Pages

July 01, 2008

Hypersonic Falcon HTV-3X


Falcon HTV-3X

The Blackswift Hypersonic program may not get fully funded for the $750 million that it needs, but the program has
a lot of interesting technology and innovations for greater efficiency. This technology and innovations are discussed below.

Making a scramjet rocket would be a better program to fund for space access. A scramjet rocket would be simpler and cheaper than a space plane and would not need to have the weight of wings and other gear.

From the designers of Skylon, there is a fairly practical spaceplane design. It is called the Mach 5 A2 commercial Concorde replacement.

The MHD bypass to slow the supersonic air so that a turbine can function while the scramjet goes up to Mach 7

However, there is a lot of interesting technology in the Blackswift program. Constant volume combustion, more efficient than Brayton cycle Humphrey cycle propulsion (like a pulse-detonation engine).


The goal is to achieve a flying Mach 6 demonstrator by 2013.


It would use regular fuel instead of hydrogen, which would be more practical but have relatively lower performance.










Advertising

Trading Futures
 
Nano Technology
 
Netbook     Technology News
 
Computer Software
   
Future Predictions


3 comments:

Kaveman said...

The scram jets should be designed to use boron nanoparticles as a fuel.It would yield specific impulse approaching hydrogen and would not need cryogenic handling.

Dezakin said...

I can't seem to get that excited about scramjets. They have a narrow window of operation, and are poorly suited to space access. They' ideal for some small class of hypersonic missiles, so its no mystery to me why theres still funding for these dogs.

Torbjörn Larsson, OM said...

Making a fast flyby; interesting subject.

The Carnot diagrams (oh boy, wasn't that a long time ago!) were a head scratcher. The usual idealized adiabatic parts are labeled "isotropic" - oh, wait, they must mean "isentropic". Duh!

(Which of course means whoever made those OH looses a lot of market cred IMO.)


They have a narrow window of operation, and are poorly suited to space access. They' ideal for some small class of hypersonic missiles, so its no mystery to me why theres still funding for these dogs.


Dezakin, the first thought had occurred to me - you don't use an F1 car to take you to the store. So the second claim solves a minor mystery. Thanks!