Kistler Fully Reusable Launch Vehicle, a SpaceX Competitor
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 09. 2022
- An early design concept sometimes referred to as the Bedpost Rocket
the Kistler K-1 was a two-stage, fully reusable launch vehicle design created by Kistler Aerospace. It was to accommodate a wide range of missions, including payload delivery to low Earth orbit (LEO), payload delivery to high-energy orbits with a K-1 Active Dispenser, technology demonstration flights, microgravity missions, and commercial cargo resupply, recovery, and reboost services for the International Space Station (ISS).
In 2004, the company won a NASA contract to fly supply missions to ISS. At the time, Kistler claimed that the design of the K-1 was 75% complete, and the $227 million NASA contract would be used to complete development and the first flights. SpaceX protested, suggesting that the presence of well-known former NASA engineers biased the decision in favor of Kistler. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) sided with SpaceX and NASA suspended the contract in favor of a new process, the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program.
Lacking funding to complete development, in 2006 Kistler was purchased by Rocketplane Limited, Inc, who had previously been developing a competing concept. Both SpaceX and the new Rocketplane Kistler won COTS contracts in August 2006, but after failing to meet several financial milestones, NASA announced in October 2007 that it was terminating funding for the project. The company declared bankruptcy in 2010. - Věda a technologie
Takes off on a bouncy castle, lands on a trampoline, awesome
Very apt descriptions.
I'd like that for my next birthday please! 😜
@@jmwoods190 No afraid not, the best I can offer you is a ride on a rocket shaped as a phallus..
Trampoline?
(Rogozin noises)
Had the second stage shared/used fuel from the adjacent first stage vessel, simultaneously taking off, the dry-mass drag friction would be resolved. The *flame retardant* landing trampoline/Net was brilliant. But also risky targeting.
I was at Scaled when we built the structure for the prototype Kistler. Like the Roton, it was a fantastically naive design that we had no design role in except to build structure. The primary structure of the prototype was complete when one of my colleagues, out of sheer frustration, and having done his PhD in hypersonics, did some back of the envelope calculations and in 3 hours proved that this design was incapable of overcoming its own transonic wave drag. As a courtesy, we shared this with the customer, which had us scrap the prototype about a month later. Its really incredible to me that investors are willing to put tons of money into things like this and Roton that haven't even passed basic analysis while economically viable, less sexy concepts, remain unfunded.
I've been occasionally poking at assembling research for a book about this. While I've interviewed a lot of the post-95 design team and learned a lot about the benefits and drawbacks of that "beer bottle" configuration, I hadn't yet been able to talk to anyone at Scaled about the early bedstead design. Any chance you'd be willing to be interviewed, or put me in contact with anyone else who could discuss it?
What's even stranger is that their CEO was George Mueller, the guy who headed up the Apollo program. You would have thought he would've known better!
@@ziggystardust4627 Mueller joined after this design, and dumping it happened very early in his tenure, with the redesign producing the "final" Kistler design which looked like this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kistler_K-1#/media/File:Kistler_K-1.jpg
That one's operations looked like this: czcams.com/video/zjjHztH9748/video.html
@human emp I actually would be curious if you could elaborate, especially as the claim was about _transonic_ wave drag (e.g. around Mach 1, during the sub-to-supersonic transition) not hypersonic. The rocket should need to get to trans-sonic. OTOH, if you have a good source for details about this early Kistler proposal, I'd love to see them.
Exactly, this channel takes us for fools!
I sense much Kerbal in you, young Kistler...
As fantastic of a concept as this was back in the day, you can't help but see how fundamentally flawed it is. No engine out capability at all on the booster, along with massive controll issues from having your thrust offset by so much. That doesn't even mention the drag penalty from this design. On the flip side, such a shame the dream of fully reusable rocketry was still multiple decades away back then
I thought it was a new concept and was willing to bet money this design will never fly. The boost stage looks like it wastes a lot of mass, and the second stage burning through its landing net is strange. Did NASA really select them based on this design?
Drag penalty on a pop-up trajectory? Not really that concerning.
