Check Out Paul Allen’s Giant Rocket-Toting Monster Plane

Paul Allen-backed Stratolaunch Systems is building an enormous airplane that will carry huge rockets to 30,000 feet and release them for trips into low-Earth orbit.

Now, for the first time, we’ve got pictures of the massive Stratolaunch carrier aircraft, nicknamed the “Roc,” which is set to become the largest airplane ever made.

The carrier plane is being built for Stratolaunch in California’s Mojave Desert by Scaled Composites. KGET 17, NBC’s Bakersfield affiliate, was recently granted “unprecedented access” to a 200,000-square-foot facility at Mojave Air and Space Port where the Roc is being assembled, Aviation Week reported this week.

more…

Yowzer!

Have to wonder how much of an inspiration to them this was:

captain_spalding said:

Yowzer!

Have to wonder how much of an inspiration to them this was:

Wonder who the central engine was controlled by?

bob(from black rock) said:

captain_spalding said:

Yowzer!

Have to wonder how much of an inspiration to them this was:

Wonder who the central engine was controlled by?

You can’t see it from the angle but there is a little cockpit above they had OOmpa Loompa’s acquired from a raid on Wonka’s factory. Another artifact lost to the war.

captain_spalding said:

Yowzer!

Have to wonder how much of an inspiration to them this was:

If the 3 fuselage are still only connected by the wing structure, how is the ROC design strong as an airframe in terms of aerodynamic drag? Is it to do with where the thrust is dipersed from?

Postpocelipse said:

captain_spalding said:

Yowzer!

Have to wonder how much of an inspiration to them this was:

If the 3 fuselage are still only connected by the wing structure, how is the ROC design strong as an airframe in terms of aerodynamic drag? Is it to do with where the thrust is dipersed from?

Maybe this one too:

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

captain_spalding said:

Yowzer!

Have to wonder how much of an inspiration to them this was:

If the 3 fuselage are still only connected by the wing structure, how is the ROC design strong as an airframe in terms of aerodynamic drag? Is it to do with where the thrust is dipersed from?

Maybe this one too:

I heard she could be twitchy but if I was going to have one WWII bird stuffed in the carport it would be that one. droool.

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

If the 3 fuselage are still only connected by the wing structure, how is the ROC design strong as an airframe in terms of aerodynamic drag? Is it to do with where the thrust is dipersed from?

Maybe this one too:

I heard she could be twitchy but if I was going to have one WWII bird stuffed in the carport it would be that one. droool.

My WWII RAAF Dad said that they were known as Gutless Wonders.

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Maybe this one too:

I heard she could be twitchy but if I was going to have one WWII bird stuffed in the carport it would be that one. droool.

My WWII RAAF Dad said that they were known as Gutless Wonders.

pfft. I can jam a RR Griffon in anything. Two isn’t a drama.

I think I’m going to have to continue the adventures of Biggles on the thunderbirds thread. ;)

Postpocelipse said:

I think I’m going to have to continue the adventures of Biggles on the thunderbirds thread. ;)

they never told the one about what happened when got tied up with the manhattan project and his supercharged mosquito took him into an alternate dimension.

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Maybe this one too:

I heard she could be twitchy but if I was going to have one WWII bird stuffed in the carport it would be that one. droool.

My WWII RAAF Dad said that they were known as Gutless Wonders.

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

I heard she could be twitchy but if I was going to have one WWII bird stuffed in the carport it would be that one. droool.

My WWII RAAF Dad said that they were known as Gutless Wonders.

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

My WWII RAAF Dad said that they were known as Gutless Wonders.

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

That could be tweaked out of the design couldn’t it?

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

My WWII RAAF Dad said that they were known as Gutless Wonders.

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

The Zeros had that over everyone.

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

That could be tweaked out of the design couldn’t it?

No.

zekes were ok at the start of the war. no armour and no self sealing fuel tanks soon saw them out done fairly quickly.

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

The Zeros had that over everyone.

until they built the corsair

roughbarked said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

That could be tweaked out of the design couldn’t it?

No.

Air tunnel testing couldn’t improve on the original?

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Compared to the Mustang, maybe.

I’d put the mosquito above the lightning though who couldn’t love the shape of both?

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

That could be tweaked out of the design couldn’t it?

Not really. Twin fuselages give slow roll rate.

ChrispenEvan said:

zekes were ok at the start of the war. no armour and no self sealing fuel tanks soon saw them out done fairly quickly.

i can only say, yep. ;)

ChrispenEvan said:

no self sealing fuel tanks .

They didn’t have a very good outlook on self preservation.

ChrispenEvan said:

zekes were ok at the start of the war. no armour and no self sealing fuel tanks soon saw them out done fairly quickly.

If you could hit them.

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

The Zeros had that over everyone.

until they built the corsair

True, The Corsair finally got it over them.

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Its roll rate was very slow & zeros could out manoeuvre them quite easily.

That could be tweaked out of the design couldn’t it?

Not really. Twin fuselages give slow roll rate.

I meant of the mosquito design. I’d be a bit upset if mine underperformed.

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

no self sealing fuel tanks .

They didn’t have a very good outlook on self preservation.

Where was the origin of kamikaze?

Tamb said:

ChrispenEvan said:

zekes were ok at the start of the war. no armour and no self sealing fuel tanks soon saw them out done fairly quickly.

If you could hit them.

I saw the difference in size betwen the ammunition the gunners in the english bombers were throwing around and the cannon shells the messerschmitts spat. Suddenly had an idea of what it was like sitting in a pod with 109s buzzing.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Check Out Paul Allen’s Giant Rocket-Toting Monster Plane

Paul Allen-backed Stratolaunch Systems is building an enormous airplane that will carry huge rockets to 30,000 feet and release them for trips into low-Earth orbit.

Now, for the first time, we’ve got pictures of the massive Stratolaunch carrier aircraft, nicknamed the “Roc,” which is set to become the largest airplane ever made.

The carrier plane is being built for Stratolaunch in California’s Mojave Desert by Scaled Composites. KGET 17, NBC’s Bakersfield affiliate, was recently granted “unprecedented access” to a 200,000-square-foot facility at Mojave Air and Space Port where the Roc is being assembled, Aviation Week reported this week.

more…

It’s only the largest in terms of wingspan, not length nor weight nor payload.

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

The Zeros had that over everyone.

until they built the corsair

True, The Corsair finally got it over them.

Shitloads of power in what was it? 24 cylinders?

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

That could be tweaked out of the design couldn’t it?

Not really. Twin fuselages give slow roll rate.

I meant of the mosquito design. I’d be a bit upset if mine underperformed.

Totally different design Two fuselages v one:

roughbarked said:

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

no self sealing fuel tanks .

They didn’t have a very good outlook on self preservation.

Where was the origin of kamikaze?

ummm. karate kid?

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Not really. Twin fuselages give slow roll rate.

I meant of the mosquito design. I’d be a bit upset if mine underperformed.

Totally different design Two fuselages v one:

mmmmm, mosquito

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

ChrispenEvan said:

zekes were ok at the start of the war. no armour and no self sealing fuel tanks soon saw them out done fairly quickly.

If you could hit them.

I saw the difference in size betwen the ammunition the gunners in the english bombers were throwing around and the cannon shells the messerschmitts spat. Suddenly had an idea of what it was like sitting in a pod with 109s buzzing.

I think my airkit would come back soiled if the pod was hit before I’d seen the bogies.

Postpocelipse said:

I think my airkit would come back soiled if the pod was hit before I’d seen the bogies.

nice way to get PTSD and all.

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

until they built the corsair

True, The Corsair finally got it over them.

Shitloads of power in what was it? 24 cylinders?

18 cylinders 2800 hp.

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

I meant of the mosquito design. I’d be a bit upset if mine underperformed.

Totally different design Two fuselages v one:

mmmmm, mosquito

I prefer the Beaufighter:
Tokyo Rose called them Whispering Death.

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

True, The Corsair finally got it over them.

Shitloads of power in what was it? 24 cylinders?

18 cylinders 2800 hp.

that’s right 24 was the typhoon.

Tamb said:

Postpocelipse said:

Tamb said:

Totally different design Two fuselages v one:

mmmmm, mosquito

I prefer the Beaufighter:
Tokyo Rose called them Whispering Death.

more passenger room and a bit more versatile.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Check Out Paul Allen’s Giant Rocket-Toting Monster Plane

Paul Allen-backed Stratolaunch Systems is building an enormous airplane that will carry huge rockets to 30,000 feet and release them for trips into low-Earth orbit.

Now, for the first time, we’ve got pictures of the massive Stratolaunch carrier aircraft, nicknamed the “Roc,” which is set to become the largest airplane ever made.

The carrier plane is being built for Stratolaunch in California’s Mojave Desert by Scaled Composites. KGET 17, NBC’s Bakersfield affiliate, was recently granted “unprecedented access” to a 200,000-square-foot facility at Mojave Air and Space Port where the Roc is being assembled, Aviation Week reported this week.

more…

Let’s see. 30,000 feet. 9.15 km. No advantage in terms of gravity or airplane velocity. Slight advantage in terms of air drag.

Air drag is proportional to air pressure, and at 3,0000 ft the air pressure is only 30% of that at ground level. You could do the same thing by adding a first stage rocket to get it up to 30,000 ft before the second stage starts, of course. I wonder, how does the fuel required to lift a jet carrying 40 tons to 30,000 ft compare with the rocket fuel required toi lift 40 tons to 30,000 ft.

mollwollfumble said:

I wonder, how does the fuel required to lift a jet carrying 40 tons to 30,000 ft compare with the rocket fuel required toi lift 40 tons to 30,000 ft.

Massively less, it’s far more efficient and reliable and safer.
But I’m also not convinced it’s the right way to go either. You have to make really sure the rocket motor is going to fire before you drop it from the aircraft or it’ll end up as a burning hole in the ground very quickly. Then there’s the transition from level flight to mostly vertical, there can be large aerodynamic loads in doing that especially as it would occur around the transonic region.

mollwollfumble said:

I wonder, how does the fuel required to lift a jet carrying 40 tons to 30,000 ft compare with the rocket fuel required toi lift 40 tons to 30,000 ft.

Not hard to figure out.
For the rocket, v₂-v₁ = c ln(m₀/m)
so if the payload mass is 40 tonnes, and the rocket starts at rest. You might be able to figure the rest of that out.
The jet’s fuel consumption is considerably less.

btm said:

so if the payload mass is 40 tonnes, and the rocket starts at rest. You might be able to figure the rest of that out.
The jet’s fuel consumption is considerably less.

For a loaded 747, you’d burn about ten tonnes of kerosene to get up to 30,000’. The Roc would have a lot more performance than a loaded 747, but that’s offset by having 50% more engines so call it even.
For maintenance on 747 engines, all you typically need to do on a turn-around is check the oil levels …. and rarely add any oil.