SkyscraperCity Forum banner
1 - 20 of 86 Posts

·
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Joined
·
55,623 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 · (Edited)
Boeing and NASA Clearing Hurdles In Race To Build Supersonic Transport


Boeing Icon II supersonic concept

NASA is claiming a breakthrough in quiet supersonic aircraft, with successful windtunnel tests of designs that combine low sonic boom and low cruise drag - characteristics once thought to be mutually exclusive.

Commenting on the completion of boom and performance tests by Boeing and Lockheed Martin, NASA Supersonic Fixed Wing project manager Peter Coen says: “This is a breakthrough. It’s the first time we have taken a design representative of a small supersonic airliner and shown we can change the configuration in a way that is compatible with high efficiency and have a sonic signature than is not a boom.”

The trick is in the shaping of the airframe to tailor the shockwaves so that they produce a sinusoidal pressure signature at the ground, rather than the abrupt N-wave shape of a traditional "double-bang" sonic boom. Instead of powerful bow and aft shockwaves, the aim is to generate lots of smaller shocks along the airframe that attenuate more quickly as they travel through the atmosphere. Boeing's model (above) shows the result of all that subtle shaping.

Boeing's design for a 202ft-long, 30-passenger supersonic airliner acheived a boom level of 81PLdB at Mach 1.8 in NASA Ames' 9 x 7ft tunnel. Lockheed's design for a 230ft-long, 81-passenger trijet (below) achieved 79PLdB at Mach 1.6. NASA's goal is 85PLdB. "That's 25dB less than Concorde and 20dB less than the best we achieved under HSR [NASA's High Speed Research program]," Coen says.

[...]

Boeing model in NASA test

NASA has been working woth Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Gulfsteam in developing the next generation of supersonic aircraft quiet enough to meet noise standards for overland flights. The first actual aircraft to roll out may be a Gulfstream business jet. Lessons learned from smaller aircraft can be scaled up for larger ones. Capacity for commercial SSTs will continue to hover around that 100 passenger mark but speeds will likely be slower than Concorde's Mach 2.2


Gulfstream supersonic concept

Another firm working with NASA is Aerion, a small start-up company based in Reno NV. Their business jet concept revolves around advanced laminar flow over composites to yield fuel savings and 'shape' the sonic boom noise more favorably:

 

·
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Joined
·
55,623 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
A number of aircraft manufacturers are working on next generation, tailless aircraft that can deliver astonishing fuel savings. Here's the Airbus concept: the A30X

Airbus A30X Blended Body-engine Concept



Airbus will likely (very) soon announce the A320 NEO for which the PW GTF seems a likely candidate. This aircraft will form the backbone of NB sales for the next 10 years.

The A320 will be succeeded by a new narrowbody when substantial technological advances have been made and the market situation demands so. Last year a few possible configurations for the Aircraft dubbed A30X have been released.



The two concepts with engine above the aft fuselage have been studied in various european research programs during the last decade. The third concpet shows a more radical redesign. It seems this concept is newer, Airbus used this summer for discussing future designs, produced additional models and graphics.



Although these are concepts only, I think a few interesting design directions become visible.

Wings: long slim clean, laminar flow wings most OEMS are looking after.

Engines: no open rotors but a more conventional ducted variant (although we do not know what’s inside). This concpet would indicate the industry isn't confident open rotor like promoted by RR will become feasible..

[...]
 

·
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Joined
·
55,623 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Сталин;100236092 said:
Where's airbus with supersonic flight?!?!
Airbus is studying the A2, a Mach 8 hypersonic aircraft:



Airbus Mach 8 Hydrogen Hypersonic Airliner on the Drawing Board

If the European Union has its way they will in the not to far future a hydrogen-fueled hypersonic aircraft. The European Space Agency just got $14.5 million in a second round of funding from the EU to study the idea of developing A2, a hydrogen-fueled hypersonic aircraft that might travel at an incredible speed of Mach 5.5. They're studying what it would take to build an aircraft so fast that you could fly from Brussels to Sydney in 4.6 hours. Sheesh, that's 10,407 miles. There's even talk of an engine that could propel the craft to Mach 8. This rocket plane makes the Mach 2 of the Concorde seem glacially slow.

The trick here is to develop a special engine they're calling Scimitar, capable of thrusting the craft to those rocket-like speeds. It will be a rocket engine with a turbo compressor added, without needing liquid oxygen like those used in the boosters that send spacecraft into orbit. Such an engine is also capable of slower flight, allowing the aircraft to fly over land where supersonic speeds aren't permitted because of sonic booms.
It would require both a powerful engine that could take the aircraft over open water at incredibly high speeds while being able to fly more slowly over land to avoid sonic boom noise issues. The aircraft is in very early stages.


http://www.ison21.es/2008/01/28/aviones-hipersonicos-de-hidrogeno/
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,314 Posts
There is also the ZEHST (Zero Emission High Supersonic Transport) concept

Airbus Dreams of Faster, Greener Space Concorde



Airbus has a new dream, and its name is ZEHST (Zero Emission High Supersonic Transport). Design plans detail a "hypersonic" commercial jet that can carry up to 100 passengers while cruising at 4,200 kilometers per hour (2,600 miles per hour) at an altitude of 32 kilometers (20 miles). The ambitious project is meant to fill the void in air travel left when the legendary Concorde was retired from service in late 2003. But its developers have another goal in mind as well -- combining three different types of propulsion systems to make it considerably more eco-friendly than its predecessor.

