To: presidio9
They didn't fully indicate if the craft was meant to splashdown in the ocean or not. One would think they'd want to analyze the the engine after use.
4 posted on
03/29/2004 8:16:11 AM PST by
zeugma
(The Great Experiment is over.)
To: zeugma
They didn't fully indicate if the craft was meant to splashdown in the ocean or not. One would think they'd want to analyze the the engine after use. This plane was never intended to be recovered. This experiment was just to see if the scramjets could be made to fly the plane at Mach 7. There is still a ton of more testing to do before they can begin to think abiut practical aspects.
7 posted on
03/29/2004 8:22:04 AM PST by
presidio9
(protectionism is a false god)
To: zeugma
It was meant to go into the Pacific & I doubt there was any serious thought given to trying to catch it on the way down.
This thing is an unguided missile,
Given prior failure, there was no way to predict trajectory,
Given potential speed/distance, there was no way to predict touch down point,
I'd have to beieve they consider "the ocean" as about as concise a definition of "target" as you could devise.
I'm quite sure no one wanted it landing in Cleveland, maybe San Francisco (close enough to the Pacific) but not the heartland.
The scramjet itself is fairly simple, it might just be more cost effective to build another or fly the backup next time.
11 posted on
03/29/2004 8:32:23 AM PST by
norton
To: zeugma
I used to work for the company that helped design that craft. It WAS meant to splash down without being recovered. The actual cost of the vehicles are fairly low.
21 posted on
03/29/2004 10:16:35 AM PST by
Bryan24
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson