I haven't seen that particular report, but just to clarify what I know, the failure wasn't in the X-43 hypersonic vehicle but in the Pegasus launch booster, built by Orbital Sciences. Apparently the Pegasus was built to be launched at 40,000 feet, however in the first test it was launched at 20,000 feet. The increased air density and aerodynamic loading at this altitude caused a structural failure in a stabilising fin on the booster, not the X-43 craft itself, which remains unproven.
It's a good idea. In theory.
At least with the history of the orbiter behind them they might have a slightly better idea of what they're up against. Even today a heck of a lot of technology is still too immature to warrant a big step in a big step in ability. What we're looking at here is probably going to end up as a refined "shuttle lite" - it'll probably be cheaper, work a little better, be more refined, but without the big bells and whistles you expect. Forget SSTO (single stage to orbit) - that won't be around for a heck of long time yet, especially because Scramjets and CCEs (combined cycle engines) are still unproven. Sure, they have tried in the past (e.g. HOTOL) but the leading edge tech was just out of reach - and I've only mentioned engines.
And while I'm at it, wasn't the X-37 project (as well as the X-38) cancelled due to lack of funds about a year or two ago?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it - if they can pull this off, with not too much overspend it will be pretty damned good, but, in this day and age, with the kind of stigma that is attached to this industry by the press and other sources of uninformed opinion, it's a lot harder to be optimistic.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't seen that particular report, but just to clarify what I know, the failure wasn't in the X-43 hypersonic vehicle but in the Pegasus launch booster, built by Orbital Sciences. Apparently the Pegasus was built to be launched at 40,000 feet, however in the first test it was launched at 20,000 feet. The increased air density and aerodynamic loading at this altitude caused a structural failure in a stabilising fin on the booster, not the X-43 craft itself, which remains unproven.
It's a good idea. In theory. At least with the history of the orbiter behind them they might have a slightly better idea of what they're up against. Even today a heck of a lot of technology is still too immature to warrant a big step in a big step in ability. What we're looking at here is probably going to end up as a refined "shuttle lite" - it'll probably be cheaper, work a little better, be more refined, but without the big bells and whistles you expect. Forget SSTO (single stage to orbit) - that won't be around for a heck of long time yet, especially because Scramjets and CCEs (combined cycle engines) are still unproven. Sure, they have tried in the past (e.g. HOTOL) but the leading edge tech was just out of reach - and I've only mentioned engines. And while I'm at it, wasn't the X-37 project (as well as the X-38) cancelled due to lack of funds about a year or two ago? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it - if they can pull this off, with not too much overspend it will be pretty damned good, but, in this day and age, with the kind of stigma that is attached to this industry by the press and other sources of uninformed opinion, it's a lot harder to be optimistic.