Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-19T01:02:02.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Water injection pre-compressor cooling assist space access

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

J. Bowles
Affiliation:
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA
J. Melton
Affiliation:
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA
L. Huynh
Affiliation:
Science and Technology Corporation, Moffett Field, California, USA
P. Hagseth
Affiliation:
Lockheed Martin Company, Fort Worth, Texas, USA

Abstract

Advances in space activity are linked to reductions in launch cost. Air-breathing propulsion-assisted flight systems offer the potential for revolutionary change of the space operations paradigm. Horizontal launch of a space-access system provides mission flexibility, responsiveness, and affordability. One way to reduce launch cost is to increase the Mach number at which a launch vehicle is staged from a carrier aircraft. Without exceeding the engine and airframe design limits, the pre-compressor cooling technology allows an operational aircraft to operate at Mach numbers and altitudes beyond its basic operational limits. This is an essential, near-term technology for reducing launch cost to place small-weight payloads in low Earth orbit. The advantage of this technology is assessed with a modified McDonnell Douglas QF-4C aircraft. Payloads are unachievable or marginal with an unmodified QF-4C. However, payloads weighing around 150 pounds are plausible with this aircraft when incorporating the water injection pre-compressor cooling (WIPCC) technology.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Bilardo, V., Curran, F., Hunt, J., Lovell, N., Maggio, G., Wilhite, A. and McKinney, L. The Benefts of Hypersonic Airbreathing Launch Systems for Access to Space, AIAA 2003-5265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Longstaff, R. and Bond, A. The SKYLON Project, AIAA 2011-2244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. European Space Agency, Skylon Assessment Report, TEC-MPC/2011/946/MF, June 2011.Google Scholar
4. Reaction Engines, The Biggest Breakthrough in Propulsion Since the Jet Engine, Press Release, 28 November 2012.Google Scholar
5.Sato, T., Tanatsugu, N., Hiroaki, K.Hatta, H., Sawai, Y. and Maru, Y. Development Study on the ATREX Engine, IAC-03-S.5.02.Google Scholar
6.Boltz, F.W.Low-cost small-satellite delivery system, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 2002, 39, (5), pp 818820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Hague, N., Siegenthaler, E. and Rothman, J.Enabling Responsive Space: F-15 Microsatellite Launch Vehicle, Proceedings of the Aerospace Conference, 2003, IEEE, 6, March 2003, pp 6_2703 – 6_2708.Google Scholar
8.Chen, T., Ferguson, P., Deamer, D. and Hensley, J. Responsive Air Launch Using F-15 Global Strike Eagle, AIAA, RS4-2006-2001.Google Scholar
9.Socher, A. and Gany, A. Investigation of Combined Air-breathing/Rocket Propulsion for Air Launch of Micro-Satellities from a Combat Aircraft, AIAA, RS6-2008-5003.Google Scholar
10.DePasquale, D., Charania, A., Matsuda, S. and Kanayama, H. NanoLauncher: An affordable and dedicated air-launch transportation service for nanosatellites, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, AIAA-2010-8629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Dassault Aviation, Rafale, Satellite Launcher Study, Web. Issue No 3, 23 October 2008.Google Scholar
12.Talbot, C. and Bonnal, C.Air Launch Solutions for Microsatellites, Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES) briefng slides, presented at Surrey University, Surrey, UK, 9 September 2008.Google Scholar
13. Riding MiG to orbit, Take-off, May 2006, pp 4647. (http://www.take-off.ru)Google Scholar
14.Bowcutt, K.G., Smith, T.R., Kothari, A.P., raghavan, V.Tarpley, C. and Livingston, J.W. The Hypersonic Space and Global Transportation System: A Concept for Routine and Affordable Access to Space, AIAA 2011-2295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. DARPA Industry Day Notice, Airborne Launch Assist Space Access (ALASA), DARPA-BAA-12-07.Google Scholar
16.King, J.A. Can Small Do What Big Does – Only Better? (An Update), SSC11-VII-1 AIAA Utah State University SmallSat 2011 Conference, 2011.Google Scholar
17.Foust, J. New Opportunies for Smallsat Launchers, The Space Review, 22 August 2011.Google Scholar
18.Foust, J. A Quarter Century of Smallsat Progress, The Space Review, 6 September 2011.Google Scholar
19.Morring, F. Jr, More With Less, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 30 July 2012.Google Scholar
20.DePasquale, D. and Bradford, J. Nano/Microsatellite Market Assessment, Public Release, Revision A, SpaceWorks, February 2013.Google Scholar
21.Trout, A.M. Theoretical Turbojet Thrust Augmentation by Evapouration of Water During Compression as Determined by use of Mollier Diagrams, NACA TN 2104, June 1950, 93R12197.Google Scholar
