Dream Chaser - The Dream Of Lifting Body Space Planes

Dream Chaser isn't the first space plane, it is however on course to be the first operational Lifting Body space plane, intended to perform its first demo launch on a Vulcan rocket and rendezvous with the International Space Station during 2022.
But its been a long time coming, the concept of lifting body space planes goes back to the 1950's, and NASA was test flying demonstrators 60 years ago, starting with the 'Flying Bathtub', build from a steel frame overlaid with plywood, and towed behind a car.
But it would take some cues from the Soviet BOR-4 test vehicle to arrive at a more optimal design, stable across much larger ranges of speed.
Follow me on Twitter for more updates:
/ djsnm
I have a discord server where I regularly turn up:
/ discord
If you really like what I do you can support me directly through Patreon
/ scottmanley

[@tesarus8461]

This Soviet system is quite unique. It used metal for heat shielding and ceramic joints (hinges of special design) in order to isolate cold volume inside of the ship from hot metal shielding.

[@wallissimpson5414]

Smart

[@SierraSpace]

Thank you for sharing the journey of our Dream Chaser spaceplane. We look forward to the launch of Tenacity!

[@Astronomy_Live]

Another test pilot who was slated to fly Dyna-Soar was Albert Crews. He still volunteers as a docent at the Sands Space History Center just outside the gates of CCSFS and I highly recommend taking a tour if you ever happen to be in the area. He was also chosen as an astronaut for the MOL program before it too was cancelled. Really fascinating individual to talk to if you happen to run into him at the museum. Honestly, most of the docents have worked at the Cape in some capacity and all have great stories to tell.

[@mfzb0912]

Hey I follow your channel!

[@maartentoors]

As a long time sub to Scott, I have to reiterate that the quality and editing is always mind-blowing (not even going into the depth of research). Thank you Scott. Fly Safe.

[@nicewhenearnedrudemostlyel489]

glad he finally started levelling the intro and outro with the video audio levels. I can actually enjoy them instead of furiously hitting the dislike button.

[@maartentoors]

@@nicewhenearnedrudemostlyel489 Nice comment, you earned this comment, mostly.. eh?

[@jd3nn1s]

all while having a full time job!!

[@varandor]

I think that his son does the editing now, I'm pretty sure Scott tweeted about it once

[@maartentoors]

@@varandor Thanks for the update, in that case; Kudos to Manley jr.!

[@edwinkania5286]

I remember when those photos were published and thought that is a cool design and when I saw dream chaser I told people the Soviets designed that!!! Thank you for proving my theory now FACT!!!

[@savel6462]

Still the most beautifully named spacecraft out there

[@HarryPalmerOrchestra]

Enterprise? Jk

[@martythemartian99]

My favorite was Snoopy (or possibly Gumdrop) :)

[@odysseusrex5908]

I liked both Kitty Hawk and Antares (Apollo 14)

[@davisdf3064]

Dyna-Soar is really cool though

[@htopherollem649]

@@davisdf3064 Dyna Soars was a character that used to be on Garbagepail Kids stickers (collectable stickers, in baseball card form, that were a spoof of Cabbage Patch Kids)

[@FandersonUfo]

God speed Dream Chaser

[@anekdoche7055]

amen

[@SierraSpace]

❤

[@transformersloverjon]

Godspeed* All one word.

[@FandersonUfo]

@@transformersloverjon - you're lucky I spelled Chaesr correctly

[@jaysmith3495]

I've been really excited about dream chaser ever since their drop test in 2017. I really hope their first flight goes well.

[@chrisspamtest]

ok, but what do wings do in space? you know starwars is fictional

[@jaysmith3495]

@@chrisspamtest this was a pretty rude comment. It’s a lifting body, doesn’t really have wings, just control surfaces. It’s also obviously designed for LEO so the added mass isn’t as significant as something designed for deep space.

[@cadennorris960]

@@chrisspamtestUnbelievably dumb question

[@jamindowney3662]

What I love is that the scifi show 'Farscape' even modeled this and showed it off. got to love when real world concepts end up in scifi

[@mattmanyam]

Almost as cool as sci-fi stuff ending up in the real world...

