
• Multi-stage
• Manned
• 500 Million / Launch

Picture courtesy of NASA
4
How do we get there now?

• Titan IV, et. al.
• Single use
• Multi-stage
• Expensive
• Long build time

Picture courtesy of NASA
5
A need for something better

• Current vehicles suffer from a few drawbacks.
• They are expensive to build and maintain.
• Multi-stage rockets require large uninhabited
  areas for stage recovery/disposal.
• It takes many months to prep the Shuttle or build
  a new expendable vehicle.
• Large specialized space ports are needed to
  launch these vehicles.

6
A solution from the past

• SSTO Single Stage to Orbit
• RLV Reusable Launch Vehicle
• Aerospace engineers have been working on this
  problem for years it has been a dream for many
  in the industry.

Picture courtesy of Space Merchants Inc. and G.
Stine
7
A few noble attempts

• Early vision for what the Space Shuttle was to
  have been
• NASA investigated the possibility of building a
  fully reusable shuttle
• Due to compromises with Congress, as well as
  then-current technology limitations, the Shuttle
  designers had to pick a staged design.

8
A few noble attempts

• X-33
• Subscale Technology Demonstrator
• NASA budgeted 941 Million for the project
• No powered prototype ever flew
• Vertical takeoff, Horizontal landing
  configuration
• Full scale version dubbed VentureStar

9
A few noble attempts

• X-37
• Technology demonstrator
• Designed to validate concepts and designs for a
  future Orbital Space Plane
• OSP not intended to be fully reusable
• Stop-gap measure while more time and money is
  spent studying a true RLV
• So far NASA has only done drop tests and
  structural tests

10
Faster, Better, Cheaper

• Delta Clipper
• Originally completed in 1993 as the DC-X
• Joint venture between the Air Force and McDonnell
  Douglas
• Intended as a one third scale prototype of a RLV
  proposed by the Strategic Defense Initiative
  Organization

Picture courtesy of NASA
11
Faster, Better, Cheaper

• A primary goal of the Delta Clipper project was
  to show that an RLV could be operated in a manner
  similar to a commercial airliner.

Pictures courtesy of NASA
12
Faster, Better, Cheaper
Picture courtesy of NASA
Picture courtesy of McDonnell Douglas

• Compare the mission profiles of the Space Shuttle
  and a Delta Clipper.

13
Faster, Better, Cheaper

• DC-X Program
• Built in 21 months for 60 Million by a team of
  100
• USAF completed 8 test flights
• During flight 5 the vehicle demonstrated its
  autoland capability, an important safety feature
• Built almost entirely of off the shelf parts

Picture courtesy of NASA
14
Faster, Better, Cheaper

• DC-XA
• Delta Clipper program acquired by NASA
• NASA installed experimental fuel tanks and a
  better reaction control system, saving 620
  kilograms of weight
• 4 Test flights were completed, as well as 2
  static engine tests

Picture courtesy of NASA
15
A path to the future

• A private organization should build an RLV based
  on the Delta Clipper experimental rocket.
• A full scale Delta Clipper would be a SSTO launch
  vehicle.
• Goal for the project will be to build a vehicle
  which can be operated much like a commercial
  airliner, and drastically reduce the cost of
  putting a payload into orbit.

16
Whose mission should this be?

• NASA should be a consumer of launch services, not
  a supplier.
• Bureaucracy gets in the way. DC-X an example of
  unhindered engineering.
• NASAs Mission Statement
• To understand and protect our home planet
• To explore the Universe and search for life
• To inspire the next generation of explorers
• as only NASA can.

17
What will it be used for?

• Smaller and cheaper satellites. More advanced
  technology in orbit due to faster and cheaper
  access to space.
• Space Station construction payload ferry.
• Space tourism
• Global Express
• Moon exploration

18
Why hasnt this been done?

• It has.
• The DC-X.

19
Why hasnt the project been completed?

• Lack of support from Congress
• Misinformation
• Wrong culture at NASA (not a corporate culture)
• NASA too busy with Shuttle and its many
  explorative missions
• NASA prefers to study new technologies, where as
  the Delta Clipper would require little new
  technology

20
Why not just build the VentureStar?

• The Delta Clipper has flown. It doesnt rely on
  cutting edge technology.
• The first stage of most development programs, the
  proof-of-concept prototype, has already been
  built and tested.
• Versatility. A modified Clipper could make a trip
  to the moon, land on the surface, and return to
  Earth.
• Safety features. Powered engine-out landing
  capability and engine redundancy to name two.

21
X-Prize

• 10 Million prize to the first team to complete
  the following goals
• Fly 3 people to an altitude of 100Km
• Repeat flight within 2 weeks
• Encourages development outside of the regular
  Aerospace industry
• Not ambitious enough to solve the problem of
  current launch technologies

Picture courtesy of Scaled Composites
Picture courtesy of Armadillo Aerospace
22
A real success

• DeltaClipperClip.mov

23
Questions, Thoughts, Comments?