Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

X-43A test a 'grand slam'(Interesting Details)
Valley Press ^ | March 28, 2004 | ALISON GATLIN

Posted on 03/28/2004 12:35:16 PM PST by BenLurkin

EDWARDS AFB - An experimental aircraft from NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center made aviation history Saturday when the unmanned X-43A hypersonic vehicle became the first non-rocket, air-breathing aircraft to fly more than seven times the speed of sound. "Today was a grand slam at the bottom of the 12th," X-43A project manager Joel Sitz said.

The successful flight was met with cheers in the Dryden control room and from those gathered to witness the historic event. Nearly three years ago, the first attempted flight of the X-43A ended in failure when the rocket booster went out of control.

"I think we saw the birth of a new propulsion system today," Sitz said.

The flight was a milestone as the first time a supersonic combustion ramjet - or scramjet - was successfully flown while integrated with an airframe.

"The ramjet, scramjet is the Holy Grail in aeronautics," Sitz said. "If you're going to go from ground to space, you need a scramjet to do it efficiently."

In Saturday's test, the vehicle's experimental scramjet engine successfully ran for slightly more than 10 seconds, providing data that researchers will use to validate the tools used to design and evaluate future scramjet engines.

"It's not often you're able to participate in a true milestone of flight," Dryden Center director Kevin Petersen said. "I think this will renew interest (in hypersonics) in the country. Once we prove the technology is viable, it should open avenues for added work."

Only 12 feet long and weighing approximately 3,000 pounds, the X-43A is shaped like a flat wedge with fins. The small research aircraft consists largely of the scramjet engine and supporting systems.

This scramjet engine was the experimental focus of the flight, part of NASA's $250 million Hyper-X program to investigate hypersonic flight.

To get the X-43A to the Mach 7 speeds necessary to test the scramjet engine, the research vehicle was propelled by a modified commercial Pegasus rocket booster. The X-43A is attached to the nose of the rocket booster via an adapter.

The entire 50-foot assembly, known collectively as "the stack," is carried aloft beneath the wing of NASA's workhorse B-52, the same carrier aircraft that launched the X-15 rocket planes.

After taking off from Edwards Air Force Base on Saturday afternoon, the bomber streamed contrails as it carried its payload to the test area over the Pacific Ocean, in the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division Sea Range.

The stack dropped from the bomber at 2 p.m., at 38,900 feet and about 50 miles off the California coast. Within seconds, the rocket booster lit its engine and streaked through the clear blue sky, carrying the X-43A to approximately 95,000 feet and Mach 7.

Upon reaching the desired altitude, the launch vehicle successfully leveled off, a maneuver never before attempted with the rocket booster.

Upon reaching the intended altitude and speed, the X-43A successfully separated from the rocket booster, a feat that also had not been attempted before. Pyrotechnic rods within the adapter pushed the research vehicle away from the rocket, which then opened the inlet to the scramjet engine to begin scooping in air.

Judging by preliminary data, the experimental engine performed just as expected, producing positive acceleration.

"It's been an outstanding, record-breaking day," said Lawrence Huebner, X-43A scramjet lead with Langley Research Center, a second NASA center involved in the project. For a historical perspective, he compared it to the Wright Brothers' first flight, which totaled about 120 feet. In the same time span, the X-43A covered over 15 miles.

"What we demonstrated today is something we've seen working on the ground for 40 years," Huebner said. "Flight is reality."

"The big difference is that it wasn't just an engine we were flying," he said. "We were flying an engine wrapped in an airframe."

Following the engine test, researchers continued to collect data as the vehicle slowed and descended to an ocean splashdown approximately 450 miles offshore. Both the X-43A and Pegasus rocket booster were intended for one-time use and will not be retrieved.

Scramjets have an advantage over conventional rocket and turbojet engines in that they are more efficient. These air-breathing engines do not have to carry an oxidizer on board to mix with fuel, instead using oxygen scooped into the engine from the air. For space launch purposes, this means lighter launch vehicles with more payload capacity.

With Saturday's successful flight, a flight of a third X-43A is scheduled for next fall. This one, with slight modifications to the third and final vehicle, would travel to Mach 10.

During the first flight of the X-43A, in June 2001, the Pegasus rocket booster and X-43A went out of control before separating. The launch vehicle was deliberately destroyed by controllers, and both the rocket booster and research vehicle dropped into the ocean without completing the experiment.

The ensuing investigation found problems in the models used in predicting the vehicles' aerodynamic characteristics and the rocket's fin actuator system.

Modifications were made to the fins system, and propellant was removed from the rocket booster to allow a more typical Pegasus launch at 40,000 feet altitude.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: aerospacevalley; antelopevalley; b52; dryden; edwardsafb; mach7; nasa; pegasus; scramjet; x43; x43a
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
It appears that the booster pushed the X-43A up to Mach 7 and then its own engine kicked in for a little while.
1 posted on 03/28/2004 12:35:17 PM PST by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
All the other reports were that the booster took it up to Mach 5 and that the RV engin pushed it up to Mach 7.
2 posted on 03/28/2004 12:50:49 PM PST by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
"It appears that the booster pushed the X-43A up to Mach 7 and then its own engine kicked in for a little while"

Thant's the way I read it also - I didn't think you needed to push it so hard before it would get started.
3 posted on 03/28/2004 12:53:53 PM PST by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Great thread on your post of Thursday night! At the press conference after the test flight it was stated that the maximum velocity was attained just prior to the separation of the Hyper-X from the booster. It will be interesting to see how the next flight shakes out.

The hype NASA generated for this test flight was appropriate based on what was achieved but I suspect their real interest, from a public relations perspective, is to generate funding beyond the next test which will use up the last X-43A. Savvy move by NASA, I don't think they'll have too much trouble finding money for the next phase of scramjet aircraft development.

4 posted on 03/28/2004 1:46:53 PM PST by concentric circles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concentric circles
Thanks!
5 posted on 03/28/2004 2:27:37 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DB
Allson Gaitlin is the Aerosspace reporter for the Valley Press and has been for a number of years. She's usually right on top of her stuff though - Lord knows - anybody can make a mistake.
6 posted on 03/28/2004 2:29:26 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Someone please explain..
The scramjet must be pushed to mach 5-7, and an altitude approaching 100,000 ft.
How much higher can it go before it runs out of enough air to keep it lit?
7 posted on 03/28/2004 2:45:57 PM PST by Vinnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
If you're going to go from ground to space, you need a scramjet to do it efficiently."

Dumb question: orbital velocity is 17K mph and escape velocity is 25K mph. How is an air breathing engine going to be useful for anything other than sub-orbital flights (On the otherhand, I'll bet it'll help getting from home base to a target rich environment quickly) ??

Don't get me wrong, I think NASA has hit a another home run and I realize there is a lot we can do with scramjet engine technology, but how's it gonna help get into space?

8 posted on 03/28/2004 2:46:00 PM PST by jgorris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgorris
Near as I can figure it is one of two things:

1) The SCRAm is part of a multi-stage system with the final stage using its own oxidizer

or

2) The SCRAM intake are placed on the bottom of the craft and it cruises at the absolute highest altitude it can go, skimming along the top of the atmosphere. There it either delivers a payload back to earth (passengers NY to Tokyo in 90 minutes?) or it launches a space vehicle off its back and into orbit.

9 posted on 03/28/2004 2:55:19 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
I wish someone would post a picture of the test plane itself. Every thread I've seen shows the Pegasus booster rocket and not a very good picture of the test plane itself.

The NASA feed gave a good view of it under the wing of the B52.

10 posted on 03/28/2004 3:00:41 PM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
That's because a scramjet cannot work below Mach 5.

"The ramjet, scramjet is the Holy Grail in aeronautics," Sitz said. "If you're going to go from ground to space, you need a scramjet to do it efficiently." Absolutely. This IS the next generation of truly reliable, routine space launch.

11 posted on 03/28/2004 3:01:39 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun

12 posted on 03/28/2004 3:02:08 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jgorris
Easy. To answer your question, the entire premise of scramjet-powered space flight is to boost up to 18,000 mph and pull the stick back. Once you're in space, you have a few maneuvering rockets. The beauty of the scram is that MOST of the fuel for the flight is already supplied (air).
13 posted on 03/28/2004 3:03:11 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jgorris
Don't get me wrong, I think NASA has hit a another home run and I realize there is a lot we can do with scramjet engine technology, but how's it gonna help get into space?

Next step is a Bussard Ramjet?
14 posted on 03/28/2004 3:04:12 PM PST by gitmo (Thanks, Mel. I needed that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin; All
Now, let me see if I get this correct - to get this 'plane', (which cannot carry any passengers, by its very nature (no way the human body can withstand the accelleration), we need a B-52, to fly high, to launch a rocket, to get this 'plane' to go fast enough to get it's engine to work (But scramjets only start to work at about Mach 6, or six times the speed of sound. And this means they first have to be boosted to their operational velocity.) so it can fly in the atmosphere.

Why not just do away with the B-52 and the scram jet, and go with the rocket from start to finish?

I have no idea what end result is desired from this Rube-Goldberg waste of money.

What is the end goal?
15 posted on 03/28/2004 3:04:21 PM PST by XBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Boy, that was quick. -Thanks-

It sure did look small mounted on the booster rocket.

16 posted on 03/28/2004 3:06:46 PM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun
About the size of an SUV I guess:

17 posted on 03/28/2004 3:14:05 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Scramjets have an advantage over conventional rocket and turbojet engines in that they are more efficient. These air-breathing engines do not have to carry an oxidizer on board to mix with fuel, instead using oxygen scooped into the engine from the air.

Ms. Gaitlin is not that technically savvy if she can write a misleading paragraph like this.

18 posted on 03/28/2004 3:27:32 PM PST by SpyGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: XBob
to get this 'plane', (which cannot carry any passengers, by its very nature (no way the human body can withstand the accelleration [sic]),

Sounds like you're confusing acceleration with velocity.
19 posted on 03/28/2004 3:34:57 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
I think Steve Austin should have been piloting it.
20 posted on 03/28/2004 3:36:51 PM PST by Benrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson