Slashdot Mirror


Air Force Sets Date To Fly Mach-6 Scramjet

coondoggie writes "The US Air Force said it was looking to launch its 14-foot long X-51A Waverider on its first hypersonic flight test attempt May 25. The unmanned X-51A is expected to fly autonomously for five minutes, after being released from a B-52 Stratofortress off the southern coast of California. The Waverider is powered by a supersonic combustion scramjet engine, and will accelerate to about Mach 6 as it climbs to nearly 70,000 feet. Once flying, the X-51 will transmit vast amounts of data to ground stations about the flight, then splash down into the Pacific. There are no plans to recover the flight test vehicle, one of four built, the Air Force stated."

22 of 252 comments (clear)

  1. Great step forward by ravenspear · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The next generation in civilian transportation.

    There are no plans to recover the flight test vehicle

    NY to Paris in 30 minutes! However, only one way tickets are allowed.

    1. Re:Great step forward by SEWilco · · Score: 4, Funny

      There are no plans to recover the flight test vehicle

      They can't recover it because it already came back yesterday.
      So the test flight will be a resounding, albeit puzzling, success.

    2. Re:Great step forward by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Indeed, I never figured out why the Concorde was banned in America. Unless it was purely for economic protectionism. Mythbusters tested sonic booms and they had to fly like 100 feet over a shed to blow out the windows. They started at 1000 feet and got no result. I think the Concorde flew a little higher than that.

    3. Re:Great step forward by RockoTDF · · Score: 4, Informative

      It was banned on and off throughout its career. It didn't do too many supersonic flights in the states even when it was allowed. It wasn't even that loud on takeoff, and flew higher than regular airliners.

      --
      There is more to science than physics!

      www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
    4. Re:Great step forward by RockoTDF · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to the wikipedia article on the concorde, it was actually quieter than many other models in service at the time.

      --
      There is more to science than physics!

      www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
    5. Re:Great step forward by phishtahko · · Score: 3, Funny

      A mach here, a mach there and soon you are talking real machs.

      Old McDonald had a scramjet?

    6. Re:Great step forward by RockoTDF · · Score: 3, Informative

      15 to 20? Citation needed there. That is between 2000-3000 lbs on a 150 pound person. Fighter pilots have to train to maintain high Gs, which even then they only pull for a matter of seconds (at the highest levels) when flying, and for maybe a few minutes in a centrifuge. They have to wear g-suits to avoid blacking out. Early on during the Korean war, the Mig pilots from the North didn't have g-suits. So the American pilots quickly figured out that if you just get them to follow you into a very high g turn they would black out and crash.

      --
      There is more to science than physics!

      www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
    7. Re:Great step forward by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative

      It seriously annoys me that people take Mythbusters psuedo-scientific results and applies them to everything possible - they used the F/A-18A, which at 35,000lb would be 1/10th the weight of Concorde (and I bet that the F/A-18A in the test had a significantly lower loading than that), and the test was done at significantly lower speeds than Concorde cruises at.

      I am doubtful as to the validity of the results the Mythbusters came up with, as it was already proven during the Oklahoma City Sonic Boom tests in 1964 caused hundreds of broken windows (windows in skyscraper structures were broken routinely over the course of the tests, with no significant occurances before and after the tests - make your own conclusions).

      Apart from physical damage, you seriously have to consider the environmental impact - can people live with loud bangs as a routine? Again, the Oklahoma City tests showed that no, people are not willing to put up with routine sonic booms as they are disruptive and invasive.

    8. Re:Great step forward by settantta · · Score: 5, Interesting

      According to the wikipedia article on the concorde, it was actually quieter than many other models in service at the time.

      I can confirm that.

      At one time I lived directly under the flight path to Darwin Airport (in Australia). That airport is also the local Air Force base and runway, so we had not only Boeing 747s and other passenger planes flying directly overhead at an altitude of less than 500 feet, but we also had Air Force Mirages on the same flight path.

      During the time I lived there, the Concorde visited, landing and taking off twice (or it might have been 3 times). I'll tell you straight, the Concorde made less noise on take-off than the Jumbo (and they were much quieter than the Mirages).

