SR-72 Confirmed: Mach 6 Project Blackswift

Originally posted by Taeas Stirling
You know considering the airforces need for regular injections of above average brains, and temperments. It would be very prudent for the DOD to release little tidbits such as we have been presented with. In order to capture the minds of the next generation. And keep em hitting the books in order to make the grade

From what I gather that is quite a big problem over in the US of A at the moment. Not enough people doing the real subjects.

Its like that over here too - far too many doing the non-math based stuff (i.e. avoiding engineering and doing something like philosophy instead). Pretty sad state of affairs really... if the government are serious about education, they should start quotas for the various subjects offered by unis IMO.

reply to post by intelgurl


Hypersonic SR-72, about time, we had to pay the Russians a pretty penny to buy the technology, at least its paying it self of in some sort of a way.

Here’s the real deal on scramjets, direct from NASA, it’s their own schedule - February 1997;

Mach 6.5 scramjet ground test (Russian Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) contract).

Note the “Russian contract” part, it means we’re BUYING scramjet tech from the Russians.

Same goes for the;

Mach 6.5 scramjet flight test (Russian CIAM contract).

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Simply put, as much as I can’t stand Wiki;

After NASA's NASP program was cut, American scientists began to look at adopting available Russian technology as a less expensive alternative to developing hypersonic flight. On November 17, 1992, Russian scientists with some additional French support successfully launched a scramjet engine "Holod" in Kazakhstan6. From 1994 to 1998 NASA worked with the Russian Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) to test a dual-mode scramjet engine and transfer technology and experience to the West. Four tests took place, reaching Mach numbers of 5.5, 5.35, 5.8, and 6.5. The final test took place aboard a modified SA-5 surface to air missile launched from the Sary Shagan test range in the Republic of Kazakhstan on 12 February 1998. According to CIAM telemetry data, first ignition of the scramjet was unsuccessful, but after 10 seconds the engine was started and the experimental system flew 77s with good performance, up until the planned SA-5 missile self-destruction (according to NASA, no net thrust was achieved).

Some sources in the Russian military have said that a hypersonic (10-15M) maneuverable ICBM warhead was tested.

The new "GLL Igla" system is expected to fly in 2009.

en.wikipedia.org...

Its all old news though. AS-19 «Koala» circa 1991, the real thing, not a 3D rendering or a model;

www.sergib.agava.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Х-43A Hiper-X, same thing, test data was simply bought in 1998 from the Russians, while Igla is already a generation ahead.

Alliant Techsystems FASTT – same thing, Russian scramjet tech.

I covered all of this last year right here;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I can’t wait until Russians will let us buy (or at least lease) their Burlak-M/ Burlak-Diana system, but I doubt they’ll give that one up any time soon, we’ll just have to wait until they are done with it.

Some pictures;

www.testpilot.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Here’s the scramjet we bough from the Russians;

www.testpilot.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

You get what you pay for, and that’s why Russian system shows much better performance;

www.testpilot.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

The real deal, flying and everything, not a model;

www.testpilot.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>



At least we’re catching up somewhat, and I do love that 3D rendering, looks all space like and futuristically sci-fi!

I am going to assume at that altitude and speed, that a Ku-band uplink to the TDRSS system will be used to send images to the ground. Hopefully that will be a boon to NASA and the Constellation program, with a much improved TDRSS network.

reply to post by iskander

Yeah, that's a lot of research you did for the sole purpose of touting Russian technology avancements.

Unfortunately your research and comments are irrelevant since they concern "scramjet" technology and the SR-72 is using RATTLRS propulsion technology which is based on turbine/ramjet hybrid tech in the same vein as the SR-71's J58 engines.

Good try though.

bIOS

[edit on 11/5/2007 by bios]

reply to post by bios

Yeah, that's a lot of research you did for the sole purpose of touting Russian technology avancements.

What advancements? Hypersonic concept has been around since the German Antipodal Bomber concept (PROJECT 1947), as of 1945.

What counts here is the investment of resources in order to brining the conceptual into the real, and as FACTS clearly show, so far only the Russians made the attempt to do so, and have done so successfully.

Feel free to get up to speed on the general topic before making personal comments.

I recommend looking into this guy first; Eugen Sanger, and his hypersonic dynamics and ramjets research.

He also had a wife, a mathematician named Irene Bredt, and together they worked on what they called “RaBo”, a concept for a suborbital rocket bomber.

Unfortunately your research and comments are irrelevant since they concern "scramjet" technology and the SR-72 is using RATTLRS propulsion technology which is based on turbine/ramjet hybrid tech in the same vein as the SR-71's J58 engines.

