Search This Blog

Sunday, May 5, 2019

Soyuz (spacecraft)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Soyuz
Soyuz TMA-7 spacecraft2edit1.jpg
Soyuz spacecraft (TMA version)

ManufacturerRKK Energia
Country of originSoviet Union, Russian Federation
OperatorSoviet space program (1967–91)
Roscosmos (1991 onwards)
ApplicationsCarry cosmonauts to orbit and back; originally intended for Soviet Moonshot and Salyut space station transportation.

Specifications
Design lifeUp to six months docked to station
RegimeLow Earth orbit (circumlunar spaceflight during early program)

Production
StatusIn service
First launch(Unmanned) November 28, 1966 (Manned) Soyuz 1 April 23, 1967

Related spacecraft
DerivativesShenzhou, Progress

Soyuz (Russian: Сою́з, IPA: [sɐˈjus], lit. Union) is a series of spacecraft designed for the Soviet space program by the Korolev Design Bureau (now RKK Energia) in the 1960s that remains in service today. The Soyuz succeeded the Voskhod spacecraft and was originally built as part of the Soviet manned lunar programs. The Soyuz spacecraft is launched on a Soyuz rocket, the most reliable launch vehicle in the world to date. The Soyuz rocket design is based on the Vostok launcher, which in turn was based on the 8K74 or R-7A Semyorka, a Soviet intercontinental ballistic missile. All Soyuz spacecraft are launched from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Soyuz is currently the only means for manned space flights in the world and is heavily used in the International Space Station program.

History

The first Soyuz flight was unmanned and started on November 28, 1966. The first Soyuz mission with a crew, Soyuz 1, launched on 23 April 1967 but ended with a crash due to a parachute failure, killing cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov. The following flight was unmanned. Soyuz 3, launched on October 26, 1968, became the program's first successful manned mission. The only other flight to suffer a fatal accident, Soyuz 11, killed its crew of three when the cabin depressurized prematurely just before reentry. These were the only humans to date to have died above the Kármán line. Despite these early incidents, Soyuz is widely considered the world's safest, most cost-effective human spaceflight vehicle, established by its unparalleled length of operational history. Soyuz spacecraft were used to carry cosmonauts to and from Salyut and later Mir Soviet space stations, and are now used for transport to and from the International Space Station (ISS). At least one Soyuz spacecraft is docked to ISS at all times for use as an escape craft in the event of an emergency. The spacecraft is intended to be replaced by the six-person Federation spacecraft.

Design

Diagram showing the three elements of the Soyuz TMA spacecraft.
 
A Soyuz spacecraft consists of three parts (from front to back):
  • A spheroid orbital module, which provides accommodation for the crew during their mission;
  • A small aerodynamic reentry module, which returns the crew to Earth;
  • A cylindrical service module with solar panels attached, which contains the instruments and engines.
The orbital and service modules are single-use and are destroyed upon reentry in the atmosphere. Though this might seem wasteful, it reduces the amount of heat shielding required for reentry, saving mass compared to designs containing all of the living space and life support in a single capsule. This allows smaller rockets to launch the spacecraft or can be used to increase the habitable space available to the crew (6.2 m3 in Apollo CM vs 7.5 m3 in Soyuz) in the mass budget. The orbital and reentry portions are habitable living space, with the service module containing the fuel, main engines and instrumentation.

Soyuz can carry up to three crew members and provide life support for about 30 person days. The life support system provides a nitrogen/oxygen atmosphere at sea level partial pressures. The atmosphere is regenerated through potassium superoxide (KO2) cylinders, which absorb most of the carbon dioxide (CO2) and water produced by the crew and regenerates the oxygen, and lithium hydroxide (LiOH) cylinders which absorb leftover CO2

The vehicle is protected during launch by a payload fairing, which is jettisoned along with the SAS at ​2 12 minutes into launch. It has an automatic docking system. The ship can be operated automatically, or by a pilot independently of ground control.

Launch escape system

The Vostok spacecraft utilized an ejector seat to bail out the cosmonaut in the event of a low-altitude launch failure, as well as during reentry, however it would probably have been ineffective in the first 20 seconds after liftoff when the altitude would be too low for the parachute to deploy. Inspired by the Mercury LES, Soviet designers began work on a similar system in 1962. This included developing a complex sensing system to monitor various launch vehicle parameters and trigger an abort if a booster malfunction occurred. Based on data from R-7 launches over the years, engineers developed a list of the most likely failure modes for the vehicle and could narrow down abort conditions to premature separation of a strap-on booster, low engine thrust, loss of combustion chamber pressure, or loss of booster guidance. The Spacecraft Abort System (SAS; Russian: Система Аварийного Спасения, translit. Sistema Avarijnogo Spaseniya) could also be manually activated from the ground, but unlike American spacecraft, there was no way for the cosmonauts to trigger it themselves.

Since it turned out to be almost impossible to separate the entire payload shroud from the Soyuz service module cleanly, the decision was made to have the shroud split between the service module and descent module during an abort. Four folding stabilizers were added to improve aerodynamic stability during ascent. Two test runs of the SAS were carried out in 1966-67.

The basic design of the SAS has remained almost unchanged in 50 years of use and all Soyuz launches carry it. The only modification was in 1972 when the aerodynamic fairing over the SAS motor nozzles was removed for weight-saving reasons as the redesigned Soyuz 7K-T spacecraft carried extra life support equipment. The unmanned Progress resupply ferry has a dummy escape tower and removes the stabilizer fins from the payload shroud. There have been three failed launches of a manned Soyuz vehicle, Soyuz 18-1 in 1975, Soyuz T-10-1 in 1983 and Soyuz MS-10 in October 2018. The 1975 failure was aborted after escape tower jettison. In 1983, Soyuz T-10-1's SAS successfully rescued the cosmonauts from an on-pad fire and explosion of the launch vehicle. Most recently in 2018, the SAS sub-system in the payload shroud of Soyuz MS-10 successfully rescued the cosmonauts from a rocket failure 2 minutes and 45 second after liftoff after the escape tower had already been jettisoned.

Orbital module

Soyuz spacecraft's Orbital Module
 
The forepart of the spacecraft is the Orbital Module (Russian: бытовой отсек, translit. bytovoi otsek), also known as habitation section. It houses all the equipment that will not be needed for reentry, such as experiments, cameras or cargo. The module also contains a toilet, docking avionics and communications gear. Internal volume is 6 m3 (212 cu ft), living space 5 m3 (177 cu ft). On the latest Soyuz versions (since Soyuz TM), a small window was introduced, providing the crew with a forward view. 

A hatch between it and the Descent Module can be closed so as to isolate it to act as an airlock if needed, crew members exiting through its side port (near the descent module). On the launch pad, the crew enter the spacecraft through this port. 

This separation also lets the Orbital Module be customized to the mission with less risk to the life-critical descent module. The convention of orientation in a micro-g environment differs from that of the Descent Module, as crew members stand or sit with their heads to the docking port. Also the rescue of the crew whilst on the launch pad or with the SAS system is complicated because of the orbital module. 

Separation of the Orbital Module is critical for a safe landing; without separation of the Orbital Module, it is not possible for the crew to survive landing in the Descent Module. This is because the Orbital Module would interfere with proper deployment of the Descent Module's parachutes, and the extra mass exceeds the capability of the main parachute and braking engines to provide a safe soft landing speed. In view of this, the Orbital Module was separated before the ignition of the return engine until the late 1980s. This guaranteed that the Descent Module and Orbital Module would be separated before the Descent Module was placed in a reentry trajectory. However, after the problematic landing of Soyuz TM-5 in September 1988 this procedure was changed and the Orbital Module is now separated after the return maneuver. This change was made as the TM-5 crew could not deorbit for 24 hours after they jettisoned their Orbital Module, which contained their sanitation facilities and the docking collar needed to attach to MIR. The risk of not being able to separate the Orbital Module is effectively judged to be less than the risk of needing the facilities in it, following a failed deorbit.

Descent module

Replica of the Soyuz spacecraft's Entry Module at the Euro Space Center In Belgium
 
Soyuz spacecraft's Descent Module
 
The Descent Module (Russian: Спуска́емый Аппара́т, tr. Spuskáyemy Apparát), also known as a reentry capsule, is used for launch and the journey back to Earth. Half of the Descent Module is covered by a heat-resistant covering to protect it during reentry; this half faces the Earth during reentry. It is slowed initially by the atmosphere, then by a braking parachute, followed by the main parachute which slows the craft for landing. At one meter above the ground, solid-fuel braking engines mounted behind the heat shield are fired to give a soft landing. One of the design requirements for the Descent Module was for it to have the highest possible volumetric efficiency (internal volume divided by hull area). The best shape for this is a sphere — as the pioneering Vostok spacecraft's Descent Module used — but such a shape can provide no lift, which results in a purely ballistic reentry. Ballistic reentries are hard on the occupants due to high deceleration and cannot be steered beyond their initial deorbit burn. That is why it was decided to go with the "headlight" shape that the Soyuz uses – a hemispherical forward area joined by a barely angled (seven degrees) conical section to a classic spherical section heat shield. This shape allows a small amount of lift to be generated due to the unequal weight distribution. The nickname was thought up at a time when nearly every headlight was circular. The small dimensions of the Descent Module led to it having only two-man crews after the death of the Soyuz 11 crew. The later Soyuz T spacecraft solved this issue. Internal volume of Soyuz SA is 4 m3 (141 cu ft); 2.5 m3 (88 cu ft) is usable for crew (living space).

Service module

Soyuz spacecraft's Instrumentation/Propulsion Module
 
At the back of the vehicle is the Service Module (Russian: прибо́рно-агрега́тный отсе́к, tr. pribórno-agregátny otsék). It has a pressurized container shaped like a bulging can (instrumentation compartment, priborniy otsek) that contains systems for temperature control, electric power supply, long-range radio communications, radio telemetry, and instruments for orientation and control. A non-pressurized part of the Service Module (propulsion compartment, agregatniy otsek) contains the main engine and a liquid-fuelled propulsion system for maneuvering in orbit and initiating the descent back to Earth. The ship also has a system of low-thrust engines for orientation, attached to the intermediate compartment (perekhodnoi otsek). Outside the Service Module are the sensors for the orientation system and the solar array, which is oriented towards the Sun by rotating the ship. An incomplete separation between the Service and Reentry Modules led to emergency situations during Soyuz 5, Soyuz TMA-10 and Soyuz TMA-11, which led to an incorrect reentry orientation (crew ingress hatch first). The failure of several explosive bolts did not cut the connection between the Service/Reentry Modules on the latter two flights.

Reentry procedure

The Soyuz uses a method similar to the US Apollo command and service module to deorbit itself. The spacecraft is turned engine-forward and the main engine is fired for deorbiting on the far side of Earth ahead of its planned landing site. This requires the least propellant for reentry; the spacecraft travels on an elliptical Hohmann transfer orbit to the entry interface point where atmospheric drag slows it enough to fall out of orbit. 

Early Soyuz spacecraft would then have the Service and Orbital Modules detach simultaneously from the Descent Module. As they are connected by tubing and electrical cables to the Descent Module, this would aid in their separation and avoid having the Descent Module alter its orientation.[citation needed] Later Soyuz spacecraft detached the Orbital Module before firing the main engine, which saved propellant. Since the Soyuz TM-5 landing issue, the Orbital Module is once again detached only after the reentry firing, which led to (but did not cause) emergency situations of Soyuz TMA-10 and TMA-11. The Orbital Module cannot remain in orbit as an addition to a space station, as the airlock hatch between the Orbital and Reentry Modules is a part of the Reentry Module, and the Orbital Module therefore depressurizes after separation.

Reentry firing is usually done on the "dawn" side of the Earth, so that the spacecraft can be seen by recovery helicopters as it descends in the evening twilight, illuminated by the Sun when it is above the shadow of the Earth. The Soyuz craft is designed to come down on land, usually somewhere in the deserts of Kazakhstan in central Asia. This is in contrast to early US manned spacecraft, which splashed down in the ocean.

