ReNova SSTO Rocket Concept Developed by Martin

The rocket engines are arranged in a ring around the major diameter of a SSTO.
The hydrogen tanks form what is , in effect, a a large plug, with a toroidal oxygen tank mounted forward.. The rockets are enclosed in an air duct equipped with adjustable inlets. A jettisonable shroud extends the mixing area down stream of the rockets. The conical payload fairing serves as an inlet spike during accent through the atmosphere. The air enter through the inlet, mixes with the rocket exhaust, is heated and expands past the plug-shaped aft body, thus contributing additional thrust. The mixing shroud is jettisoned and the inlets are closed after leaving the atmosphere

[@mpetersen6]

Kind of reminds me of Boeing's Big Onion and Chrysler's SSTO proposal. One thing about the large diameter vehicles is the mass ratio between tank structure and volume should become more favorable the bigger you get.

[@davisdf3064]

Yes, the square cube law, wich is why it's hard to see very small rockets

[@ptonpc]

Imagine a world where all of these designs were built and flown.

[@ziggystardust4627]

That's what this channel's all about!

[@jmi5969]

Yes. Project Orion with tetraborane boosters. Nice.

[@serpentphoenix]

It would be as fictional as the goverments who got their act together to build and launch them.

[@zfear6959]

@@serpentphoenix and thi, friends, is why we can't have nice things.

[@hubbsllc]

Sure. Basically one without our extraordinarily top-heavy wealth distribution and forever wars.

[@ScienceRules118]

57 seconds since upload. I find it a little odd how all of these 60s/70s SSTO concepts wind up having similar shapes.

[@ptonpc]

It makes sense, given the knowledge of physics and the state of computer and analogue modelling, there are only so many shapes that work.

[@zfear6959]

​@@ptonpccame here to say this. Paraphrased, play by physics's rules, the playing pieces tend to group onto sets that achieve the respective goals of the game. 🤷

[@davisdf3064]

Probably due to square cube law and the idea of reusability

[@MrMichkov]

You can argue with physics and there is precious little in terms of simulation capability back in the day. If all you got is a slide rule and a t square that is what you end up with. Even the modern ones aren't all that different from a cone.

[@trout1187]

Now you know USA steels & copycats atheres Ideas

[@jmwoods190]

SOCTO- Single Oreo Cupcake To Orbit

[@Relativumspace]

There are so many SSTO concepts... but no one flown at this day.

[@Wayoutthere]

Very poor stability and drag among other things.

[@davisdf3064]

SSTOs are (mostly) not worth the cost. They have horrible payload mass to rocket mass ratio, and unless made to be reusable, they are too expensive for a s job that a 2 stage vehicle can easily do. An SSTO using more unconventional engines could work however. Something like a nuclear thermal engine would give it enough ISP, or something extreme like NSWR would make it the perfect Single Stage to Anywhere vehicle (if you forget about your ground being filled with nuclear waste)

[@PaulZyCZ]

@@davisdf3064 There's the laser option. About a decade ago there was a proposal to use laser to heat the fuel while launching the rocket or sending the spaceship to other celestial body. With the latter there's a caveat gigantic lasers in space have bad reputation, but if on ground? If I remember the proposal correctly, the rocket would need 1/10 of the fuel for the launch. Laser beam would replace the oxidizer. Rocket or space plane.

[@letsburn00]

​@@PaulZyCZ The laser launch was an interesting idea, the problem was that for 3 minutes, it needs absolute gigawatts of power. So either you co-ordinate your power demand with dozens of private companies, or you end up building your own nuclear plants. Either of which isn't realistic

[@TheWebstaff]

If it a bird? Is it a plane? No it's a teepee attached to an aerospike!!