[@softdorothy]

"Journey to the Far Side of the Sun" was way ahead of Farscape.

[@Kineth1]

It looks just like Kryten's module.

[@williamduffy1227]

@@softdorothy ... and don't forget Ironman 1 from the movie "Marooned".

[@nicewhenearnedrudemostlyel489]

Why have you GOT to love it? Sounds like paid advertisement BS appealing to the uninitiated, to me. I'd prefer my "fi" not be beaten with a reality stick.

[@IanChunck]

I actually got to talk with John Curry about a decade or so ago as an interview for a school project. It was quite the experience and he even gave me the dream chaser pin he had on his suit which I still have to this day.

[@GURken]

Interesting that in 2005 when Mark Sirangelo (CEO of SpaceDev at the time) visited Russia, he made a promise that, when Dream Chaser was finished, he would put the names of the Russian team that worked on BOR program right next to those of the American teams.

[@tbjtbj7930]

Good for him 👍 . Next time somebody says Buran was a shuttle rip-off, I'll mention the MiG 105

[@jlangevin65]

@@tbjtbj7930 Completely different - did you even watch the video? Buran and the shuttle weren't lifting-body aircraft.

[@tbjtbj7930]

@@jlangevin65 Of course I did. I was comparing the Shuttle -> Buran debate to Sirangelo correctly and generously crediting the BOR team for their contribution to the design. I could have talked about pianos instead to make the same point. The shuttle and Buran did generate lift from their fuselage shape.

[@sanchorim8014]

@@tbjtbj7930 There's a debate? Buran is clearly based on Shuttle. I still find it funny that the Soviets decided that the American vehicle was so ridiculous that we wouldn't use it unless we knew something they didn't, and decided to copy that. Talk about overestimating your opponent. But Buran had autonomous flight and 10 person seating, so it had some improvements over Shuttle.

[@aladik2010]

NOT "russia", UKRAINIANS maked all rockets in concentration camp named "ussr"

[@970357ers]

The Space Shuttle remains quite a beautiful design. Especially in plan projection.

[@incargeek]

Yep. The worlds greatest all-electric flying machine.

[@josephc.9520]

@@incargeek Flying might be a stretch considering it had a 4:1 glide ratio

[@incargeek]

@@josephc.9520 4.5 at approach and landing speeds. It flew well.

[@frankmcgowan9457]

Though I always thought it was kinda clunky looking, the fact that it was a *_new design_* made it much more attractive to me.

[@snower13]

The large wings on the space shuttle were needed to give the aircraft large amounts of crossrange. That was needed because the military wanted to do one orbit flights, and return to the launch site. Probably to capture USSR satellites. I feel like Scott did a video on this?

[@scottmanley]

I did

[@snower13]

@@scottmanley indeed! kzbin.info/www/bejne/laKVmmObqphol7s

[@patreekotime4578]

It was so weird watching that video and realizing that the shape of the most iconic spacecraft of my childhood was created because the military wanted to copy the plot point of a James Bond film. 🤣

[@gostkillr]

​@@patreekotime4578with the screenplay by Roald Dahl!

[@trespire]

@@patreekotime4578 Yet still preferable to a capsule. Humans are not thermonuclear devices.

[@GenaTrius]

I really hope Dream Chaser finds lots of success, though really only because of my nostalgia for the shuttle. I grew up on the space coast, and that beautiful black and white bird was plastered on everything. Everyone used to be so proud to even be part of the support structure for the people who made those things fly. I have no control over what systems get used for future spaceflight missions, but I hope they involve lots more tiled lifting bodies.

[@wilboersma9441]

Same! I relate to that so much. The Shuttle gets bashed by so many people so often who can only see the price tag and say that "it's refurbishable, not reusable" which is true, but they just can't appreciate it's affect on people's imaginations and their way of viewing space. Space went from something only highly-trained professional test pilots can do, to something you can literally "hop on a shuttle" nd go to a space station. It will forever be the first true spaceship.

[@keiyakins]

Honestly the biggest problem with the shuttle is the enormous cost and juuust enough refurbishability meant we couldn't really iterate on them.