? It’s not my “research”, it’s COMMON KNOLEDGE, nothing special here. It’s wikipedia material for crying out loud.

Look into scramjets first, and then feel free to talk about hybrids and which one is a generation ahead of the other.

Here’s the first tip – scramjet has a total of ZERO moving parts.

Good luck and enjoy!

edit:spl


[edit on 7-11-2007 by iskander]

Originally posted by iskander

 

Feel free to get up to speed on the general topic before making personal comments.
[edit on 7-11-2007 by iskander]

Honestly in every thread you have posted on here you have made this claim againest people you know nothing about and frankly its cocky and rude. How about you get to know people before you make comments like this and see what they actually do know. Your a long way onto peoples hate list with treating people like this.

Also I'm pretty sure you forgot that Bios told you

"SR-72 is using RATTLRS propulsion technology which is based on turbine/ramjet hybrid tech in the same vein as the SR-71's J58 engines."

We aren't even talking about scramjets the RATTLRS is more of a hybrid as Bios said. The use of a turbine engine is the key factor this is not a simple theory of ram or scramjets. There are more moving parts and a turbine still acting as a compressor for slower flight until higher speeds are reached. These are the key points of the programe to allow for:
Optimized vehicle configuration for payload, range, or endurance
Improved efficiency in multiple speed regimes.
Reduced cost
Multiple-launch platform capable

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]

Originally posted by iskander

What counts here is the investment of resources in order to brining the conceptual into the real, and as FACTS clearly show, so far only the Russians made the attempt to do so, and have done so successfully.

Interestingly enough the Russians could not get their scramjet to exceed M 5.7 or 5.8 until NASA stepped in to help, then they got it to M 6.5.
Source: When was the first scramjet flight-tested?: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society - Nov/Dec 2002

Meanwhile I believe the NASA X-43A scramjet powered craft hit around M 9.8. Interesting, ain't it?

Originally posted by iskander
Feel free to get up to speed on the general topic before making personal comments.

And that's the problem with your post buddy, your comments are not even on the general topic of this thread. Duh!

Originally posted by iskander

Originally posted by Bios

Unfortunately your research and comments are irrelevant since they concern "scramjet" technology and the SR-72 is using RATTLRS propulsion technology which is based on turbine/ramjet hybrid tech in the same vein as the SR-71's J58 engines.

? It’s not my “research”, it’s COMMON KNOLEDGE, nothing special here. It’s wikipedia material for crying out loud.

I would venture to say that as easy as it may be to look up a subject on Wikipedia, that still constitutes "research" unless you gain your knowledge through osmosis.

Originally posted by iskander
Look into scramjets first, and then feel free to talk about hybrids and which one is a generation ahead of the other.

Here’s the first tip – scramjet has a total of ZERO moving parts.

Good luck and enjoy!

edit:spl

What you don't seem to realize in your psuedointellectual verbal gymnastics is that I, like my wife (Intelgurl) am in the aerospace industry, and I am more than merely acquainted with scramjets, etc.

The bottom line here is that you have attempted to hijack this thread with off-subject ramblings about scramjets, which are not the thread's subject.

Feel free to start another thread spewing the virtues of Russian scramjet technology, but it is inappropriate in this particular thread.

reply to post by iskander


Lockheed Skunkworks Job Description for $30M sub-contracting oversight:

42829BR
Industry Job Title Aeronautical Engineer Prin
Standard Job Code/Title E1456:Aeronautical Engineer Prin
Required skills Proven team leadership experience, Subcontractor management, Engine supplier coordination, Strong technical background with high speed compressible flow, High speed ground test experience
Desired skills Ramjet/scramjet experience, Project management experience

Specific Job Description This position requires an extremely experienced individual responsible for management of the technical performance of sub-contractor Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne during development of the dual mode ramjet (DMRJ), common SERN nozzle, manufacturing demonstration of the actively cooled DMRJ combustor and design, fabrication and test of the DMRJ Freejet model in a high-speed (up to Mach 6.5) government test facility. Total approximate budget for sub-contract propulsion elements of Falcon in 2007 is $30M with expected increase in out years. The high visibility and importance of propulsion success and the risk associated with executing this significant DARPA program requires the need for this level of a propulsion engineer. This candidate must have applicable experience and capability for the program’s technical propulsion and propulsion integration challenges. Good oral and written communication skills are essential. A combination of education and experience may be considered equivalent to the degree requirement. Case-by-case evaluation must occur. Applicants selected will be subject to a government security investigation and must meet eligibility requirements for access to classified information.
....
Security Clearance Secret
Program Falcon
Department 6C4P10ropulsion Analysis-Palmdale

reply to post by RigelFive

Excellent find and welcome to ATS, RigelFive!!!

reply to post by Retro


If the Lockheed job description is correct (see above), this has to be a stepping stone. $30 million is gone in a year.

