How to make space exploration less expensive? Reuse the rockets.

A reusable space rocket engine has been undergoing tests in an effort to make space travel easier to engineer and more affordable. Officials have been firing up the rocket every 24 hours, to see if it can sustain regular and repeated use. 

Gerald Herbert/AP
An AR-22 rocket engine is test fired on the A-2 test stand at the NASA Stennis Space Center in Stennis, Miss., on July 2, 2018. Officials test fired the rocket engine designed to be part of a reusable spacecraft.

Triggering a massive cloud of vapor and a roar, officials on Monday test fired a rocket engine designed to be part of a reusable spacecraft that can launch into space repeatedly with a quick turnaround time.

The AR-22 engine will power an experimental spacecraft – called the Phantom Express – that's a collaboration between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Boeing, and Aerojet Rocketdyne. Engineers are currently testing the engine over a 10-day period by firing it up for 100 seconds and then doing it again 24 hours later. Monday's was the sixth of what is anticipated to be 10 test fires.

Tom Martin from Aerojet Rocketdyne said Monday's test at Stennis Space Center in Mississippi was "awesome" to see although a bit "boring" because everything went exactly as planned.

"The action starts when the engine shuts down. The whole idea is, 'How do we get this engine ready to go in 24 hours?' " he said. "Nothing went wrong. The data is exactly what we expected. The engine did exactly what we were expecting it to."

The goal is to create a new type of spacecraft that can launch into low Earth orbit on short-notice – days instead of months or years – and cost less than traditional space programs.

The spacecraft would be unmanned and roughly about the size of a business jet. It would take off vertically and once it reaches a certain altitude a second stage would be released that could then deploy a satellite to orbit.

The first stage would glide back to earth and land horizontally on a runway like an airplane. It would then be able to quickly launch again for another flight. The craft could carry payloads between 3,000 and 5,000 pounds, said Steve Johnston, from Boeing.

Historically, launching satellites into space has been an expensive endeavor that requires a lot of lead time, said Scott Wierzbanowski, from DARPA.

"What we wanted to do at DARPA was change that paradigm. We wanted to enable tactical use of space, to be able to make it more affordable, to reduce times to space," Mr. Wierzbanowski said. "We want to show that you can have a reusable space system and use it on a daily basis."

One of the key challenges is drying the moisture in the engine that's created when the fuel – liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen – combusts, said Jeff Haynes, from Aerojet. Once the engine has been test fired, they run high-pressure air through the system for hours to dry it out.

"It generates a whole bunch of moisture and water within the engine," he said. With the space shuttle program, that moisture was also an issue but the drying only had to happen over weeks or months. "We have to show that we can do it in about eight hours, maybe six hours."

Wierzbanowski said the Phantom Express actually uses many of the capabilities and technologies from the space shuttle – specifically the main engine and thermal protection system.

This story was reported by The Associated Press. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to How to make space exploration less expensive? Reuse the rockets.
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today