[@wilboersma9441]

@@keiyakins Yeah, once the shuttle was operational they never got enough funding to make them better, no "Shuttle V2" or an Energya-like launch vehicle. Hopefully Starship can escape the same fate because now private companies are doing the developing in a competitive atmosphere, not a political vacuum (see what I did there).

[@Blaze6108]

Well, while lifting bodies are harder to make than classical rockets, they do have the advantage of being able to land without having to waste 30-40% of their delta-v on retropropulsion. So in the future, when advanced materials and shapes become more practiceable, they might become more commonplace.

[@ronjon7942]

A reply to another comment about using ‘outdated’ tech: ​ That’s a good point. It’s a little sad to hear so many criticize the DC, and fault the Shuttle’s safety record due to it’s design, which just isn’t true. The Challenger o-ring issue and Columbia’s foam issue seem more related to installation and operational problems, poor assumptions…you obviously know the story. But to criticize the Dream Chaser for using tiles and ‘old’ manufacturing techniques that are based on prior NASA and Shuttle evolution and experience is just ignorant of safety and reliability first, over cutting edge and using technology that, while great and seems to be working well, just doesn’t have the maturity of all the DC is using. OK, I’m off my high horse. Actually, I’m a SpaceX fanboy and think they’ve done and are doing phenomenal work; same w RocketLab, Firefly, now Relativity, Orbital, even Astra - hopefully they can get back on track. But no one at NASA is going to risk their careers (and manslaughter charges) by ditching Sierra and going w some 3d printed designs, endangering lives w the latest. Really, I’m surprised NASA went with Dragon so quickly - turned out to be a good call in the end, but whew.

[@kylereichenbach4475]

I remember being a middleschool student in 2013 when a representative from Sierra visited our science class and showed off their spacecraft. I had no idea anyone was planning anything similar to the shuttle and was told it would do the same duties as the shuttle but at a cheaper cost. Last summer I found myself driving near one of their facilities here in Colorado and I'm excited to see them bring that bird to life.

[@sanchorim8014]

That same year, I was also in middle school and visited KSC, where an infograph was displayed in the visitors center.

[@taraswertelecki3786]

Hopefully, they can get Dreamchaser, or a successor to the point where if the need arises, one can be aloft within hours to rescue a crew in trouble aboard ISS or some other space station. The threat to the lives of astronauts from equipment failures or collisions with space junk are very real, and the more people are in space for longer periods of time, the sooner one of more people will die up there without a rescue vehicle on the way to save them.

[@rocketsocks]

I think one of the major benefits of having a space station is being able to run this development cycle for pressurized spacecraft of doing a cargo vehicle of a new design first then doing a crewed vehicle. It's definitely been advantageous for SpaceX's dragon, you can see the design and operational maturity in the crew dragon from the lessons of running the cargo program, and, perhaps, the lack of that maturity in Starliner.

[@tbjtbj7930]

Glad to see the shout out for test pilot Steve Austin. Eventually he got hardware upgrades and became Scott Manley.

[@TheDisgruntledImperial]

Really excited about Dream Chaser's potential, especially as a "lifeboat" of sorts. Have a few of these on a space station, ready to detach and speed an astronaut or sensitive experiment down to ground level *much* faster than a capsule could. Think emergency surgery like an appendectomy or something. It'll be a perfect supplement to Starship.

[@ghost307]

You should check out the movie 'Marooned'.

[@arctic_haze]

@@ghost307 Oh, yeah. I remember it quite fondly. I do not want to spoil it but its launch was the highlight of the movie.

[@robertmiller9735]

@@arctic_haze Bet lots of people were reminded of that last fall.

[@xomm]

Do they get back to earth from orbit faster or is it mainly less time spent on sea recovery?

[@arctic_haze]

@@xomm I wondered the same. I think that the descent is actually a little longer in a space plane (this is why it does not get so hot) but you save a lot of time by not being hauled up from the water and then transferred by helicopter.

