Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 12:27 GMT
"Hypersonic for this purpose is defined as five times the speed of sound or faster"
The speed of sound *in what* ?
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 12:27 GMT
Firstly the serious one - $30 million? Isn't that pocket change to these establishments? Given that, as intimated in the article, the issues to be overcome will require significant research and advances in multiple areas including materials technology and chemistry, $30 mill really seems like a let's throw a few coppers out there and see what comes back kind of plan. Good luck with that.
Second - 'slap the pendulous jowls of established wisdom with the gauntlet of disregard' - I love, I'm going to use it.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 12:27 GMT
"The Pentagon's famous bad-boy scientists, DARPA* - who slap the pendulous jowls of established wisdom with the gauntlet of disregard ".
Do you deliberately wait until lunchtime before you post these articles - you must have shares in a keyboard manufacturer,
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 12:48 GMT
> slap the pendulous jowls of established wisdom with the gauntlet of disregard
Somebody's been listening to Just a Minute
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 12:52 GMT
No I haven't. The fellow routinely steals my ideas in advance.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 13:01 GMT
The speed of sound in whatever you are flying through.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 13:47 GMT
I'm keeping that one in my notes.
Thanks!
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 13:47 GMT
"the speed of sound *in what*?"
In metres per second, presumably.
Although, being American, they probably express it in some bonkers mediaeval measure such as acres per square pound.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 13:47 GMT
Is generally accepted as being approximately 762 mph at sea level (I know... it's a measurement though, I doubt anyone's done that, or survived if they did) at STP.
Better expressed as a Mach number - for example, the transitional value for the Hypersonic transition is < Mach 5
What's the difference? Well, Mach numbers are effectively dimensonles numbers. Which can clarify the math somewhat.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 13:47 GMT
I just developed a system that allows me to travel at more than five times the speed of sound... in a vacuum. What do I win?
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 14:34 GMT
A SHEEP!
Actually, its been a while since the RSU (Reg System of Units) had an airing.
and, @ AC - Wasn't there a land speed record attempt fairly recently that busted the sound barrier? At STP? And the driver survived?
If that doesn't slap the pendulous jowls of established wisdom with the gauntlet of disregard, I dunno what does
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 15:41 GMT
I think you mean Humphs wonderful exit lines from "I'm sorry I haven't a clue"
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 15:41 GMT
Remember the Skylon?
http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/skylon_overview.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 15:41 GMT
faster... faster...
mines the one with the NASA badge on the shoulder
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 16:14 GMT
I believe this record still stands.
ProjectSageburner
http://steeljawscribe.com/2007/03/23/flightdeck-friday-the-yf4h-1-phantom-ii-operations-skyburner-and-sageburner
I also believe this record cannot now be competed for, 'cause it's too damn dangerous.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 20:13 GMT
You already know 'what' based on the context. If not, this article is already above your education level.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 20:13 GMT
Oh, but even before Skylon...
HOTOL and before that things like the Hawker Siddeley APD.1019/H1 - designed to be capable of Mach 10.
Posted Tuesday 23rd September 2008 20:16 GMT
Maybe Darpa already has all of Alan Bond's research to hand and in due course will present it as their own. It wouldn't be the first time that the tea dumpers have claimed British developments for their own.
Posted Wednesday 24th September 2008 12:21 GMT
"who slap the pendulous jowls of established wisdom with the gauntlet of disregard"
Priceless !!
Posted Wednesday 24th September 2008 12:21 GMT
Ah, but is it an African or European sound?
Mine's the one with shrubbery in the pcoket....
Posted Wednesday 24th September 2008 12:23 GMT
Why they seem to keep ignoring these guys is beyond me. Maybe its the fact it wasn't made in the US, didn't cost enough, or that they're trying to use off the shelf componentry. Anyway, they still beat NASA to a working scramjet.
http://www.uq.edu.au/hypersonics/?page=19501
http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/hyshot/default.htm
Posted Wednesday 24th September 2008 16:46 GMT
The copious amount of money they spend on these things, could be spent getting research done into what has not been done before.
Principle: research, develop, prove, patent, adopt for whatever project and license. Prove the basic grounds and elements one at a time for the project and use and work up until you have enough for the actually project. Think small, think simple, practical steps. Be innovative and work out the practical (is that allowed).
And don't try to spend copious amounts of money trying to prove there used to be bacterial life on mars, find something more useful, like drive research that will allow you to do much more research much cheaper for even similar amounts of money that you would have spent trying to do it with present technologies into the distant future.
Wayne Morellini.
Back to the article
