Slashdot Mirror
Brits To Crash Test a Scramjet
hywel_ap_ieuan writes "The BBC is reporting that a the "Hyshot consortium" will be testing a scramjet called Hyshot III in Australia on Friday. The fun part: "If everything goes to plan, the experiment will begin at a height of 35 km. As the engine continues its downward path the fuel in the scramjet is expected to automatically ignite. The scientists will then have just six seconds to monitor its performance before the £1m engine eventually crashes into the ground.""
Perhaps they could team up with some Earth Sciences researchers doing work on crater formation...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
All expeirements should end in some kind of explosion! What good is being a scienctist if you don't get to blow shit up?!?
> "If everything goes to plan, the experiment will begin at a height of 35 km. As the engine continues its downward path the fuel in the scramjet is expected to automatically ignite. The scientists will then have just six seconds to monitor its performance before the £1m engine eventually crashes into the ground."
Revised for 2006: "We'll settle for one out of three these days... as long as you have a hell of a lot of it to compensate."
Then again, the British did usher in the passener jet age with the Comet.
and that will be obvious after my question........
but couldn't they build it to survive impact into the ocean, and then retrieve it?
I seem to remember the US space program doing this when they first went to the moon. And that man who singlehandedly built the rocket and went to the moon. What was his name? Apollo Creed? Anyways Tom Hanks was really great in that movie. Forest Gump I think it was.
On its descent the engine is expected to reach a top speed of Mach 7.6 or over 9,000km/ hour.
I think crash is a bit of an understatement!
This has been done before, at Woomera test range. The University of Queensland launched HyShot in 2002, and had a major success.
. htm
http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/default
I'm sure they could suggest hundreds of places where they'd like to see a new crater. Two birds with one stone 'n' all that.
"The White House is not an intelligence-gathering agency," -- Scott McClellan, Whitehouse spokesman.
it can only be deemed a failure if it *doesn't* crash? -- jeek
ScramJet is the work of Australians Ray Stalker and Allan Paull who achieved the phenomenon with a budget of tins cans, string and glue
RTFA: "The scramjet engine, known as Hyshot III, has been designed by British defence firm Qinetiq."
There's this concept called "international collaboration". It's not actually impossible for a project to involve people from more than one country. Yes, and one of the Australians you name is in charge. But the scramjet engine that's being tested on Friday was designed by the British. A few days later they'll be testing another one that was designed in Japan. After that, there's an Australian-designed one lined up too.
We're talking big money international collaboration here. Stalker and Paull aren't working with a budget of tin cans any more.
Until MythBusters decides to try this one!
Creative misinterpretation is your friend.
Nasa failed with a team of hundreds and a 9 figure budget.
The first much-ballyhooed flight may have failed (because the Pegasus rocket exploded, not because of a problem with the scramjet), but the Hyper-X program is considered a rousing success, with two successful hypersonic flights and a new jet-powered speed record of Mach 9.6.
That being said, I applaud the efforts of the University of Queensland, who is helping push the limits of aerospace knowledge. If they can do that on a shoestring budget, then that's all the better.
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
Do you see a comment by "heatdeath" responded to by "LiquidCoooled."
Computational Chemistry products and services.
a plane flight to tokyo won't put you in danger of deep vein thrombosis.
Sure blame the plane flight for DVTs. I mean, forget about the fact you weight 300 lbs (around the same as your cholesterol level), smoke, take birth control pills and are diabetic. It's the plane trip that caused it...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
However scramjets do not begin to work until they reach five times the speed of sound.
All scramjets, including this one, use rockets to get the engine up to speed - scramjets don't work at subsonic speeds.
They're trying to test an engine design here. Would you rather have them spend 200M building a whole craft to test an engine that's likely to be used only once? They're a long way from an anything that could actually be used for something practical, so cheapest is best as long as it moves the ball forward.
I'd have thought that getting as much data as humanly possible would be worth almost any additional effort.
Ah....This ending pretty much explains the whole comment. You must be a physicist....certainly NOT an engineer. There is always diminishing returns on investment. You must pick a price point evaluate what you will get out of any test. More data is almost always better, but somebody has to pay out in the real (non-university) world.
Other errors:
There are solid state data recorders specifically made for high speed impacts. On the order of 100,000 G's. Place one in the back behind something heavy/solid and you shouldn't have any problem.
Wireless can hit 10,000,000 bits/second with one channel. Throw a couple of S-band channels and you have a stout communication line to the ground. Plus the hardware (Rx stations) is already in place at most ranges.
I assume they are doing the burn on the way down because they couldn't afford a rocket big enough to accelerate up to M=7.6 in a dense atmosphere. Plus they don't have to deal with all the heating issues while they are accelerating. Take a nice gentle ride at speeds up to M=3 or 4 and then use gravity to assist you up to the desired speed for the test. As an ENGINEER, I like their simple, low-cost solution to their test.
Religion and science are both 90% crap..but that doesn't negate the other 10%.
The engineering behind the ramjet and scramjet couldn't be any more different. Ramjets are basically scramjet engines that purposefully slow the air intake so that combustion can occur. In a scramjet the big problem is that the air is moving so fast that when you ignite the fuel/air mixture, the combustion will actually take place outside the engine. It would be ridiculous to slow the air, so the problem lies in how you get the mixture to ignite sooner. To this end they are testing ionizing mixtures, etc. Some scramjet geometries are highly classified.
Here's a good link that talks about the combustion issue: http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-10/iss-4/p24.htm l
And of course some general information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet
Anything worth doing can be done in 6 seconds! ;)
... Windows 98. No, seriously, think about it:
The scientists will then have just six seconds to monitor its performance before the £1m engine eventually crashes into the ground.
Replace the word "scientists" with "consumers", "£1m" with "$5b", and "engine" with "OS." Also, add the phrase "If it boots," before the statement.
Latewire