NASA jet breaks speed record

[NcDeuce]

NASA jet breaks speed record

LOS ANGELES, California -- NASA has made aeronautics history by launching an experimental jet that reached a record velocity of just over seven times the speed of sound.

Fifty-seven years after test pilot Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier, NASA on Saturday launched the unpiloted research jet, in a development some observers say could change the future of space travel.

It is the first time a supersonic-combustion ramjet, or scramjet, which uses air for fuel, had traveled so fast, flight engineer Lawrence Huebner told reporters.

Scientists hope such jets will make space travel more affordable and spur commercial ventures.

Some observers compared Saturday's accomplishment to the Wright brothers' first powered flight.

The 12-foot-long (3.65-meter), X-43A experimental craft rode atop a Pegasus booster rocket that was launched from a converted B-52 bomber about 400 miles (643 kilometers) off the coast of southern California.

As planned, the X-43A plunged into the Pacific Ocean after the test and was not recovered.

Pegasus, which flew to nearly 100,000 feet, reached a speed of Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound, preliminary data on the test flight showed.

The needle-nosed scramjet then reached a maximum speed of slightly over seven times the speed of sound, or about 5,000 mph (8,000 kilometers).

"It's a great way to end, certainly all the sweeter because of all the challenges we've had to step up to and overcome through the life of this project," said Griffin Corpening, chief engineer on the project at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center.

The first X-43A flight ended in failure June 2, 2001, after the modified Pegasus rocket used to accelerate the plane veered off course and was detonated.

An investigation board found preflight analyses failed to predict how the rocket would perform, leaving its control system unable to maintain stable flight.

NASA built the X-43A under a $250 million program to develop and test these exotic type of engines.

Saturday's flight tested aspects of a design to allow planes to overcome the pull of Earth's gravity by reaching escape velocity.

The "air-breathing" jet was not bogged down with heavy fuel tanks, Huebner said.

The space agency's dogged pursuit of extreme speed, officials hope, will ultimately make space flight easier to accomplish.

It also could drastically cut the time of commercial flights -- perhaps shortening the trip between New York and London to less than five hours.

After Pegasus released the X-43A, it flew under its own power for six minutes to do maneuvers over the ocean.

The B-52 left California at 3:40 p.m. ET, taking at least an hour to reach the launch site over the ocean. The entire test lasted only about 10 minutes.

NASA said it could test a vehicle at Mach 10 by the end of the year.

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/TECH/space/03/28/hypersonic.jet.flight/story.test.flight.jpg
The Pegasus rocket booster carrying the X-43A is released from the B-52 bomber midflight.

[Durandal]

This rocks SOOOOOOO hard.....

:D

[Midav]

kewl!

Looking forward to going US-Europe in two hours or less.

Just too bad it will be some time down the road before the tech gets to commercial use....

[mocking_loudly_died]

I'm only impressed when they put monkeys inside experimental jets.

[Seraphim]

I'm only impressed when they put monkeys inside experimental jets.


I'll volunteer.

[Ballistic]

This rocks SOOOOOOO hard.....

:D

Indeed it does :D

[Durandal]

Looking forward to going US-Europe in two hours or less.

Mach 7...

Try 15 minutes.

:)

[admar2]

Looking forward to going US-Europe in two hours or less.

Mach 7...

Try 15 minutes.

:)

more like 40 minutes.

about 3400 nautical miles new york to london, at 5000mph.

;)

[EvanL]

Looking forward to going US-Europe in two hours or less.

Mach 7...

Try 15 minutes.

:)

more like 40 minutes.

about 3400 nautical miles new york to london, at 5000mph.

;)Even faster if they start more flights going from Halifax-London.

[George W. Bush]

Scramjet cruise missiles by 2025? But I want them now!!

[kommando]

Hmmmm america has it now
8-10 years and well get it yay
haha
no but its good to see technology still has room to advance thats pretty amazing running the rocket off air itself woot

[Sleeping Sun]

That's sooooooo cooooooooooooooooooool!!!
I saw the launch live on BBC World. Makes me wonder when will it be used for the first time to kill people... like all the previous flying machines made by man.

[Kilgor]

Imagine sticking a DU rod in that thing. Imagine the bunker penetration :P

[grendel]

This is old news. ;)

Australia's University of Queensland students successfully flew a scramjet engine in August 2002 at a fraction of the cost of the NASA program.


The Australian Hypersonics Initiative will build on Australia`s leading role in hypersonics, demonstrated last year when The University of Queensland successfully launched the world`s first experimental flight of an air-breathing supersonic ramjet engine (scramjet), and commissioned the world’s largest interplanetary flight simulation wind tunnel.

This success paved the way for widespread interest nationally and internationally in supporting Australia`s hypersonics research.

Last year’s test flight reached speeds of Mach 7.6, proving that the scramjet engine was viable. The technology will be useful for low-cost satellite launches and high-speed missile propulsion.

http://www.uq.edu.au/news/index.phtml?article=5234


http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/img/hyshot.jpg
Launching of UQ`s HyShot rocket at Woomera Range, South Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/img/orion.jpg
The staged Terrier Orion rocket and UQ payload on the launch pad at Woomera.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/img/team.jpg
Oh, what a feeling... members of the successful HyShot team (from left) Judy Odam, Dr Ross Paull, Bert Paull, Dr Allan Paull, Dr Susan Anderson, Myles Frost, Suhee Won and Aggie Branczyk.

More info, pics & videos here (http://www.uq.edu.au/news/hyshot.phtml).

[AFACadet]

I checked out the website. While scramjet technology was in fact tested, it was tested in a very different way.

This program used a ballistic missile to get the scramjet into the lower reaches of space. It would then start coming down again and under the influence of gravity, reach Mach 8. Due to friction, the scramjet would then start to decrease speed until it reached mach 7.6 where the scramjet would ignite. The scramjet would continue almost straight down for 6 more seconds at mach 7.6 before the scramjet burned out and the ballistic missile coasted the rest of the way and impacted the ground at a high rate of speed.


I'm not knocking the program at all, the did an extremely good job at demonstrating scramjet technology.


To keep people from being confused at the speed differences, this was simply a ballistic missile with a scramjet on it. Ballistic weapons have reached speeds well over Mach 7.6 since the 1950.


What makes the X-43 different is that it was an actual aircraft (just an unmanned one). It flew under aerodynamic principals horizontally, and used its own power to accelerate from Mach 6 to Mach 7 and maintained that speed for a few seconds. Then after burnout if flew a couple minutes doing some manuvers before it impacted the ocean.

[Ratamacue]

Actually, I believe it accelerated from Mach 5 to over Mach 7.

[AFACadet]

No, the Pegasus booster got it up to around 90,000 feet and Mach 6, which is about the slowest a scramjet can work.

[Ratamacue]

Pegasus, which flew to nearly 100,000 feet, reached a speed of Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound, preliminary data on the test flight showed.

The needle-nosed scramjet then reached a maximum speed of slightly over seven times the speed of sound, or about 5,000 mph (8,000 kilometers).

From the article above.

[Ballistic]

This is old news. ;)

Australia's University of Queensland students successfully flew a scramjet engine in August 2002 at a fraction of the cost of the NASA program.


The Australian Hypersonics Initiative will build on Australia`s leading role in hypersonics, demonstrated last year when The University of Queensland successfully launched the world`s first experimental flight of an air-breathing supersonic ramjet engine (scramjet), and commissioned the world’s largest interplanetary flight simulation wind tunnel.

This success paved the way for widespread interest nationally and internationally in supporting Australia`s hypersonics research.

Last year’s test flight reached speeds of Mach 7.6, proving that the scramjet engine was viable. The technology will be useful for low-cost satellite launches and high-speed missile propulsion.

http://www.uq.edu.au/news/index.phtml?article=5234


http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/img/hyshot.jpg
Launching of UQ`s HyShot rocket at Woomera Range, South Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/img/orion.jpg
The staged Terrier Orion rocket and UQ payload on the launch pad at Woomera.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/img/team.jpg
Oh, what a feeling... members of the successful HyShot team (from left) Judy Odam, Dr Ross Paull, Bert Paull, Dr Allan Paull, Dr Susan Anderson, Myles Frost, Suhee Won and Aggie Branczyk.