Spacecraft systems

Soyuz diagram
 
Exploded plan of the Soyuz MS spacecraft.
Exploded plan of the Soyuz MS spacecraft.
  • Thermal control systemSistema Obespecheniya Teplovogo Rezhima, SOTR
  • Life support systemKompleks Sredstv Obespecheniya Zhiznideyatelnosti, KSOZh
  • Power supply systemSistema Elektropitaniya, SEP
  • Communication and tracking systems – Rassvet (Dawn) radio communications system, onboard measurement system (SBI), Kvant-V spacecraft control, Klyost-M television system, orbit radio tracking (RKO)
  • Onboard complex control systemSistema Upravleniya Bortovym Kompleksom, SUBK
  • Combined propulsion systemKompleksnaya Dvigatelnaya Ustanovka, KDU
  • Chaika-3 motion control system (SUD)
  • Optical/visual devices (OVP) – VSK-4 (Vizir Spetsialniy Kosmicheskiy-4), night vision device (VNUK-K, Visir Nochnogo Upravleniya po Kursu), docking light, pilot's sight (VP-1, Vizir Pilota-1), laser rangefinder (LPR-1, Lazerniy Dalnomer-1)
  • Kurs rendezvous system
  • Docking systemSistema Stykovki i Vnutrennego Perekhoda, SSVP
  • Teleoperator control modeTeleoperatorniy Rezhim Upravleniya, TORU
  • Entry actuators systemSistema Ispolnitelnikh Organov Spuska, SIO-S
  • Landing aids kitKompleks Sredstv Prizemleniya, KSP
  • Portable survival kitNosimiy Avariyniy Zapas, NAZ, containing a TP-82 Cosmonaut survival pistol or Makarov pistol
  • Soyuz launch escape systemSistema Avariynogo Spaseniya, SAS
Drawing-Soyuz-TMA-exp12.png
Orbital module (A)
1 docking mechanism
2, 4 Kurs rendezvous radar antenna
3 television transmission antenna
5 camera
6 hatch

Descent module (B)

7 parachute compartment
8 periscope
9 porthole
11 heat shield

Service module (C)

10, 18 attitude control engines
12 Earth sensors
13 Sun sensor
14 solar panel attachment point
15 thermal sensor
16 Kurs antenna
17 main propulsion
19 communication antenna
20 fuel tanks
21 oxygen tank

Variants

The Soyuz spacecraft has been the subject of continuous evolution since the early 1960s. Thus several different versions, proposals and projects exist.

Soyuz family tree

Specifications

Soyuz 7K (part of the 7K-9K-11K circumlunar complex) (1963)

Soyuz 7K manned spacecraft concept (1963).

Sergei Korolev initially promoted the Soyuz A-B-V circumlunar complex (7K-9K-11K) concept (also known as L1) in which a two-man craft Soyuz 7K would rendezvous with other components (9K and 11K) in Earth orbit to assemble a lunar excursion vehicle, the components being delivered by the proven R-7 rocket.

First generation

Soyuz 7K-OK(A) spacecraft with an active docking unit.
 
Soyuz 7K-OKS for Salyut space stations.
 
The manned Soyuz spacecraft can be classified into design generations. Soyuz 1 through Soyuz 11 (1967–1971) were first-generation vehicles, carrying a crew of up to three without spacesuits and distinguished from those following by their bent solar panels and their use of the Igla automatic docking navigation system, which required special radar antennas. This first generation encompassed the original Soyuz 7K-OK and the Soyuz 7K-OKS for docking with the Salyut 1 space station. The probe and drogue docking system permitted internal transfer of cosmonauts from the Soyuz to the station. 

The Soyuz 7K-L1 was designed to launch a crew from the Earth to circle the moon, and was the primary hope for a Soviet circumlunar flight. It had several test flights in the Zond program from 1967–1970 (Zond 4 to Zond 8), which produced multiple failures in the 7K-L1's reentry systems. The remaining 7K-L1s were scrapped. The Soyuz 7K-L3 was designed and developed in parallel to the Soyuz 7K-L1, but was also scrapped. Soyuz 1 was plagued with technical issues, and cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov was killed when the spacecraft crashed during its return to Earth. This was the first in-flight fatality in the history of spaceflight

The next manned version of the Soyuz was the Soyuz 7K-OKS. It was designed for space station flights and had a docking port that allowed internal transfer between spacecraft. The Soyuz 7K-OKS had two manned flights, both in 1971. Soyuz 11, the second flight, depressurized upon reentry, killing its three-man crew.

Second generation

Upgraded Soyuz 7K-T version.

The second generation, called Soyuz Ferry or Soyuz 7K-T, comprised Soyuz 12 through Soyuz 40 (1973–1981).

It was developed out of the military Soyuz concepts studied in previous years and was capable of carrying 2 cosmonauts with Sokol space suits (after the Soyuz 11 accident). Several models were planned, but none actually flew in space. These versions were named Soyuz P, Soyuz PPK, Soyuz R, Soyuz 7K-VI, and Soyuz OIS (Orbital Research Station). 

The Soyuz 7K-T/A9 version was used for the flights to the military Almaz space station.

Soyuz 7K-TM was the spacecraft used in the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975, which saw the first and only docking of a Soyuz spacecraft with an Apollo Command/Service Module. It was also flown in 1976 for the Earth-science mission, Soyuz 22. Soyuz 7K-TM served as a technological bridge to the third generation.

Third generation

Soyuz-T spacecraft.

The third generation Soyuz-T (T: Russian: транспортный, translit. transportnyi, lit. 'transport') spacecraft (1976–1986) featured solar panels allowing longer missions, a revised Igla rendezvous system and new translation/attitude thruster system on the Service module. It could carry a crew of three, now wearing spacesuits.

Fourth generation

Soyuz-TM (1986–2003)

Soyuz-TM spacecraft. Compare the antennas on the orbital module to those on Soyuz-T. Differences reflect the change from the Igla rendezvous system used on Soyuz-T to the Kurs rendezvous system used on Soyuz-TM.

The Soyuz-TM crew transports (M: Russian: модифицированный, translit. modifitsirovannyi, lit. 'modified') were fourth generation Soyuz spacecraft, and were used from 1986 to 2003 for ferry flights to Mir and the International Space Station.

Soyuz-TMA (2003–2012)


Soyuz TMA (A: Russian: антропометрический, translit. antropometricheskii, lit. 'anthropometric') features several changes to accommodate requirements requested by NASA in order to service the International Space Station, including more latitude in the height and weight of the crew and improved parachute systems. It is also the first expendable vehicle to feature "glass cockpit" technology. Soyuz-TMA looks identical to a Soyuz-TM spacecraft on the outside, but interior differences allow it to accommodate taller occupants with new adjustable crew couches.

Soyuz TMA-M (2010–2016)

The Soyuz TMA-M was an upgrade of the baseline Soyuz-TMA, using a new computer, digital interior displays, updated docking equipment, and the vehicle's total mass was reduced by 70 kilograms. The new version debuted on 7 October 2010 with the launch of TMA-01M, carrying the ISS Expedition 25 crew.

The Soyuz TMA-08M mission set a new record for the fastest manned docking with a space station. The mission used a new six-hour rendezvous, faster than the previous Soyuz launches, which had, since 1986, taken two days.