Plus the clearance is only Secret.

[edit on 14-11-2007 by RigelFive]

reply to post by bios

""
Thanks Bio. Glad to be here.

reply to post by bios

Interestingly enough the Russians could not get their scramjet to exceed M 5.7 or 5.8 until NASA stepped in to help, then they got it to M 6.5.

LOL!

Do you even read your own sources?

When your to quick on the draw, you end up shooting your self in the foot, and right now you’re missing a few tows there buddy!

Further tests made jointly with NASA pushed the Russian scramjet even faster. These were carried out in the dead of the Siberian winter so that the extreme cold would make the fuel on the missile denser than normal, allowing more to be packed in and increasing the top speed to about Mach 6.5.

- Source: When was the first scramjet flight-tested?: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society - Nov/Dec 2002

www.americanscientist.org...

Meanwhile I believe the NASA X-43A scramjet powered craft hit around M 9.8. Interesting, ain't it?

Not really, since X-43A is based on NASP, which was flat out bought from the Russians.

And yet again the same picture which tells a thousand words;

www.testpilot.ru... " target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

READ HERE - “Hyper-X”

Background

One of the primary goals of NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise, as delineated in the NASA Strategic Plan, specified the development and demonstration of technologies for air-breathing hypersonic flight. Following the cancellation of the National Aerospace Plane (NASP) program in November 1994, the United States lacked a cohesive hypersonic technology development program. As one of the "better, faster, cheaper" program developed by NASA in the late 1990s, Hyper-X used National Aerospace Plane technology, and was to quickly moving it forward to the next step, which was demonstration of hypersonic air breathing propulsion in flight.

To make it OBVIOUS, here’s the real deal;

Scramjet - Hyper-X

NASA's Hyper-X program is the successor to the National Aerospace Plane (NASP) program which was cancelled in November 1994. This program involves flight testing through the construction of the X-43 vehicles. NASA first successfully flew its X-43A scramjet test vehicle on March 27, 2004 (an earlier test, on June 2, 2001 went out of control and had to be destroyed)

www.experiencefestival.com...



Here’s the actual engine;

www.testpilot.ru... " target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

And the cherry on top;

Scramjet - Russia and France and NASA

On November 17, 1992, Russian scientists with some additional French support successfully launched a scramjet engine in Kazakhstan5. From 1994 to 1998 NASA worked with the Russian central institute of aviation motors (CIAM) to test a dual-mode scramjet engine. Four tests took place, reaching Mach numbers of 5.5, 5.35, 5.8, and 6.5. The final test took place aboard a modified SA-5 surface to air missile launched from the Sary Shagan test range in the Republic of Kazakhstan on 12 February 1998. Data regarding whether the internal combustion took place in supersonic air streams was inconclusive, according to NASA. No net thrust was achieved.

www.experiencefestival.com...

So NASA paid for the tests to buy the test data only to conveniently find it to be “inconclusive”, then promptly shut down NASP program only to resurrect it in a relabeled X-43 clone all in order to claim it as the their own design.

Dr. Wernher von Braun was not a scientist by the way, he was a good manager with a team to run, its he’s ambition that really went to the moon, and “our own” Hyper-X project is nothing more then a fancy label stuck on the Russian hypersonic engine.

I would venture to say that as easy as it may be to look up a subject on Wikipedia, that still constitutes "research" unless you gain your knowledge through osmosis.

My only answer to that is this - www.wikitruth.info...

Wiki is for people who are not capable of independent thought.

What you don't seem to realize in your psuedointellectual verbal gymnastics is that I, like my wife (Intelgurl) am in the aerospace industry, and I am more than merely acquainted with scramjets, etc.

Well, I’m very scared now, are you proud of your self?

I literally can’t contain my self, and I will immediately run to get my blanky and teddy bear.

I know where the blanky is, but I’ll have to ask my wife were the teddy is… this is getting weird…

The bottom line here is that you have attempted to hijack this thread with off-subject ramblings about scramjets, which are not the thread's subject.

Are you calling me a terrorist? I know how it starts, first words like ”hijack” get used, “ramblings about scramjet”, then “somebody” casually throws pu-239 into the mix, and then NSA tagflags go up.

What are you trying to do to me here? Confess!!

