Slashdot Mirror
New Experimental Lockheed Supersonic Jet Starts Production (wtop.com)
Lockheed Martin's X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology aircraft is officially in "the manufacturing phase," bringing the company "one step closer to enabling supersonic travel for passengers around the world." The experimental jet was awarded a contract from NASA earlier this year as it is capable of flying at supersonic speeds without creating loud supersonic booms. Currently, commercial supersonic aircraft are banned from flying over land because of the noise and potential damage the booms may cause. WTOP reports: "The long, slender design of the aircraft is the key to achieving a low sonic boom," said Peter Iosifidis, Low Boom Flight Demonstrator program manager at Lockheed Martin. "As we enter into the manufacturing phase, the aircraft structure begins to take shape, bringing us one step closer to enabling supersonic travel for passengers around the world," he said.
Lockheed expects to conduct its first flight in 2021 and gather community response data on the acceptability of the "quiet sonic boom" the plane creates. NASA will use that information to establish an acceptable commercial supersonic noise standard to overturn current regulations banning supersonic travel over land. The X-59 will cruise at a speed of about 940 mph and an altitude of 55,000 feet. Lockheed says it will create a sound about as loud as a car door closing, instead of a deafening sonic boom.
Lockheed expects to conduct its first flight in 2021 and gather community response data on the acceptability of the "quiet sonic boom" the plane creates. NASA will use that information to establish an acceptable commercial supersonic noise standard to overturn current regulations banning supersonic travel over land. The X-59 will cruise at a speed of about 940 mph and an altitude of 55,000 feet. Lockheed says it will create a sound about as loud as a car door closing, instead of a deafening sonic boom.
Furthering the bounds or aeronautics research is what the National Aeronautics and Space Administration does, and has been doing since it was the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, back in 1915.
Or didn't you ever wonder what the "A" in NASA stands for?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Because they have the wind tunnels, supercomputers and software to model and supersonic flight airframe designs?
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
If the booms were supersonic, nobody would even complain.
Alas, the booms are indeed sonic.
I know you paid a quarter for that word, but my advice: Ask for change.
They don't boom during takeoff/landing, they boom during flight
"The long and slender design..."
Probably means fewer passengers and a really crappy fuel economy per passenger compared with the wider and slower jets in service.
A dingo ate my sig...
Sonic booms don't happen anywhere near the runway, so why would that matter? You don't think they approach at supersonic speed, do you? This would be to enable cross-country flights at supersonic speeds. And if indeed the noise is like "a car door closing" then calling it a noise event is a bit exaggerated. Maybe somewhere over North Dakota it would add a tiny bit of noise, but not really more than the call of a horny elk would...
So does my muscle car. Learn to like it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Exactly my point.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
That's silly. If you can build a supersonic plane that makes a "boom" that's no louder than a car door closing, why put restrictions on where it can fly? We don't put restrictions on where you can close your car door.
Some history for you. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/7...
May not have been NASA, but it was a Government agency that paid for it.
The program used the Bell Aircraft-built XS-1 rocket engine powered aircraft, with Yeager serving as lead pilot for the Air Force and Hoover for the NACA.
What came of that knowledge I wonder?
The research techniques used for the X-1 program became the pattern for all subsequent X-craft projects, including the X-15 experimental aircraft for hypersonic flight research built by North American Aviation. NASA conducted the X-15 project with the Air Force and the Navy between 1959 and 1968, the plane setting unofficial worldâ(TM)s speed (4,520 miles per hour or Mach 6.7) and altitude (354,200 feet) records. Similar to the X-1 under the B-29, the X-15 was carried into the air under the wing of a B-52 and after release ignited its rocket engine to begin it supersonic flight. Twelve pilots from NASA, the Air Force, the Navy and North American made 199 flights in three X-15 aircraft.
Now, what I expect that will be learned from this specific plane is how to make it economical for public use.
Or, what everything the government does with big business never makes life better for the general population?
Do you really think it would cost less to do this type of research in house by the government itself? Seriously?
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
I expect that they are a less polluting and more economical solution to supersonic flight. I am not assuming(make an ass out of you(me)), but the SST was very expensive for flights and maintenance.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
This looks like a modern version of the OLD X planes. In other words, it is to be used for proving concepts. I still think they are out to correct the complaints about the old SST(Cost per flirght, noise)
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
That's 1513 km/h (or 420 m/s) and 16.8 km.
According to NASA's mach speed calculator, that's Mach 1.42.
With nothing less than civilization at stake, it's a wonder that these projects are being embraced by the organizations that understand implications of climate change.
The Concorde burnt 2 tonnes of fuel just taxiing the runways. 16L/100km per passenger in the air, or half the efficiency of the average car. I'm sure there will be relative improvements. But supersonic jets are a luxury few of us can afford monetarily, and none of us can afford in terms of emissions.
Sure. But airplanes that make sonic booms that sound like the soothing whispers of a breeze blowing through soft moss should be encouraged.
Pretty much as relevant as your neighbour's motorcycle.
I still think they are out to correct the complaints about the old SST(Cost per flirght, noise)
If that existing shape is the only way to achieve [sub-optimal] quiet supersonic flight, they'll have to scale it up to rather large airframes or this'll remain a boutique tech for a small handful of impatient ultra-rich.
As an aside, seems to me 'quiet overland nach1+' is all well and good unless it means utterly-unviable designs capacity/economy-wise...
What? You talked about airport restrictions, except the noise is not anywhere near the airport it takes off or lands at. What zoned property is near the airport has nothing to do what area will be near where the sonic boom is made, as that will be considerable distance away.
"Let's mandate noise absorption barriers around suburban driveways, because of the road noise of cars at highway speeds." "But cars don't drive highway speeds in drive ways." "Exactly my point"
Just have a look how well supersonic flights sold when Concorde was still active...
Lol, and Tang. God, I hate that drink.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
Money? NASA? They run ancient setups and antequated code because that's all they can afford. They have no money and get less each year in real terms.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Nobody worships nature, silly! That would annoy Thor.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
You can do mach 5 using a hydrogen-powered ramjet on a waverider airfoil, according to theory.
The design would seat a lot of passengers.
The Scottish Rocketry Society produced a waverider before NASA had even been satisfied the theory would work.
Nobody has come close to producing a commercially viable waverider of the necessary design.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/de...
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/de...
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
A waverider should generate little sonic boom because of where the shockwave is placed. We also know how to build them and they should be capable of passenger loads comparable to - or better than - the high-end Airbusses.
I assume they're not the design used because they're a bugger to make stable and NASA had some accidents, but that would seem a better way to go.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Round where I live, it's the learner drivers with their two stroke mopeds that make the noise. The larger more powerful ones are quiet.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
If you watch those videos of fighter jets flying at low altitude over beaches, you can see the shock wave cause water to condense. What they plan on doing is creating two shock waves from different parts of the aircraft and have them cancel out.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
I figured it had something to do with "budget-minded" A-holes in the anti-science anti-governance Obstructican Party?
When was the last time you saw a creationist filing suit against a reactor or lying down in front of an earthmover? The anti-science people who actually obstruct science are in the Obstructicrat Party.
This means that you rip through the air, and what's behind you, is a vacuum, that collapses. That's what the sonic boom is.
No, that's not right at all. A sonic boom is air pressure waves "piling up" to form a larger shockwave. Has nothing to do with "vacuum collapsing".
There's no way to eliminate it.
Not completely, but there certainly are ways to minimize it.
Hey y'all. Check out the photos of the thing. It looks awesome, and has the realistic capacity of a private jet, and a small one at that! This plane may allow civilians to travel at 60% the speed of Concorde, but it will not be commercial at its current size. It will be a private jet. For reference, Concorde had room for 120 passengers and a flight crew of 6 or 7, including the navigator!
35 million dollar man in 2018 dollars, unless his price tag increased along the lines of the defense department, in which case he's the $300 million dollar man.
those expensive glorified vibrators called Harleys are quiet?
why is NASA subsidizing a commercial project..
You don't have any clue what NASA does do you? Research is their primary mission, specifically including public/private research partnerships. This is how NASA's research activities benefit the US. NASA research eventually gets turned over to the private sector and we all benefit from it - the term for this is technology transfer. This is exactly the sort of "subsidy" you want because no private company could justify the risk for such an exotic and unproven technology.
Also you do realize NASA doesn't build rockets or aircraft themselves right? They hire contractors to build and operate them including lockheed. NASA isn't an intergalactic bus and freight service and shouldn't be. Furthermore this is an X plane. The X stands for experimental. This is a public/private research project which if it works it will result in jobs and grow our economy. Call it a subsidy if you want but technology research like this is among the best uses for tax dollars there are. The internet that you are using right at this moment is a great example of a US government (DARPA) research project that resulted in a gigantic ROI to the American people.
i guess they DO have to much money?!!!!
Every dollar we spend on NASA results in somewhere between a 7X-14X return on that investment to our economy. Are you seriously arguing we should reduce our investment on something that has that much benefit? Especially when NASA's budget accounts for 0.5% of the federal budget?
"A low sonic boom" is still a noise event that may exceed urban noise limits
I'll buy that argument when urban areas start actively banning Harley Davidson motorcycles and other more mundane sources of unnecessary noise pollution.
In any case if this aircraft does what they hope then it will be FAR quieter than any noise restrictions in most communities at around 75dB perceived.
Or didn't you ever wonder what the "A" in NASA stands for?
I thought it was "Administration".
I work in product development. To me, production implies sellable units. Lockheed is manufacturing a prototype. Big difference. Call it manufacturing, developing, fabricating, but don't call it production. This thing may never see true production.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Will this be the same "... gather community response data ..." that they didn't offer pilots for the F-35 piece of shit that ran over schedule and over budget?
Does Lockheed Martin have fucking pictures of prominent politicians with goddam donkeys?
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Electric cars have great torque.
You'll get to hear the tire noise, even louder. Traction control is easy to disable.
You will be enjoying smokey burnouts for your lifetime!
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Technically, I live next to a highway, SR-99. So do a lot of people.
A plane taking off over the ocean from a runway creates noise over the ocean, not over populated land. This is why there were so many SST restrictions.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Read what I said
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
that was kinda my point, i guess i forgot the tag :)
it seems like boing needed a hand out and it got routed through NASA for a commercial application of a project benefiting a corporation.
Well, to be fair, since Congress shut down NASA's work with Boeing on the blended wing body, no civilian aircraft manufacturer has taken the work further.
In other words, some research that is arguably essential just can't be done privately.
Now, I could see a case for LaRC doing the work independently and then providing it to everyone, but if I remember rightly from my time there, they're not allowed. They're only allowed to do joint ventures with private companies. That's all LaRC is, these days, a R&D unit for rich aviation companies.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)