    9. Re:Great step forward by ZosX · · Score: 3, Funny

      can people live with loud bangs as a routine?

      The evidence where I live (Valencia, Spain; a city addicted to pyrotechnics) is that yes, we can.

      Welcome to hong kong. ;)

      Welcome to my hood!

  2. Geotaggers, your mission should you choose to.. by qwerty8ytrewq · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..accept it, is to go and get this baby. It should fetch a good price on ebay. I can only imagine the difficulties of finding this craft in the Pacific Ocean, but if you could... Legend status is yours.

    --
    Waiting for the other shoe to...
  3. Wait a minute.... by mikesd81 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are no plans to recover the flight test vehicle, one of four built, the Air Force stated."

    I would suspect that there is some secret stuff in this plane....so unless it plans on breaking up into a huge fireball right before it hits the ocean.....wouldn't it be foolish to drop something like that and not retrieve it?

    --
    That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
    1. Re:Wait a minute.... by Jaysyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If it's going to hit the ocean anywhere near Mach 6 (3900+ MPH), it will be a huge fireball. At the very least it will disintegrate.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  4. Re:Umm... by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

    In this case, it's splash!

  5. Re:Nuke Engines by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yeah so now every time a plane overshoots a runway we have a radiation leak...

    Nuclear energy is great for things like space travel and for generating electricity. It isn't so great for earth-bound transportation where it could easily leak. Not to mention the restrictions on a plane. Who cares if it can go from New York to Paris in an hour if it won't be able to be landed in Paris due to the fact it has nuclear material...

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  6. Re:Nuke Engines by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    nuclear...isn't so great for earth bound travel

    quick! Nobody tell the Navy they've been using numerous nuclear powered aircraft carriers for earth bound travel for almost 50 years without incident!

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  7. Re:Always money for military space projects by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Informative

    "We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

    This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

    Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

    In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

    Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

    The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

    Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. " -- Dwight D Eisenhower, 1961

  8. About time..... by Brad1138 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone else think it is odd that the fastest plane in the world is still the SR-71, which came into service in 1964.

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    1. Re:About time..... by El+Capitaine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or that we landed a man on the moon in 1969 and yet we no longer have that capability?

  9. Would a faster SR-71 even be publicly known? by WoTG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If there was a plane faster than an SR-71, there's no guarantee that it would be public knowledge.

    That said, a fast plane isn't as necessary for spying as it was in the 60's. Who knows what kind of crazy tech is out there doing the hard spy work now, the geek in me hopes that there's something more interesting than satellites...

  10. Re:Always money for military space projects by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 4, Informative

    You have no clue... A mach 6 fighter/bomber would very much be useful in the armament. At that speed it can outrun most missiles used to shoot it down. Very few weapons platforms can track and engage an aircraft flying faster than mach 4 at the moment, let alone something flying mach 6. There are only a handful of missiles (surface-to-air or air-to-air) which can even travel mach 6 or faster, which means you can only attach from a forward vector and once it passes your position or is flying away from you, your missiles will not be able to catch the plane. This assumes that your radar system can even detect a plane that fast and can instruct the missile how to intercept the target.

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
  11. French have had this for 30 years by copponex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They have had this in France for years. France is largely nuclear powered and sells electricity to it's neighbors. The train is a very sensible tech platform - uses existing rail lines for up to 140mph, and can go up to 200mph on specially graded track. I took the TGV from Paris to Marseille - a few hours for what would have been a six or seven hour drive and at least 3 or 4 hours through an airport.

    Most Americans have no idea how convenient rail travel is. I bought my ticket 10 minutes before the train left, and a few minutes after boarding I was enjoying a cup of coffee while I sat in the equivalent of first class on an airplane for about $50. I had a table, a full size restroom nearby, and dining car at my disposal. If you've really got the dough or don't have the time, you can walk on without a ticket and pay the conductor the highest rate.

    Planes are still the way to go for cross-continental travel, but a regional electric train system is a no brainer. Well, if you have a society that wants reality based solutions instead of empty rhetoric like "Drill, baby, drill."