Slashdot Mirror
NASA Tests X-43A
An anonymous reader writes "NASA TV has live coverage of the
launch of the X-43A
scram jet flight. Hopes are that the unmanned vehicle will reach speeds in
excess of mach 7-10. The last flight a few years ago failed." Stephen Watts sends this link for X-43A background information.
The last time they launched the (unmanned) scramjet, it crashed.
Well, don't turn it off. As I was typing this they said it's launching in the next 9 minutes.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
The funny part, when they finally did launch you couldn't see the damn thing.
They should have launched 2. One with the camera and one doing the test.
Rod Taylor
I'm actually watching the windows media stream live in totem as we speak, works like a charm without the real player linux vulnerabilities...
I had to laugh out-loud when one of the NASA folks (S2?) referred to the B52 as a BUFF. (Air Force jargon: Big Ugly Fat Fscker ...)
Still chuckling a bit. =)
James
NASA TV is going to replay the launch soon. Right now they are showing a board stating that they will replay the launch shortly...
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
There's an old Airforce saying: A new plane doesn't make a new engine possible, A new engine makes a new plane possible. That's why when NASA went for the moon a critical development was the F-1 first stage rocket engine. Capable of 1.5M lbs. of thrust it allowed the Saturn V first stage to be built with only 5 engines. Compare this with the Russian failed manned lunar rocket the Energia (I think) which had 20 engines. They never were able to work all together (vibrational problems) and abandoned it after several launch disasters. So why is NASA cancelling this program in particular? Are we (under Bush's program) sacrificing everything to plant a flag on Mars and not making space flight practical? It might be worth it if we ever got to Mars but it looks highly doubtful that his proposal is a serious attempt at anything but votes!
A lot of posts are commenting on how fast this is.
Speed is not the point of this experiment.. there have already been a number of aircraft faster than this, much faster.
The point is that, after boosting it to mach 5 with a conventional engine, it was set free for the scramjet to work, and it boosted it another mach or two.. meaning the scramjet worked.
Not having to carry liquid oxygen means you can now carry more fuel, cargo, whatever.
If there were only some way to work scramjets into the war on terrorism....
How about the idea that's been floating around of a hypersonic bomber capable of reaching any target in the world within two hours?
Interesting in how they mentitoned we probably won't be seeing this in the civilian sector for some time because of size constriants (ie; more unstable the larger the craft is), but it has potential crusie missile applications and other military stuff.
Now reconissance I can see. A small mach 7 spy plane is going to be damn hard to hit. but cruise missile? That is one expensive shot. I mean, a tomahawk is something like $500,000 a piece, right? You gotta be having something awfully important to be hitting in a hurry to be shooting of an X-Missile. And what kind of warhead are you mounting on it to make it worth the while?? I guess for first strike shock value, they'll work. Instant retaliation. But damn, you'd better have a good reason....
You need a FREE iPod Nano
did anyone manage to find any statistics anywhere about the average fuel consumption on that trip? It's probably not quite the first issue on most peoples' minds but it'd be interesting to know anyway.
Sigs for Nerds. Sigs that Matter.