Since 2006, engineers at EADS, the aerospace group that owns the airplane manufacturer Airbus, have been working on the design for French and Japanese clients. During a presentation delivered Sunday, one day ahead of the Paris Air Show opening at the Le Bourget airport, EADS CEO Louis Gallois stressed that all technical problems related to the project are solvable, but that it could still take 30 to 40 years before this vision became a reality. "We're not talking about a product that we launch in the next few years," Gallois said, according to news agency Reuters. "We have to see security, integration of different technologies, how man reacts to it."
http://www.spiegel.de/international...f-faster-greener-space-concorde-a-769435.html
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
Since they are being supported by The European Space Agency, wouldn't they be able to travel into space? All we'd need then would be some colony on Mars or the Moon for it to fly to...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
Сталин;100267274 said:
Since they are being supported by The European Space Agency, wouldn't they be able to travel into space? All we'd need then would be some colony on Mars or the Moon for it to fly to...
The A2 Hypersonic airliner is a byproduct of the Skylon Spaceplane Project

Endorsed By European Space Agency The 'biggest breakthrough since the jet' could reach anywhere in the world in just four hours or power a spaceplane into orbit with no need for rocket stages.

Spacecraft Skylon is a design for a spaceplane by the British company Reaction Engines Limited. It uses SABRE, a combined-cycle, air-breathing rocket engine, to reach orbit in a single stage.

Wingspan: 25 m
Length: 83 m
Engine type: SABRE




 

·
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Joined
·
55,623 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Сталин;100305051 said:
Its interesting how all these new companies plan to build such spacecraft while, Airbus and Boeing don't seem to have any space traveling dreams.
Boeing is heavily immersed in defense space, something that could later yield civillian transoprts, but has shunned commercial space endeavours which are highly risky, capital-intensive and subject to difficult and untested market conditions. There is no doubt that they are watching SpaceX and Virgin Galactic closely.


WhiteKnightTwo with SpaceShipTwo. Photo by Mark Greenberg by Virgin Galactic, on Flickr
 

·
In Search of Sanity
Joined
·
3,677 Posts
This is the successor to the SR-71 Blackbird, and it is gorgeous

BY BRIAN FUNG
November 1 at 10:58 am

The SR-71, arguably the country's most recognizable spy plane after the U-2, was retired in 1998 . . . .

More than a decade after the last SR-71 was decommissioned, Lockheed Martin has unveiled the gorgeous-looking SR-72. It flies just as far and twice as fast as its predecessor — and, in a twist, it's now lethal, according to Aviationweek:
The SR-72 is being designed with strike capability in mind. “We would envision a role with over-flight ISR, as well as missiles,” Leland says. Being launched from a Mach 6 platform, the weapons would not require a booster, significantly reducing weight. The higher speed of the SR-72 would also give it the ability to detect and strike more agile targets. “Even with the -SR-71, at Mach 3, there was still time to notify that the plane was coming, but at Mach 6, there is no reaction time to hide a mobile target. It is unavoidable ISR,” he adds.

The jet accelerates by way of a two-part system. A conventional jet turbine helps boost the aircraft up to Mach 3, at which point a specialized ramjet takes over and pushes the plane even faster into hypersonic mode.

From Lockheed's mock-ups, there doesn't appear to be a bubble for the pilot — which suggests a windowless cockpit or fantasies about a future unmanned version of the plane . . . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...r-71-blackbird-and-it-is-gorgeous/?tid=pm_pop
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
I wonder what this is going to do to help regular civilian aviation if the SR-72 takes off. Most likely nothing at all since it will be kept so secret. Totally pathetic.

They could instead build passenger craft like this instead. At least passenger transport is profitable, and this is just for defense with no income.

which suggests a windowless cockpit or fantasies about a future unmanned version of the plane . . . .
I can't imagine what psychopaths would have "fantasies" about murdering people with something that could be used so greatly to help people.
 

·
In Search of Sanity
Joined
·
3,677 Posts
Hypersonic planes simply don't work economically in civilian aviation. The Concord proved that.

Meanwhile, what nation are you thinking of that doesn't want any planes that "murder" people? Certainly not Russia or Germany.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,775 Posts
Hypersonic planes simply don't work economically in civilian aviation. The Concord proved that.

Meanwhile, what nation are you thinking of that doesn't want any planes that "murder" people? Certainly not Russia or Germany.
The Concorde was in the past, with aged technologies. I believe that with new and efficient technologies, a hypersonic passenger plane is possible, although it would need to use a very inexpensive fuel. Concord failed because its fuel costs where so high, and not many people could afford flying on them, therefore if the fuel it uses is biofuel that's cheap, or another source of energy, it would be possible. The government spends millions on these planes, and yet they are never used, except maybe once or twice if a war happens but that's unlikely. It would be the same as dumping millions into water and not getting it back. The government could invest in carrying passengers for free rather than having these for a war that will never happen.

And also with civilian aviation, hypersonic flight would increase the times for flights per day, so an airline can fly more flights per day with one aircraft. It would increase flexibility and efficiency and obviously speed.

Another alternative is to get rid of capitalism which would enable these hypersonic aircraft to fly passengers with no cost at all. Who wouldn't want to fly from New York to Frankfurt in 1 hour anyway?
 

·
One Brickell CityCentre
Joined
·
13,110 Posts
Wasn't the issue with the Concorde also the fact that it was limited as to where it could fly because of the sonic boom it created, and thus, was less cost effective also for this reason?
 
1 - 20 of 86 Posts
Top