Soyuz MS (since 2016)

Soyuz MS-01 docked to the ISS

Soyuz MS is the final planned upgrade of the Soyuz spacecraft. Its maiden flight was in July 2016 with mission MS-01. Major changes include:
  • more efficient solar panels
  • modified docking and attitude control engine positions for redundancy during docking and de-orbit burns
  • new Kurs NA approach and docking system which weighs half as much and consumes a third of the power of previous system
  • new TsVM-101 computer, about one eighth the weight (8.3 kg vs. 70 kg) and much smaller than the previous Argon-16 computer
  • unified digital command/telemetry system (MBITS) to relay telemetry via satellite, and control spacecraft when out of sight of ground stations; also provides the crew with position data when out of ground tracking range
  • GLONASS/GPS and Cospas-Sarsat satellite systems for more accurate location during search/rescue operations after landing

Related craft

The unmanned Progress spacecraft were derived from Soyuz and are used for servicing space stations. 

While not being direct derivatives of Soyuz, the Chinese Shenzhou spacecraft uses Soyuz TM technology sold in 1984 and the Indian Orbital Vehicle follow the same general layout as that pioneered by Soyuz.

Aerospike engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

XRS-2200 linear aerospike engine for the X-33 program being tested at the Stennis Space Center
 
The aerospike engine is a type of rocket engine that maintains its aerodynamic efficiency across a wide range of altitudes. It belongs to the class of altitude compensating nozzle engines. A vehicle with an aerospike engine uses 25–30% less fuel at low altitudes, where most missions have the greatest need for thrust. Aerospike engines have been studied for a number of years and are the baseline engines for many single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) designs and were also a strong contender for the Space Shuttle main engine. However, no such engine is in commercial production, although some large-scale aerospikes are in testing phases.

The terminology in the literature surrounding this subject is somewhat confused—the term aerospike was originally used for a truncated plug nozzle with a very rough conical taper and some gas injection, forming an "air spike" to help make up for the absence of the plug tail. However, frequently, a full-length plug nozzle is now called an aerospike.

Principles

The purpose of any engine bell is to direct the exhaust of a rocket engine in one direction, generating thrust in the opposite direction. The exhaust, a high-temperature mix of gases, has an effectively random momentum distribution (i.e., the exhaust pushes in any direction it can). If the exhaust is allowed to escape in this form, only a small part of the flow will be moving in the correct direction and thus contribute to forward thrust. The bell redirects exhaust moving in the wrong direction so that it generates thrust in the correct direction. Ambient air pressure also imparts a small pressure against the exhaust, helping to keep it moving in the "right" direction as it exits the engine. As the vehicle travels upwards through the atmosphere, ambient air pressure is reduced. This causes the thrust-generating exhaust to begin to expand outside the edge of the bell. Since this exhaust begins traveling in the "wrong" direction (i.e., outward from the main exhaust plume), the efficiency of the engine is reduced as the rocket travels because this escaping exhaust is no longer contributing to the thrust of the engine. An aerospike rocket engine seeks to eliminate this loss of efficiency.

Comparison between the design of a bell-nozzle rocket (left) and an aerospike rocket (right)
 
Instead of firing the exhaust out of a small hole in the middle of a bell, an aerospike engine avoids this random distribution by firing along the outside edge of a wedge-shaped protrusion, the "spike", which serves the same function as a traditional engine bell. The spike forms one side of a "virtual" bell, with the other side being formed by the outside air—thus the "aerospike". 

The idea behind the aerospike design is that at low altitude the ambient pressure compresses the exhaust against the spike. Exhaust recirculation in the base zone of the spike can raise the pressure in that zone to nearly ambient. Since the pressure in front of the vehicle is ambient, this means that the exhaust at the base of the spike nearly balances out with the drag experienced by the vehicle. It gives no overall thrust, but this part of the nozzle also doesn't lose thrust by forming a partial vacuum. The thrust at the base part of the nozzle can be ignored at low altitude. 

As the vehicle climbs to higher altitudes, the air pressure holding the exhaust against the spike decreases, as does the drag in front of the vehicle. The recirculation zone at the base of the spike maintains the pressure in that zone to a fraction of 1 bar, higher than the near-vacuum in front of the vehicle, thus giving extra thrust as altitude increases. This effectively behaves like an "altitude compensator" in that the size of the bell automatically compensates as air pressure falls.

The disadvantages of aerospikes seem to be extra weight for the spike, and increased cooling requirements to the extra heated area, the spike. Furthermore, the larger cooled area can reduce performance below theoretical levels by reducing the pressure against the nozzle. Aerospikes work relatively poorly between Mach 1–3, where the airflow around the vehicle has reduced the pressure, thus reducing the thrust.

Variations

Several versions of the design exist, differentiated by their shapes. In the toroidal aerospike the spike is bowl-shaped with the exhaust exiting in a ring around the outer rim. In theory this requires an infinitely long spike for best efficiency, but by blowing a small amount of gas out of the center of a shorter truncated spike (like base bleed in an artillery shell), something similar can be achieved. 

In the linear aerospike the spike consists of a tapered wedge-shaped plate, with exhaust exiting on either side at the "thick" end. This design has the advantage of being stackable, allowing several smaller engines to be placed in a row to make one larger engine while augmenting steering performance with the use of individual engine throttle control.

Performance

Rocketdyne's J-2T-250k annular aerospike test firing.
 
Rocketdyne conducted a lengthy series of tests in the 1960s on various designs. Later models of these engines were based on their highly reliable J-2 engine machinery and provided the same sort of thrust levels as the conventional engines they were based on; 200,000 lbf (890 kN) in the J-2T-200k, and 250,000 lbf (1.1 MN) in the J-2T-250k (the T refers to the toroidal combustion chamber). Thirty years later their work was dusted off again for use in NASA's X-33 project. In this case the slightly upgraded J-2S engine machinery was used with a linear spike, creating the XRS-2200. After more development and considerable testing, this project was cancelled when the X-33's composite fuel tanks repeatedly failed. 

CSULB aerospike engine
 
Three XRS-2200 engines were built during the X-33 program and underwent testing at NASA's Stennis Space Center. The single-engine tests were a success, but the program was halted before the testing for the two-engine setup could be completed. The XRS-2200 produces 204,420 lbf (909,300 N) thrust with an Isp of 339 seconds at sea level, and 266,230 lbf (1,184,300 N) thrust with an Isp of 436.5 seconds in a vacuum. 