I wouldl add to the list of flaws inability to use vacuum-optimized engine on second stage
Nobody should ever go for a first stage like that. Air launch is a much better option (an An-225 could handle the load). But that boost stage looks like an amazing place to slap on some jet engines, why didn’t they do that?
@@xlynx9 No, they selected them based on the design they did after they discarded this design and went with something better after a year or two.
This is such a Kerbal design. In fact, I built a flying platform that launched rockets once in KSP; the main difference was that my design used jet engines to make it cheaper and easier to operate.
I had no idea why enginieers in the real world took seriously the use of jet engines in SSTO or TSTO designs. For vertical take-off the boosters are only in the atmosphere for less than a minute. For horizontal takeoff designs you have to have a really advanced jet engine to get the speed benefit above 5 mach to start the second stage.
@@ArjunaKunti That's interesting, you've got a point. A very simple rocket engine could be designed that only has a minute or two of fuel on board that could provide enough thrust to get the plane airborne in seconds. You could even design them so they detached after launch, like a RATO bottle. I might make that in KSP for fun. :)
@@doggonemess1 I think the principle of stages fueling the higher stage during lift-off has the greatest potential. Pls. check BAC Mustard design or the Space Shuttle's giant external fuel tank but with a reusable form. With this method, you can 'hack' Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation. However I Don't know whether this can be hbuilt in KSP or not.
Did not work in the realism overhaul mod with an earth. The thrust to weight ratio is to small.
@@DerBlaueRabe42 Of course, I always forget that the planet in KSP is much smaller than Earth. Most of the Kerbal engineering wouldn't work in real life.
When you give a kid a Lego space shuttle set, but the kid builds a castle instead.
Seems like the designers of this rocket only heard the term "aerodynamics" without actually understanding its meaning.
AIUI from interviewing former employees, that and some of the engine out issues along with some internal corporate politics were why this was discarded, and they switched to the more conventional-looking "beer bottle" shape in 1995.
Another great animation! I feel like adding a lag in the engine audio would significantly improve the feel of authenticity in the video though. Eagerly awaiting more of the great work!
The "capsule" uses a heat shield absorbing thousands of degrees of heat and then there pops out from it's center
an engine to give a soft landing? Seems unlikely.
Love how you use the audio from the original Kistler promo in the beginning. Also note that Kistler concept existed even before Falcon 9 entered service!
Imagine where we would be today if they would have had access to the same funding as Elon
@@stoned3225 yeah. If we have the same funding as Elon, we would have the full video, and may be some episodes 😊
@@stoned3225 Imagine if they got the Bezos treatment, this thing would've been on magazines and films all the time!
Wow, the original Kistler Koncept. )) Will we eventually see the final planned Kistler approach get the Hazegrayart treatment? Lutz Kayser's OTRAG,? Thanks for these great animations.
I love your renderings. The addition of the jet contrail at about the 1:00 mark was brilliant.
what?
@@S1nwar The sky in the background isnt just a generic slice of blue, there is actually texture in it.
and the people walking on the platform before maybe. nice attention to detail but I'm skeptical..
This would be. A great design at a lower speed but it SUCH speed and the design will catch WAY TO MCUH AIR
It could've been a feasible design, had the center/second-stage craft, shared the adjacent rockets fuel to start launch a thrust as well. Because the only advantage of adjacent extended first stage vessel, was landing, but a huge drag during lift, not being under the second stage.
This is quite innovative and a unique launching platrform. Somebody really did think outside the box
Well that was pleasantly insane!
Huge frontal area toward the air.
Nice capture of SpaceX audio.
Who dreamt this up? I'd wager there's next to nothing but a video.
A guy named Walter Kistler and another named Bob Citron. Scaled Composites built some subscale structures and Dan Delong (later of Roton and XCOR) did engine development work for this design before it was abandoned in 1995 and the company pivoted to their slightly-more-conservative second design which had most of the parts finished but ran out of money before they could assemble it.
This has to be the most kebal thing I've ever seen a real company design
Reminds me of some of my early designs in KSP
Same
Gorgeous as always - the Earth below the payload deployment was astonishingly beautiful.
Definitely getting "The Last Starfighter" vibes with this concept.
Death Blossom!
That looks Kerbal as hell, I love it
Outstanding as always!