[@weedmanwestvancouverbc9266]

I like how it blows off part of the fairing halfway up to convert the aerospike engine to vacuum performance

[@mpetersen6]

Now do a video of the nuclear engined Liberty Ship SSTO

[@DragonSFS]

This sorta looks like a giant ramjet

[@1959Edsel]

It would have functioned somewhat like one as well. Look up air-augmented rocket for more info.

[@terencewong-lane4309]

*Spectacular*

[@skrape99]

Now I have to look into this design to find out what the specific impulse was. The Meteor air to air missile uses an air-augmented rocket like the.

[@jamesbatchelor3834]

It had about double the ISP of its contemporaries, because it was an air-augmented design. The problem was that building and carrying the shroud to drive extra airflow into the exhaust added so much mass that the ISP advantage was negated.

[@centaur1a]

Well, the launch was small. No launch tower (how are the crew or personal get to the ship? Wasn’t the design have the ship land on land with four retractable landing pads? If it did at sea. How was it recovered?

[@steveengleman9257]

I don't know what software you're using, but your graphics are awesome!!

[@therichieboy]

Superb work as always. I think there may be some scaling issues with the earth at the initial orbit scenes.

[@user-yk7yv8rb5i]

I love these videos they are well done great ❤

[@PaulZyCZ]

Again great animation! Recommendation for a future video: About a decade ago there was a proposal to use ground-based laser instead of the oxidizer. So 1/10 of the fuel required and in theory it could serve for both starts and to heat a spaceship traveling between Earth orbit and Luna or even Mars. I'm not sure if there was a full concept or just a study, but something you could take a look at, Hazegrayart. :)

[@nealsofge9305]

Look for "Apollo Lightcraft" -- it's actually 40 years old.

[@pseudotasuki]

The nozzle ring it drops seems counterproductive. An aerospike shouldn't have flow separation issues.

[@stratometal]

Not an aerospike. The description says how it works.

[@pseudotasuki]

@@stratometal It describes a toroidal aerospike (engines clustered around a central ramp) but it also answered my question. The engine is air-augmented, which is basically the rocket equivalent of a turbofan. Once the air thins out, the bypass duct becomes dead weight and they drop it.

[@goatofpower]

I was more worried how they could possibly have cooled that ring while exposed to full rocket plume!

[@pseudotasuki]

@@goatofpower There's a layer of relatively cold air between the engine exhaust and ring.

[@jim2lane]

If we see parts being jettisoned and staging taking place, the it's not truly SSTO

[@hlumasays]

If it contained an engine your comment would be true.

[@NelsonGoncalves-sh8lq]

Magnífico

[@deutandev1728]

Who's Martin? Anyway nice try, Martin

[@DragonSFS]

I guess Martin Marietta, which later merged with Lockheed to become well... Lockheed Martin

[@FastSloth87]

@@DragonSFSMartin and American-Marietta were separate companies, they merged in 1961. (1940) American Asphalt Paint Company + Marietta Paint and Color Company = American-Marietta Corporation (1961) American-Marietta Corporation + Glenn L. Martin Company = Martin Marietta Corporation (1995) Martin Marietta Corporation + Lockheed Corporation = Lockheed Martin Corporation

[@longtsun8286]

Well done.

[@nickdinnen4667]

What sort of payload did they have in mind? I guess fairing width becomes less of a concern with a vehicle this wide!

[@jamesbatchelor3834]

ReNova could carry about 450 tonnes, in the same class as ROMBUS.

[@joansparky4439]

splendid

[@redlogicsquare]

Tagine rocket gets hot FAST!

[@pontuswendt2486]

AMAZINGNES!!!

[@atptourfan]

Soooo... where is the propellant stored? Is there any useful payload to orbit??

[@FastSloth87]

The propellants are stored in the aerospike cone, bottom hydrogen and a ring tank for LOX. LEO Payload: 423,000 kg (932,000 lb) to a 185 km orbit.

[@mariocos7252]

Come è bello, la fantascienza, oggi con questa grafica!