The RS-2200 Linear Aerospike Engine was derived from the XRS-2200. The RS-2200 was to power the VentureStar single-stage-to-orbit vehicle. In the latest design, seven RS-2200s producing 542,000 pounds-force (2,410 kN) each would boost the VentureStar into low earth orbit. The development on the RS-2200 was formally halted in early 2001 when the X-33 program did not receive Space Launch Initiative funding. Lockheed Martin chose to not continue the VentureStar program without any funding support from NASA. An engine of this type is on outdoor display on the grounds of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville Alabama. 

NASA's Toroidal aerospike nozzle
 
The cancellation of the Lockheed Martin X-33 by the federal government in 2001 decreased funding availability, but aerospike engines remain an area of active research. For example, a milestone was achieved when a joint academic/industry team from California State University, Long Beach (CSULB) and Garvey Spacecraft Corporation successfully conducted a flight test of a liquid-propellant powered aerospike engine in the Mojave Desert on September 20, 2003. CSULB students had developed their Prospector 2 (P-2) rocket using a 1,000 lbf (4.4 kN) LOX/ethanol aerospike engine. This work on aerospike engines continues; Prospector-10, a ten-chamber aerospike engine, was test-fired June 25, 2008.

Nozzle performance comparison of bell and aerospike nozzle
 
Further progress came in March 2004 when two successful tests sponsored by the NASA Dryden Flight Research Centre using high-power rockets manufactured by Blacksky Corporation, based in Carlsbad, California. The aerospike nozzles and solid rocket motors were developed and built by the rocket motor division of Cesaroni Technology Incorporated, north of Toronto, Ontario. The two rockets were solid-fuel powered and fitted with non-truncated toroidal aerospike nozzles. Flown at the Pecos County Aerospace Development Center, Fort Stockton, Texas, the rockets achieved apogees of 26,000 ft (7,900 m) and speeds of about Mach 1.5. 

Small-scale aerospike engine development using a hybrid rocket propellant configuration has been ongoing by members of the Reaction Research Society.

Implementations

Firefly Aerospace

In July 2014 Firefly Space Systems announced its planned Alpha launcher that uses an aerospike engine for its first stage. Intended for the small satellite launch market, it is designed to launch satellites into low-Earth orbit (LEO) at a price of US$8–9 million, much lower than with conventional launchers.

Firefly Alpha 1.0 was designed to carry payloads of up to 400 kilograms (880 lb). It uses carbon composite materials and uses the same basic design for both stages. The plug-cluster aerospike engine puts out 90,000 pounds-force (400 kN) of thrust. The engine has a bell-shaped nozzle that has been cut in half, then stretched to form a ring with the half-nozzle now forming the profile of a plug.

But this rocket design was never launched. The design was abandoned after Firefly Space Systems went bankrupt. A new company, Firefly Aerospace, has replaced the aerospike engine with a conventional engine in the Alpha 2.0 design.

ARCA Space

In March 2017 ARCA Space Corporation announced their intention to build a single-stage-to-orbit rocket, named Haas 2CA, using a linear aerospike engine. The rocket is designed to send up to 100kg into low-Earth orbit, at a price of US$ 1 million per launch. They later announced that their Executor Aerospike engine would produce 50,500 pounds-force (225 kN) of thrust at sea-level and 73,800 pounds-force (328 kN) of thrust in vacuum.

In June 2017, ARCA announced that they would fly their Demonstrator3 rocket to space, using a linear aerospike engine. This rocket was designed to test several components of their Haas 2CA at a lower cost. They announced a flight for August 2017. In September 2017, ARCA announced that after being delayed, their linear aerospike engine was ready to perform ground tests and flight tests on a Demonstrator3 rocket.

KSF Space and Interstellar Space

Another spike engine concept model, by KSF Space and Interstellar Space in Los Angeles, was designed for orbital vehicle named SATORI. Due to lack of funding, the concept is still undeveloped.

Rocketstar

Rocketstar announced that it would launch its 3D-printed aerospike rocket to an altitude of 50 miles in February 2019.

Dream Chaser

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dream Chaser Cargo System
Dream Chaser flight test vehicle in 2013
Dream Chaser flight test vehicle in 2013

ManufacturerSierra Nevada Corporation
Country of originUnited States
OperatorNASA
ApplicationsISS resupply

Specifications
Spacecraft typeUnmanned cargo vehicle
Payload capacity5,000 kg (5.0 t; 11,000 lb) pressurized, 500 kg (0.50 t; 1,100 lb) unpressurized
Crew capacity0

Production
StatusIn development

Related spacecraft
Derived fromUnmanned HL-20 Personnel Launch System
 
Dream Chaser Space System
Dream Chaser pre-drop tests.5.jpg

ManufacturerSierra Nevada Corporation

Related spacecraft
Derived fromHL-20 Personnel Launch System

The Dream Chaser Cargo System is an American reusable lifting body spaceplane being developed by Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) Space Systems. The Dream Chaser is designed to resupply the International Space Station with both pressurized and unpressurized cargo. The vehicle will launch vertically on an Atlas V or Ariane 5 rocket, and autonomously land horizontally on conventional runways. Potential further development of the spaceplane includes a crewed version called the Dream Chaser Space System, which would be capable of carrying up to seven people to and from low Earth orbit.

Design

Propulsion

On-orbit propulsion of the Dream Chaser was supposed to be provided by twin hybrid rocket engines fueled with non-toxic and storable hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) and nitrous oxide. Unlike solid rockets, Dream Chaser's hybrid fuel system would allow the motor to stop and start repeatedly and be throttleable. SNC Space Systems was also developing a similar hybrid rocket, RocketMotor Two, for Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo, as a subcontractor to Scaled Composites. In May 2014 their involvement in the program ended after Virgin Galactic elected to replace SNC's version of RocketMotorTwo, powered by HTBD rubber fuel, with its own internally developed hybrid motor using a polyamide plastic fuel, while continuing to use the same nitrous oxide oxidizer.

After the acquisition of Orbitec LLC in July 2014, Sierra Nevada Corporation announced a major change to the propulsion system. The hybrid rocket engine design was dropped in favor of a cluster of Orbitec's Vortex engines. The new engines would use propane and nitrous oxide as propellants.

