6 thoughts on “Suborbital In Japan”

    1. It is, but the company website is even more sketchy. They show a Gulfstream performing parabolic arcs. And then the sketches of the final spaceplane design looks like SS2 with a different wing configuration. It even shows the same horizontal stabilizer in the early sketch.

      1. Those are probably just proof of concept drawings used to get money from the gullible rich investors. I’d give this only about a 20% chance of actually getting to the point of flying. But they might provide some good data points on what doesn’t work with this sort of design. That is useful for everyone. So if you have a few million to piss away, jump on in. But I wouldn’t invest the rent money.

  1. Seems like relatively simple propulsion idea. Jets are cheap and light weight (when compared to hypersonics) then when you get to the top end of their useful altitude you shut them off and turn on the more energetically expensive rocket motor. Seems like a perfectly reasonable way to go about things (F-104 did the same thing) I’m glad someone is putting time and effort into figuring out if they can make it work.

    1. I know the X-15 had a RCS system when the air control surfaces lost effectiveness. Harriers had a system too, but used bleed air. I don’t know about SS2, but I understand that such a trip could be mostly ballistic so long as you quickly regain attitude control once you reenter atmosphere.

      So are these aero designs, like SS2, incorporating RCS? Because they add a good deal of weight, but would make for a more comfortable flight.

  2. Pulsed detonation solid propellent rocket engine? I haven’t been following, but this seems like a pretty major development project.

Comments are closed.