The Star-Raker - A 1979 Space Plane With 15 Engines, Massive Wings & Huge Ambition
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ย. 2020
- The Star-Raker began life as an alternative proposal by Rockwell for the Space Shuttle, but in 1978 they fleshed out the concept as a cargo ferry to deliver tens of thousands of tons to orbit every year as part of a visionary plan for the US to build a network of space power stations to supply the nation's energy needs.
Star-Raker would have been 2000 tons at launch, over 100 meters long and powered by 10 multi-mode airbreathing jet engines, 3 hydrogen fueled rocket engines and a pair of orbital maneuvering engines. Ultimately it never flew but it was an interesting study in what it might take to build a single stage to orbit spaceplane with the technology of the era.
Largely inspired by Davis S Portree's research on the Star-Raker, I highly recommend his blog about space history
spaceflighthistory.blogspot.com/ - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[Watch Party] APL 2024 Bacon Time Vs Hong Kong Attitude ชนะเข้ารอบ](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ikUfW81sDaw/mqdefault.jpg)
Ironically, a video about Star-Raker in Kerbal Space was essentially what kick started my channel a few years back. It was a surprisingly popular video that I made for fun on a channel that was entirely about mathematics.
"Hello Wonderful Person."
I was going to say that this was an underrated comment, but then I saw it was just half an hour old :).
You could've posted a link to that video. If it's still available. It's a good thing you can edit your comment on TH-cam.
How aren't you verified my brudda?
Are you scott manley? >_>
I know this project sounds difficult to pull off, but this is Rockwell, they created the Turboencabulator. They could do anything.
And here I thought that was Chrysler
@@mpetersen6 Chrysler co-developed the technology and specialized in automotive-grade turboencabulators
Making the heat shielding out of prefamulated amulite was a real game changer.
Bifricating dingle arms could have been used to increase the efficiency of the turbo pumps ten fold.
The cromulence of the design gives me goosebumps.
Speaking about the Space Power Satellite, I met twice with Pr Peter Glaser, promoter of the idea. The first time was in Florida when he presented the concept. The second time was in Toulouse during a congress. I remember that we took the same train from Toulouse to Cannes where I worked. In the Matabiau railway station of Toulouse, where our train was due to "take-off" at 16:00, he asked me anxiously at 15:57 if the train was late, and one minute after, the train was there, and departed at 16:00 from Toulouse. All the way long, he was checking his train time table and was astonished that the train was exactly on time in each station along the line. Peter Glaser was able to imagine satellites of ten kilometer wingspan, with antenna diameter of 2 km, but he could not believe that the french train could be on time !
Well he was an aerospace engineer so to him the only thing more surprising than hearing something's is running on schedule would be hearing that it's also under budget
Alain Girard Amtrack sucks lol
@@maxk4324 smartest rip I've heard in a very long time. : )
Yeah, after 20 years living in France I share his skepticism about French train time tables. Did you work at Thales by any chance?
@@chiefengineer58 I worked in Aerospatiale in Cannes, which happens to be Thales Alenia Space now, after being held by Alcatel for a while. French train moves several billions pasengers each year, and their time table accuracy is far better than US trains ! The trouble with trains is that you notice every out of schedule event, but don't care about trains on time. The french trains are among the most reliable about time of start and arrival, with more than 95% of on time, which is already a miracle.
So many studies and documentaries fail to give the viewer a concept of the size of the thing they're talking about. That illustration of the Star-Raker next to a commercial airline was PERFECT!
What impressed me about the SABRE engine is the precooler. Cooling the air hundreds of degrees from air-intake to supercold in micro-seconds before reaching the engine
In an alternate universe spacex successfully flew sstos and scott will have made a video showing how cool vertical landing rockets are in Kerbal
And American Airline Boeing 747's would still be flying passengers ! ...
And the Orion III space plane is flying like in “2001, a space odyssey.”
@@walterlyzohub8112 trying to KSP Orion is a favourite of mine.
It's a good day when Scott uploads..
:)
@@GareebScientist wow u r here
Ya but what about you . Very less freq. 😟
are bhai bhai
are bhai jai ho
4:51 - Rockwell: "Nah, payload doors on top introduce a point of structural weakness." *cuts fuselage circumferentially behind cockpit so that it can hinge to one side*
Pretty sure nobody at NASA ever seriously thought this was going to fly; they just wanted an excuse to draw pictures of massive cool spaceplanes.