Dream Chaser Space System

Artist's conception of the Dream Chaser Space System in the launch configuration
 
Dream Chaser Space System is a planned human-rated version designed to carry from two to seven people and cargo to orbital destinations such as the International Space Station. It is to have a built-in launch escape system and could fly autonomously if needed. Although it could use any suitable launch vehicle, it is currently planned to be launched on a human-rated Atlas V 412 rocket. The vehicle is to be able to return from space by gliding (typically experiencing less than 1.5 g on re-entry) and landing on any airport runway that handles commercial air traffic. Its reaction control system thrusters burn ethanol-based fuel, which is not an explosively volatile material, nor toxic like hydrazine, allowing the Dream Chaser to be handled immediately after landing, unlike the Space Shuttle. Its thermal protection system (TPS) will be made up of silica-based tiles and a new composite material called Toughened Unipiece Fibrous Reusable Oxidation Resistant Ceramic (TUFROC).

A second round of Dream Chaser flight tests at NASA's Armstrong Flight Research Center was scheduled to continue during 2017.

History

An artist's impression of the X-20 Dyna-Soar being launched using a Titan booster, with large fins added to the Titan's first stage
 
The historical antecedents of the Dream Chaser in the U.S. go back to the mid-twentieth century X-20 Dyna-Soar concept of 1957 and the 1966 Northrop M2-F2 and Martin X-23 PRIME lifting bodies. Its design is derived from NASA's 1990 HL-20 lifting body design which was itself similar to the 1980s Soviet BOR-4, which in turn was considered by NASA engineers as influenced by the late 1960s HL-10, and the Soviet "Spiral"(Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-105), a military spaceplane concept, the latter having been studied as a means to develop a Cold War Soviet counterpart to the US's X-20 Dyna-Soar.

The name "Dream Chaser" has been used for two separate space vehicles. One, planned to be an orbital vehicle based on the NASA HL-20, originated at SpaceDev when Jim Benson was still there. The second, a suborbital vehicle, was the result of Jim Benson's having reused the name when he formed the Benson Space Company for the purposes of space tourism.

On 24 June 2011, SNC announced it had achieved two critical milestones for NASA's CCDev program. The first was a Systems Requirement Review (SRR), where SNC validated their requirements based on NASA's draft Commercial Crew Program Requirements. The SRR was successfully completed on 1 June 2011, with participation from NASA and SNC industry partners. The second milestone was a review of the improved airfoil fin shape for Dream Chaser used to aid its control through the atmosphere. Testing in a wind tunnel and computational fluid dynamics analyses allowed the fin selection to pass the NASA milestone.

As of October 2011, Sierra Nevada Corp had completed four of the 13 milestones set out in the CCDev Agreement. The most recent milestones accomplished include: a System Requirements Review, a new cockpit simulator, finalizing the tip fin airfoil design and most recently, a Vehicle Avionics Integration Laboratory (VAIL), which will be used to test Dream Chaser computers and electronics in simulated space mission scenarios.

By February 2012, Sierra Nevada Corporation stated that it had completed the assembly and delivery of the primary structure of the first Dream Chaser flight test vehicle. With this, SNC completed all 11 of its CCDev milestones that were scheduled up to that point. SNC stated in a press release that it was "...on time and on budget." On 24 April 2012, Sierra Nevada Corporation announced the successful completion of wind tunnel testing of a scale model of the Dream Chaser vehicle.

On June 12, 2012 SNC announced the commemoration of its fifth year as a NASA Langley partner in the design and development of Dream Chaser. Together with ULA, the NASA/SNC team performed buffet tests on the Dream Chaser and Atlas V stack. To date, the Langley/SNC team has worked on aerodynamic and aerothermal analysis of Dream Chaser, as well as guidance, navigation, and control systems. On July 11, 2012 SNC announced that it successfully completed testing of the nose landing gear for Dream Chaser. This milestone evaluated the impact to the landing gear during simulated approach and landing tests as well as the impact of future orbital flights. The main landing gear was tested in a similar way in February 2012. The nose gear landing test was the last milestone to be completed before the free flight approach and landing tests scheduled for later in 2012. In August 2012, SNC completed CCiCap Milestone 1, or the ‘Program Implementation Plan Review’. This included creating a plan for implementing design, development, testing, and evaluation activities through the duration of CCiCap funding. By October 2012 the "Integrated System Baseline Review", or CCiCap Milestone 2, had been completed. This review demonstrated the maturity of the Dream Chaser Space System as well as the integration and support of the Atlas V launch vehicle, mission systems, and ground systems.

On January 30, 2013 SNC announced a new partnership with Lockheed Martin. Under the agreement, SNC will pay Lockheed Martin $10 million to build the second airframe at its Michoud facility in New Orleans, Louisiana. This second airframe is slated to be the first orbital test vehicle, with orbital flight testing planned to begin within the next two years. In January 2014, SNC announced it had signed a launch contract to fly the first orbital test vehicle on a robotically controlled orbital test flight in November 2016.

In January 2013, Sierra Nevada also announced that the second captive carry and first unpowered drop test of Dream Chaser would take place at Edwards Air Force Base, California in March 2013. The spaceplane release would occur at 12,000 feet (3,700 m) altitude and would be followed by an autonomous robotic landing. On March 13, 2013, NASA announced that former space shuttle commander Lee Archambault was leaving the agency in order to join SNC. Archambault, a former combat pilot and 15-year NASA veteran who flew on Atlantis and Discovery, will work on the Dream Chaser program as a systems engineer and test pilot. On April 29, 2013, Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo sub-orbital vehicle was propelled on its first ever powered flight by SNC's Hybrid Rocket Motor. SNC manufactures the main oxidizer valve and the hybrid rocket motor, plus the nitrous oxide dump and pressurization system control valves. The hybrid rocket motor and oxidizer valve system are manufactured at an SNC facility in Poway, California, where motors for both Space Ship Two and Dream Chaser are produced.

SpaceDev Dream Chaser proposal

Commercial Orbital Transportation Services

The Dream Chaser was publicly announced on September 20, 2004 as a candidate for NASA's Vision for Space Exploration and later Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Program (COTS).

When the Dream Chaser was not selected under Phase 1 of the COTS Program, SpaceDev founder James Benson stepped down as Chairman of SpaceDev and started Benson Space Company to pursue the development of the Dream Chaser. In April 2007, SpaceDev announced that it had partnered with the United Launch Alliance to pursue the possibility of using the Atlas V booster rocket as the Dream Chaser's launch vehicle. In June 2007, SpaceDev signed a Space Act agreement with NASA.