More info, pics & videos here (http://www.uq.edu.au/news/hyshot.phtml).

The actual test flights and way the tests were conducted where completely different. The Aussie project focused on just using a rocket based system while NASA's test focused on using an actual airframe and aerodynamics, and NASA was the first to be able to launch the scramjet coupled with an aircraft (X 43). NASA took is a step further in intergrating the scramjet with an aircraft and that had never been done before, thats why it cost so much and thats why it's such an important milestone in aviation history.

EDIT: Whoops said basically the same thing as AFACadet, sorry mate :).

[grendel]

HyShot team congratulate NASA on scramjet success
Monday , 29 March 2004

Australian scramjet pioneers today congratulated the NASA team which at the weekend flew an airbreathing scramjet powered aircraft freely for the first time.

Leader of the international HyShot program Professor Allan Paull of The University of Queensland`s Centre for Hypersonics said the NASA experiment was a "terrific advance".

"Our colleagues at NASA have met a new milestone and have been excellent in their abilities," Professor Paull said.

"We understand how they must be feeling and our heartiest congratulations go to them."

On July 31, 2002, the HyShot team achieved success with the world`s first flight test of supersonic combustion, the process used in an air-breathing supersonic ramjet engine, known as a scramjet.

The more modestly funded Australian experiment tested an engine at Mach 7.6 (or more than 8000km an hour) while the new U.S. experiment has powered a plane to similar speeds, of more than Mach 7.


http://www.uq.edu.au/news/index.phtml?article=5427

[Loco]

The actual test flights and way the tests were conducted where completely different. The Aussie project focused on just using a rocket based system while NASA's test focused on using an actual airframe and aerodynamics,
More than that. Actually, NASA experiment used a jet engine system, contrary to the rocked used in Australia. Btw, both very interesting experiences. I´d like news like this everyday.

[Shadow]

LOL
It's not to difficult to accelerate such a little thing to high speed.
But try to make the same with some kind of Personel Carrier.
It won't work! Maybe at Mach 3 or 4 but no 7700km/h.
Btw it only flew that fast for 10 Seconds!
And its a scramjet so it have to be at Mach 3 if you want it to work.
OK who wants to be put in a little aircraft that is attached to a huge rocket booster which is under a huge bomber?Who wants to pay 1 000 000$ for 1 FLight? I would prefer a good old airbus.

[Ratamacue]

LOL
It's not to difficult to accelerate such a little thing to high speed.
But try to make the same with some kind of Personel Carrier.
It won't work! Maybe at Mach 3 or 4 but no 7700km/h.
Btw it only flew that fast for 10 Seconds!
And its a scramjet so it have to be at Mach 3 if you want it to work.
OK who wants to be put in a little aircraft that is attached to a huge rocket booster which is under a huge bomber?Who wants to pay 1 000 000$ for 1 FLight? I would prefer a good old airbus.

This is one of the first tests of scramjet technology. I bet there were plenty of people like you back in the 50's and 60's saying "WHAT!? YOU WANT TO PUT A PERSON ON A GIANT ROCKET AND THROW THEM INTO SPACE!?"

To say that because an early test had such little results is extremely ignorant. Besides, the X-43 is not some large aircraft--it's 12 feet long. You say it won't work with a payload inside? Since when are you an expert?

[Shadow]

Well, I'm not an expert but i have got a brain that is able to think logical.
And putting a man in a rocket and lunching him into space is not as unrealistic as building a big enough aircraft that is able to take off from a runway and reaches such high speeds for a long time. IMHO. But thats just my opinion. Usally i am a huge fan of everything that's related with space travelling.

[Flagg]

Imagine sticking a DU rod in that thing. Imagine the bunker penetration

Imagine how fast I'll be able to make a beer run in that thing when my moocher mates stop by.

According to my calculations the round trip will reduce to 2.476 seconds.