Money better spent than on the development of SLS heuheueheu
@@NuclearTopSpot agreed
Sadly people really did and some do delude themselves into thinking spaceplanes could work if you just solve a few more technical problems.
@@SierraSierraFoxtrot Reality is endlessly frustrating it seems.
oh well.
@@KuraIthys I think now that we regularly see the Falcon 9 takeing off and landing regularly we can finally let go of the dream of HTHL.
I say spaceplanes look cool as model but VTVL looks much cooler in action... and it works. Starship will actually lift more than Star Raker was supposed to lift!
wow - this thing would have been AWESOME .. I love the whole 70's sci-fi style of the paintings. always felt they had such BIG dreams and ideas back then, nothing felt impossible. imagine being a cargo pilot flying stuff from all around the world to orbit in this thing in a video game in THAT graphics style :D anyone interested in making this for fun?
The 70's/80's visions of the future were so bright and full of potential....
I fell in love with this monster when a UK newspaper did an article on it in the 1970s. Just loved the design and the size of it.
Now, who else heard the name Star-Raker and instantly thought of the goofiest ever Bond movie?
weldonwin probably one where bond gets frozen in the 90s and defrosted into the far future of the 2020s to prevent alternate future elon musk from snuffing out the sun to power their fleet of electric warp vehicles.
@@alepthanderson5189 Was talking about Moonraker, the one where Bond goes into space, there were laser battles and the most pompous man in the universe intended to breed a super race, without seemingly understanding the concept of genetic diversity and how necessary it is in the viability of a species
This was the way to go.There was so many great plans back then.Skylab was a space station from the early 70s and was roomier than the International Space Station.The ISS got bigger because more modules were added but it did not make it more comfortable.Everything was bigger and better back then, but then we went smaller and more compact like the Europeans.
@@weldonwin That was the flick that turned Jaws to the side of law and order! Not one of the best Bond flicks, but it had its moments.
@@jessfrankel5212 Not exactly to the side of law and order, so much as he wanted to protect his new girlfriend from a pompous asshole with a god complex
This would have been so much cooler than the shuttle.
I just love how Gery Anderson (Thunderbirds) this craft looks!
Thinking about it, Thunderbirds are Go.
Transformers. Robots in diguise
UFO
Not to mention Gerry and Sylvia Anderson
Thanks Scott, I'm spending the night at the hospital and it's always comforting to hear you talk about cool stuff like this :)
Hope you are on the mend! Take care, and get well soon!
Get well soon! Praying for you!
Thanks friends! I'm back home after a few difficult days, but things should be okay now :)
5:34 “well the front fell off, it isn’t supposed to do that”
"some of them are built so that the front doesn't fall off at all."
No cardboard or cardboard derivatives
I hate it when that happens.
@@Lusty_Wench I'm neither being a Brit and too young to remember the skit - but its too good not to find out about if you have any interest - not like that is the only shipping disaster...
Would love a new Skylon video. Something about spaceplanes is just so cool. Also love how you legitimately use KSP to demonstrate the concepts you're talking about
Engineers: cargo bay doors weaken the structure.
Also engineers: let's cut the vehicle completely in half.
-edit-
Oh my, 300 likes and a couple of serious replies. I was kidding of course.
I think that you can't have cargo bay doors, on the behind, because, well that's where the engine are (and since it's an ssto, you need lots of fuel and engines, which are at the behind). When you deliver cargo from the front (or behind, but that's not possible here), by "cutting the vehicle in half" you get full control on the orbit/trajectory of the thing that you're sending into space. When you release the object from the top/bottom, you gotta do extra calculations for the object, and you need more fuel for course correction.
SSTO to go at Mars is not the best idea... you are going to have to carry part of the structure (dead weight) that only served you to leave planet earth
Well it's like cork to a wine bottle. So actually pretty solid structural solution. also hinging in space would not be problem. Main problem would me as it with front loading large cargo planes like C-5 and AN-124, opening the front on Earth. the hinge is under gravity stress and more importantly... it is a huge sail. Another good reason to use that clean room loading setup. It provides a windshield for the cracked open plane.
Once closed as with wine cork in bottle. Just use something like locking wedges or eyelets and bolts to make sure the cork can't pull out of the bottle and it is solid structure. Ofcourse assuming the inner ring is strong build enough not to buckle in and the outer ring doesn't split open, but those would have to be heavy duty anyway to handle launch stress. Be it open hinging or not.
