Small Can Sometimes Be Better

One of the futuristic technologies the article cited reads a lot like the British Skylon concept ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_Engines_Skylon ), a runway takeoff and landing orbital vehicle. Not exactly a "smaller" type of project, but probably a must-have technology when it becomes feasible.

While they're at it they should try to find some much needed solutions to our CEV quandary, two of which might be:
-A way for a ballistic capsule (Orion) to transform itself into a lifting body or semi-glider after entry,
or
-a large, high performance carrier plane that can somehow make a mid-air intercept of an Orion capsule. This might also be useful for sky borne rescues of disabled planes.

I might add about mid-air intercept--it would be fortuitous in case of bad weather at the planned landing site (which a fast return capsule could not otherwise avoid); the plane could intercept Orion above the bad weather and fly to a clear landing-strip.
Regarding the feasibility of intercepting and carrying an Orion: If a 747 can carry a Shuttle Orbiter, then there's certainly hope for a plane bearing up under an Orion mating. It just needs to make the capture.

Man the timing on that would have to be ridiculous. Maybe you could have a huge tether flying above to allow more margin but geez. GPS failure on the Orion would not be an option.

If you're thinking the Orion will land on top of the plane then please pass a little of what you're smoking.

The auto-gyro of that gaetanomarano guy or just adding some control surfaces for a little bit of range is much more believable.

Am I not seeing something?

hikingmike: "Am I not seeing something?"

I'm basing my fundamental feasibility assumption on the NASA announced plan of using mid-air intercept for Orion Lite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_Lite

How they do it is up to them, my point was that the issue with the un-Lite Orion must be its size and mass, so they must need a bigger plane than what they had planned for the Lite.
And since a plane now carries an Orbiter, which is bigger and heavier than Orion, then it's probably feasible. It's all just simple logic about basic feasibility, not an actual detailed method, which I hope they can be creative about themselves.

The copter blades might help; also some directional capability so it can turn around if it overshoots, or spiral so it stays in a zone.

If its capable of making a ground or water landing anyway, then attempting an intercept that fails does not doom the capsule; it can still make its pathetic splash-down or whatever.

The Wikipedia page says nothing about aerial recovery being NASA's plan. It's part of something that Bigelow's pitching to NASA, according to the article cited in the page.