[@whidzee]

The origins of the lifting body concept dates back further than that. Look at Burnelli's designs. He created planes that had fuselages shaped like aerofoils which had amazing performance properties. the last one around exists in the New England Air Museum, called the Burnelli CBY3 - Loadmaster

[@gabrielbennett5162]

Looking forward to seeing a lifting body finally make it to orbit! My grandfather, Vic Horton, was the project leader on NASA's original plywood M2-F1 "flying bathtub" way back in 1963. He was selected for the job by Dale Reed and FRC director Paul Bikle. Later, he was a project engineer on the rocket powered heavyweight lifting bodies that followed and flew as Launch Panel Operator on the B-52 mothership, including when Bruce Peterson had his famous crash in the M2-F2 on May 10, 1967, which was later shown in the opening sequence of "The Six Million Dollar Man."

[@jamesowens7176]

Very cool story! Thanks for sharing!

[@tomersde]

You forgot to mention the X-38, the closest we got to an operational lifting body craft until now. The prototype was over 90% complete with a reservation on a Shuttle to bring it up to the ISS. It was suppose to be a lifeboat first, but anyone with eyes could see that it was a viable crew transport. With Ariane 5 already man-rated and Atlas 5 coming online in a few short years you'd think that there's no way it wouldn't become operational, but in pre-Columbia days anything that was risk to Shuttle's supply chain ended up going nowhere and so did the X-38

[@Nowhereman10]

No, that last part simply wasn't true at all. The reason it was cancelled was to save money on the ISS program which was suffering from cost overruns. Those cuts also extended to the cancelling of actual full modules for the UOS that were also far along in construction, namely the Habitation and the Centrifuge modules. The second of the two Boeing-built node modules was left grounded in favor of a barter agreement with ESA to have them build additional nodes in exchange for a Shuttle launch of the Columbus module and other hardware.

[@antigravityworkshop1436]

Thanks for mentioning that. The SAC Museum west of Omaha has one of the X-38 test articles. I was explaining to my tour companion the whole life boat for ISS story at a Space Station model. We rounded a corner and - there she was. The X-38! It would have been really cool but the traditional aerospace industry (Boeing, Lockheed, etc.) just can't keep a program on time or on budget. It's a shame. Could have been a great vehicle.

[@Nowhereman10]

@@antigravityworkshop1436 The X-38 orbital vehicle that was nearly complete at the time of cancellation was not being built by LockMart or Boeing, it was being built in-house at Johnson Space Center. Scaled Composites built the shells and some of the hardware for the atmospheric test craft. In the end, X-38 was blanket cancelled along with the Hab, Centrifuge modules, and grounding the Boeing-built Node-2, etc to cover cost overruns in the program.

[@ronjon7942]

Plus, the Dream Chaser is much better looking.

[@catbertz]

Thanks for this deep dive into the early Soviet designs. I just love the look of space planes and I like Dream Chaser even more than the shuttle, which I was a huge fan of. Can't wait to see her in action.

[@allenvaughan1]

Excellent presentation, Scott! Having stood next to those lifting bodies as a kid, I have always found the concept fascinating. Thanks again!

[@temper44]

It's always interesting to see how many Soviet designs inspired NASA and vice versa.

[@taskforce58]

The Six Million Dollar Man opening sequence actually showed both the HL-10 (the initial drop from the B-52 mothership) and the M2-F2 (the crash).

[@mosquitobight]

"We have separation..."

[@TheBlahblahblahhh]

Scott your content is absolutely enthralling. I swear every time I watch your videos I get most of the way through and I think to myself, "WTF where did my last 10-20 mins go?" It's like being a little kid again. Thanks so much for making it.

[@mattmcc72]

I can't believe you left out the Farscape! :D 6M$M just got a crash, Farscape got 4 seasons and a movie!

[@m.streicher8286]

Even if the chaser had no advantages over the dragon capsule (it does) The experience and R&D is invaluable.

[@jamesowens7176]

Not to mention dissimilar redundancy, which is very important.

[@Wordsmiths]

@@jamesowens7176 Y E S .

[@ronjon7942]

@@jamesowens7176 THAT is an excellent point. Well put.

[@beijingbond]

There is a book 'The X-Planes:X-1 to X-45' (Jay Miller, Midland Publishing) which has a lot of info about lifting bodies.

[@saundby]

Flying without Wings by Milt Thomson is even better, for lifting body information.