[Mark Sman]

The purpose of a scramjet may not me to excape the gravity well, or even reach a low earth orbit. It could be used for either, but so can rockets.

A scramjet would more likely be used for edge of the atmosphere transportation.

Anyone want a mach-8 cruise missile with a lower heat sig than a rocket? Something that could do a good part of its flight at very high speed in a redirectable ballistic bounce at the edge of the atmosphere and then be able to maneuver like a low-profile lifting-body airframe on the far end?

Or maybe even useful for anti-satellite or anti-missle purposes. Advanced radar deployment? A two-stage Mars orbital return and docking vehicle?

If there is one thing that most scientists will probably agree about its that sometimes you just have to flip the switch and see what happens. Process of elimination and a huge budget will handle the rest. Just go ahead and invent the dam thing. The engineers will figure out what its for.

If none of it works we still have Tang.

Back in the day SF writers used to tell me we'd be whizzing around this little sphere in semi-ballistic transports. I'm still waiting for my rocket bike too.

[HELEX]

It is way to expensive for civil use, it is only for things like that:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/article.cfm?Id=1170

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/images/0308/p40colucci.jpg

[Ballistic]

It may be expensive and very young technology now, but in years to come scramjet technology will evolve into other projects and other propulsion systems. NASA and teams like Hyshot are paving the way for the future. It may be only experienced by some, but the fact that such things are possible is unbelievable and so exciting.

[GazB]

NASA took is a step further in intergrating the scramjet with an aircraft and that had never been done before, thats why it cost so much and thats why it's such an important milestone in aviation history.



More than that. Actually, NASA experiment used a jet engine system, contrary to the rocked used in Australia.


On July 31, 2002, the HyShot team achieved success with the world`s first flight test of supersonic combustion, the process used in an air-breathing supersonic ramjet engine, known as a scramjet.


Seems like we need a little injection of facts here before we can discuss this properly.

The system we are talking about is a SCRAMJET. And the Russians tested on in the 80s BTW.

The rocket engine consists of an engine that carries fuel and oxygen either in tanks or solid form that is burnt at very high speed. Currently it is the only way of getting fast enough to leave the earths atmosphere for good.

A Jet engine on the other hand must burn its fuel subsonically. The complex air intakes on supersonic aircraft are used to control the air going in to an engine to keep it subsonic so the engine doesn't choke or stall on it.

Very simply a normal turbojet engine is a long tube that starts out quite wide, gets narrow in the middle and then gets wide again at the rear. There is a shaft down the centre with blades attached. When the shaft spins the blades suck air through the tube. The air comes in the front of the tube and are compressed where the tube gets narrow. This heats it up. In the centre narrow section fuel is added and burned which heats the air up to very high temperatures.... and it exhausts out the back at high speed generating thrust.

A RAMJET engine is the simplist most basic form of jet engine... no blades or shaft... just a tube that gets narrow in the middle and larger at the rear. A Ramjet requires the air to be flowing through it before it can start up. The Russians use Lots of ramjet powered missiles and their best designs have rocket boosters positioned through the empty tube up the middle of the weapon. Western systems use rear mounted rocket boosters or sometimes strap on boosters that make the weapons much longer or wider.

A Ramjet burns fuel subsonically and has an efficient speed range from about mach 1.8 through to about mach 6.

A Scramjet... or supersonic combustion ramjet is a redesigned ramjet that burns fuel supersonically. It can be used from mach 1.8 through to about mach 26... theoretically at least. The advantage over rockets is that for every kilo of fuel burnt in a rocket you need to carry about 3 kilos of oxygen to burn the fuel. Oxygen is dangerous to handle and store. Solid propellents are mildly safer, and easier to store but once ignited you can't put them out and you can't throttle them like a liquid propellent Rocket or Scramjet.

The idea that in the future liquid hydrogen powered Scramjets could get you to the edge of space and then the intake closed and from internal tanks slush oxygen used to carry to your space based destination... ie space station or an ion engine trip to the moon or mars or whereever is quite interesting. Liquid hydrogen fuel could be pumped through the nose skin of the vehicle to stop it from melting at extreme high speed.

