Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 60 posts

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#21

Post by disputin »

eksith wrote: post #2

This is a dubious investment IMO. Rockets that have shrouds have been thrown about for a long time, but they have one fundamental weakness. The shroud only works while in the atmosphere. After that, it's dead weight (since no significant aerodynamic forces come into play further up). It's not quite the same as the SR-71 Blackbird engine which is a turbojet engine that morphs mid-flight into a ramjet. That's quite a s…

It'll be fine - "Mr Osborne himself has inspected the test rig"!? The UK gov will jump at any potential economy booster ('scuse) right now.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#22

Post by lifeisstillgood »

This made my day however:

  has passed an independent audit from European Space 
  Agency experts, and Mr Osborne himself has inspected the 
  test rig on the Culham science park in Oxfordshire.
The ESA has verified the engine, but thank goodness, George Osbourne double checked it all, just in case those rocket scientists missed micro-fluctuations in heat transfer gradients. I mean they were probably all French anyway.

George Osbourne (UK CFO/Treasury Secretary) is getting a lot of political flack, and having his name associated with UK home grown and based innovative technology is clearly something his press office wanted the BBC to know. Who were too lazy to cut the sentence.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#23

Post by stcredzero »

speeder wrote: post #13

Whoa, this is really awesome! For those that don't know, airbreathing engines are MUCH MORE efficient than conventional rocket engines. Not only in terms of weight saved from not having to lug around too much O2, but also because of the way it works inherently. I decided to make a space game once, with real world stuff on it, and settled for the Triton engine for my game spaceship, I did lots of research about rocket…

Not that much of a handwave, if you allow for energy storage as light and compact as antimatter. Engineering such a craft the size of a fighter might be quite difficult, though.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#24

Post by stcredzero »

chromaton wrote: post #8
eksith wrote: post #2

This is a dubious investment IMO. Rockets that have shrouds have been thrown about for a long time, but they have one fundamental weakness. The shroud only works while in the atmosphere. After that, it's dead weight (since no significant aerodynamic forces come into play further up). It's not quite the same as the SR-71 Blackbird engine which is a turbojet engine that morphs mid-flight into a ramjet. That's quite a s…

There's also the drag effects to worry about which pure rockets don't have to deal with. This engine could end up being useful in the long run, but the clear path to cheap access to space involves reusability, and a more complex motor works against that.

However, the ability to avoid staging is also a huge win.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#25

Post by colinm »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #22

This made my day however: has passed an independent audit from European Space Agency experts, and Mr Osborne himself has inspected the test rig on the Culham science park in Oxfordshire. The ESA has verified the engine, but thank goodness, George Osbourne double checked it all, just in case those rocket scientists missed micro-fluctuations in heat transfer gradients. I mean they were probably all French anyway. Georg…

"Do you have one in green?"

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#26

Post by lmm »

colinm wrote: post #25
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #22

This made my day however: has passed an independent audit from European Space Agency experts, and Mr Osborne himself has inspected the test rig on the Culham science park in Oxfordshire. The ESA has verified the engine, but thank goodness, George Osbourne double checked it all, just in case those rocket scientists missed micro-fluctuations in heat transfer gradients. I mean they were probably all French anyway. Georg…

"Do you have one in green?"

What are you talking about? The only thing I can think of is British racing green, and that's a bit of a stretch.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#27

Post by moogleii »

3327 wrote: post #11

The Brits are good engineers, and, compared to American juggernaut companies, specially in the defense and aerospace area, they manage to make innovation with very little. The US military spent millions all through the 1960's upto the late 1980's for a successful VTOL aircraft. Along came the brits with fractions of the budget with a great product the Harrier GR-1. There are some great arguments here, specially the s…

It's hard to say how much of US defense/aerospace costs are due to..."overcharging" though. Also, it looks like the US had a hand in engine development for the initial experimental versions (P.1127). Costs were shared with West Germany as well (from harrier.org.uk). From the wiki:

By the end of 1958, barely eighteen months after the start of the project, all the main features of the P.1127 were developed with one exception, the reaction control system - this was resolved by April 1959.[6] As the P.1127 had been developed at a time of deep UK defense cuts; Hawker had to seek commercial funding, significant engine development funding came from the U.S.[4][7] Wind tunnel tests conducted by NASA Langley Research Center using a sub-scale model showed acceptable flight characteristics.[4][8]

I'm not sure how nimble and less wasteful NASA is, or even if it would be considered "cheap", but their X43A project costs were about 27 million 1958 British pounds ($230M US in 1997).

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#28

Post by voicereason »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #22

This made my day however: has passed an independent audit from European Space Agency experts, and Mr Osborne himself has inspected the test rig on the Culham science park in Oxfordshire. The ESA has verified the engine, but thank goodness, George Osbourne double checked it all, just in case those rocket scientists missed micro-fluctuations in heat transfer gradients. I mean they were probably all French anyway. Georg…

You clearly have something against Osborne.

The UK government are investing the money. Osborne is the Chancellor of the Exchequer, why is it strange that he would be mentioned in the article as having a look at it?

He's only getting political flak from socialists and welfare claimants really - no surprise there.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#29

Post by cpleppert »

eksith wrote: post #2

This is a dubious investment IMO. Rockets that have shrouds have been thrown about for a long time, but they have one fundamental weakness. The shroud only works while in the atmosphere. After that, it's dead weight (since no significant aerodynamic forces come into play further up). It's not quite the same as the SR-71 Blackbird engine which is a turbojet engine that morphs mid-flight into a ramjet. That's quite a s…

There are a lot of weaknesses in the design that haven't been worked out regardless of the technical merit of the engine. Reusable vehicles are tremendously expensive and Sabre has to peform perfectly not only on the engine but the vehicle as well to get any return on its investment.

Although the sabre is more efficient operating in the atmosphere than a conventional rocket engine the vehicle itself will have to spend the cost of having wings, strengthening the vehicle to operate in several orientations on ascent, operating in the atmosphere for longer than a conventional rocket(which costs fuel and requires the vehicle to be shaped in a way that just isn't as efficient as a conventional rocket), and being able to withstand reentry temperatures(more weight) not to mention not being able to get rid of dead weight on ascent. The reusable components of the engine also weigh a lot more as well. If you go through everything it doesn't look like that great a win; and that is if everything works perfectly.

The space shuttle never came close to its projections and this vehicle is far more technically ambitious in every possible way. I just don't think that their projections of even $10-15 billion in development costs are even remotely realistic. Last time I checked their business plan suggested they could break even if satellite launch costs didn't come down and the volume of launches of large satellites increase.

Re: UK government invests in Sabre air-breathing rocket engine

#30

Post by JonnieCache »

3327 wrote: post #11

The Brits are good engineers, and, compared to American juggernaut companies, specially in the defense and aerospace area, they manage to make innovation with very little. The US military spent millions all through the 1960's upto the late 1980's for a successful VTOL aircraft. Along came the brits with fractions of the budget with a great product the Harrier GR-1. There are some great arguments here, specially the s…

>If the government doesn't take the risk, long term innovation would be very difficult.

What I'm wondering is, if the taxpayers have to take all the risk and spend all the R&D money out of our own pockets, why don't we get to keep all the profits as well? I thought innovation was the role of heroic figures who eat risk for breakfast? I thought the massive, economy-distorting pay packages were justified by all that risk?

EDIT: obviously a lot more money is needed for marketing, manufacturing etc. But as I understand it the IP from these projects is basically given as a gift to favoured arms manufacturers when it's ready to become a product? Please correct me.

Post reply on HN