SR-72 Confirmed: Mach 6 Project Blackswift

a reply to: andy06shake

Or, you send in a $500M stealth bomber to drop a $2M bomb, or use a $120M stealthy cruise missile.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes but those already do what they says on the tin.

I don't really imagine we would use cutting-edge hypersonic drones as fire and forget missiles, at least not until the materials and engine design/components become mainstream in the manner than LG bombs and cruise missiles now are in today's world.

Was just pointing out that at that speed it would make a hell of a mess if indeed used as a weapon without any additional armaments.

Disturbance rejection dynamic inverse control of air-breathing hypersonic vehicles

www.sciencedirect.com...

aviationweek.com...

a reply to: intelgurl

Amazing, i have always been into aircraft and airplane simulators this is brilliant news!

Analysis and reduction of skin-friction in a rocket-based combined-cycle engine flow path operating from Mach 1.5 to 6.0

www.sciencedirect.com...

Note: friction at Mach 6 is ~4x Mach 1.5.

Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of flow parameters on aerodynamics of a hypersonic inlet

www.sciencedirect.com...

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Zaphod58

That's true.

But how many potential targets are going to require Mach 6+ missile/drone to take them out?

You would be surprised actually the speed allows it to be used in real time for targets of opportunity as well like say a Hezbollah leader gets stuck in a drive through line at the local fast food eatery. Mach 6+ allows the target to be engaged fast before they can react. The hyper speed allows for greater operational flexibility

Design and high speed aerodynamic performance analysis of vortex lift waverider with a wide-speed range

www.sciencedirect.com...

According to the geometrical relationships of osculating cone waveriders, two kinds of design methods for the constant swept waverider are discussed in the current study, and both of them own more flexible design curves. The correctness and effectiveness of the proposed approaches has been verified by means of the CFD approach. The design Mach numbers of the cuspidal waverider and the general osculating cone waverider with the same volumetric efficiency of the delta-winged waverider have been determined by writing a program for calculating the volumetric efficiencies of waveriders. Furthermore, the high speed aerodynamic performance advantages of the cuspidal and delta-winged waveriders have been analyzed in detail, in comparison with the high speed aerodynamic performance of the general osculating cone waverider. The obtained results show that compared with the general osculating cone waverider, the cuspidal waverider has better high speed aerodynamic performance under any flight condition in the high speed range, while the high speed aerodynamic performance of the delta-winged waverider is worse. In addition, at the high flight Mach number, the cuspidal waverider shows the significant non-linear behavior of the vortex generated lift, while the delta-winged waverider and the general osculating cone waverider do not have this property.

Combustion stabilization modes in a hydrogen-fueled scramjet combustor at high stagnation temperature


www.sciencedirect.com...

Adaptive higher order super-twisting control algorithm for a flexible air-breathing hypersonic vehicle

www.sciencedirect.com...

a reply to: anzha

Did you see the Boeing comments about their hypersonic airliner? Some interesting things there.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Missed it. hmm.

strike that. I did see it. I didn't read it because I took it to be another sonic cruiser announcement.

a reply to: anzha

I thought the thing about cabin pressure was rather intriguing.

They've got all the MDD work already sitting in file cabinets somewhere. Just brush the dust off.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: anzha

Did you see the Boeing comments about their hypersonic airliner? Some interesting things there.

Any links to the article? Tried searching but could not find it, needle in a haystack job !

www.flightglobal.com...
I find it , may be a derivative of it for strike or ISR could be in interest for military.

originally posted by: darksidius
www.flightglobal.com...
I find it , may be a derivative of it for strike or ISR could be in interest for military.

Thanks for finding a link. Very interesting indeed on the depressurisation bit. Also noteworthy was the possible use of high bypass engines for mach 5. Hmmmmm ... forget about the airframe problems for now, with the right technology could you stretch those engines to mach 6 ?

Mach 5 seem to be the limit of speed for a affordable high speed plane.

originally posted by: darksidius
www.flightglobal.com...
I find it , may be a derivative of it for strike or ISR could be in interest for military.

You mean the predecessor of this hypothetical plane is used for ISR and strike?

The comment about engine tech and fuel is even more interessting imo. Confirms some assumptions. Crazy how far they pushed the 71 solution.