[@dvv18]

"lapot" is in fact a basket-like, woven bast shoe (see, of course, Wikipedia for more details). Fun fact: runway aiming point markings are often called "lapti" (plural of "lapot") in the Russian pilot lingo.

[@PotatoShack]

Thanks for covering this! I have been waiting for someone to show more information on Dream Chaser! It's a fantastic little spacecraft.

[@Gogreenoo3]

Excellent video Scott! Great compilation of clips and history. You got so much more correct about the Dream Chaser and it's history than any other reporting or commenting I've seen over the years.

[@rileyk99]

This is my favorite non-Artmeis project that's going on right now. Years ago I got to see some of the early tooling being constructed and I've been watching it ever since.

[@washussan]

I saw that crash many, many times as a kid. I loved that show!

[@druspork7737]

Awesome work. Really fascinating take. Anticipating the flight of this lifting body with enthusiasm.

[@michaelmurray2595]

Thanks, Scott: your videos are just great!

[@paulhaynes8045]

Excellent video. I've been wondering about the Dream Chaser and it's predecessors for years - seemed like a really good idea, but never seemed to happen. Now, at last, here it is! I know all the arguments about capsules vs planes, the history and mistakes of the Shuttle, etc. etc, but plane-shaped space craft landing on normal runways just seems so much more obvious - and modern! We badly need some more sci-fi to come true!

[@olsonspeed]

Dream Chaser is GO! I have always been an advocate of gliding reentry over ballistic, very good to see the progress being made at Sierra Space.

[@robertmcgowan3352]

Excellent presentation . Keep them coming. Thanks mate!

[@ellieinspace]

🎉 great information, Scott!!! Thanks for making a video about Dream Chaser!

[@wilboersma9441]

Dream Chaser/Shooting Star is honestly one of my favorite spacecraft EVER! It's so cool, and especially because we are (hopefully!) going to get to see it fly this year!

[@SierraSpace]

Thank you for your support, Wil! We are excited for what the future holds.

[@stanstocker8858]

I remember reading John McPhee's Deltoid Pumpkin Seed as a young teen. That book, along with the Scientific American Book Of Projects for Amateur Scientists and Brinley's Rocket Manual for Amateurs made me realize there was a wonderful world of science "stuff" that normal people could actually have a part in. As always, thanks for all the great videos!

[@yes_head]

Thanks, Scott. I'm very excited about Dream Chaser and hope it is a smashing success!

[@kenjackson5685]

Fantastic !!! Thanks for sharing Scott

[@RyzawaVT]

Calling this a fascinating history would be an understatement. Hoping it's a huge success!

[@cripplemadewhole]

It's really cool to see the laws of physics and prior designs forcing converging evolution of these different models!

[@jacobhunter6891]

Apparently I'm not the only Jacob H that likes spaceplanes

[@wattsmichaele]

Scott….as long time subscriber this is one of the best videos you have done with content, photos, videos. Excellent!!!

[@SirCharles12357]

Your videos are never a waste of my time! I always learn something fascinating.

[@Mafuskas]

Awesome video, Scott, thank you! I love the lifting body style concept. I was surprised to see no mention of the X-38 prototype crew return vehicle, though perhaps it had less connection to the Dream Chaser than I thought, and that's why it didn't make it in.

[@incargeek]

I saw the X-38 ACRV prototype at JSC in July 2002. I was waiting for it to make an appearance in the video too. After all, it did make atmospheric test flights.

[@BrandonSchuster]

You brought back some memories from when I was an early teenager and did my first deep dive into the space program. Really was fascinated by it all. Was probably about 1987…

[@MCsCreations]

Fascinating history! Thanks, Scott! 😊 Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

[@lostpony4885]

Great stuff as always Scott!

[@Zaphael]

I remember reading about the Dyna-Soar program when I was a kid and seeing all of these concepts and test planes back then and thinking that it was going to become Space Shuttle 2.0. I would love to see the Dream Chaser succeed and become part of the fleet. I've really liked the X-37B but since everything it does is classified, kinda takes the wind out of trying to keep up with it.

[@GiulioVonKerman]

This is amazing. Can't wait to see this fly. It's amazing, an engineering masterpiece

[@P51]

that's some AWESOME archival video, Scott

[@diraziz396]

Fascinating. Amazing to see a real live shot of the Family. Glad you got it for Us.