Feel free to start another thread spewing the virtues of Russian scramjet technology, but it is inappropriate in this particular thread.

Absolutely your highness, please accept my outmost apologies for my inconvenient opinions. Your assertion of me “spewing the virtues of Russian scramjet technology” are most indubitable, and will make sure to ask permission for the allowance of such behavior in the future.

How may I serve you today Master bios?

p.s. May I humbly request a list of what is acceptable and was is not according to Master bios?

Your servant, Iskander.

reply to post by RigelFive


RigelFive, so?

Originally posted by iskander
Absolutely your highness, please accept my outmost apologies for my inconvenient opinions. Your assertion of me “spewing the virtues of Russian scramjet technology” are most indubitable, and will make sure to ask permission for the allowance of such behavior in the future.

How may I serve you today Master bios?

p.s. May I humbly request a list of what is acceptable and was is not according to Master bios?

Your servant, Iskander.

All sarcasm aside, this is a thread about a new hypersonic aircraft current known as "Blackswift".
It utilizes turbine/ramjet hybrid engines - just as the SR-71 did - not a scramjet.

It would be good if the subject were not diverted to who makes the best scramjet, who invented scramjets, who has flown the fastest scramjet, etc since the original post had absolutely nothing to do with scramjets and those people who are attracted to this thread because of the title are expecting to read and comment on the Blackswift, not who's got the biggest, er ... scramjet.

It's just good etiquette to not take a thread off on a rabbit trail it was not intended to go on.

If you start your own thread on scramjets I'm sure Bios and many others would love to comment.

Natalie~
sitting in the Bellagio watching the fountains dance...

I think we can do without all the sarcasm.

Please, let's do our best to promote an atmosphere of scholarly debate and maintain the high standards the Aircraft Projects forum is famous for.

Fair enough?

The first picture a prototype of a proposed supersonic stealth cruise missile. It was rejected and different subsonic design was choosen. This new design,of which no pictures are available, will be undoubtably be used in Iran if it comes to war. Iran and Soviet air defence will not see it coming before it is too late.

The send picture is a proposed UAV bomber as a follow on to the B-2. It happens like clock work that after 10 years of deployment that a replacement starts developing.

Remember even a 100K feet, you'll get shot down, unless you can't be seen. Low orbit (120K+) stealth vehicles are the only way to look at China or Russia with immunity. You will never ever see these kind of pictures of the real thing leaked, I can assure you. These programs are beyond black. They are blacked out and invisible.

Originally posted by intelgurl
US Black project research for 2008 will be the highest in history. Some $17.5 billion will be alocated toward R&D programs, but what's more tell-tale is the $14.4 billion in black weapon systems acquisition for 2008.

Interesting source article:
"Black" U.S. R&D Budget Estimated at $17.5B: Defense News, Sept 22, 2007

But that doesn't make any sense, how are they going to finance this thing. With foreign money? Still expecting China and others to continue buying US bonds. And according to this article, the new defence spending bill will amount to $459 billion.

It is the same plane, right? The article is from this thread

Most importantly intelgurl, is this thing really capable of intercepting China satellite killer?

Originally posted by Jazzyguy

Originally posted by intelgurl
US Black project research for 2008 will be the highest in history. Some $17.5 billion will be alocated toward R&D programs, but what's more tell-tale is the $14.4 billion in black weapon systems acquisition for 2008.

Interesting source article:
"Black" U.S. R&D Budget Estimated at $17.5B: Defense News, Sept 22, 2007

But that doesn't make any sense, how are they going to finance this thing. With foreign money? Still expecting China and others to continue buying US bonds. And according to this article, the new defence spending bill will amount to $459 billion.

From what I understand the spending bill may be $459 billion, but the BLACK projects are accounting for approximately $17.5 billion.

It is the same plane, right? The article is from this thread

My sources doubt that it's exactly the same - but Intelgurl may have different info.

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Most importantly intelgurl, is this thing really capable of intercepting China satellite killer?

Again, in lieu of Intelgurl's availability, and talking to some of the same sources she talks to, the Blackswift would not be able to intercept Chinese ASATs without some weapon modifications.

reply to post by iskander


Iskander-
Checkout www.uq.edu.au...

If we're spending billions on hypersonic research, its obvious we're shopping somewhere else other than the US (or North Las Vegas). NASA/DARPA/Air Force is in heavy with Australia, Germany, Korea, Japan and others.

Wasn't Russian scramjet technology kerosene based? X-43 was just a couple of hydrogen bottles at 9000 psi with a heat exchanger.

How may I serve you today Master bios?

I have an idea... Shuttup so we can concentrate on the actual topic?