Cargo aircraft minimise doors in the side for strength reasons but routinely have hinged noses for long cargo. The required door size for long cargo is smaller that way.
It does make sense though, you're not losing strength in nearly as important a direction. During ascent you've got no significant shear force on the nose, and the descent is gradual enough that the force is minimal. A shuttle-style door is compromising strength during all the highest force times while this is having nearly no impact. While open on the ground would of course be a very stressful time - I'd be tempted to make some kinda messy ground support equipment to avoid needing hugely overbuilt hinges (overbuilt compared to the loads all the rest of the time) as mass budget is so much more important than on conventional aircraft. As Ari Takalo points out, wind loading would be no joke when open also.
Looks like an Avro Vulcan with rocket engines
Let's get the vulcan flying again as space planes...
If the Vulcan had had rocket engines, the British government would probably had cancellled it... Still, that's an awesome thought!
The Star-Raker concept looks like something that Gerry Anderson would have come up with.
I think he did have something very, very similar, though I'm not sure if it was in Thunderbirds or one of his other shows.
But Gerry Anderson would have designed it with nuclear powered engines.
@@zaeonnine0 that modelwork is something else. Would definitely like to see a Scott video talking about the design.
@@peterells1720 of course, all of those machines were built with one or two huge obvious glaring points of failure for the drama 😆
"Landing is hard" *crosses threshold at 240 km/h*
I had problems with pitch authority
@@scottmanley Fair enough. Guess you didn't have 20 years. :D
@@scottmanley The thing looks like it could have used some canards while flying, although I'm not sure how they would work in reentry.
Daan Wilmer Folding canards like the Tu-144 would be an option. The Canards deploy only at low speed.
Delta wings need the gear only just behind Center of gravity to get good pitch authority at the expense of needing long gear for ground clearance.
60 m/s isn't THAT fast for a big Whiplash/Vector SSTO spaceplane on landing approach
Wow , space shuttle and all those concepts always feel amazing
I'll stick to my 747-launched Moonraker thank you very much! Any 747 pilot volunteers?
-The Drax Corporation
I loved that movie
Just like the Staaaaaaaar-Raker Goes,
In Search Of His Dream Of Gold,
Iiiiiiiiiiii Search For Love,
For Some one to Have and Hold...
Also, Hugo Drax, one of my favorite Bond villains ever, for the sheer scene chewing pomposity of the man
Ironically Reaction Engines have recently solved the engine problem (mostly) with their Scimitar design.
Though even back then engineers knew that adding wings to a reusable spacecraft just made it more expensive in comparison to a reusable VTOL design. Which is what SpaceX is finally developing.
As SpaceX learned, they're not _completely_ irrelevant, they just don't add value away from atmosphere. That's why Starship is getting reentry wings.
The SABRE engine system is very clever, it uses some cunning thermodynamic tricks to make single stage to orbit more efficient than any other attempt, in fact, I think it is the ONLY system that has actually proven that it can get the job done with enough efficiency so that it can carry a sizeable payload into orbit.
Scott I've been watching your videos since the Kerbal Interstellar days.
My best friend and I spent hours watching you haul little green idiots to space and honestly those are some of the best memories of my early 30s.
I hope I commented early enough for you to see this, you're the best!
When Scott uploads a new vid i explode with happiness. This channel is one of only a handful that upload quality content. Well done and keep it up
Thank you for this, I have heard of Skylon but never seen Sky Raker. I have been slowly writing a sci-fi novel and used something like Sky raker, and had been thinking of removing it for being impossible, then I watch this . Brovo, I gotta get better at KSP
[YEARNING FOR SKYLON INTENSIFIES]
Skylon and Sabre = hoax.
I TF· ·FR ME· ·R ATE TenFramesPerSecond conspiracy theorist
These space planes seem so much more complex than just strapping some rockets on giant fuel tanks. I’m guessing that’s probably why these concepts have never gotten off the ground.
Now that would have been the absolute coolest spacecraft ever. Especially loved the dirty well used fuselage images towards the end. Grateful vid as always Mr M
Thank you for the upload, Scott. Thank you also for not making it a “premiere.”
Perfect for tidying up those space leaves!
This looks like the ship in 2001, docking with the space station.
I love the artwork from back then. That alone could be an episode. The art & visions they had in the US, Russia and elsewhere.
Anton Petrov did one on one of the Russian artists.
