New hypersonic Air Travel.

[padi56]

I like to keep up with the new scientific breakthroughs in this world
And there has been much talk of the future replacement for the Jet engine, which is currently effective, but dirtier than an Essex girls underwear, and as thirsty as a dessicated Camel.

This replacement is capable of truly fantastic speeds, and we are talking SEVEN times the speed of sound, which will, according to the industry, make travelling from London to Sydney a matter of only two hours.The thought of being able to send our criminals that distance so fast is certainly very appealling...

It's called the Scramjet, which stands for supersonic combustion ramjet, which is a far more exiting term than ' Vauxhall-Vectra' for example, but alas, nearly as useless.

You see, the problem is an inherent one, that the Scramjet only works at speeds of over FIVE times the speed of sound

So lets get this right...They want to equip a passenger Jet with an engine that only works over 3000mph, but enables it to cruise at 5000mph....

Take off is going to be a bit lethargic to say the least, and seeing as there is nothing capable of thrusting a 767 sized plane up to 1000mph, let alone 3000, they have a bigger problem than they originally thought.

The idea of kitting out this 'new plane' with a set of behemoth Jets for take off, and then god-knows-what- to enable it to hit 3000mph, and then a third set of Scramjets for Ubersonic cruising, is too bleeding much for even the most optimistic person since John DeLoreans bank manager, said 'Sure looks like a nice motor there John'

So lets say they do this, and make the engine setup which all fits into the new I will call it Hypo-Concorde, what the FeK are they making this thing from?
Current Supersonic planes suffer from stretching and shrinking to a nigh on impossible degree already, and there is nothing in existence yet, or anywhere near it, that will withstand the stresses of passenger carrying Ubersonic travel.

Are they are wasting their time, and inevitably,our cash.

[Goodwatch]

SR-71 Blackbird.

I’m really starting to look forward to your articles Peter, because I’m into these things as well. In a similar proposal (NASA) the plane is supposed to exit the earth’s atmosphere and re-enter through a parabolic trajectory. Will we be around to see this?

I once had the pleasure to travel on the Venice Simplon Orient Express with Mrs. Frans Hens and I kinda like this way of travel. Not everything has to go fast in once life you know!

[JJ Irani]

With all this "SPEED" talk, wonder if tossing speeds will improve?

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

With all this "SPEED" talk, wonder if tossing speeds will improve?

Now JJ, when adults are having a good conversation, children have to be quiet. So be quiet!

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

SR-71 Blackbird.

Not sure what this comment is supposed to mean, Frans. Are you saying this is an example of the technical challenges Padi mentions being overcome? If so, I don't think it's a good example. For one it's not fast enough - officially Mach 3.2 cruising speed, unofficially 3.5.

Being able to reach very high speeds in a military setting is a very different proposition from making it commercially viable. The SR-71 requires such a lot of maintenance and expense that the technology isn't practical for commerical success. Of course, it's also quite old technology (first flight some 42 years ago).

It could be that the technology is out there (or close) to make this kind of thing happen, but I'm quite sure it is the realm of the US military if it exists, and not likely something they are going to share for commercial purposes.

I recall being in Washington at Andrews AFB when the Stealth technologies were first shown publicly (I was there as media - long story)......at that time no one had any idea this kind of thing existed. So, I'm sure things have a come a long way since then........

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Not sure what this comment is supposed to mean, Frans. Are you saying this is an example of the technical challenges Padi mentions being overcome?

The SR-71 was a test bed to overcome some challenges. The heat caused by air friction and the materials used (titanium shell). Because the US government pour billions of dollars in the project they could make it work. That doesn’t mean it’s feasible on a commercial scale, that is true. But this is being said about commercial space travel as well.

[mailman]

This is a great post guys. Tell us more

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by mailman

This is a great post guys. Tell us more

My bit was just a question!!

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

The SR-71 was a test bed to overcome some challenges. The heat caused by air friction and the materials used (titanium shell). Because the US government pour billions of dollars in the project they could make it work. That doesn’t mean it’s feasible on a commercial scale, that is true. But this is being said about commercial space travel as well.

In my view, commercial space flight is technically a much easier proposition than hypersonic flight is (I think the X-Prize is good evidence that it can be done by "amateurs"). That doesn't mean it won't happen some day, but as Padi has correctly pointed out, it's decades away. I believe that commercial space flight is likely to happen well before commercial hypersonic flight.

[SLRdude]

The SCRAMJET has been around for quite a while... at least ten years if not more.
I remember when NASA tested that plane... it was November 2004.
It earned a spot in the Guiness Book of Records. At Mach 9.6 it was the fastest airplane ever built.

Here is a movie of that flight, courtesy of NASA

Our Australian friends might be happy to know that On August 16, 2002, the University of Queensland in Australia completed the first successful flight of a scramjet vehicle, reaching speeds of Mach 7, or seven times the speed of sound.

The University of Queensland, Australia reported in 1995 the first development of a scramjet that achieved more thrust than drag and in 2002 successfully tested the HyShot Scramjet system. Then in March 2006 the HyshotIII with its £1,000,000 engine made an apparently successful flight (and planned crash landing) reaching in the order of 7.5 Mach. (not quite as fast as the NASA flight in 2004)

[padi56]

Apparently, NASA tested a scramjet the other day.
It was carried up on a Pegasus Rocket which was itself attached to a B52 bomber.

The bomber flew to 12km and released the rocket which went to 25km and then released the scramjet which burned fuel for 11 seconds before ditching in the briny.

And that's taken 3 bloody years,and at a cost,well they wont say,but a bit more than your average Rolex.

And NASA are bleeding thrilled.

NASA wrote:
We are looking at what to do next," a spokesman said at a post-flight press conference.


Well, I've brainstormed, meta-analysed and done some blue-sky thinking and I think I've got it!

Make it stay in the bloody air for longer than 11 seconds you dipsticks.

They estimate that we are 25 years away from a manned scramjet flight.

So I have just cancelled my booking,I expect by then, to be in a place as bloody hot,if not hotter, than the exhaust gas from the scramjet engine.