BTW the Soviet experiment involved operating a Scramjet for 133 seconds. It was a very small device (about 2m) attached to the nose of a very large launch rocket (An SA-2 with warhead and guidance package removed) and it didn't seperate yet managed to accelerate from mach 5.2 to Mach 6.7 during the 133 second flight. ( it travelled about 180km in that time...)

The Flight path was not ballistic.... "aircraft" flying at over mach 5 are aeroballistic...

[Mark Sman]

The Flight path was not ballistic.... "aircraft" flying at over mach 5 are aeroballistic...

Ah but it was. . .


(DOD, NATO) The science or art that deals with the motion, behavior, appearance, or modification of missiles or other vehicles acted upon by propellants, wind, gravity, temperature, or any other modifying substance, condition, or force.

The flight path was ballistic part time, controlled flight at others using the lifting body. Hence, semi-ballistic. Its an old concept for missile delivery that was considered at the very beginiing of ICBM development.

The future idea is that it will use the scramjet in atmosphere. Fly outside the atmosphere in short ballistic arc for a period of time. During which the vehicle body will not be heated and slowed by atmospheric drag.

Then desend back to atmosphere, refire scramjets and exit the atmosphere again. Might do this 50 or 60 times on a global trip.

[GazB]

The flight path was ballistic part time, controlled flight at others using the lifting body. Hence, semi-ballistic. Its an old concept for missile delivery that was considered at the very beginiing of ICBM development.


Ummm, nope. The SA-2 is a guided missile, not a ballistic one and was guided to a particular height and speed to initiate the Scramjet operation.

While the Scramjet was operating aeroballistic lift kept it flying straight and level and when it ran out of fuel it then descended and crashed ballisticaly, but it was no more a ballistic flight than any other aircraft with an uncontrolled landing.


During which the vehicle body will not be heated and slowed by atmospheric drag.


Except that to leave the earths atmosphere it will need to accelerate to a speed that will certainly heat it and generate drag...

The idea of skipping accross the atmosphere is nice but travelling a bit faster and leaving the earths atmosphere for longer would be less violent for the passengers and create a much more comfortable ride... not to mention be less stressful to the aircraft. Do you really think it would be pleasant riding on a stone skipping on the water?

[Mark Sman]

Ummm, nope. The SA-2 is a guided missile,

Who said anything about SA-2? I said "Its an old concept for missile delivery that was considered at the very beginiing of ICBM development."

And it was considered, but scraped as not feasible or desireable at the time.


While the Scramjet was operating aeroballistic lift kept it flying straight and level

No. While the Scramjet was operating lift, thrust and controls kept it flying straight and level. Nothing else.


and when it ran out of fuel it then descended and crashed ballisticaly, but it was no more a ballistic flight than any other aircraft with an uncontrolled landing.

Wrong again. The test model that NASA launched is a lifting body that can provide guidance on its flight and decent. And so could other Scramjets.



Quote:
Mark Sman - "During which the vehicle body will not be heated and slowed by atmospheric drag."


GazB - "Except that to leave the earths atmosphere it will need to accelerate to a speed that will certainly heat it and generate drag..."

Very true, we still haven't figured out how to break that law of physics. So what. This is true of every vehicle. The point I made is that the vehicle I'm talking about can travel ballisitcally outside the atmospher for part of its travel. And during that part of its travel it won't be trying to pound Mach-10 through the atmosphere.

Then it could re-enter the atmosphere, redirect itself, and exit the atmosphere again. At very high speed.


GazB - The idea of skipping across the atmosphere is nice but travelling a bit faster and leaving the earths atmosphere for longer would be less violent for the passengers and create a much more comfortable ride... not to mention be less stressful to the aircraft. Do you really think it would be pleasant riding on a stone skipping on the water?

Umpleasant for whom? I'm thinking that unmanned uses might be the primary ones. Maybe manned missions if you had some actual reason for it. I could think of some, but it might not be for Qwantas or Delta. Some of the puddle jumpers I've ridden in local service might as well have been semi-ballistics though.

Scramjet is just a tech. Like any other tool on the rack.