From a distance it looks a bit like an RV with a wing tacked onto it.
Going to plaid!
Don't forget the raspberry jam.
Tell your brother Pichael is say hello.
Hi Scott, as a space hardware artist I've worked with David Portree on numerous projects over the years, good to see his work getting mention.
I can still recall a book I read as a child from the school library. I've forgotten the title but it was by Arthur C. Clarke, a non-fiction book, it may have been called _Rockets, Missles and Spaceflight._ In one chapter he described a vehicle that takes off like an airplane using turbojets, which switch over to ramjet mode, then finally rocket mode. He referred to it as a turbo-ram-rocket aerospace plane. After at least 49 years I still remember it as an amazing concept.
(Now I need to go see if I can find that book online! ☺)
Thanks Scott, as much as I enjoy your posts on real astronomy I still feel like your Kerbal stuff is the best. Please keep it coming into the new version.
@Christian Bai the kerbal stuff used to be the primary content.
A few years ago i listened to a lecture given by the chief engineer of Skylon and he detailed their roadmap for design, it was very interesting, i believe they plan on having a single engine on a set of wings in the 2030's. After they can prove the engine's functionality they'll start to focus on the actual craft itself. Skylon is a way off, but they've done the hard work of creating a revolutionary new engine. In my opinion this will one day surpass space x and rocketry as the primary method of space travel.
Doubtful (SSTOs are not actually a great way to do space even if you can do it), but I expect to see it revolutionize transoceanic aircraft.
But which Space Station has Low Conductivity High Temperature Ceramic Tiles? 6:50 ;) I guess the Space Shuttle was indeed a Space Station when in orbit :)
If you can get it into space and make it stay there, then anything can be a space station!
*Anything with a pressurised compartment, docking port, power source, and life support.
@@xlynx9 and room for 5 or more crew!
@@GabrielDeVault I see what you did there, and I approve.
Wait, other comments said a space station needed to stay up there and hold five or more occupants... So I guess Skylab didn't count? 😢 (Poor thing, neglected while people focused on the Shuttle instead.)
Would love an episode on Reaction Engines and Skylon
Reaction Engines concept-spaceplane vs Skylon concept-propulsionhoax.
@@-danR wtf are you talking about, Reaction Engines is the company that has designed the Skylon concept.
@@shimmy1984 I TF is just another moron that thinks something they don't understand can't be possible. Or it's just another troll. It's been making the same type of statement all over the comments.
5:25 - the front fell off
Mach 7? That's crazy! Skylon is only trying to get to mach 5.5 and it's been hard enough getting even that to work.
A Scott Manley video at 2AM (my time) *HELL YES!!!*
That's some crazy inventiveness on par with a H-bomb mega rocket :)
Never heard of these fascinating machines. 👍
Some day around that time when such visionary projects stalled, future stopped being what it used to be.
Instead, we have flying water towers and grain silos. Although I'm sure the full size StarShip will look like it came straight out of 60s or 70s scifi.
I can always count on you for fascinating space history I had never heard of before!
Yesss! One of my all-time favourite concept spacecraft!
Good to see two videos released with only a days difference
As I recall, Reaction Engines tried something with a similar layout before Skylon, but found that the center of gravity changed too much as propellant was consumed or cargo was deployed which required excessive torque/trim forces.
The design of Skylon with cargo and engines in the middle and multiple propellant tanks symmetrically in front of and behind the center was created to solve this issue.
Skylon has to create a solution to the fact that Sabre is a hoax.
@@-danR Unlikely. It has been reviewed by ESA who found the design to be sound.
Now, whether it's the most practical way to achieve cheap orbital access is another question. It may not be, but this doesn't mean it's a hoax.
"how can we make the most complex most expensive space cargo ship in history " rockwell engineers hold my beer !
The irony being that once built, it would in theory dramatically reduce the cost of space launches, by removing the need for specialized facilities and having a fully reusable launch vehicle, without any wasted stages
@starshipeleven
_"The problem is finding anyone that needs to launch so much cargo to justify the mass production infrastructure."_ Watch the video again. The plan was for orbital solar power stations in GEO.
_"If you launch an expendable rocket every 8 hours, rockets would become much cheaper than a SSTO."_ Care to explain how the raw material suddenly becomes much cheaper just because you use more of it?
SSTOs are practicably limited by the cost of fuel. Throw-Away rockets are limited by the cost of their components AND their fuel.
