As the aerospace world prepares to say goodbye to the space shuttles, engineers are looking for cheaper, faster replacements. The German space agency is apparently ahead of the game, announcing a retro-looking multi-faceted design late last week.
The German Aerospace Centre (DLR) is developing a heat-resistant, 8-sided rocket that can re-enter the atmosphere without breaking up or suffering much damage, according to The Local. It would be the only rocket capable of guiding itself home.
The flat-sided nose cone has eight faces, which provides better aerodynamics and cheaper construction than a round nose. Last week, DLR scientists unveiled the 8-foot nose cone for the SHEFEX II program, short for “sharp-edged test flight,” at the DLR headquarters near Munich. It will make its first test flight next March in Australia.Hendrik Weihs, the DLR’s project leader, says the goal is to create, step-by-step, a reusable space glider. Germany funded the $16 million project.
It would be an improvement over current ballistic systems like those used by Russia and China, which are incapable of a controlled re-entry.
The SHEFEX II rocket could be controlled as it descends from about 60 miles above Earth. Once it reaches roughly 12 miles, a parachute would guide it home.
One major problem is keeping the nose cool, and that’s where the multiple facets come in. They will deflect the heat of re-entry so that only the apex will get extremely hot. What’s more, gas will be pushed through the apex to act as a buffer.
After initial unmanned tests in the Australian Outback next spring, it’s possible DLR could stage a manned flight, with cooperation from the European Union and the U.S., Weihs says.
Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
This new rocket design only cost $16 million to develop. Why can't NASA do that? They spend hundreds of millions developing something. What's wrong here?
looks kinda flash gordon ish
People of england beware. This looks like a V3 rocket to me.
@anotherconsumer
They are just developing a model, mainly the body of the rocket. To develop the whole rocket with engines, etc. etc will cost far-far more than 16 mill. If a small airliner cost ten million of dollars just to assemble on a production line, imagine the cost to develop such a thing from the ground up.
Thinking such a thing could be cheap is just the lack of understanding how developing is done.
So that's why NASA seems to be inept these days- the German rocket scientists are staying in Germany!
The headline makes it sound like they have already flown this design.
There is a big difference between being proved on paper and in reality.
Without "breaking up or suffering much damage".......
Uh...considering how nasty re-entry is, almost any damage would be catastrophic, no? Especially the to any part that's critical in protecting the vehicle during re-entry.
What caused Columbia to break up? Wasn't it a hole in the fuselage that allowed super heated air into the body that melted/destroyed stuff that lead to the breakup of the space craft?
I can see SpaceX and NASA drafters everywhere opening up SolidWorks/ProE and turning all those round extrusions into octagons.
Cyback of Prexus
Actually rpenri it was a tile in the wing that was damaged by foam off of the external fuel tank on liftoff.