Aerospike Engine

[@The_Forge_Master]

0:40 that's a massive gimbal range.

[@royromano9792]

0:17 Best part of the video

[@Ethan_Roberts]

To push ants to LEO and beyond!

[@CountArtha]

The Most Interesting Rocket Engineers Who Happen to Be Twins in the World

[@zanzalurspace3161]

roy romano a

[@someonesomeone1616]

That's one powerful welder , that's why it takes twins .

[@DFEUERMAN]

The Blues Brothers!

[@TheDct88]

0:49 over 73 engine tests......so 74?

[@jasonofcompsci]

Probably 73 tests plus some minor tests not worth enumerating. So 73 tests.

[@Holton0289]

TheDct88 there are more tests that just firing it up and letting her rip.

[@danross1489]

Or maybe, 73 deliberate tests, and an accident that happened produce useful data.

[@patman0250]

over meaning more then .. moron !

[@tazdvil3376]

+patman0250 Don't you mean more than?....Ha moron

[@sneekysmurf2084]

i feel like im ready to purchase one of them there spiky rocket

[@maximeloiseau8050]

Very interesting ! Quite clear explanation of how-it-works and what is the difference with a classical rocket circular exhaust. I don't know for performance but one advantage seems it is very easily tiltable.

[@tonyperone3242]

I think it went the way of the flying wing for now. Eventually they will use it,but not before others run out of ideas for improving the original engines.

[@theclephane2914]

Check all the Classified USAF projects! They use it!

[@headbanger1428]

@@theclephane2914 How can we find the classified projects, the darknet?

[@dumdidumdumification]

@@headbanger1428 war thunder fora?

[@turboguy86]

Thank you for this upload, amazing concept in rocket engine design.

[@donk.johnson7346]

Those tests were shot up on the hills of Chatsworth at the old Rocketdyne site. They closed that place many years ago.

[@TheArfdog]

0:19 um did the dude in gray put a torch on the other dude in blue's hand? Probably burned the shit out of him and had words off-camera lol!

[@Skittleshunter64]

Camera angle

[@darksidehero]

yeah, it looks like it went over his glove.

[@xres1329]

That acetylene torch at 0:17 is one powerful nozzle!

[@sillaceestekay2069]

so why was it cancelled?

[@shannonmiller3990]

+SILLACE ESTEKAY not sure but i think the skylon plane will use one.

[@2sudonim]

+Shannon Miller Nope. Skylon uses an air breathing rocket called SABRE.

[@2sudonim]

The project it was attached to was cancelled. I never had the infrastructure built to support it. So the space shuttle main engine is cheaper to build. Even though the ssme is less efficient.

[@shannonmiller3990]

2sudonim oh yeah

[@ronparker5589]

Skylon uses a spike configuration on its inlet. But it appears - at least the public view of the engine cutaways - to use traditional nozzles. It would certainly be smart to use this design. It's a heartbreaking fact of life in all engineering that engineers don't stop progress. Others do; lawyers chiefly, then business types, political types, regulatory... omg

[@TriumVee]

1:27 "multiple thrusters are then clustered--" what a rhyme .

[@bigimskiweisenheimer8325]

oh yeah, I love my thrusters clustered.

[@ramosel]

Whether toroidal or linear, is the exhaust held to the central cone/spike solely by directional aiming or does Coanda effect come into play?

[@DaManBearPig]

ramosel ambient air pressure I would imagine. Obviously the exhaust plume dilates with altitude. One of the ingenious aspects of it is it’s organic efficiency at any altitude. I find this to be one of the most interesting aspects of it.

[@craig3.0]

1:02 I'd never trust an engine where someone, while working on a critical part, screwed something in with a screwdriver and thought "Yeah, that seems about hand tight. Let's put this in the rocket."

[@harrisn3693]

Boeing does it all the time. Yhe aerospike is far less complex, thus less goes wrong in the hands of dumb drunk UAW workers that assemble the engines.

[@supasexystick]

Must be nice being naive

[@edcallahan9536]

Does the Everyday Astronaut know about this Aerospike video & footage?!? 🤭. Thanks for putting this out!

[@teyton90]

he and Elon just got me here

[@MTd2]

Could SABRE be used in conjunction with this? The exist side is a rocket part anyway.

[@ronparker5589]

The Sabre engine technology is chiefly a novel - although fairly simple to comprehend - heat exchanger cooling multi-mach compression friction in the inlet for control of air density and velocity (higher mass slower speed - the cooling causes the contraction into which the nozzle spike is regulating a balanced flow - therefore a constant massive high speed feed of very hot air cooled within seconds to a higher density low velocity air mass the turbine can pull in for oxygen). There is no reason the traditional nozzles can't be replaced by an aerospike nozzle as shown in this video. It has to do with the perception of risk in the financial political and professional communities. You have a "new" technology on the front end and the risk people are going to say no to putting a "new" technology on the rear end as well - multiplying your risk, as it were. It's an economy-of-scale judgement (mostly false due to overthinking) and it plagues human thinking. We can only ingest just so much knowledge and angst about not knowing before we blow up our ideas and settle for less.