[@Nowhereman10]

Ah, you skipped one of the other important lifting body developments, the X-38 which was to have been the U.S. contribution to the Assured Crew Return capability, in addition to Russia and Roscosmos' Soyuz. It was cancelled in the early 2000s just as first spaceflight capable vehicle was nearing completion in order to save money, and despite a good number of test flights with subsonic flight articles showing the vehicle not only could fly, but it had a rather unique parafoil system that would allow for very gentle and slow touchdowns without the need for large amounts of runway. Unfortunate that happened since the X-38 ARCV was capable of carrying the entire 7 person crew back and it was being built so that it could stay on orbit for years, thus reducing the need for a launch every 6 months as is the case for the current crew vehicles.

[@thomasackerman5399]

Yeah, X-38 ARCV's loss is now coming back to bite NASA and Roscosmos with this latest little incident involving the MS-22 Soyuz, especially with the first flight vehicle about 93% complete!

[@Wordsmiths]

@@thomasackerman5399 Sad and true. They sowed a minimal crew-return policy, and they reaped a crew-return crisis. Again. It's a testament to how well the operational side has been handled that they haven't had more frequent and more serious crew-return crises over the years, honestly. If we're going to make any progress in cislunar space development (involving human crews), we have got to have more options, more "dissimilar redundancy" in crew launch and crew return vehicles. Here's hoping that an X-37B crewed variant (or a resurrected X-38?) will follow the Dream Chaser to offer yet another option with yet another set of capabilities distinct from the other options. (...but first let's get Dream Chaser operational!)

[@tinman3586]

This is a very cool design and I like how it's a different type of spacecraft compared to the capsules manufacturered by Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, and SpaceX. Looks very cool and hopefully they'll do a manned version.

[@CS_247]

Fascinating!! Thank you!!

[@saxoman1]

The outro music has no business bumping that hard! Thanks for the space update as always!

[@StevePemberton2]

9:13 This somewhat vindicates Buran and Tu-144 which were always accused of being just copies of the Shuttle and Concorde. The shapes were clearly copied to a large extent, in spite of denials by Russia. But the similarity was only skin deep which not everyone realizes. I'm sure other than the shape, Dream Chaser has little in common with the MiG-105. Although one feature that would be good to copy from the MiG-105 is the jettisonable crew capsule that would have brought the crew down by parachute in case of an abort.

[@darrenorange2982]

Flying Bathtubs and their legacy!

[@richb313]

Thanks for all the information Scott.

[@sleepyheadfpv1507]

Hydrogen Peroxide as the fuel? I at first thought it was a error but it was said twice. That's insane!! Love ya Scott

[@scottmanley]

Soyuz uses hydrogen peroxide on the descent module because it’s less toxic

[@IngieKerr]

@@scottmanley ... with the side effect that the crew have to live in Пермь for several months after landing.

[@ghost307]

@@scottmanley And the Cosmonauts can gargle with it while waiting for the helicopter to come and pick them up.

[@benjaminhanke79]

@@scottmanley That's what I thought when you mentioned they want to land on an conventional airfield. You don't want to mess around with Hydrazine there. Just watch the leak checks they did after a shuttle landing.

[@StevePemberton2]

I remember on their website they used to say that they used non-toxic propellants and that the spacecraft could be accessed immediately on landing. They updated their Dream Chaser page last year which has fewer details listed and that's one that got dropped. I looked at older versions of their website on the Wayback Machine and it was listed through May 2022, here is the exact wording: IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO CREW OR CARGO UPON LANDING Since Dream Chaser uses all non-toxic consumables, including propellants, there are no environmental or safety hazards that require unique ground support infrastructure. As a result, it has the potential to land anywhere that has a suitable 10,000 ft runway capable of handling a typical large passenger airplane. Almost immediately after landing, the Dream Chaser spaceplane offers access to cargo and crew.

[@AneriGS]

i love the look of it

[@Capt.Turner]

Kind of a renaissance to all these concepts I've seen in all my books as child and never understood, why they were abandoned back in the day. So I'm really looking forward to see Dreamchaser take to space an back fulfilling one of my childhood dreams. This should be exciting.

[@mufflerdad5048]

Great video as usual, Scott.

[@preferredimage]

Had my eye on the Farscape project since the nineties.... Keen to see its maiden voyage...

[@tonym480]

Watch out for those Wormholes ! , 'I'm just trying to get home!' 😄

[@afrobuddha]

I keep thinking of John Crichton's shuttle in Farscape

[@mik3r0wave]

Hey Scott, that was an awesome deep dive into lifting bodies!

[@ryanhamstra49]

Oh man, the clips at 5:35 bring back memories! I had that VHS growing up and wore it out…. Great stuff!!

[@sadham2668]

Do you remember what is was called?

[@ryanhamstra49]

“Space shuttle in the beginning” It’s part of a 5 cassette set, which I have recorded and plan to upload, just haven’t got to it yet. Just need to take an evening to upload them.

[@Columbiastargazer]

ESA had HERMES as a concept too

[@HighlandPhoenix]

I can't believe @Scott Manley didn't mention Farscape near the end of the video... 😢

[@regulatormachine2788]

Always the best content

[@VictoraAnderson2001]

Fantastic video. Full of facts, interesting stories and we got to see the flying bathtub!

[@user-if1tz7uj5f]

Thank you Scott. There was another Russian project Kliper, unfortunately because luck of financing project was closed. And funny story about Russian Lapot. For the first fly russians scattered watermelons on runway, otherwise Lapot did not move.

[@Wordsmiths]

Watermelons?! I think something got lost in translation! More explanation please!

[@MoonWeasel23]

Hadn’t heard about the new crewed concept from them. I had always assumed they would just make a crewed version and a cargo version of the same vehicle, but it’s interesting to see that they actually have two versions. I wonder how much in common the two designs have?

[@bbeen40]

It was originally designed to be manned for the commercial crew competition. They lost out to Boeing and SpaceX so they continued as a unmanned platform and won a NASA contract for unmanned commercial resupply.

[@jamesowens7176]

@@bbeen40 Right, but what Aubrey was getting at is that the crew design is no longer just the same as the cargo design. They've actually evolved it for some reason.

[@ronjon7942]

@@jamesowens7176 There’s actually three versions planned. There’s a nice slide comparing all three, when I find it, I’l post. SpaceBucket has a LOT of SNC DC presentations and updates and is where I first saw it.

[@carsonpower5948]

scott i love your content keep it up

[@glennscott8622]

Excellent presentation, Scott 👏

[@GilWanderley]

If the HL-20 could be repurposed, I really hope someone recovers the parts of the VentureStar

[@Wordsmiths]

Oh, the VentureStar... we were so close to triumph... a whole set of painful memories. (Scott actually has a great video about it)

[@ronjon7942]

Yes, the VS should be flying today. Even when Congress tries to reduce spending, they still manage to bork things up - with a lot of helpful advice from NASA Admin Bekey. Bekey stunned NASA and the Skunk Works with his words, and were completely demoralized when all the new tech was either buried in crates or destroyed. LockMart was so close to having the major issues worked out; 5 years, $1.5billion…gone. We all lost not having the X-33 and them the Venture Star, but my heart breaks for the technicians and engineers who worked their hearts out but had the rug pulled out from under them.

[@DeadBaron]

I remember learning about Dreamchaser years ago and thought it was a dead project, I'm glad to see it's still around

[@odysseusrex5908]

Sierra had bid Dream Chaser for the Commercial crew contract. They were a finalist but lost out to SpaceX and Boeing. Boy, I bet somebody at NASA wishes they had picked Dream Chaser over Starliner. Anyway, after that, on their own dime, they modified the design to an unmanned one and bid on the resupply contract which they won a piece of. They are still, on their own dime, developing a new manned variant. Sierra doesn't let anything hold them back.

[@I_am_ARTBOT]

Great episode! Always loved those old lifting body aircraft.

[@dansorkin6985]

An excellent, clear, and fascinating look at the history of lifting body space planes and the genesis of the Dream Chaser. Thanks, Scott.

[@sylak2112]

Remid me of the European Space shuttle that never come true. I thought it was cool at the time.

[@ruairidhmunro]

Dreamchaser is such a cool looking concept. It's a shame that they were not awarded a contract as part of CRS/CCT and NASA (read Congress) decided to subsidise Beoing Starliner. I've a feeling Dreamchaser would have flown long ago had it not been for politics.

[@tomamberg5361]

Back when the contracts were awarded, Boeing was not the mess it's been the past few years. (We all hope they're crawling out of their woes, for the good of the country, at least...)

[@JMOUC265]

Thanks for posting and for sharing your knowledge.

[@modrarybivrana5654]

great work. always look forward to learning something new.

[@leonbarnes1402]

im 100% for dreamchaser, it does need to get a crew rating though. way better than dropping people back to earth in a tin can with parachutes. though it does remind me of farscape 1 from farscape, but its clear where their inspiration came from. id rather see it launch on a falcon though

[@ghost307]

I always thought that Farscape 1 was inspired by the rescue craft in the movie 'Marooned'.

[@lordgarion514]

And how many people have died in tin cans with parachutes, compared to the space shuttle?

[@TheEvilmooseofdoom]

@@lordgarion514 I think it's 1:1 in terms of mission lost. Different on body count but that's because nothing else carried as many bodies as the shuttle.

[@HellToupee1]

@@TheEvilmooseofdoom difference is those tin can failures happened in the first generation craft when lessons were still being learnt while both failure modes of the shuttle were unlikely to happen to a capsule while capsules have proven to survive aborting booster failures on the pad and inflight.

[@ronjon7942]

I’m guessing it’d eventually ride on the F9, but Sierra, ULA, and NASA have been working on this together for a long time: prolly since Sierra’s inception in 2004 with NASA, and maybe as early as 2006 when ULA was founded. Looking at the executives, it seems to me several people likely knew each for even longer. Since the Vulcan already has 70 Vulcan missions sold, including 7 for Tenacity, Vulcan’s prolly going to be first choice for Sierra for some time, especially as it obtains it’s human rating. My prediction is the Ariane 6 will be certified for the Dream Chaser next, well before Falcon9, so the ESA can contribute it’s resources to replenishing and remanning the ISS.

[@zandvoort8616]

Won’t it have the same heat resistant tile problems?

[@Kevin_Street]

What a fascinating history. Thank you for this video!

[@smnash82]

I got interested in lifting body aircraft after watching Interstellar and falling instantly in love with the Ranger craft. Can't wait to see Dream Chaser fly and hopefully get greenlit for manned missions. Great video!

[@agungprasetyo2665]

Conclusion.. thanks Russia

[@ponymurderer534]

Soviet Union

[@WozWozEre]

Finally a new employment opportunity for all those unemployed space shuttle door gunners.

[@bryant3825]

I love Dreamchaser and Sierra Space is a fantastic company. I wish them the best of luck with their missions and success. And the best part of it all there is more diversity in vehicles to use for space. While Space X's Crew Dragon is cool. I think Spaceplanes overall have a very cool factor to them that as Scott pointed out makes it more efficient of getting the payload out compared to Capsules. (I love both Spacecraft types). I know the dreamchaser is going to land in Kennedy Space Center and among those is Huntsville AL. Also I am an Embry-Riddle Student this makes me happy, as I am heading to my goals of entering NASA, Space Force, FAA and more. Can't wait to graduate and be there already. But thanks Scott I know I am a bit late for the comments as I am a student was busy for a while but your content is always top notch.

[@Roxas99Yami]

Great video your history analysis is very informative

[@jaspersiegmund]

It's interesting how this concept comes across as very innovative and modern where in fact it's an idea which is older than most things flying today. Makes you wonder what other things from the past are worth revisiting.

[@helplmchoking]

I'm not one for ego contests in space, partly 'cause I'm not from any country with a space programme, but you have to love that render of this sleek, high tech, ultra-futuristic spacecraft berthing to the ISS next to the ancient, Soviet Soyuz capsule. Just a little satisfying

[@NuWatts]

Love your history lessons!

[@Desbo]

Wow, incredible information incredible video!

[@PedroRafael]

These are good news. Fingers crossed it makes in maiden voyage this year, that would be cool. Thank you for the details and bits of history!