Commercial Crew Development

About two weeks after Benson's October 10, 2008 death, SpaceDev agreed to be acquired by Sierra Nevada Corporation, a privately owned company operated by Fatih Ozmen and Eren Ozmen, on October 21, 2008 for US$38 million. On February 1, 2010, Sierra Nevada Corporation was awarded $20 million in seed money under NASA's Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) phase 1 program for the development of the Dream Chaser. Of the $50 million awarded by the CCDev program, Dream Chaser's award represented the largest share of the funds. SNC completed the four planned milestones on time which included program implementation plans, manufacturing readiness capability, hybrid rocket test fires, and the preliminary structure design. Further initial Dream Chaser tests included the drop test of a 15% scaled version at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. The 1.5 m (5 ft) model was dropped from an altitude of 14,000 feet (4,300 m) to test flight stability and collect aerodynamic data for flight control surfaces.

For the CCDev phase 2 solicitation by NASA in October 2010, Sierra Nevada proposed extensions of Dream Chaser spaceplane technology. According to head of Sierra Nevada Space Systems Mark Sirangelo, the cost of completing the Dream Chaser should be less than $1 billion.

On April 18, 2011, NASA awarded nearly $270 million in funding for CCDev 2, including $80 million to Sierra Nevada Corporation for Dream Chaser. Since then, nearly a dozen further milestones have been completed under that Space Act Agreement. Some of these milestones included testing of the airfoil fin shape, integrated flight software and hardware, landing gear, and a full-scale captive carry flight test.

Commercial Crew integrated Capability

On August 3, 2012, NASA announced the award of $212.5 million to Sierra Nevada Corporation to continue work on the Dream Chaser under the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) Program.

In December 2013, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) announced a funded study to investigate ways in which Europe might take advantage of the Dream Chaser crewed spaceplane technology. Named the DC4EU (Dream Chaser for European Utilization), the project will study using it for sending crews and cargo to the ISS and on missions not involving the ISS, particularly in orbits of substantially greater altitude than the ISS can reach.

In January 2014, the European Space Agency (ESA) agreed to be a partner on the DC4EU project, and will also investigate whether the Dream Chaser can use ESA avionics and docking mechanisms. ESA will also study launching options for the "Europeanized" Dream Chaser, particularly whether it can be launched within the Ariane 5's large aerodynamic cargo fairing – or, like the Atlas V, without it. In order to fit within the fairing, the Dream Chaser's wing length will have to be reduced slightly, which is thought to be easier than going through a full aerodynamic test program to evaluate and prove it along with the Ariane for flight without the fairing.

In late January 2014, it was announced that the Dream Chaser orbital test vehicle was under contract to be launched on an initial orbital test flight, using an Atlas V rocket, from Kennedy Space Center in November 2016. This is a privately arranged commercial agreement, and is funded directly by Sierra Nevada and is not a part of any existing NASA contract.

September 2014 CCtCap non-selection by NASA

After being involved with the NASA Commercial Crew Development program since 2009—and being selected as one of the contract award recipients in each prior phase of the program—NASA did not select the Dream Chaser for the next phase of the Commercial Crew Program announced September 16, 2014 due to lack of maturity. Sierra Nevada filed a protest to the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) on September 26. Boeing and SpaceX were asked by NASA to "stop work" on the crewed spacecraft during the protest resolution. However, on October 22, 2014, a Federal Judge ruled that NASA could proceed with contracts with Boeing and SpaceX to develop their "space taxis", while the GAO continued to consider Sierra Nevada's protest of NASA's original decision.

Two weeks after losing the Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) competition to SpaceX and Boeing on September 16, 2014, Sierra Nevada Corporation announced it has designed a launch system that combines a scale version of the company's Dream Chaser space plane with the Stratolaunch Systems air launch system. Earlier the same week, Sierra Nevada introduced the "Dream Chaser Global Project" which would provide customized access to low Earth orbit to global customers.

Despite not being selected to continue forward under NASA's Commercial Crew transportation Capability (CCtCap) phase of the effort to send crews to orbit via private companies, SNC is still completing milestones under earlier phases of the CCP. On December 2, 2014 SNC announced that it completed NASA's CCiCap Milestone 5a related to propulsion risk reduction for the Dream Chaser space system.

By late December, details had emerged that "a high-ranking agency official"—"William Gerstenmaier, the agency's top human exploration official and the one who made the final decision"—"opted to rank Boeing's proposal higher than a previous panel of agency procurement experts." More specifically, Sierra Nevada asserted in their filings with the GAO that Gerstenmaier may have "overstepped his authority by unilaterally changing the scoring criteria."

On January 5, 2015, the GAO denied Sierra Nevada's CCtCap challenge, stating that NASA made the proper decision when it decided to award Boeing $4.2 billion and SpaceX $2.6 billion to develop their vehicles. Ralph White, the GAO's managing associate counsel, announced that NASA "recognized Boeing's higher price but also considered Boeing's proposal to be the strongest of all three proposals in terms of technical approach, management approach and past performance, and to offer the crew transportation system with most utility and highest value to the government." Furthermore, the agency found "several favorable features" in SNC's proposal "but ultimately concluded that SpaceX's lower price made it a better value."

Dream Chaser Global Project

In September 2014, SNC announced that it would, with global partners, use the Dream Chaser as the baseline spacecraft for orbital access for a variety of programs, specializing the craft as needed.

On November 5, 2014 during the Space Traffic Management Conference at Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University, SNC's Space Systems team presented the challenges and opportunities related to landing the Dream Chaser spacecraft at public-use airports. According to the presentation, "Unlike the Space Shuttle, the Dream Chaser does not require any unique landing aids or specialized equipment as it uses all non-toxic propellants and industry standard subsystems."

Stratolaunch and Dream Chaser

In late November 2014, Vulcan Aerospace released the results of the SNC/Stratolaunch space transportation architecture, which indicated that the reduced-size Dream Chaser in conjunction with the Stratolaunch-based launch system mission capabilities. The system would have an outbound range of 1,900 kilometers; 1,200 miles (1,000 nmi) away from the airport where the aircraft departed. The launch vehicle would be a modified air-launched Orbital Sciences rocket that is approximately 37 m (120 ft) in length. The Dream Chaser payload would be a 75-percent sized version of the vehicle previously proposed to NASA—while maintaining the relative outer mold line-6.9 m (22.5 ft) in length with a wingspan of 5.5 m (18.2 ft), which could carry 2 to 3 crewmembers plus a variety of scientific and research payloads.

Dream Chaser for European Utilization

In 2013, SNC and OHB entered into an agreement to study the feasibility of using SNC's Dream Chaser spacecraft for a variety of missions. The DC4EU study thoroughly reviewed applications for the Dream Chaser including crewed and uncrewed flights to low-Earth orbit (LEO) for missions such as microgravity science, satellite servicing, and active debris removal (ADR).

On February 3, 2015, the Sierra Nevada Corporation's (SNC) Space Systems and OHB System AG (OHB) in Germany announced the completion of the initial Dream Chaser for European Utilization (DC4EU) study.

According to Dr. Fritz Merkle, member of the Executive Management Board of OHB AG:
"The inherent design advantages of the Dream Chaser reusable lifting body spacecraft make it an ideal vehicle for a broad range of space applications. We partnered with SNC to study how the design of the Dream Chaser can be used to advance European interests in space. The study results confirm the viability of using the spacecraft for microgravity science and ADR. DC4EU can benefit the entire international space community with its unique capabilities. We look forward to further maturing our design with SNC as we expand our partnership."
The cooperation was renewed in April 2015 for additional two years.

United Nations missions

The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), which has never launched a space mission of its own, selected the cargo Dream Chaser for at least one mission for United Nations member states that have no space access or space programs of their own. The mission would last for at least two weeks in freeflight, to allow the payloads a microgravity environment, without docking with the International Space Station. The proposed mission would launch as soon as 2021.

Hubble Telescope service mission

The Trump Administration is currently considering the applications to use a crewed version of the Dream Chaser to service the Hubble Space Telescope sometime in the 2020s.

Dream Chaser Cargo System

Artist's conception of the Dream Chaser Docked to ISS
 
The cargo variant of the SNC Dream Chaser is called the Dream Chaser Cargo System. Featuring an expendable cargo portion, containing solar panels, the cargo version of the spacecraft will be capable of returning 1,750 kg (3,860 lb) to Earth, undergoing re-entry forces of 1.5G. It has been proposed for the Phase II program for cargo resupply of the International Space Station.

January 2016 CRS2 selection by NASA

In December 2014, Sierra Nevada proposed Dream Chaser for CRS-2 consideration. It is in competition with the existing CRS-1 contract holders SpaceX Dragon capsule and Orbital Sciences Cygnus capsule, as well as fellow CCDev competitor Boeing CST-100. In January 2016, NASA announced that Dream Chaser had been awarded one of the contracts under CRS2. NASA committed to purchasing a minimum of six resupply missions to the ISS from Sierra Nevada.

To meet CRS2 guidelines, the cargo Dream Chaser will feature foldable wings, to fit within a 5m cargo fairing, unlike the passenger Dream Chaser, which did not use a cargo fairing. The ability to fit in a cargo fairing allows launches from Ariane 5 as well as Atlas V rocket launcher vehicles. To expand the cargo uplift capacity, an expendable cargo module is affixed aft, which will not support downlift, but can be used for disposal of up to 3,250 kg (7,170 lb) of trash. Total uplift is planned for 5,000 kg (11,000 lb) pressurized, 500 kg (1,100 lb) unpressurized, with downlift of 1,750 kg (3,860 lb) wholly within the spaceplane.

Testing

Engine

Sierra Nevada completed an initial test phase on the Dream Chaser rocket engine in 2010, under the CCDev1 program, including three successful test firings on a single hybrid motor in a single day.

A second phase of testing began in June 2013, with a motor firing and ignition test in order to validate the newly modified test stand, as a start to the Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) contract test phase.

Wind tunnel

In 2014, Sierra Nevada completed its wind tunnel testing as part of its CCiCAP Milestone 8. The Wind tunnel testing involved analyzing the flight dynamics characteristics that the vehicle will experience during orbital ascent and re-entry. Wind tunnel testing was also completed for the Dream Chaser Atlas V integrated launch system. These tests were completed at NASA Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, California, CALSPAN Transonic Wind Tunnel in New York, and at NASA Langley Research Center Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel in Hampton, Virginia.

Flight test program

In May 2013, The Dream Chaser Engineering Test Article (ETA) was shipped to the Dryden Flight Research Center in California for a series of ground tests and aerodynamic flight tests. This move to Dryden came about a year after a captive carry test that was conducted near the Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport on May 29, 2012. During that test, an Erickson Skycrane was used to lift the Dream Chaser to better determine its aerodynamic properties. A second captive carry flight test was completed on August 22, 2013.

On October 26, 2013, the first free-flight occurred. The test vehicle was released from the "skycrane" helicopter, and flew the correct flightpath to touchdown less than a minute later. Just prior to landing, the left main landing gear failed to deploy resulting in a crash landing. In a press teleconference a short while later, Mark Sirangelo, corporate vice president of Sierra Nevada, told reporters that the view of the ETA was obscured by the dust as it skidded off the runway, but that the vehicle was found upright, with the crew compartment intact, and all systems inside still in working order. Sierra Nevada corporation engineers do not believe that the ETA flipped over.

On August 1, 2014, the first completed piece of the orbital test vehicle's composite airframe was unveiled at the Lockheed Martin Michoud Assembly Facility in Louisiana. In October 2015, the thermal protection system was installed on the ETA for the next phase of atmospheric flight testing. The orbital cabin assembly of the FTA orbital test vehicle was also completed by contractor Lockheed Martin.

The first two Dream Chasers — the ETA and the Flight Test Article (FTA) — have been given internal and external names, with some sources reporting that the ETA will be named Eagle, while the FTA was originally named Ascalon before being changed to Ascension.

Dream Chaser model being tested at NASA Langley.
 
In 2014, an initial orbital test flight of the Dream Chaser orbital test vehicle was planned for November 1, 2016, launching on an Atlas V rocket from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 41.

On November 11, 2017, the Dream Chaser successfully completed a glide test, after being released from an altitude of 3,700 m and landing at Edwards AFB. NASA indicated that the first commercial cargo flight by any provider under the CRS-2 contract will not occur until 2019. As of January 2019, the first ISS flight of the Dream Chaser is planned for 2020.

Status

In January 2016, Sierra Nevada signed a contract with NASA to provide at least six CRS2 missions to the space station. As of March 2019, the validation of NASA’s Integrated Review Milestone 5 (IR5) confirms that development is still ongoing at a nominal pace. 

The cargo Dream Chaser was selected by UNOOSA in 2016 for the first United Nations space mission, to allow nations without access to space to fly microgravity experiments. First flight is planned no earlier than 2021.

Technology partners

The following organizations were named as technology partners in 2010 for the original passenger Dream Chaser:

Butane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...