I mean you wouldn't make such a comment about air planes, would you?
@starshipeleven
Okay.
@starshipeleven : As you yourself pointed out, this thing wouldn't require the ceramic tiles of the Space Shuttle orbiter. I have my quibbles with this design too _(why_ does it need to orbit at all?), but comparing it to the overly brittle nightmare that was the Space Shuttle is disingenuous. It would certainly be more of a hassle than a normal aircraft, but not by much. Reentry energies allowing metal heat shielding mean that the stresses of space launch are drastically reduced, which in turn reduces the problems associated with the vehicle. Honestly, the only real design problem is the engines, if not for those, we could realistically build this today with no changes and have it easily work.
@@weldonwin *on paper. The shuttle was suppose to be much cheaper with little maintenance and quick turnaround, on paper. But a paper space plane looks a lot different when heat shield meets reentry. It's hard enough to get something to orbit, the complexity and difficulties goes up another magnitude when you add reentry capability to the same amount of hardware that you takeoff with.
Always love it when Scott and other KSP'ers use the game to recreate anachronisms from the history of spaceflight, it's relevant to my interests. 🙂
Good episode Scott.
It reminds me of a story I read in Pop Sci or Pop Mech a couple decades back. Some Maverick dude was building prototypes of fuselages with external combustion scramjets fueled by kerosene. at the time I read about it they were in the process of finalizing the construction of their supersonic combustion wind tunnel.
The magic sauce was the fact that they would bleed the kerosene over the leading edge of the Delta wing and it would simultaneously cool the skin and catalyze the fuel into something that would combust with the low oxygen atmosphere.
I thought it showed great promise but never heard anything of it again. Perhaps you could dig up some more on it and make a story out of it.
Holy. Fucking. Shit. This is literally the best space launch system ever seriously proposed, period. It nearly matches even some of my alternate-historical space launch systems (specifically spaceplanes) from more optimal worlds, conceptualized almost deliberately to be as amazing as possible. It's absolutely heartening knowing that such a vehicle was considered and thought possible.
Also, 15 engines and 2,000 tons? AFAIK, that's the most engines ever proposed for any non-VTOL aircraft, and the heaviest ever proposed for any aircraft.
This is the best thing I ever saw.
I always loved the concept od an SSTO spaceplane including, of course, the two HOTOLs. Well, that was before a certain guy started to land rockets the way "God and Bob Heinlein have wanted it". I still hope Skylon will get a chance.
Thanks for this video, Scott.
Frankly, for space planes to be a good idea, they need to _not_ go orbital, so SSTO is completely wrong for any practically-minded space plane design. Getting the wings & such into orbit is a waste of fuel, and doesn't even need to be done.
@@absalomdraconis It's a shame we can't do the same thing that every aircraft does and store fuel in the wings
@@absalomdraconis Well there´s still the the Sänger-type two-stage.
Often ignored is the stability problem during VT landings. You may remember the problems during the first SX landings.
However, I´ve got deepest respect for the SpaceX engineers to have solved this!!!
I´m still not convinced by todays TSTO approaches because of cost effectiveness, sustainability and turnaround time.
Anyway, they are still FAR AHEAD what some space agencies and companies do (I look at you NASA and Boeing!)
Two variants I liked were described by Robertr Zubrin in Islands in the Sky, and, an different version, in Entering Space.
And, IMHO, the best concept so far was Kawasaki´s Kankoh Maru design study (looked a bit like the old Union-class dropships from Battletech). Sadly it was only a study.
Scott,
Always enjoy your videos! Keep up the excellent work!
Scott, love your channel. Can you make an episode on solid fuel Ramjets?
lol all that was needed was “magic” engines, perhaps built from unobtainiam, I cannot think why it wasn’t developed as an SSTO.
The SABRE is getting closer to the multi-mode precooled unobtanium cycle, but yeah that's not flown either...
An engine that transforms from a turbojet to a ramjet was already developed and in use in the SR-71 at that time.
You don't need magic to think you can further develop that engine to reach higher speeds.
I can think of plenty of other reasons why it wasn't further developed. (like not having the large budget for a space program anymore.... Or still having rocket engines next to these turboramjets. extra weight, cost and complexity)
@@marcdevries9027
SR-71: Mach 3.5 with JP-7
Star-Raker: Mach 6-7 with Hydrogen.
Considering that the engines on the Sr-71 were already running near the physical limits of the materials, the engines on the Star-Raker would have required some very serious magic to stay solid.
