A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Scram Jets



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 29th 04, 06:41 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Scram Jets

Anyone know the slowest speed at which a scram jet would likely be able to
start?

It seems NASA is using a rocket booster to get to speed, which would make me
think this idea is a bit less than practical for civilian use. Can't see
the Concorde crowd signing up for a rocket powered plane, though I could be
wrong. It would be neat if it worked at a low enough Mach that you could
build a workable SST.

OTOH using one for a cruise missile would be neat. Picture a third world
dictator about to go on live TV. By the time the sycophant finishes the
introduction, the missile will have left CONUS in time to blast the podium
before the "general and president for life" is finished blaming the US for
everything bad in his little banana republic!



  #2  
Old September 29th 04, 07:48 PM
gerrcoin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dude wrote:
Anyone know the slowest speed at which a scram jet would likely be able to
start?

It seems NASA is using a rocket booster to get to speed, which would make me
think this idea is a bit less than practical for civilian use. Can't see
the Concorde crowd signing up for a rocket powered plane, though I could be
wrong. It would be neat if it worked at a low enough Mach that you could
build a workable SST.

OTOH using one for a cruise missile would be neat. Picture a third world
dictator about to go on live TV. By the time the sycophant finishes the
introduction, the missile will have left CONUS in time to blast the podium
before the "general and president for life" is finished blaming the US for
everything bad in his little banana republic!



IIRC they only get going at around mach 5 or so.

Rockets are used at the moment but eventually the idea is to use a
hybrid engine with a conventional engine to get it up to ramjet speeds
(mach 1.5-3.5), then the ramjet to 3.5 or so and then fire up the
scramjet. Each of these engine phases will have defined altitudes as
well of course.
  #3  
Old September 29th 04, 08:07 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

1.5 seems a low enough number.

Do you have any links about hybrids? I was thinking you would have seperate
engines.



"gerrcoin" wrote in message
...
Dude wrote:
Anyone know the slowest speed at which a scram jet would likely be able

to
start?

It seems NASA is using a rocket booster to get to speed, which would

make me
think this idea is a bit less than practical for civilian use. Can't

see
the Concorde crowd signing up for a rocket powered plane, though I could

be
wrong. It would be neat if it worked at a low enough Mach that you could
build a workable SST.

OTOH using one for a cruise missile would be neat. Picture a third

world
dictator about to go on live TV. By the time the sycophant finishes the
introduction, the missile will have left CONUS in time to blast the

podium
before the "general and president for life" is finished blaming the US

for
everything bad in his little banana republic!



IIRC they only get going at around mach 5 or so.

Rockets are used at the moment but eventually the idea is to use a
hybrid engine with a conventional engine to get it up to ramjet speeds
(mach 1.5-3.5), then the ramjet to 3.5 or so and then fire up the
scramjet. Each of these engine phases will have defined altitudes as
well of course.



  #4  
Old September 30th 04, 04:03 AM
Pete Schaefer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAHOHOHOHOHOHHEEHEEEHEEHEEHEE!!SCRA MJETSFORCIVILIANUSE!!!HHHA
AHHAHAA....

sorry...just lost control there for a second....

All this **** about scramjets and hypersonics has been going on for a lot
longer than I've been alive, and I haven't seen anything yet that tells me
that there is any really significant progress towards anything that might
even remotely be construed as "practical". A guy I used to work with is the
chief on that Hyper-X project. He's just spent like 25 years of his career
for 11 seconds of data.


"Dude" wrote in message
...
It seems NASA is using a rocket booster to get to speed, which would make

me
think this idea is a bit less than practical for civilian use. Can't see



  #5  
Old September 30th 04, 11:31 PM
gerrcoin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dude wrote:
1.5 seems a low enough number.

Do you have any links about hybrids? I was thinking you would have seperate
engines.



"gerrcoin" wrote in message
...

Dude wrote:

Anyone know the slowest speed at which a scram jet would likely be able


to

start?

It seems NASA is using a rocket booster to get to speed, which would


make me

think this idea is a bit less than practical for civilian use. Can't


see

the Concorde crowd signing up for a rocket powered plane, though I could


be

wrong. It would be neat if it worked at a low enough Mach that you could
build a workable SST.

OTOH using one for a cruise missile would be neat. Picture a third


world

dictator about to go on live TV. By the time the sycophant finishes the
introduction, the missile will have left CONUS in time to blast the


podium

before the "general and president for life" is finished blaming the US


for

everything bad in his little banana republic!




IIRC they only get going at around mach 5 or so.

Rockets are used at the moment but eventually the idea is to use a
hybrid engine with a conventional engine to get it up to ramjet speeds
(mach 1.5-3.5), then the ramjet to 3.5 or so and then fire up the
scramjet. Each of these engine phases will have defined altitudes as
well of course.




That's only where the ramjet or rocket picks up. The scramjet itself
cannot fire up below about mach 5 and needs to be in the upper atmosphere.

I can't find much info on hybrid engines, mainly because they don't
exist yet-it's all just theory so far.

Try these though.
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/AERO/base/pdet.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/hypersonic-plane.htm
  #6  
Old October 1st 04, 05:03 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bummer

"Pete Schaefer" wrote in message
news:HHK6d.392182$8_6.17841@attbi_s04...

BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAHOHOHOHOHOHHEEHEEEHEEHEEHEE!!SCRA MJETSFORCIVILIANUSE!!!HHHA
AHHAHAA....

sorry...just lost control there for a second....

All this **** about scramjets and hypersonics has been going on for a lot
longer than I've been alive, and I haven't seen anything yet that tells me
that there is any really significant progress towards anything that might
even remotely be construed as "practical". A guy I used to work with is

the
chief on that Hyper-X project. He's just spent like 25 years of his career
for 11 seconds of data.


"Dude" wrote in message
...
It seems NASA is using a rocket booster to get to speed, which would

make
me
think this idea is a bit less than practical for civilian use. Can't

see




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hair on the palm of my hand; was Jets: Takeoff performance questions pac plyer Home Built 1 July 2nd 03 02:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.