A beautifully rendered video of a ridiculously designed spacecraft. Any chance you might do Boeing's basin launched and recovered SSTO heavy lift vehicle? It can be seen in T.A. Heppenheimer's "Colonies In Space" from the 1970s.
You sir are extremely talented. I always love when you post a new video. 👏❤️🖖🏻
It's a shame they can't do this for real. It would really be interesting to see some thing like this. But the cost would be really crazy those. But I will admit I enjoy your 3d modeling. What program do you use to produce your graphics with?
Could you make a video/animation about the "Shuttle II" concept. Was quite interesting and futuristic.
Anybody remember those black and white silent films from the early days of aviation... rickety airplanes with wings that flapped like birds, and the guy with ten wings that, when the plane started rolling, the wings collapsed, and the guy on iceskates with a rocket strapped to his back that set his rear end on fire.
I guess we're there again.
This is an amazing design concept
Sound effects and animation are awesome!
Your sound design is getting way, way better!
How did you/what did you use to learn how to animate? genuine question, as I'd like to start myself. thanks
So the second stage engine would be optimized for sea-level and vacuum use too?
One of the most Kerbal rockets ive seen in a while.
Congrats on passing 100K subs!
Thank you!
im sorry how is the engine nozzle protected on reentry?
I've made something similar to this in KSP for landing bases on the mun. The four tanks are locked together and decouple from the base/payload. Shocked to see something so similar!
What was the booster layout supposed to accomplish?
When you spread out a design, this increases the chances of the launch to go sideways by the square root.
Is there any reason to make 4 boosters and connections between them instead of only one regular booster?
I wonder what the shockwaves look like around MaxQ...
that background looks more like near Independence or Lone Pine than it does Mojave or Palmdale.
Kinda makes me think of that one company that wanted to launch from maglev rails going up Mt Whitney.
What stabilizes the platform when descending?
Cool! What about the idea of construction of ultra-tall artificial hill for the space industry? Are such concepts exist? Why not to build some 50+ km tall hill. It should be easier on the poles
iirc that would only get you a small, single digit reduction in energy needed. remember you need to end up going 7.5+ km/s horizontally from a standstill. On mars though you could get beyond escape velocity with a relatively low (human compatible) acceleration on a linear motor up the side of Olympus Mons
wow this is so cool looks like we will have other launch vehicles in the future
Wow! That would be REALLY COOL!
I didn't know SpaceX was competing in making CGI videos. 😊
Bros be chillin' up on the pad as they phonk walk around like Dr. Livesey!
Just may my day a Happy Day, Thanks Hazegrayart
what happens if 1 thruster decides to make more or less thrust than the others and how do you stop it from tumbling in the unpowered descent also using the second stage main engine as a heat shield interesting
That was so Kerbal! I would have love to have seen this in action!
This is brilliant!
what do they compete with? animations?
Like the rocket sound effects.
what program do you use??
If you lose one engine you will Catherine wheel to a fiery death. There's a reason every rocket has its engines close together.
The U.S. and SpaceX needs more competition in space. And more then a short animation clip!
All that for a small payload - bay doors need to be larger like the space shuttle. However anything is better than bellyflop landing.
I like it. Would be nice to see it in production.
Lovely ! Don't launchjust the ship, launch the whole pad! Definitely so Kerbal! 'Axe
very cool
What's your favorite rocket, Jesus?
Ain't no way bro 💀😅
I wonder how it would handle failure of one or more boosters?
Ben bu olayı beğendim özellikle şu alt kısmı ben ona sehpa ismini verdim. Onun düz zemine kullanıldıktan sonra dik roketlere göre çok daha rahat ve başarılı inişler yapacağına eminim. (Çünkü benim zamanında buna benzer roket tasarımım vardı) Yakıtını koyup tekrar kullanmanın Moda olduğunu öğrendiğim zamanlarda ben buna benzer tasarım yapmışdım.Kafası hariç : ))))))
How will castle orientate itself and backtrack to launch pad? Might spin our of control from air resistance 🤔
A Medieval Castle, moved by 4 ugly dragoons, spiting fire . OH, Romeu, where the fuck are thou ? Incredibly fun !