This is another case where the research done with NERVA would have come in handy.
@@3gunslingers With this attitude we'll be to Mars in no time at all.
Awesome video Scott! Thanks for sharing. As always, educational and fun. Great job on that landing!
Love your videos! I’ve been watching since 2013!
Now you definitely have to make a video about Skylon too!
Currently sitting in my apartment pending covid test results. Going to be binge watching a lot of scotts videos for the next few days
Been there, done that. Good luck, mate!
Good luck.
Why worry about a flu so mild that you need a test to tell you you have it?
Don’t worry you haven’t got it the test will come back negative unless you have a cold or flu 🤒 if you have I wouldn’t of gone for the test they will tell you ,you have it it’s all a hoax virus believe me
@@rockspoon6528 Because you don't want to kill anyone else? People have different reactions to disease, that's why there's never been a disease that's either 100% fatal *or* 100% survivable.
I had the Estes Star Raker Rocket growing up :-D
I built the "Orbital Transport" complete with shuttle glider on top. Less than nominal launch took it on a big arc into the Owens Corning Fiberglass compound. No survivors.
Chris Gonzales RIP Orbital Transport...
Your end was too soon... 😞
Thanks Scott!
I'd really love it if such a space plane was possible.
It's almost possible to do the original design today (a british company has almost finished a compatible engine design), but trying to actually _orbit_ a space plane instead of letting the payload do orbital insertion itself is a waste of fuel, so it's a little silly.
15 engines? very kerbal.
I really hate being on a KSP playing binge, come to youtube to see any KSP video, and then keep right clicking and trying to move the camera or zoom in and out, makes you feel so dumb because it takes some time to realize it, lol.
Thanks for any kind of KSP videos!!!
Lol, I've done this more times than I care to admit.
I have a stock SSTO ship called “Cargo Boss” with one of the large shuttle bays, it’s a ridiculous monster of around 300 tons with lots of Ramjets like this and it can bring 20 tons to ultra-low orbit and then land back at the KSP.
Yaaaay. He's back !!!
Love to see the KSP content👏🏽
Damn, I love the concept art!
That is a beautiful spaceplane. I'd quite forgotten about it and a lot of other weird and wonderful space and even aeroplane concepts. I might have to make a Star Raker for my big infrastructure/colonization build in KSP. Hazard-ish has shown the hinged nose is possible, but it looks like it requires some visible extra wing-pieces and at least one intrusive docking port to keep it closed. I'll probably have a regular cargo bay opening downward; done that before. || Got to love old space art, too; with or without giant transparent bubbles! XD I ought to go on a hunt for it for inspiration.
Amazing video. Love you Scott
Woah, that's one beautiful shot at 7:48
Fascinating!
We can see definite Space Shuttle influences with Star-Raker.
A video on the Skylon/Sabre project is a great idea imho! Always found it a very interesting concept, but don't think they put out a lot of information on progress/challenges.
I Absolutely love your dialect, clean, beatiful and very articulated, easy to understand for people who does not speak English natively. Of cource, your videos are great and informative as well.
You should do a vid on the Lockheed CL-1201, takes a crew of nearly 500 to operate it. Concept craft from 1969 that would operate as a flying carrier
Yes! One of the First! And a KSP vid!
The Kerbal approach to engineering makes perfect sense, once you have realized that no matter how bad the crash, the Kerbal pilots survive. However, if your species is not functionally immortal, you probably should not subcontract to them.
What an absolute beast.
Commander: "Joe, did you remember to lock the trunk?"
Joe? JOE? (sound of rushing air with a wiggling nose section)
Gotta love the artwork!
Very interesting! I had no idea about this!!!! But a little slipper at 6:57 the ceramic tiles weren't used on the space station but on the space shuttle. ;) Thanks for all the interesting videos anyways Scott, keep going! :)
I love this craft a lot
Amazing
Cool blog!
Those jet engines look super interesting
Nice
I definitely want to see more about space planes.
Beautiful thing
Nice scott
Excellent team up with Kerbal Space.
Avro Vulcan with extra engines and extra engines and extra engines!
Moonraker debuted in 1979, the novel was published in 1955. Star-Raker's name seems very inspired and timely. I love it.
So how did the movie compare to the novel?
Looking forward to your video on Skylon. Keep up the good work. 👏 👍
Did you happen to use mods for this? So many of these parts look so cleanly on there for KSP.