Mach 10 - NASA kicks butt again.

[CFLarsen]

The high-risk, unpiloted 12-foot-long scramjet-powered vehicle will be launched from the wing of the B-52B over the Pacific Ocean at an altitude of 40,000 feet, then boosted to the test altitude of nearly 110,000 feet by its modified Pegasus booster rocket. Following separation from the booster, the X-43A will fly briefly under its own power at nearly 10 times the speed of sound, or 7,000 mph.

Mission events will be broadcast on NASA TV http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

Source: NASA (http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/x43-main.html)

Wow.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

NASA, we do rocket science every day.

[Michael Redman]

Big deal. In 40 years, some private consortium will do exactly the same thing, but with newer materials, and it won't cost as much. That will be worthy of great praise.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

The ultimate goal of this research is single stage to orbit craft and commercial airliners that go possibly Mach 20, and you thought the concord was fast. :)

[Michael Redman]

It's in the air now, waiting to launch. I'm watching the feed. Thanks for putting this up.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
Big deal. In 40 years, some private consortium will do exactly the same thing, but with newer materials, and it won't cost as much. That will be worthy of great praise.

Based on government research.

Thank you for calling.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
It's in the air now, waiting to launch. I'm watching the feed. Thanks for putting this up.

You're welcome.

[garys_2k]

Went off as planned, I see. Congrats to NASA.

[DangerousBeliefs]

This is nothing... the Aurora has been flying a scram jet for 10 years now. :D

(Psst. It's based on alien technology)

[Disco]

Originally posted by garys_2k
Went off as planned, I see. Congrats to NASA.

I'll pass on your congrats-my husband works for systems safety on this project. They're lifting a few beers in Lancaster, in celebration, as I post.

He was in the control room all day yesterday, no breaks, and was kinda convinced it would not go today, either. I'm glad all is well so he doesn't have to go in again tomorrow at 4 am. :D

Thanks Claus for this thread. Our NASA teams need all the support they can get. DOD is doing their best to force them out of the US budget. :(

MHB

[Dylab]

So how long until they are going to be able to put something into orbit using one of these things?

[Mercutio]

On the morning news, they were saying this technology would be used (eventually) for a New York to Los Angeles flight that would take half an hour.

Yeah...color me skeptical. What would be the G forces on takeoff and landing for such a flight?

[Disco]

Originally posted by Mercutio
On the morning news, they were saying this technology would be used (eventually) for a New York to Los Angeles flight that would take half an hour.

Yeah...color me skeptical. What would be the G forces on takeoff and landing for such a flight?

True, Merc, but as I understand from my husband it would still be lifted from the ground on a conventional airplane & only achieve mach+ once in the air. But landing? Good question. Our guess is this is another DOD obfuscation for public consumption only. Great press, NASA in the media, more $ diverted to DOD. NASA is getting the shaft from all ends for media coverage in the public eye. And the sad thing is that most guys & gals in NASA don't really see the long term problem this creates, they are just glad they still have some limited funding.

MHB

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by ooh_child
I'll pass on your congrats-my husband works for systems safety on this project. They're lifting a few beers in Lancaster, in celebration, as I post.

Hopefully, the beers are big enough to be lifted by rockets... :)

Originally posted by ooh_child
Thanks Claus for this thread. Our NASA teams need all the support they can get. DOD is doing their best to force them out of the US budget. :(

You're welcome. I share your concern.

Think hubby could be persuaded to come here and answer questions? It could be cool to talk to someone behind the project.

[neutrino_cannon]

Originally posted by SkepticJ
The ultimate goal of this research is single stage to orbit craft and commercial airliners that go possibly Mach 20, and you thought the concord was fast. :)

Jeez, and you thought the concorde was a fuel-guzzler.


Mercutio:

Ramjets or scram (Structural ramjets, or external combusion engines) only function appreciably at high speeds, that's why it has to be boosted by a rocket first. In a manned aircraft you would probably have some sort of turbofan auxilliary engine to accelerate you slowly up to speed before you switched on the scramjet.

Does anyone have a complete list of hot testbeds that have been nuzzled under the motherly wing of a BUFF? I count X-1, and X-15, but I know there's way more than that.

[stingy get]

It seems to me that every-so-often there's a flurry of activity and interest in ramjets/scramjets, then it just dies a death.

I have a book from 30 years ago which details a ramjet aircraft able to carry passengers from London to Sydney in a few hours. 20 years ago whilst at University the HOTOL project was the future of spaceflight - funding was cut at the end of the eighties.

Now there's work going on at NASA and in Australia, (Hyshot) but from what I've read this is the last launch planned by NASA. Again - funding problems.

So, I not holding out much hope of any tangible developments in the near future.

BTW, this prompted me to look up the HOTOL project and see what happened to it - apparently a small team of diehards are still working on something similar:

[davidhorman]

Big deal. In 40 years, some private consortium will do exactly the same thing, but with newer materials, and it won't cost as much. That will be worthy of great praise.

Just in case you aren't being sarcastic...

Someone will always come along later and do something better - it's called progress. Doesn't mean we should scoff at what's being done now.

