Re: NASA 'Scramjet' Soars at Almost 7,000 Mph

From: Jack Love (jackxxloveyy_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 11/20/04 

Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:28:47 -0800

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:19:43 -0700, Scott Ferrin
<sferrin@xmission.com> wrote:

>On 18 Nov 2004 14:50:36 -0800, jacklinthicum@earthlink.net (Jack
>Linthicum) wrote:
>
>>"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<419C0F46.5C75FC68@attbi.com>...
>>> Bunn E. Rabbit <BunnERabbit@verizon.hutch.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041117/D86DA1MG0.html
>>> >
>>> > NASA 'Scramjet' Soars at Almost 7,000 Mph
>>> > Nov 16, 7:52 PM (ET)
>>> > By JOHN ANTCZAK
>>> >
>>> > LOS ANGELES (AP) - A tiny unmanned NASA "scramjet" soared above the
>>> > Pacific Ocean Tuesday at nearly 10 times the speed of sound, or almost
>>> > 7,000 mph, in a successful demonstration of a radical new engine
>>> > technology.
>>>
>>> I thought it was pretty cool... engineers have been trying for years to
>>> make a workable Scramjet.
>>>
>>> "That's the idea behind a different propulsion system called "scramjet,"
>>> or Supersonic Combustion Ramjet: The oxygen needed by the engine to
>>> combust is taken from the atmosphere passing through the vehicle,
>>> instead of from a tank onboard. The craft becomes smaller, lighter and
>>> faster. How fast? Researchers predict scramjet speeds could reach 15
>>> times the speed of sound. An 18-hour trip to Tokyo from New York City
>>> becomes a 2-hour flight".
>>>
>>> http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/f_scramjets.html
>>
>>The problem with very high speeds is heat, the ability to withstand
>>the heat buildup in the structure and the ability to cool the
>>structure to the point that live human beings can either get in or out
>>of the vehicle or service it. The 2.7 mach 2707 of the 60s was
>>cancelled because they didn't have the glues to hold a aircraft
>>together under the heat regime of that flight profile.
>
>
>Actually it was cancelled because of money. GLUE?? Whether or not
>they needed it it wouldn't have been an issue, they made the
>Blackbirds and the XB-70 just fine and they were getting hotter at
>MAch 3.
>
>
Don't bother him with facts. AND he's also ignoring the other
inconvenient fact: Nixon came back shortly after the cancellation and
wanted to 'uncancel' I can't remember exactly but it was within a
couple of months. Boeing said "fine it will cost $3Billion"...."Wait
whaaaaat?" Boeing: "We've just spent the last n months cancelling
and paying cancellation charges to our 11,000 subcontractors, we're
not going to eat that cost because you can't make up your mind."

>
>
>> I would think 3
>>or more times that velocity would create a heat buildup impossible to
>>dissapate, either in the air or on the ground. I would imagine the
>>mission for this device and its follow-ons is a long reach cruise
>>missile with speed to avoid or negate tracking and intercept.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: NASA Scramjet Soars at Almost 7,000 Mph
    ... >>The problem with very high speeds is heat, the ability to withstand ... and paying cancellation charges to our 11,000 subcontractors, we're ... >>or more times that velocity would create a heat buildup impossible to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: NASA Scramjet Soars at Almost 7,000 Mph
    ... > The problem with very high speeds is heat, the ability to withstand ... > or more times that velocity would create a heat buildup impossible to ... We seem to be back to the Icarus problem of melting glue again, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: NASA Scramjet Soars at Almost 7,000 Mph
    ... > The problem with very high speeds is heat, the ability to withstand ... > or more times that velocity would create a heat buildup impossible to ... We seem to be back to the Icarus problem of melting glue again, ...
    (sci.astro)