22.Wilcox, E.C. and Trout, A.M. Analysis of thrust augmentation of turbojet engines by water injection at compressor inlet including charts for calculating compression processes with water injection, NACA-TR-1006, NACA Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, 1 January 1951, 93R21353.Google Scholar
23.Willens, D. Liquid Injection on Turbojet Engines for High Speed Aircraft. Propulsion Research Report R-139, 25 February 1955, AD0140167.Google Scholar
24.Sohn, R.L. Theoretical and Experimental Studies of Pre-Compressor Evapourative Cooling for Application to the Turbojet Engine in High Altitude Supersonic Flight. Propulsion Research Corporation, WADC-TR-56-477, August 1956, AD097262.Google Scholar
25.King, P.G. and Nygaard, R.C. Mechanical Operating Experience with Three J57-P-11 Turbojet Enging during a Pre-Compressor Spray Cooling Test in an Altitude Test Chamber, AEDC-TN-57-70, February 1958, AD150076.Google Scholar
26.Jones, W.L., Sivo, J.N. and Wanhainen, J.P. The effect of compressor-inlet water injection on engine and afterburner performance, NACA-RM-E58D03B, July 1958, 71N70228.Google Scholar
27.Neely, J. and Ward, T.R. Maximum Power Performance of a J57 and a YJ75 Turbojet engine with Pre-Compressor Water Evapourative Cooling, AEDC-TR-58-18, February 1959, AD-304817.Google Scholar
28.King, L.D. Design and Testing of a Pre-Compressor Cooling System for a High Speed Aircraft, Chase Vought Corporation, Vought Aeronautics Division, May 1961, AD324250.Google Scholar
29.Henneberry, H.M. and Snyder, C.A. Analysis of Gas Turbine Engines Using Water and Oxygen Injection to Achieve High Mach Numbers and High Thrust, NASA TM-106270, July 1993, 94N13143.Google Scholar
30.Balepin, V. Method and Apparatus for Reducing the Temperature of Air Entering a Compressor of a Turbojet Engine by Variably Injecting Fluid into the Incoming Air, United States Patent US 6,202,404, 20 March 2001.Google Scholar
31.Balepin, V., Liston, G. and Moszee, R. Combined Cycles with Inlet Air Conditioning, AIAA-2002-5148.Google Scholar
32.Carter, P., Balepin, V., Spath, T. and Ossello, C. MIPCC Technology Development, AIAA-2003-6929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Balepin, V., Bruno, C. and Ingenito, A. Evaluation of the Combustion Process in the Mass Injection Precompression Cooling Engine, ISABE-2003-1127.Google Scholar
34.Balepin, V., Engers, R., Spath, T. and Ossello, C. MIPCC Technology Development, ISABE-2005-1297.Google Scholar
35.Balepin, V.High Speed Propulsion Cycles. In Advances on Propulsion Technology for High-Speed Aircraft (Paper 2, pp 132). Educational Notes RTO-EN-AVT-150. Neuilly-sur-Seine, France: RTO, 2007. (http://www.rto.nato.int).Google Scholar
36.Miller, J. Peace Jack An Enigma Exposed, Air International, July 1985, pp 1823.Google Scholar
37.Carter, P., Brown, O. and Rice, T. DARPA’s Rapid Access Small Cargo Affordable Launch (RASCAL) Program, AIAA-2003-8004.Google Scholar
38. Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY) 2006/FY 2007 Budget Estimates; Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide; Volume 1; Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), February 2005.Google Scholar
39. S. HRG. 109–22, PT. 5; Department of Defense Authorization for Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2006; Hearings Before the Committee on Armed Services United States Senate One Hundred Ninth Congress First Session on S. 1042 to Authorize Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2006 For Military Activities of the Department of Defense; for Military Construction, and for Defense Activities of The Department Of Energy; to Prescribe Personnel Strengths for Such Fiscal Year for the Armed Forces, and for Other Purposes; Part 5; Emerging Threats And Capabilities; March 9; April 11-22, 2005.Google Scholar
40.Bonine, W.J., Niemann, C.R., Sonntag, A.H. and Weber, W.B. Aerodynamic Derivatives, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, 10 February 1964, Model F/RF-4B-C, Revision K, 10 December 1971.Google Scholar
41.Striepe, S.A., Powell, R.W., Desai, P.N., Queen, E.M., Brauer, G.L., Cornick, D.E., Olson, D.W., Petersen, F.M., Stevenson, R., Engel, M.C., Marsh, S.M. and Gromoko, A.M.Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST II), Vol. II Utilization Manual Version 1.1.6.G; Jan. 2004, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA.Google Scholar
42. Technical Analyses of RF-4X Concept, Lockheed Martin Company, 12 April 1973.Google Scholar
43.Hesse, J. and Mumford, N. Jr, Jet Propulsion for Aerospace Applications, 2nd ed, Pitman Publishing Corporation, 1964.Google Scholar
44.Ardema, M.Solution of the minimum time-to-climb problem by matched asymptotic expansion, AIAA J, July 1976, 14, (7), pp 843850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar