It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lockheed selected by NASA to build quiet boom demonstrator

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
NASA has selected Lockheed to build an X-Plane demonstrator to show that aircraft can be built that will alleviate the sonic boom effects on the ground. If the program goes forward, then it could lead to a feasible SST, capable of flying over land areas. The concept released shows a single engine aircraft, with thrust vectoring, and an upward looking windscreen. Interestingly, there is no forward looking windscreen.

NASA has described the demonstrator as being representative of a 100 seat aircraft, weighing up to 300,000 pounds. First flight would be in 2019, with acoustic monitoring starting in California in 2021. A report released by NASA of a 2010 study showed that the signature of a 100 seat aircraft could be reduced to 75EPndB, the FAA limit is 85EPndB.


NASA has selected Lockheed Martin to design a half-scale supersonic X-plane with boom-suppression technology in an effort to lift the international ban on flying faster than Mach 1.0 overland.

The announcement on 29 February at Washington National Airport launches the preliminary design phase of the quiet supersonic technology (QueSST) programme.

NASA administrator Charles Bolden linked QueSST with the agency’s legacy of high-speed research, beginning with the rocket-powered Bell X-1 that first broke the sound barrier in 1947.

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   
DLR -> Black Projects -> Experimental Aircraft Sighting in 1995

You're welcome


I believe that was internally funded though
edit on 072Mondaypm2016-02-29T18:43:47-06:00kMon2016610 by BlackDog10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

3 years to put together a demonstrator?

That's not a whole lot of time is it?

Interesting that a (I assume) passenger aircraft needs thrust vectoring?



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackDog10

That's just the tip of the iceberg



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

A lot of the work is already done, as far as design and technology goes, so at this point it's just a matter of building it and preparing for the test program. As for the thrust vectoring, that may just be because it's a single engine aircraft. An aircraft that size would benefit from it, with just the centerline engine like that.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I was under the impression that most airlines were not interested in supersonic passenger aircraft due to the high cost of operating them. Besides being quieter has Lockheed found a way to make them much more fuel efficient?



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
what a surprise.





edit on 29-2-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Two words:

Business aircraft

Time is money, and there's a growing class of people who will happily pay twice what they're now paying to fly if it gets them there twice as fast. They just don't fly commercial, that's all.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

One of the biggest costs is from the fact that they have to fly almost 600 miles subsonic (250-300 miles on either end) before they can go supersonic. If they were able to from shortly after takeoff until shortly before landing, they'd be more feasible. Still not as economic as a 787 or something along those lines, but more feasible than the Concorde was.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
Business aircraft


100 seat business aircraft? I cannot imagine there is a very large market for something that size.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

I know what you mean...



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
One of the biggest costs is from the fact that they have to fly almost 600 miles subsonic (250-300 miles on either end) before they can go supersonic. If they were able to from shortly after takeoff until shortly before landing, they'd be more feasible. Still not as economic as a 787 or something along those lines, but more feasible than the Concorde was.


Does the FAA ban have to be lifted or will this quieter version be able to fly over land and circumvent the restriction?



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

One of the biggest costs is from the fact that they have to fly almost 600 miles subsonic (250-300 miles on either end) before they can go supersonic. If they were able to from shortly after takeoff until shortly before landing, they'd be more feasible. Still not as economic as a 787 or something along those lines, but more feasible than the Concorde was.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No, but the Boeing Business Jet is based off of a 120 seat 737, remember.

100 seats means this thing would be MRJ/E190 sized, (at least in terms of interior volume) which is about the same size as a modern top-tier business jet.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I figured this was the case.

Be a handy troop carrier too, wouldn't it?



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
No, but the Boeing Business Jet is based off of a 120 seat 737, remember.


They have only had 13 orders on the 737 business variant over 20 years according to the information I just read. I think Lockheed would need to sell much more than that to make this platform feasible.

Correction, it appears there are several other variants with more production.

I still wonder about the amount of orders they can pull initially, I am sure a SST will be much higher than a non-SST version.





edit on 29-2-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

yes id imagine they would be looking to incorporate the technology into more than just private corporate jets.

I can't figure out what though for the life of me. but, I'm sure theyll find a way to make the concept more lucrative, cause you know lockheed, always seeing green.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
...cause you know lockheed, always seeing green.


One of my favorite horses in the portfolio, they always seem to deliver.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:27 PM
link   
yeah were all big fans of that one.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Could the thrust vectoring also be a means of minimizing control surface deflections while supersonic, thereby keeping as many sharp edges that could cause downward-pointing shockwaves out of the airstream as possible?




top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join