Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA to Attempt Mach 10 Flight Next Week

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the hello-john-val-says-hi dept.

Dirak writes "NASA intends to break its own aircraft-speed record for the second time this year by flying X43a scramjet ten times faster than sound. On November 15 the X-43A supersonic-combustion ramjet - or scramjet - will again take to the skies aiming for Mach 10."

8 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. To Bad for the sonic Boom. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All this extra speed will not be available for the common public until they can resolve the problem with the sonic boom. Once that is resolved I think it would be a lot more interesting where they could have supersonic flights that go over land as well. And the general public will advance. Right now having an airplain that can go at Mach 10 is somewhat useless because we can already out fly our enemies planes which most were build during the cold war times.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:To Bad for the sonic Boom. by Saltine+Cracker · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At an altitude of 110,000 feet, I don't think surface dwellers need to worry too much about sonic booms.

      Or is the point of your post that the Government shouldn't fund research unless it's fruits can be made readily available to the public?

  2. Final Flight by SimURL · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If successful it would be a great accomplishment. However, according to this Wired article
    http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,65671, 00.html?tw=wn_tophead_3,
    NASA is "phasing out its hypersonic engine program to free up funding for President Bush's 'Vision for Space Exploration,' which calls on NASA to focus its energy on sending humans to the moon and Mars."

    Therefore,
    "As of now, next week's X-43A flight is the final flight in the $230 million program."

    I can't help but wonder if these priorities are correct as I'm not quite sure what we intend to do after we reach the moon and Mars.

  3. Re:Very Cool, But... by susano_otter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think that if the theoretical parameters of the ideal scramjet play out in practice, they'll be a very efficient motor for getting things into low earth orbit.

    Sure, they don't work outside the atmosphere, but what about a next-gen shuttle that develops most of its thrust during the scramjet phase, uses a small rocket motor to get that extra bit of velocity at the upper end, and still has enough room left over for some worthwhile payload?

    I imagine that's the kind of thing NASA's interested in.

    Space Ship Two, anyone?

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  4. Blackbird and the Swedish fighter Viggen by 3770 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The U.S. Blackbird spy plane was _really_ fast when it came out. It is still probably one of the fastest aircrafts out there. Maybe still the fastest.

    The Swedish fighter jet, Viggen (which is built by SAAB) was the first fighter plane to ever get a "lock" on the blackbird.

    The Swedish radar systems got it on radar. The Viggen flew to intercept it with after burners on the whole time.

    It got a lock on it and then had to turn back because it was out of fuel. There was of course never any intention of firing a missile, but still.

    The black bird crew sent a box of chocolate to the Swedish air base and said "Congratulations!".

    At least, this is what I heard. Whether it really is true, I couldn't tell you for sure.

    --
    The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
  5. Re:What is the Speed of Sound? by ab762 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Precisely - Mach 1 is the local speed of sound. Specifically, it's the velocity at which shockwaves propagate. If you are flying at Mach 1 (plus delta) you are encountering a medium which is uninfluenced by your motion until you encounter it - it doesn't have time to get out of the way. That makes a huge difference to the behavior, a little like the difference between swimming in water and swimming in concrete!

    There is, of course, a FAQ on this Frequently Asked Question.

  6. It means Mach 10 at the altitude it will be flying by i41Overlord · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It will be 10 times the speed of sound at the altitude the craft will be flying.

    You can't take the sea level speed of mach and multiply it by 10, because that would be incorrect. The speed of sound is about 760 mph at sea level, while at 95,000 feet (where the HyperX flies), the speed of sound is about 677 mph.

    So when it flies Mach 10 it is not going 7,600 mph, it is going 6770 mph.

    This is a common mistake that I see being made. Same thing with the SR-71...it is often quoted by dumb journalists as going 2280 mph, which is Mach 3 at speed level. But it can't go Mach 3 at speed level, it would break apart. It goes Mach 3 at 85,000 feet, which is about 1992 mph.

    There's a cool utility for calculating Mach here: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/sound.ht ml

  7. Re:Great by IHateSlashDot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did everybody wake up and take a stupid pill this morning or something? The arguments about this being too fast for commercial flight are in the same vein as early arguments that noboby would ever need more than 64KB of memory. Of course this is acceptable speed for commercial flights. It'll take a while to get there, but it will happen