Mach 5.1 aircraft - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > The Club House > Mach 5.1 aircraft

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-05-2013, 03:30 AM   #11
FAA licensed bugsmasher
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ScottA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Davenport,IA
Posts: 6,710
Liked 2096 Times on 1138 Posts
Likes Given: 755

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DFlynt View Post
Pretty cool but for now I'll stick with the X-15: Mach 6.7 with a pilot on board

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-052-DFRC.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_X-15
While the X-15 was an amazing aircraft, it was a totally different technology. When scramjets are perfected, it will be as much of a jump in aviation tech as going from props to jets.
__________________

Scott

Quote:
If you're not representing Jesus in a way that makes people want to hang out with you, you're doing it wrong.
Quote:
Those who refuse to participate in politics shall be governed by their inferiors. -Plato
Regent Holdings What you need to know about silver, gold, and the economy.

Join the NRA
ScottA is online now  
303tom Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 03:17 PM   #12
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
303tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 3,529
Liked 1171 Times on 802 Posts
Likes Given: 1177

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottA View Post
While the X-15 was an amazing aircraft, it was a totally different technology. When scramjets are perfected, it will be as much of a jump in aviation tech as going from props to jets.
You got that right, the X-15 was a rocket with a range of less than 300 miles. The Scramjet is a air breathing engine. You want to talk top of the mark, there is the SR-71, 2900 miles at Mach 3.3+, it has out run rockets fired at it. The Scramjet is leaps beyond that even, in air breathing engines...........
__________________

When all else fails.

303tom is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 04:26 PM   #13
-06
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 125
Liked 34 Times on 24 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

The Blackbird did 31+ once that is known about. Now that is an amazing aircraft. It is retired but still holds every record out there. Wonder what they have now--must really be something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet
http://www.boeing.com/stories/videos/vid_18_waverider.html?cm_ven=Paid+Search+Google&cm _cat=Innovation&cm_pla=Technology&cm_ite=Scramjet+ WaveRider

__________________

Last edited by -06; 05-06-2013 at 04:33 PM.
-06 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 02:07 AM   #14
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,121
Liked 5538 Times on 3134 Posts
Likes Given: 4818

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottA View Post
Towards the end of his career in the USAF, my father ran into another officer who he had gone through some of his early training with. Turns out, he had eventually wound up working in "black projects".

The only thing he could tell him about his job was that anything the Air Force is willing to let people know about, they are testing technology 25 years in the future.
You can bet they didn't retire the SR-71 unless they had something better already deployed.

If they're willing to talk about the wave rider, it's very near deployment, (Or already in limited deployment) and it's replacement is on the drawing boards.
__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
ScottA Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:04 AM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,641
Liked 1057 Times on 589 Posts
Likes Given: 442

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 303tom View Post
You got that right, the X-15 was a rocket with a range of less than 300 miles. The Scramjet is a air breathing engine. You want to talk top of the mark, there is the SR-71, 2900 miles at Mach 3.3+, it has out run rockets fired at it. The Scramjet is leaps beyond that even, in air breathing engines...........
You left out the part where it ran into its own cannon shells. Apparently if you're gonna fire cannon shells from a perfectly good airplane it's a good idea to make sure that the BB's are flying substantially faster than the aircraft they're shot out of. Apparently those slide rules don't help when you misplace a zero somewhere.

It's pretty funny that they were worried about it being shot down with a missile. It would've taken the Russians longer to track and acquire a lock on it than it would've been inside the engagement envelope of anything they had to launch at it.

I also like the fact that it was made with Russian Titanium. Nothing like building weapons with the material that the enemy makes for you.
__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:06 AM   #16
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,641
Liked 1057 Times on 589 Posts
Likes Given: 442

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
You can bet they didn't retire the SR-71 unless they had something better already deployed.

If they're willing to talk about the wave rider, it's very near deployment, (Or already in limited deployment) and it's replacement is on the drawing boards.
They retired the SR-71 because Keyhole was providing better imagery once the camera (lens technology, actually) was of sufficient quality to negate the utility of the airplane.

That said, it was a damn impressive feat of engineering and science.
__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:11 AM   #17
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DFlynt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Festus, Missouri
Posts: 3,039
Liked 1786 Times on 1170 Posts
Likes Given: 1523

Default

The one that has me wondering is the X-37, I really wonder what it was doing the 6 months or so it was up in space on the 2 missions it has flown.

__________________

“Somebody has to speak for these people. Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but y'all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this—they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people...better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave.” Mal Reynolds Serenity/Firefly

DFlynt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:16 AM   #18
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,641
Liked 1057 Times on 589 Posts
Likes Given: 442

Default

It's flown three missions, so far as I know.

My guess is simple spying, which is what the Air Force, CIA, and NSA are traditionally most interested in.

__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:20 AM   #19
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DFlynt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Festus, Missouri
Posts: 3,039
Liked 1786 Times on 1170 Posts
Likes Given: 1523

Default

Possible it was keeping a close eye on Iran or something, seems it would be easier to move it into place than moving one of the spy satellites

__________________

“Somebody has to speak for these people. Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but y'all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this—they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people...better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave.” Mal Reynolds Serenity/Firefly

DFlynt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:25 AM   #20
FAA licensed bugsmasher
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ScottA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Davenport,IA
Posts: 6,710
Liked 2096 Times on 1138 Posts
Likes Given: 755

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DFlynt View Post
Possible it was keeping a close eye on Iran or something, seems it would be easier to move it into place than moving one of the spy satellites
That could be. Short term orbits compared to the satellites means it could burn more fuel moving around.
__________________

Scott

Quote:
If you're not representing Jesus in a way that makes people want to hang out with you, you're doing it wrong.
Quote:
Those who refuse to participate in politics shall be governed by their inferiors. -Plato
Regent Holdings What you need to know about silver, gold, and the economy.

Join the NRA
ScottA is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Savage .17 Mach 2 Simpleman General Rifle Discussion 3 04-19-2011 08:10 AM
Barrel life: .17 Rem vs .17 Rem Mach IV/Fireball Bad Wolf General Rifle Discussion 3 08-29-2008 02:57 PM