The center rocket ship needs 2 stages. A boost stage and final ascent stage. Otherwise, looks like it might work.
Cool concept!🙂
Great CGI! Call us when the little toy is ready 👍🏻
Having engines in square config inflates the problem of -if one loses thrust the whole rocket goes in the other Direction .
I'm not rocket scientist but it seems to me that the farther apart you put the thrust vectors, the harder the thing is going to be to control. And if you have a failure, well, you're screwed.
Si ,me gustó el concepto de nave reutilizable.buena idea.
Now I want to see you do the Rocket Ship concept from the book 'The Rocket Company'...
Kistler was just a weird booknote in space history, they almost actually got through with the K-1 but just couldn’t get the funding at the 11th hour, there were up for grabs for the very first COTS contract with spaceX and everything
What kind of net is that?
Very cool animation. Be a great weekend project for some Estes parts and a styrofoam Christmas tree cone from Hobby Lobby or Michael's
On a completely different design, it just occurred to me that Dragon and Starship kind of validated the TWA rocket that used to stand outside of Disneyland's Trip to the Moon.
Musk has always said he prefers those old designs from his SF reading and watching youth to any other design, regardless of practicality or cost.
If you have enough money, you can make your prejudice into the "only practical option" in everyone else's mind too.
Круто - браво 👏 отличный концепт!
Excellent stuff bro
Reminds me of the Concept for the reusable N1.
My first thoughts were about how this would rip itself apart at max q.
I feel like the designs that have multiple tanks strapped togheter like falcon 9 heavy, delta 4 and the shuttle are hard to develop, I have not heard a reason but I suspect vibrations and resonance in multiple bodies make engineering such a rocket tricky.
Esse modelo sempre esteve na minha mente 👍👍👏👏👏👏
Good animation and theory but can this really work or fly and land safely back?
The comment section is just bursting at the seams with aerospace engineers, rocket scientists and geniuses.
i wonder what supermaterial is the trampoline made of :D
High heat resistant steel cables.The heat pulse isn't really that bad (for steel alloy anyway) as it's pretty short
Amazing so many “great” minds thought this would be viable. I can’t believe how smart I must really be and yet my kids think I am dumb as a rock!
I've built so many successful rockets just like this one in KSP... I started laughing the moment I saw this... (I never knew it existed)...
Heck I've even de-orbited and landed medium sized asteroids next to the VAB with them.... Fun times. ;)
I remember Kistler's design, they had many illustrations of it floating around, and I don't *ever* remember seeing this daft design. So got a source for this, or are you just making crap up?
Huh, I had to look for a while to find any information on this design concept. I was starting to think this whole thing was made up... But no, this was a legitimate design that Kistler had (though the later versions of the K-1 they eventually went with look much more conventional).
The interesting thing, is that they contracted Scaled Composites to build the thing (Burt Rutan's company). The same company that designed the Virgin galactic rocket "spaceship one", and numerous other wildly unconventional aircrafts (and some of my favorite designs). Rutan is a legend, and for a design this weird, well they certainly found the right guy to put on that project.
Love it!
Looks very ingenious, but might have some potential flaws, the spacing between the rockets makes it very critical to have full control over rocket boosters, if one of the rockets boosters flames out or not being consistent, it would have it off the trajectory.
nicely done
My brain: IT'S KERBAL TIME!
COMPETITOR is a big word..😂😂😂
And this my dear friends, is how you launch an entire space station in one go on KSP.
So if its launch platform also takes off... does it technically make it a SSTO? (joking)
Since the Kistler K-1 reusable rocket design, corresponds to the main requested specification from Admiral-General Haffaz Aladeen; regarding the need for the tip of the rocket to be pointy... Then It has its usefulness value.
Stupid question: how do you protect the engine from the intense heat during the re-entry?
Take this with a very large pinch of salt, but I think the engine bells can withstand the heat, as they obviously have to not melt when operating. This is only really half of the solution though ig
If only producing hardware was as easy as producing CGI, does Remind me of a child's backyard birthday party though.
Very interesting idea
KSP Rockets be like:
Was the landing strong enough to bare the heat of the landing engine🤔