[@stranger5250]

Where i can buy one? asking for a friend

[@bigimskiweisenheimer8325]

Thank you. You answered everything I needed to know. Now, can it be delivered in a crate to a residential address? Just leave it by my basement door and ring the bell 3 times please.

[@calvinsylveste8474]

I once ate some bad takeaway and spent over 4000 seconds in the bog.

[@Barnekkid]

If it's such a good engine how come it's not in use?

[@2sudonim]

Infrastructure issues. The SSME has a manufacturing base already in place. So it's chapped to build and operate.

[@Nszewczak]

Not mentioned in video, Thrust drop-off at supersonic transition (rocket crossing sound barrier) as unsolved issue with aerospike engines.

[@JohnFly4real]

so if someone solves it, it mean money to the man-or women?

[@ebe7157]

It is. Just because they don't show you the vehicles using them, doesn't mean they're not in use.

[@anthonypeterson5618]

My guess is hydrogen peroxide weight/duration. Not a long range solution.

[@coreyfro]

WHOA!!! Look who it is!

[@spaceman.sam.coniglio]

+Corey McGuire Yup! Howdy! I had a few VHS tapes I kept from my previous life in the aerospace industry. I finally got around to digitizing, editing, and uploading them. The most rare and critical videos are in the Internet Archive. Look up DC-X. I was on that project.

[@anthonytieman2706]

+Samuel “Spaceman Sam” Coniglio Its amazing to see this video during the "spaceplane" race, and to hear her say "only the best will win". Now, in 2016, we are just getting to the testbed of the new engine that could actually pull the entire spaceplane idea off, unfortunately, we are still a very long way off. Thanks for sharing this video. It is awesome to see things that come from "insiders" at the biggest rocket club in the world!

[@anthonytieman2706]

also, were these ever tested at Plumbrook in Milan, Ohio? my uncle did large HVAC (read industrial level) jobs out there, and I use to go to the Vocational Trade School right down the road. I would stop on the way home and take pictures of the dome. Until recently I had thought Plumbrook was an observatory. A few months ago I learned they had the worlds largest vac chamber for spacecraft testing. Crazy to think I could have been taking pics of some pretty cool stuff in that huge building and that dome and had no idea lol!

[@Pooua]

I witnessed the maiden flight of DC-X at White Sands Missile Range. I have a photo with my Nation Space Society chapter posing in front of it.

[@Miata822]

PSI not BAR?

[@voronwae]

Alberto Knox American aerospace engineering still uses PSI, pounds thrust and slugs, i.e., they've never converted to metric. It causes problems when NASA scientists buy hardware and then have to convert everything over. See Mars Climate Orbiter.

[@FredPilcher]

Whatever happened to the aerospike?

[@johnzetterstrom3141]

X-33 happened.

[@scheerBOM]

***** not

[@peronik349]

Fred Pilcher like we said in French "they throw the baby out with the bathwater "

[@thecrazylooser7]

I am from year 2020, no Aerospike nozzle soon but nice investment. SpaceX and Rocket lab uses multiple bell nozzles and redirect the flow to the center, I am not sure if this is imitate an aerospike system?

[@b43xoit]

Isp?

[@NACAM42]

339s at sea level and 436s vacuum according to the rocketdyne wiki

[@progmachine]

Nearly the same as SSME. It's not surprise that politicans prefered traditional and cheeper, bell shaped nozzle engines.

[@sahinyasar9119]

I think they can make ceramic nozzle wall for Aerospike because ceramic can handle the heat of engine

[@peachtrees27]

Thanks for posting this impressive video. I wonder which billionaire will attempt this...

[@justanotherasian4395]

Pete Kuhns Elon dusk

[@bkklaaw]

Nope!

[@MnemonicFarce]

Was this video made by PBS back in 1982?

[@SampleroftheMultiverse]

When will it fly?

[@2sudonim]

It won't. The project or was attached to, the VentureStar, was canceled over issues with its fuel tanks and heat shield. The engines worked fine but the other two key technologies, composite fuel tanks and metallized heat shield never panned out.

[@f2air]

So is the Aerospike similar to a turbo encabulator?

[@wraith01mg]

I wonder if the engine would be more efficient if it used a closed cycle fuel pump, you wouldn't need the large space in the spike. However this design seems to have disappeared, any more news anyone?

[@voronwae]

wraith01mg I don't think so. The open spike creates a low pressure zone for pump exhaust to exit, but it's still contributing to thrust, so you don't gain anything by going to staged combustion.

