Slashdot Mirror


USAF Scramjet Hits Mach 6, Sets Record

s122604 writes "The [X-51A Waverider]'s scramjet engine accelerated the vehicle to Mach 6, and it flew autonomously for 200 seconds before losing acceleration. At that point the test was terminated. The Air Force said the previous record for a hypersonic scramjet burn was 12 seconds. Joe Vogel, Boeing's director of hypersonics, said, 'This is a new world record and sets the foundation for several hypersonic applications, including access to space, reconnaissance, strike, global reach and commercial transportation.'"

8 of 326 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why so short bursts? by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Proof of concept. Scientists can only go so far on theory ( and it's impressive how far they do go ). At some point their research hits a point where they need to perform experiments.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  2. Re:Why so short bursts? by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keep in mind that at mach six 200 seconds is 400 kilometers. That's already enough range to make a useful weapon (and yes I realize there was some acceleration time in there). Heck, that's already longer range than the most advanced missiles that many countries have. Increase the stability to just 10 minutes of burn time and you've got a missile that can go 5% of the way around the world.

  3. Re:Uh hu by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Commercial applications do usually follow. Whether or not you agree with it, military research has led to an enormous number of scientific advances that were initially used by the military but later disseminated more broadly. Jet engines, the Internet, cryptography, GPS, nuclear reactors, etc. Mach 6 might be inefficient overkill for Earth-side transportation, but it may provide a viable means of launching spaceflights one day.

    --
    $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
  4. Re:Why so short bursts? by rufty_tufty · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Likewise you want to stop the test before failure so you can look for signs of component wear and material stress so that you know what to improve for next time. Stopping at 200 seconds and finding this out is very useful. Stopping at 201 seconds after it has exploded and you have to work out from the pieces what went wrong is not as informative.

    --
    "The weirdest thing about a mind, is that every answer that you find, is the basis of a brand new cliche" -
  5. Re:Why so short bursts? by ckaminski · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except they're not recovering these vehicles for analysis.

  6. Re:FYI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Assuming the acceleration is modest, her facial expression aqt Mach 6 should be identical to when she's sitting on her living room sofa.

  7. Re:Why so short bursts? by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's all part of the Prompt Global Strike program. Eventually the goal is to have scramjet powered missiles with a range of 12000+ miles. Allowing you to fire an obviously non-nuclear missile from Kansas to North Korea and have it hit the target in less than 3 hours. Basically, even launching a B2 for a direct strike takes days or weeks. Refueling planes need to be put into the air, mission plans drawn up, clearance over foreign airspace cleared, pilots briefed, etc. They want to be able to say "Fire" and have the missile in the air within minutes and at target within hours; with the added benefit of not putting any American lives in harms way.

  8. Re:FYI... by Sique · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or you just lie flat on the earth and let gravity do about the same.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*