N.A.S.A.'s X-43 SCRAMJet platform flies Pacific @ Mach 7

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 12:00 pm

He made a math mistake, and he is asscombat, need I say more?

Tetrad · Post by **Tetrad** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 12:09 pm

Beowulf wrote: Tetrad, because if you enjoy flaming people over the internet then you must not derive pleasure from very much else in life.

Ha ha. I wasn't flaming. Go back and re-read my post.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 2:36 pm

roid wrote:pot
kettle
black

read through your posts in this very thread and tell me otherwise. all you do is TRY to pull ppl down.

change.

I suggest you look up the definition for sarcasm roid.

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 3:16 pm

T-bone: 1
AceCombat: 0

(flight instructors are cool, and they generally know a little about knots)

bash · Post by **bash** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 3:29 pm

Light the damn thing already. I'm reminded of that scene from the Beatles *HELP* movie where the scientist is going *I'm moving my right foot, I'm moving my left foot...*.

Sage · Post by **Sage** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 1:20 am

The Hyper-X isn't as good as the X-1 or the X-15 because it's a stupid remote controlled toy. No men is in it damnit!

They should be making a REAL plane that men fly!!!

[edit]
srry

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 2:12 am

MD-2389 wrote:
roid (in response to stingray) wrote:pot
kettle
black

read through your posts in this very thread and tell me otherwise. all you do is TRY to pull ppl down.

change.
I suggest you look up the definition for sarcasm roid.

no i think i've got stingray's personality down pretty well. there is no sarcasm. sarcasm is where you are momentarily acting out a part.
so be sure to tell me when his "i'm a jamroll" act stops, do this by sending me an email or something, i dunno, maybe a tellegram? (i can't read morse), how about just quote-posting it on the thread in question in a really big font. maybe red too. so no-one misses it when he actually takes the time to prove to the rest of us on this forum that he actually owns a hearts that is at least 5degrees above absolute 0Kelvin. and actually IS less shallow than the saucepan i fry my french toast on in the mornings (with basil!!! mmm basil).

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 2:19 am

ps: congrats nasa on the world's 2nd sucessful scramjet test

(i saw a few seconds of footage on a news update this morning)

bash · Post by **bash** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 2:56 am

btw, roid, this was the 3rd successful test of a scramjet engine. The US beat Australia by a year for the title of first.

Australia did have the first successful atmospheric test. I think that's what is confusing your downunderdog self.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 3:00 am

you sure about that? i didn't think nasa (or anyone) had windtunnels powerful enough to test a scramjet engine.

bash · Post by **bash** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 3:09 am

It was shot from a gun, apparently.

The first-ever free flight of a scramjet was conducted by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) in 2001. Its engine was fired from a gun in an enclosed facility on the ground.

A year later, University of Queensland researchers flew their HyShot scramjet on a missile.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3572909.stm

Can't find the link again but I think today's test was somewhat a collaborative effort between US and Australian researchers. At the very least, no doubt NASA had access to the Queensland data.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 3:50 am

gah, NOOOOO!! WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 4:14 am

anyway, after this latest test flight i can't find any info on specifics of the flight.

also i can't find any footage of the scramjet in operation. the footage you are all seeing on the TV is of the booster pegasus rocket firing.

the scramjet operated for 10seconds after the pegasus detatched, so where's the footage huh?

hush hush?

bash · Post by **bash** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 4:22 am

I was wondering the same thing. I waited an hour to watch it fly and all we got was the booster rocket, which was still pretty cool, but probably there were no external cameras on the research vehicle. If you think about it, why would there be? Nothing to see at that altitude and just another weight/aerodynamics/system issue to contend with. Maybe some footage from groundstations will emerge.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 4:23 am

what?! GAH damnit!

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rlv-04a.html

the article wrote: ...
NASA will film the trial.

"You'll see the takeoff of the B-52 from Edwards Air Force Base and its climb out and there will be a chase plane with a television camera on it," Brown said.

"When the launch actually occurs, we'll have a camera view from one of the chase planes that is flying alongside and slightly to the rear," he said.

"And they will get the dropping, the X-43 and the booster rocket that will drop away from the B-52. We should get the ignition of the rocket and its acceleration forward and its pitching up. At that point, we are probably going to lose it, because it will outrun the chase planes -- seriously."

Brown said NASA was "trying to arrange to utilize some other aircraft that are not NASA aircraft, that have some very specialized type of camera equipment, visual and infrared, to be able to track the vehicle as it is flying at very high altitude.

