instead of resurrecting ideas from 50 yrs ago we had not shelved the idea in the first place....
instead of resurrecting ideas from 50 yrs ago we had not shelved the idea in the first place. http://spacenews.com/dream-chaser-successfully-completes-glide-flight/
Remember that the X-24 was designed to explore the handling characteristics of a potential reentry vehicle. A pretty complete set of aerothermal data bases were developed for X-24 types of vehicles. The STS Orbiter was the other vehicle for which a very complete set of parameters were developed and ultimately flown. When it came time to build the X-40/X-37 series of vehicles, Boeing could have chosen either as the baseline, but chose the Shuttle aero data base because they were more familiar with it from their Shuttle work. X-37B just launched on its 5th mission, so they made a good choice. We did not have the computer systems we now have, so the X-24 vehicles were manned and often flew on the ragged edge of controllability. We learned a lot from the X-24 and X-20 Dynasoar, the first planned spaceplane, but it took a while for the technology and materials to catch up.
Personally, I'm not convinced the Dream Chaser is anything other than a waste of money, and I suppose a fun project for some guys. Can you convince me otherwise? What can it do that other platforms, such as Dragon, can't do?
It offers more flexibility wrt re-entry track and landing options. Other than that, doesn't offer much, especially since it still relies on being launched using a standard rocket (Atlas, Ariane V, or Falcon Heavy according to Wiki). I like the idea of a winged vehicle, but we should be to the point where we have one that is horizontally launched, with minimal expendable components, rather than still relying on roman candles to lift into orbit. 'Necessity is the mother of invention', so the saying goes. The X20/X24 were not necessarily ahead of their time. If the programs had been continued solutions for any issues would likely have been solved. Having been a kid and watched our spaceflight program progress from putting a man in space to landing on the moon in less than a decade, the current pace of system development is just depressing. It will have taken the US twice as long to development and make operational the SLS as it did to create Apollow. Add in the fact that we are re-hashing ideas that were tested 50 yrs ago, including salvaging Rocketdyne F-1 engines from the ocean floor to measure them and figure out how they worked, just adds to that frustration.
