Skip to comments.
NASA Launches Unmanned Hypersonic Jet
AP News ^
| November 16, 2004
| AP
Posted on 11/16/2004 3:28:29 PM PST by O.C. - Old Cracker
LOS ANGELES (AP) - An unmanned NASA jet was launched over the Pacific Ocean on Tuesday in a bid to demonstrate a radical new engine technology by flying at a world-record 7,000 mph - almost 10 times the speed of sound.
The 12-foot-long X-43A "scramjet" was carried aloft under the wing of a B-52 aircraft and released over a test range off the Southern California coast. It was to fly under its own power at Mach 10 for about 10 seconds at 110,000 feet, then glide to a splash landing. The craft was designed to sink and will not be recovered.
Unlike rockets, scramjets do not have to carry heavy oxidizer necessary to burn fuel. Instead, they can scoop oxygen out of the atmosphere.
Scramjet technology could be used to develop hypersonic missiles and airplanes or reusable space launch vehicles, with a potential for speeds of at least Mach 15.
The first X-43A flight failed in 2001 when the booster rocket veered off course and had to be destroyed. The second X-43A flew in March and reached Mach 6.83, or nearly 5,000 mph, a record for an aircraft powered by an air-breathing engine.
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 7000mph; hypersonic; jet; nasa; scramjet; x43a
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-115 next last
To: snopercod
It was attached to the nose of the booster and yes it flew free. :-)
To: Aeronaut
Do you think this thing will out run this Zenith 701 I am fixing to buy??
62
posted on
11/16/2004 7:16:29 PM PST
by
U S Army EOD
(John Kerry, the mother of all flip floppers.I)
To: Tallguy
NASA did a good job through the Apollo program because it acted more as an agenda setter and a clearing house for technology. The aerospace companies of the day did most of the heavy-lifting. Now NASA is like an old-fashioned, government-run arsenal. Inefficient to say the least. Of course, we have far fewer aerospace companies to turn to than in the 50's and 60's.
It's true that we have far fewer aerospace companies to turn to than in the 50's and 60's, but we're also not trying to get to the moon for the first time. What's come of the hundreds of billions of dollars sent to NASA since then? Foam mattress material that's being touted on infomercials and TANG?
63
posted on
11/16/2004 7:20:58 PM PST
by
Jaysun
(Wal-Mart is wonderful.)
To: O.C. - Old Cracker
At that speed, if it could be sustained, it can circle the earth in 3.5 hours.
64
posted on
11/16/2004 7:21:10 PM PST
by
Lunatic Fringe
(http://www.drunkenbuffoonery.com/mboards/)
To: CWOJackson; ElkGroveDan
Ah, landing might have required another 13 months.Except this was an ion engine. Not very practical for short hops to the Moon and such. However, across the solar system they shine.
I still favor VASIMR or NERVA myself. Possibly using ion engines for lateral thrust and/or monoprops (hydrazine with platinum/iridium catbeds) for attitude control or quick rotations.
To: Jaysun
What's come of the hundreds of billions of dollars sent to NASA since then? Foam mattress material that's being touted on infomercials and TANG?New understandings of this planet, solar system, and the entire universe for one thing. How about improved telemetry/com design, material sciences, propulsion systems, etc.
To: RadioAstronomer
How about improved telemetry/com design, material sciences, propulsion systems, etc.
Those things are wonderful, but I still say that private enterprise is more than capable of giving birth to such things - in a much quicker and cost effective fashion.
67
posted on
11/16/2004 7:49:21 PM PST
by
Jaysun
(Wal-Mart is wonderful.)
To: Jaysun
but I still say that private enterprise is more than capable of giving birth to such things Where is the return to the stockholders for a Mars mission, space telescope, radio telescope, map of the surface of Venus, gamma ray telescope, etc?
Some things require Gov funding to be accomplished.
To: RadioAstronomer
Where is the return to the stockholders for a Mars mission, space telescope, radio telescope, map of the surface of Venus, gamma ray telescope, etc?
Some things require Gov funding to be accomplished.
Yes I know. As I said before, they have a role. I just wish it wasn't such a money pit that's all.
69
posted on
11/16/2004 7:55:30 PM PST
by
Jaysun
(Wal-Mart is wonderful.)
To: GalaxieFiveHundred
That looks an kinda like Uncle Martin's ride.
To: F15Eagle
??? FAS.org claims solid propellants through 3 stages then bus for warheads. I should have clarified that. The TOPOL they used was modified with a scramjet.
If you Google the following:
TOPOL scramjet
you will see a number of articles about this. Here follows the text of one:
Russia is deploying a new series of nuclear tipped missiles with warheads designed with the aid of US supercomputers. The new Russian SS-27 missile - an uprated version of the SS-25 TOPOL Mod One - is being moved directly into deployment with an advanced 550 kiloton nuclear warhead made by the Arzamas-16 nuclear design bureau. The SS-27 design has also been exported to China and will be built under license as the DF-41.
Russia is testing a new warhead for its SS-27 TOPOL M. The new warhead is reported to be a nuclear-armed supersonic ramjet, or Scramjet, capable of avoiding U.S.-designed anti-ballistic missiles. The recent successful SS-27 test showed the Scramjet warhead was able to fly at high speeds in the upper reaches of the atmosphere.
71
posted on
11/16/2004 8:10:45 PM PST
by
Dont_Tread_On_Me_888
(John Kerry--three fake Purple Hearts. George Bush--one real heart of gold.)
Comment #72 Removed by Moderator
To: Dont_Tread_On_Me_888
TOPOL (SS-25). is a 3 stage solid fuel rocket
73
posted on
11/16/2004 11:14:45 PM PST
by
XBob
(Free-traitors steal our jobs for their profit.)
To: snopercod
The booster rocket gets it to minimum scramjet operational speed and then the craft separates and flies under its own power from there.
74
posted on
11/16/2004 11:27:25 PM PST
by
DB
(©)
To: rwfromkansas
Only if you hit something not going that fast...
75
posted on
11/16/2004 11:29:48 PM PST
by
DB
(©)
To: Ichneumon; petercooper
76
posted on
11/17/2004 12:10:22 AM PST
by
ex-Texan
(Si triste trop mauvais. Revoyez-vous !)
To: DB
Thanks. How's the house coming along?
77
posted on
11/17/2004 4:10:51 AM PST
by
snopercod
(Bigger government means clinton won. Less freedom means Osama won. Get it?)
To: snopercod
All the walls are up and trusses set.
We're trying to get a roof on it in the next couple of weeks...
There's been about 7" of rain so far which is very unusual here and that has slowed things down some.
House prices are still rising in this area, so far... So it hasn't been a mistake yet to hold on to our current house and not sell it until the new house is done.
It is expected to take another 6 to 8 months to complete our new home and I don't think it is likely the housing market will turn too sour in that time. Fingers crossed...
Thanks for asking!
78
posted on
11/17/2004 4:28:04 AM PST
by
DB
(©)
To: NormsRevenge
I hope that moon probe takes some pics of the dark side of the moon.Why?
79
posted on
11/17/2004 4:42:32 AM PST
by
houeto
To: O.C. - Old Cracker
This is so cool! Now the government ought to sell some of its less-classified research to the US private sector, have the private sector "run with it", and make private applications of this technology.
80
posted on
11/17/2004 4:54:15 AM PST
by
alwaysconservative
(Addicted to FReeping and don't want to be cured.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-115 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson