speed record set by scramjet - fair?

(Don French) wrote in message . com...
Seriously,
they could have dropped a Piper cub off that rocket and it could have
maintained Mach 9 for hundreds of miles.

I know you started that sentence with the word "seriously", but you
can't be serious. A Piper Cub would instantly disintegrate at Mach 9,
assuming you were somehow able to protect it from the blast of
(relatively thin) air while you accellerated to that speed. It
certainly doubt that even the pieces would "maintain" Mach 9 long
enough to travel hundreds of miles. I'm pretty sure that they would
travel hundreds of miles, though.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Regardless, it seems to me that the rocket's speed has to be
subtracted from the jet's speed to arrive at the actual jet speed when
you talk about the world's record for speed of a jet plane.

On a deeper level, I find the enthusiasm about this scramjet flight to be,
in many ways, pathetic.

I mean, c'mon -- we're talking about an unmanned, rocket-assisted, 10 second
flight here -- which is somehow trumped up to be some sort of a huge success
for NASA? Worse, they're claming that they've "beaten the speed record set
by the X-15 some 40 years ago..."

Compare this sad little program to the heady days of the manned X-15, with
dozens of suborbital flights over a period of years, and you soon see what I
mean. It's hard to watch this new generation getting all excited about a
program that, in the 1960s, wouldn't have merited mention on the nightly
news.

But I suppose that's all they really have to get excited about nowadays,
with the space program completely shut down.

NASA has sunk so far since I was a boy...it is to weep.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 11/17/04 9:47 PM, in article 03Umd.45151$V41.23702@attbi_s52, "Jay
Honeck" wrote:


On a deeper level, I find the enthusiasm about this scramjet flight to be,
in many ways, pathetic.

I mean, c'mon -- we're talking about an unmanned, rocket-assisted, 10 second
flight here -- which is somehow trumped up to be some sort of a huge success
for NASA? Worse, they're claming that they've "beaten the speed record set
by the X-15 some 40 years ago..."

Compare this sad little program to the heady days of the manned X-15, with
dozens of suborbital flights over a period of years, and you soon see what I
mean. It's hard to watch this new generation getting all excited about a
program that, in the 1960s, wouldn't have merited mention on the nightly
news.

But I suppose that's all they really have to get excited about nowadays,
with the space program completely shut down.

NASA has sunk so far since I was a boy...it is to weep.

I feel the same way. I have a hard time calling the thing a plane since it's
unmanned. In my mind, a plane has a pilot sitting at the controls.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino
Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:03Umd.45151$V41.23702@attbi_s52...
Regardless, it seems to me that the rocket's speed has to be
subtracted from the jet's speed to arrive at the actual jet speed when
you talk about the world's record for speed of a jet plane.

On a deeper level, I find the enthusiasm about this scramjet flight to be,
in many ways, pathetic.

I mean, c'mon -- we're talking about an unmanned, rocket-assisted, 10
second flight here -- which is somehow trumped up to be some sort of a
huge success for NASA? Worse, they're claming that they've "beaten the
speed record set by the X-15 some 40 years ago..."

Compare this sad little program to the heady days of the manned X-15, with
dozens of suborbital flights over a period of years, and you soon see what
I mean. It's hard to watch this new generation getting all excited about
a program that, in the 1960s, wouldn't have merited mention on the nightly
news.

But I suppose that's all they really have to get excited about nowadays,
with the space program completely shut down.

NASA has sunk so far since I was a boy...it is to weep.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

It typical NASA hype. Note that they claimed to have "invented" virtually
everything new in the '60s.

Mike
MU-2

It typical NASA hype. Note that they claimed to have "invented" virtually
everything new in the '60s.

Mike
MU-2

Well, NASA may not have "invented" everything new in the 60's, but they most
definitely paid for it

Jay Honeck wrote:
On a deeper level, I find the enthusiasm about this scramjet flight to be,
in many ways, pathetic.

I mean, c'mon -- we're talking about an unmanned, rocket-assisted, 10 second
flight here -- which is somehow trumped up to be some sort of a huge success
for NASA? Worse, they're claming that they've "beaten the speed record set
by the X-15 some 40 years ago..."


The excitement is about the technology. I think the press is making a
bigger thing about the "record" than NASA really cares about. The ability
to run a jet engine, at close to Mach 10, without bringing along an
oxygen tank, is the REAL achievement. There will undoubtedly be many
more unmanned test flights before a manned flight is attempted with this
engine.

--- Jay



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

"Jay Masino" wrote in message news:419c904b$0

The excitement is about the technology. I think the press is making a
bigger thing about the "record" than NASA really cares about. The ability
to run a jet engine, at close to Mach 10, without bringing along an
oxygen tank, is the REAL achievement.

Exactly. All they care about is the proof of concept, although I'd be
surprised if it hasn't already been done out there. (Kinda like Cassini.)

-c

NASA's site prominently mentions the speed record and the technology
hardly at all. Read all about it:

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/x43-main.html

(Jay Masino) wrote in message ...
Jay Honeck wrote:
On a deeper level, I find the enthusiasm about this scramjet flight to be,
in many ways, pathetic.

I mean, c'mon -- we're talking about an unmanned, rocket-assisted, 10 second
flight here -- which is somehow trumped up to be some sort of a huge success
for NASA? Worse, they're claming that they've "beaten the speed record set
by the X-15 some 40 years ago..."


The excitement is about the technology. I think the press is making a
bigger thing about the "record" than NASA really cares about. The ability
to run a jet engine, at close to Mach 10, without bringing along an
oxygen tank, is the REAL achievement. There will undoubtedly be many
more unmanned test flights before a manned flight is attempted with this
engine.

--- Jay

"Don French" wrote in message
om...
NASA's site prominently mentions the speed record and the technology
hardly at all. Read all about it:

http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/x43-main.html

Well, a) for an "air-breathing engine", Mach 10 *is* a pretty amazing speed
record to break, and b) I really don't get your interpretation of the web
page you've pointed us to.

They mention the speed here and there, but the press release announcing the
successful flight concentrates almost entirely on the technology, and
certainly the technology is not given short shrift compared to the speed
anywhere else that I can find on that site.

Maybe you could quote exact language on that site that illustrates your
interpretation? Please don't forget to explain how the language negates all
the other mentions of the technology.

Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:
Well, a) for an "air-breathing engine", Mach 10 *is* a pretty amazing speed
record to break, and b) I really don't get your interpretation of the web
page you've pointed us to.
They mention the speed here and there, but the press release announcing the
successful flight concentrates almost entirely on the technology, and
certainly the technology is not given short shrift compared to the speed
anywhere else that I can find on that site.
Maybe you could quote exact language on that site that illustrates your
interpretation? Please don't forget to explain how the language negates all
the other mentions of the technology.

In addition, these press releases are released by NASA public relations
people. The scientists and engineers working on the project are probably
more concerned with the advancement of the technology.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com