"We don't know if we'll be able to release that footage publicly. It's an army aircraft, it's not from a satellite."
...

hope you guys don't mind my using this thread as a notepad

.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 9:15 am

i figured it would be classifed, the army always craps on the public when a milestone in aviation occurs and its military equipment

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:25 pm

roid wrote:no i think i've got stingray's personality down pretty well. there is no sarcasm. sarcasm is where you are momentarily acting out a part.
so be sure to tell me when his "i'm a jamroll" act stops, do this by sending me an email or something, i dunno, maybe a tellegram? (i can't read morse), how about just quote-posting it on the thread in question in a really big font. maybe red too. so no-one misses it when he actually takes the time to prove to the rest of us on this forum that he actually owns a hearts that is at least 5degrees above absolute 0Kelvin. and actually IS less shallow than the saucepan i fry my french toast on in the mornings (with basil!!! mmm basil).

Roid, EVERYTHING he posts is sarcasm. Thats just how he is. Matter of fact, I don't think he's ever made a serious post on this BB at all.

Hostile · Post by **Hostile** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 7:45 pm

T-Bone....what type of instructor quals do you have?

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:05 pm

MD-2389 wrote:Roid, EVERYTHING he posts is sarcasm. Thats just how he is. Matter of fact, I don't think he's ever made a serious post on this BB at all.

BS!!! ive made plenty of serious posts

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:22 pm

*sigh* ace, we're talking about stingray

Sting_Ray · Post by **Sting_Ray** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 11:04 pm

He's just used to being the target =)

I was just being a dic

k... it's my calling in life. I've made serious posts before, but I much prefer to be an as

shole

roid · Post by **roid** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 11:13 pm

o_O

maybe "friends" arn't for you.

Zer0Cool · Post by **Zer0Cool** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 11:25 pm

i'm Joe's friend

Right Bling Ray

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:43 am

Sting_Ray wrote:He's just used to being the target =)

yah i guess i am used to it

T-Bone · Post by **T-Bone** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:37 am

Hostile wrote:T-Bone....what type of instructor quals do you have?

Just a plain ol' CFI, but I am a multi-engine, instrument rated pilot.

MD-2389 · Post by **MD-2389** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 1:52 pm

Zer0Cool wrote:i'm Joe's friend

Right Bling Ray

As am I.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 8:03 am

T-Bone wrote:Just a plain ol' CFI, but I am a multi-engine, instrument rated pilot.

and im a Rotor-Wing VFR/IFR Licensed Pilot

Kumba · Post by **Kumba** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:47 am

I'm not really interested in this mach speed crap. Someone call me when we reach warp 5

Sting_Ray · Post by **Sting_Ray** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:37 pm

I love you mikey

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 10:11 am

Kumba wrote:I'm not really interested in this mach speed crap. Someone call me when we reach warp 5

you will be long dead and burning in hell when that day comes... but maybe you can fart hard enough and reach warp speed in hell, from the heat igniting your flammable methane release under some serious pressure from eating too many rasins and other "fart" foods

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 12:52 pm

AceCombat wrote:
Kumba wrote:I'm not really interested in this mach speed crap. Someone call me when we reach warp 5
you will be long dead and burning in hell when that day comes... but maybe you can fart hard enough and reach warp speed in hell, from the heat igniting your flammable methane release under some serious pressure from eating too many rasins and other "fart" foods

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:55 pm

HAHAHAHA!!!!

Bold Deceiver · Post by **Bold Deceiver** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:06 pm

Fuggedaboudit.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:22 pm

NEW INFO on the X43

Written by ROBERT JABLON LOS ANGELES (AP) - Three years after its first test flight ended in an explosion, NASA on Saturday successfully launched an experimental jet that the agency believes reached a record-setting speed of about 5,000 mph.

The unpiloted X-43A made an 11-second powered flight, then went through some twists and turns during a six-minute glide before plunging into the Pacific Ocean about 400 miles off the California coast.

``It was fun all the way to Mach 7,'' said Joel Sitz, project manager at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center.

Flight engineer Lawrence Huebner said preliminary data indicated the needle-nosed jet reached a maximum speed of slightly over seven times the speed of sound, or about 5,000 mph, after a rocket boosted it to about 3,500 mph.

Huebner said it was the first time an ``air-breathing'' jet had ever traveled so fast. The rocket-powered X-15 reached Mach 6.7 in 1967.

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

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 10:09 pm

some news article i was reading said that it was gliding (unpowered, ie: after the 11 second scramjet burn) mostly at SUPERSONIC speeds. i dunno about that, seems pretty unbelievable.

i'd imagine the air friction would slow you down VERY quick to a subsonic speed.

maybe someone that knows a bunch about guns (i'd imagine this is a lot of you hicks, jkjk

) could answer this for me. i don't know much about guns. from what i understand: most guns fire supersonic rounds, which is partially why unsilenced guns are so freaking loud.

but surely the round doesn't stay supersonic for long, the air friction would be IMMENSE.

AceCombat · Post by **AceCombat** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 8:00 am

this plane was designed to cut down on that friction just so it could stay supersonic with no power, bullets are fired at a velocity that they remain at supersonic speeds for a good 20-30 seconds.