[@gabrielchanel4448]

Surely you can just make a rocket engine nozzle that can extend and retract a half of the nozzle

[@thom3124]

Then why did we not ever use it?

[@namasayanif]

I think the program that was supposed to use it, and would have flight tested it got cancelled. The engine is never flight tested, and since they're not planning on frequent Single Stage to Orbit flights any time soon they won't spend more money to continue the Aerospike development.

[@426superbee4]

Going down today and buy one

[@i_love_python5862]

why is this being recommended

[@crazyoldhippieguy]

Thanck you,

[@Calypso993]

shame on you nasa for ditching your only chance at getting worthy space launch system

[@garyhelvey8714]

Awsome tech

[@atsants1]

Gosto de ver toda esta tecnologia é uma paixão para mim.

[@Zennyfy]

0:16 set it on fire like everyone can

[@craig3.0]

This promotional piece is hilarious, with the b-roll of workers trying to look busy doing made-up jobs. What'd they tell the guy at 0:17? "Hey, just point this acetylene torch at this rocket booster we had precision made by robots, and then maybe we'll get a take where you whack it with a hammer a few times". Like, this stuff has to be super reliable so it doesn't fail when you put it in space, and also it has to be super precise because... well, it's a rocket engine, and because of that there is no point in the process of building a rocket where someone is doing anything with hand tools.

[@Jeffrey314159]

The Future That Never Happened! Does anyone remember that 1984 movie RUNAWAY by Michael Creighton?

[@pabllo2004]

I do watch it i early 90s great ideas in movie but but fx age bad

[@zippy3711]

Gotta be something wrong with this idea if they have been working on it from the 70s till now

[@theredstonehive]

Nothing wrong. The X-33 Venture Star program was meant to have an Aerospike engine, and one of the only programs to use it. When the program was canceled testing for the aerospike engine stopped aswell. However Arca Space plans on making an SSTO with the engine.

[@taraswertelecki7874]

With all the advantages this engine has to offer, why isn't it being flown now? I imagine a full flow, staged combustion areospike engine would offer even higher performance. Either way, the next manned space shuttle should have this engine, and enough fuel aboard to accomplish in orbit what the Space Shuttle could not.

[@davidernesto6258]

The rocket of this *century *Does not indicate 2000's*

[@Nutt007]

tfw this never got anywhere

[@billtapless54]

i cant get it back

[@HalfDayHero]

V-hickle.

[@stunt_niklas452]

wait a minute rocketdyne exists i thought this is from ksp only

[@razzakksa]

I came here after the Spacex Falcon Heavy launch.

[@DarylCook63]

Cancelled because rocket scientists love their nozzles…Venturi FTW!

[@draigygoch]

This reminds me of an advertisement in ROBOCOP

[@MarsFKA]

I'd buy that for a dollar!

[@markusgarvey]

That is some POWER. Fun fact. [$500 million has been spent in development to date?] We spent $500 million on golf in tRump's first term.

[@andreberetta8565]

They hate it cuz the cost was too low and it was probably too reliable for their standards

[@ДмитрийАлексеев-э8д]

Shauberger forever!

[@BAGINAZARD]

And yet this futuristic engine has yet to go anywhere near space.

[@adamlemus7585]

2:01 do not watch while on shrooms!

[@macanix8072]

All this tech... and all you could do is 240p ?

[@douglasaranda2010]

+Mac Anix It's an old video man

[@sebbes333]

Ok, so why isn't it used today? too many "micro engines" that need to be controlled?

[@alexanderbelov6892]

There are rotating detonation engines in roadmap. Why concentrate on obsolete technologies variations that do not improve Isp and Thrust?

[@rich3371]

Instead of saying 1000 seconds, why not say 16 minutes and 40 seconds?

[@MrJones0207]

+Richie Mann Rocket engines are compared in impulse seconds.Ud actually have to convert it to seconds if they gave it in minutes to compare it to another rocket engine

[@misroybinrahmanmisroybinra5711]

Bumi ni pasangkan enjin jadi boleh la bergerak mana2 nk pergi.. Huhu

[@JFrazer4303]

The "Venturestar" was anything but low cost, simple and robust. Quite the opposite.

[@thisisbeyondajoke6748]

The elites playtoy

[@tango_oscar]

Came here because of 9gag

[@frasera11]

thats a lot of money they spent on something that went nowhere

[@Jeffrey314159]

That's Big Government for you! Or should I call it 'Progress'?

[@wtuanmu]

If they had succeed, there will be no SpaceX.

[@CarlosAM1]

Or... spacex would have adapted, like they always do

[@hbh3144]

It's kind of true. Since they failed there was a big empty gap where SpaceX aggressively stept-in

[@foreveryoung7582]

Too bad it was scrapped

[@th3unn3rv3d3]

What the hell are we doing? This is still advanced by today's standard... from the freakin 70's.

[@happycline]

i suppose we can start more work on ion thrusters.

[@thisisnotajoke]

I didn't even know that Rocketdyne had done aerospike development work back in the 70's? I knew about the XRS-2200 work/tests done during the X33 program, but to find out those engines have been worked on way before that time makes it even more puzzling that nobody is building aerospikes these days?!?!

[@TiSapph]

It is complicated to cool the inner cone of the engine, thats the main problem. Normal bell nozzles work good enough on staged rockets. A single-stage-to-orbit vehicle would be expensive and not necessary. But they look so awesome! :) The first attempts to use aerospikes were back in 1941, when the Germans built the Messerschmitt Me 262. It was used with a jet engine, not a rocket engine, but the concept is the same.

[@puct9]

Meh, i like aerospikes that are in video games, really helpful in my ssto

[@andrewgordon235]

They've been working on it since the late 1960's and they still haven't adopted it? Probably not going to happen then.

[@benlawton5420]

Veeehicle.

[@valeniusthekat]

$500 MILLION? chump change

[@kareszt]

Were do ya put da brain?

[@riven3117]

Full hd :v

[@supercalifeafilististicexp5513]

Is this the planet of the apes what year is this what planet are we on Elon help

[@elultimobuho]

🤔 🙂🇪🇸👏👏👏 👌🎋

[@nikemolan4922]

It's a ufo

[@keeyon81]

The aerospike engine was invented during the time we did not have landing rockets being reused in the excuse for not improving on this is what I think it's just laziness buy the new rocket company is coming up

[@มดแดง-ฃ3ข]

เครื่องยนต์มันน่าสนใจมากมันอาจจะทำให้การดีไซน์ฉีกหนีจากทรงกลมไปตลอดกลายเป็นทรงรี0

[@SingularityAdvent]

This technology is as obsolete as NASA is. NASA is a facade, a front hiding the real deal. Black programs, have better technologies. look Aurora Program , Solar warden etc. Maybe they are conspiracies theories, but i doubt US will give up being the leaders in space technology. Therefore I believe that they let NASA survive with minimum spending, since every other country takes NASA as a benchmark. If NASA doesn't push forward , no one does. This means that US can be relaxed and explore Space at their own pace, without the need to look over the shoulder. One day will come to light and all humanity will be able to use this hidden technologies commercially, so just chillax.

[@stunt_niklas452]

china has a good space program if they keep going like that they maybe overtake nasa in 10 years or so but i highly doubt that after nasa starts launching the sls

[@demondik]

This was a huge waste of tax money! Where is the production model today? Nowhere, that's where.

[@phantomcruizer]

China!

[@OriginalOmgCow]

+Mr. Lowery R&D costs money

[@demondik]

+omgcow Tell me about it! The R&D for the F-35 is running up to about a trillion dollars when all is said and done and for this massive expenditure the US and the unlucky pals of the US who signed contracts ordering the defunct POS vapor-plane MIGHT, that's MIGHT get an operational aircraft! WHOA! Fuckin beautiful!

[@OriginalOmgCow]

+Mr. Lowery Well, without it we'd not have any of the luxuries we have. It makes our projects more efficient in the long run, and thus cost effective. Besides, getting off this planet is worth way more than your pathetic tax money you'd only use on self pleasurable desires, m8.

[@demondik]

+omgcow Do you even know what a trillion dollars actually is? Anyone who thinks the government spending a trillion dollars on a single defense program that has produced unusable results is a moron! Sorry pal, but the F-35 paperweight isn't defending anything. It's a trillion dollar piece of shit!

[@abhijeettube1]

Except it didn't,

[@zevak1]

Who needs cheap engines when you have stupid tax payers

[@Alex40498]

But what a waste. When they were almost successful, the project was stopped.

[@kareszt]

LMFAO, the most beautiful prop you will evar see

[@donaldduck7628]

Better in every way. Then why so long to accept? Is this industry conservatism?

[@someonesomeone1616]

Until they unvail the electro antigravity engine/propulsion , space travel will remain low earth orbit . It will take antigrativic to travel in space safely !

[@greggarmin9426]

Aerowasteofmoney

[@hirokobayashi5037]

Que sistema más obsoleto

[@MrGashden]

Amazing that Americans can come with this kind of High-Tec but cannot pronounce the word 'vehicle'. It is pronounced 'veercal' the 'h' is silent!

[@arttyfightingwitouttafight4471]

If its survives Obama, Hillary and Chelsea.. its certainly worth it..

[@h.plovecraftn-4307]

Two hours later never happen thanks NASA and Lockheed martin

[@zoesdada8923]

Why arent these being used?