"Did you hear? The Wright brothers flew a powered aircraft for 12 seconds!"

"Big deal. In 40 years, planes will be flying across the Atlantic."

David

[Oleron]

Originally posted by Mercutio
On the morning news, they were saying this technology would be used (eventually) for a New York to Los Angeles flight that would take half an hour.

Yeah...color me skeptical. What would be the G forces on takeoff and landing for such a flight?

They could make this an advantage -

"Transam flight and non-surgical facelift - Get your ticket now!"

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by davidhorman
Just in case you aren't being sarcastic...

Someone will always come along later and do something better - it's called progress. Doesn't mean we should scoff at what's being done now.

"Did you hear? The Wright brothers flew a powered aircraft for 12 seconds!"

"Big deal. In 40 years, planes will be flying across the Atlantic."

David

One notable exception: Parapsychology. ;)

[Anders]

Originally posted by Dylab
So how long until they are going to be able to put something into orbit using one of these things?
I think that's the aim of this project. Instead of using expansive and dangerous rockets, they use safe Jets to get the vehicle up to a large height and perhaps even into orbit. I'm not sure if it's possible to retain the velocity to escape earths gravity field. I'm sure someone else on this board knows that.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Originally posted by Anders
I think that's the aim of this project. Instead of using expansive and dangerous rockets, they use safe Jets to get the vehicle up to a large height and perhaps even into orbit. I'm not sure if it's possible to retain the velocity to escape earths gravity field. I'm sure someone else on this board knows that.

A grown-up may need to correct me, but escape velocity is around 17,000mph and Mach 15 (the stated aim at the NASA website is only about 2/3 of that) So I think it's suborbital only- which frankly is a lot less interesting when what we would really like is an easy route into space.

Could the path to orbit be a stack of plane-rocket-scramjet-rocket? Where the plane and scramjet phases are still worthwhile because of the avoidance of carrying O2 for that phase of the acceleration.

[BillHoyt]

Originally posted by Mercutio
On the morning news, they were saying this technology would be used (eventually) for a New York to Los Angeles flight that would take half an hour.

Yeah...color me skeptical. What would be the G forces on takeoff and landing for such a flight?

Aye, there's the rub. It would take half an hour, plus 1/2 hour to find a parking slot, 2 hours through security, 1/2 hour wait at the gate, 1/2 hour to accelerate to mach 10, 1/2 hour to decelerate from mach 10, 1 hour in hold pattern, waiting for landing clearance, 1/2 hour to deplane, 1/2 hour for your luggage, 1/4 hour to hail a taxi at the airport. Total time? Under 7 hours.

[Michael Redman]

Originally posted by davidhorman
Just in case you aren't being sarcastic... Of course I'm being sarcastic.

[Soapy Sam]

"Aye, there's the rub. It would take half an hour, plus 1/2 hour to find a parking slot, 2 hours through security, 1/2 hour wait at the gate, 1/2 hour to accelerate to mach 10, 1/2 hour to decelerate from mach 10, 1 hour in hold pattern, waiting for landing clearance, 1/2 hour to deplane, 1/2 hour for your luggage, 1/4 hour to hail a taxi at the airport. Total time? Under 7 hours."- BillHoyt

Aye. And as Sir Arthur pointed out many years ago- Half the time the toilet will be out of order and half the time it will be out of reach."

[patnray]

Originally posted by Badly Shaved Monkey
A grown-up may need to correct me, but escape velocity is around 17,000mph and Mach 15 (the stated aim at the NASA website is only about 2/3 of that) So I think it's suborbital only- which frankly is a lot less interesting when what we would really like is an easy route into space.

Could the path to orbit be a stack of plane-rocket-scramjet-rocket? Where the plane and scramjet phases are still worthwhile because of the avoidance of carrying O2 for that phase of the acceleration.

Correct. A jet could never reach orbit due to lack of oxygen. Even if you could reach 17,000 mph in the atmosphere without burning up from friction it would slow down, from friction, without reaching orbit. But it has enormous potential as a reuseable booster to either reduce the size and cost of the final rocket stage or increase the lift capacity of current rockets.

Soapy Sam's comment reminds me of the old saying, "If you've time to spare, go by air"...

[Zep]

This is amazing stuff. AND it's REAL science. AND it's REAL adventure too! :clap:

[thatguywhojuggles]

Kudos, NASA!

[Disco]

Originally posted by CFLarsen

Think hubby could be persuaded to come here and answer questions? It could be cool to talk to someone behind the project.

Sadly, I doubt it.

First, I don't think he would be comfortable talking about the project in an open forum w/ his security clearance, & how weird our country is right now about "homeland security". He probably wouldn't even be happy about me talking about it. (You have no idea the wringer I went through just to get HIS clearance.) So, I don't even want to tell him about this post.

Second, he thinks I'm a little weird lurking (mostly) around you guys. Hey, I think y'all are great & I've learned SO much from reading the many threads here. He just thinks I pick up bad ideas from you guys! :D

He did say that this is it for Hyper-X. No more funding. We're not sure what he'll be working on next. :(

Thanks for all the congrats-I'll pass it on in a discreet way.

MHB