Posted on 05/27/2010 9:50:17 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
An aircraft resembling a large bodyboard detached from a flying B-52 bomber and then shot across the Pacific on Wednesday at more than 3,500 mph, shattering aviation records and reigniting decades-long efforts to develop a vehicle that could travel faster than a speeding bullet.
The unmanned X-51 WaveRider, powered by an air-breathing hypersonic engine that has virtually no moving parts, was launched midair off the coast near Point Mugu. It sped westward for 200 seconds before plunging into the ocean as planned. Previous attempts at hypersonic flights lasted no more than 10 seconds.
"Everything went very well for a first flight," said Charlie Brink, the X-51 program manager for the Air Force. "For things to go off the way they did, we're confident this technology has a bright future."
Since the 1960s, the Air Force has been flirting with hypersonic technology, which can propel vehicles at a velocity that cannot be achieved from traditional turbine-powered jet engines.
» Don't miss a thing. Get breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox.
But the technology has been exceedingly difficult to perfect. Previous attempts produced very limited results including flights that lasted only a few seconds, said Peter Wilson, senior defense analyst with Rand Corp.
It has held great promise, however. A passenger aircraft powered by hypersonic engines could fly from Los Angeles to New York in 30 minutes. It also could travel faster than existing cruise missiles.
With the technology, the military could strike anywhere on planet within an hour or less, said John Pike, director of Globalsecurity.org, a website for military policy research.
"The WaveRider represents a major change that could have big implications on today's weapon systems," he said. "It can travel great distances at remarkable speeds, showing potential for a long-range cruise missile."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
the end of the aircraft carrier is in sight. For that matter, the end of overseas airbases is in sight.
I disagree. We need overseas bases for our bomber units and there is still a need for a carriers.
Overseas bases would be absolutely indispensable in either a nuclear or nonnuclear limited war.
Ping
They can call it an “aircraft” but in reality it’s just a rocket.
Two completely different technologies.
Point taken, but it’s far more rocket-like than a familiar fixed wing aircraft. About as far as you can go and still have an aspirating powerplant.
Cruise missiles are not meant to be supersonic let alone hypersonic.
For goodness sake. Do any of these moron journalists have any clue as to the subject they write about? They are supposed to give us facts but then make us question their veracity when they write ignorant statements.
bflr
XX
The public learned about the stealth fighter in 1990 during Iraq I; at that time, it had been a proven air frame for 10 years.
Food for thought.
“Overseas bases would be absolutely indispensable in either a nuclear or nonnuclear limited war.”
I agree with that. We will always need “boots on the ground.”
In regards to future warfare, boats will be rendered old school and extremely vulnerable...
For the moment.
I stood next to (literally next to) the Eisenhower in 1968 at Subic. I agree; it is a magnificent presence, not to mention the rest of the ships in the flotilla. The entire ship group is a verrrry formidable force.
B-52 and the mounted X-51
I can't stop myself from reinterpreting and paraphrasing that description as a personal invective...
"You air-breathing, hypersonic, virtually-no-moving-parts engine of stupid!"
Kinda has a ring to it.
Bump
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.