[@gerstmanndavid]

Seems like it would have to overcome an enormous amount of atmospheric drag.

[@FatovMikhail]

i think it shouldn't sink so deep into the water, that's the whole point of the shape to keep engines dry. it's mostly just an empty barrel

[@user-oj6mr7dj7w]

🔥🔥🔥👏

[@ahmetizmir1081]

interesting and doable

[@tomg3903]

It's using the Rocketdyne Aerospike design.

[@stratometal]

Maybe explain how it works in the video itself instead of only in the description. Several people think its an aerospike.

[@m.lifestylesreality3397]

Are those videos made using ksp ?

[@inspectormills3290]

Looks like it has a circular speed brake deployed

[@datathunderstorm]

I saw that too - wouldn’t that interfere with the climb to escape velocity? 😮

[@orion14operative]

So only one stage needed to get in to orbit?

[@barbotal]

Пепелац же. И музыка подходящая 😂

[@Kalaerospace]

Is it really an ssto if shroud is ejected ?

[@wascargerardohernandezemil4455]

Aerodynamics is on sabbatical honey

[@stevensonDonnie]

It doesn’t need fuel talks because it runs on space air!

[@-Ripcord-]

What program is this?

[@farid47an]

The only and optimal solution at the present time to deliver vehicles to space is a solution Space X

[@idranardone4500]

Aldebaran spacecraft next

[@hubbsllc]

So this is basically launching a whole damn Disney World ride into orbit.

[@PiDsPagePrototypes]

Seeing the touch-down and thinking, how would the proposed F9 landings near the Bahamas resorts look?

[@markalee1]

Pretty hard to generate that much thrust without fuel tanks.

[@Estes705]

The fuel tank is inside the inverted cone on the underside.

[@4DCResinSmoker]

Those parachutes would of been huge !

[@OrdinaryLatvian]

Would have. Would've.

[@brettteeter3461]

@@OrdinaryLatvianthank you

[@OrdinaryLatvian]

@@brettteeter3461 It bothers me to no end how illiterate some people are.

[@brettteeter3461]

@@OrdinaryLatvian A coworker emails “would of” to me all the time. Like nails on a chalkboard. And “your welcome”…. Don’t even get me started.

[@simongeard4824]

That was my reaction too. It's hard to get a sense of scale on this, but if modern capsules like Dragon and Starliner require four chutes (with some redundancy), an SSTO (generally pretty big) with only two chutes seems unlikely. Yes, you can make bigger chutes than Dragon uses... but that doesn't scale trivially...

[@lunargamez725]

why does bro have balloon in middle?

[@Ekkletos]

So Starship is also SSTO?

[@simongeard4824]

No? If you're questioning the fact that the video shows it staging, then consider the difference between "single stage to orbit" and "single stage". SSTO doesn't mean you can't deploy a payload once you get there...

[@LDTV22OfficialChannel]

OMG YES HAZEGREY LISTENED TO ME

[@ThomasHaberkorn]

Where's the propellant hiding?

[@SMunro]

SSTO is single stage to orbit. That ejected sections. So not SSTO.

[@kamipollna225]

Cone with a rocket engine bolted to it

[@jamesschenk]

Too much drag wouldnt fly right

[@Robert_Douglass]

Attach three of these to the back of a large wedge-shaped ship with q huge trapezoidal conning tower atop the stern, with eight big railguns, four port and four starboard, you know what you got, don't you?

[@datathunderstorm]

An Imperial Star Destroyer of course 😅

[@Robert_Douglass]

@@datathunderstorm An *American* Star Destroyer. Understand that.

[@trojanthedog]

The Germans had interesting plans for a large 2 stage version of the v2 with a pilot. Great to see that brought to life.

[@cbuchner1]

The flying cupcake

[@FathiAlJishi]

is this real

[@igormuslakov5581]

Летающая конфорка😂😂😂!

[@emmanuelgarcia2870]

😲

[@testpilotmafia862]

Burns butterfly 🦋 farts.

[@captjack2112]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 humorous. But Cheers to any attempts

[@jocax188723]

Huh. Aerospike cupcake. Sure, why not?

[@yasnac7576]

Ok..... Where is all that fuel coming from??? 🤔

[@Indi_DevJames]

Do yall not know what SSTO means.... Single Stage To Orbit....that was atleast 2 if not 3....

[@Chris.Davies]

We have spent many decades and many billions of dollars studying SSTOs and so we know a lot about them. And what we know is that they are no damned good.

[@user-wp6qm3ec4i]

Авторы считают, что толстый и короткий лучше чем тонкий, но длинный. Спорное утверждение.

[@jameswilson5165]

Ridiculous. What kind of miracle fuel was this using?

[@44R0Ndin]

Liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen.

[@aaronsmith8073]

Super duper high octane oxyborane fuel! I'm kidding

[@LamgiMari]

I'm counting approx. 60 main engines. No way that would have worked as planned.

[@jamesbatchelor3834]

It's an annular aerospike. It's the same design that Stoke Space is using, and that's perfectly sound as a design.

[@davisdf3064]

Many engines is not a problem with rigorous testing, like SpaceX and most modern space agencies do.

[@Limey2632]

Someone was paid for this? Where are the fuel tanks?

[@danielszabo3864]

That is all cool, but it's not an SSTO.

[@ballreal3]

balls

[@horrido666]

The puny rollers on the transport pad ruin it for me. It brings up the question, what other liberties have you taken? Looks cool, though.

[@raykewin3608]

There is a reason why rockets are long and skinny not short and fat.

[@Madhuntr]

The reason is just that These concepts were never built. It all depends on what you want to launch. Most of These chonky concepts sere thought of to colomize the moon i assume and it would have been easier to build something on earth and then send it up then try and construct it in the moon

[@matthewconnor5483]

Well the requirement to move them by barge or truck limits your options.

[@johnnydev9318]

So would you perhaps care to illuminate us all about what that reason is ?

[@user-bn4vg8mn2n]

Ошибка инженеров в пролёт приведёт дракона прожорливого, без коэфециента полезного действия до орбиты вне досигаемости. 🎉

[@mpetersen6]

Transportation buy truck, rail or water from the assembly plant to launch site play a part. As does politics. There is no way that almost all of the economic impact could be in one area or State and get through Congress. At least in the US. As to transportation. The SRBs from the Shuttle and SLS had to be able to be transported from the foundry. To the machining facility. And then to Morton Thiokol's Utah facility for propellant loading. Then to KSC for final assembly. I'm not sure were the raw casting or forging was done. I do know that the machining was initially done by Ladish Corporation in their South Milwaukee facility. And was moved back there after Challenger was lost. The requirement to move the SRB sections by road and rail limited their maximum diameter.

[@antoniobragancamartins3165]

It's one more social experiment! The aim is to identify the stupidity of the common population with general knowledge about rockets! What happened to the rocket equation? Where's the fuel tanks? What happened to the payload relation?

[@davisdf3064]

The fuel tanks are within the "Aerospike" cone itself. The rocket equation is supposed to work here because it uses air-augmentation to increase it's ISP through atmosphere. This SSTO should (key word, should) be capable of transportation 450 tons to LEO, the rocket itself would have been waay heavier though.

[@johntheux9238]

USA

[@tamtamich4]

why old rocket concepts is fat SSTOs

[@MichaelBrigg-ij7qo]

Where is the description on how it works, and the obvious thing is how can a rocket engine work with no fuel. This is a total unworkable fantasy.

[@clinchfieldtheghostfriendly]

......i hate this design

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

@Hazegrayart >>> Great video...👍

[@atptourfan]

new Hazegrayart!!

[@DISCORDJOINBIO]

Unsubscribe cause your channel has no description. Hope you change that.