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.

 

DARPA awards hypersonic engine work to Orbital ATK (Northrop?)

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 05:03 PM
link   
DARPA just awarded orbital atk a $21 million contract to work on hypersonic engines. The AFRE (advanced full range engine) sounds a lot like what Lockheed was pushing for its so-called SR-72 concept a few years back. Was orbital teamed with Lockheed before? For some reason, I thought it was Pratt & Whitney.

Mega geek me couldn't help but wonder if the advent engine could be the embedded jet engine. Long rang and mega dash. Stupid, I'm sure but, hey...

www.parabolicarc.com...

And in a plot twist, Northrop is trying to buy orbital. Might we end up with two companies in the fast over business?

www.defencetalk.com...




posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 05:10 PM
link   
MORE importantly...what will it be called?
Noratk?
Sounds RUSSIAN...



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

There's push back on the acquisition already. Esp from those working on the silo based ICBM program. It might not go through.



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

HANG on, the SR 72 IS a done deal and requires engines from the WHITE world.



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

It wouldn't be any different than the E-8 recapitalization with the new ICBM. Northrop is both a bidder and developing one of the radars for the program.



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Its weird as any new engine tech would be in the test cells and not long on Youtube..Even SABRE was doing ground runs to be a proof of concept before they pushed for more funding for a bigger workshop and development centre.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Orbital ATK is being bought by NG for $7.8 billion.

www.latimes.com...



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
MORE importantly...what will it be called?
Noratk?
Sounds RUSSIAN...





posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   
So basically DARPA decided to hand out pork to an soon to be Northrop subsidiary hoping, noone would notice Lockheeds TBCC demo at Groom. Good one.

“This won’t be the first time that ambitious engineers will attempt to combine turbine and ramjet technologies. But with recent advances in manufacturing methods, modeling, and other disciplines, we believe this potentially groundbreaking achievement may finally be within reach.”

gee you think?
edit on 20-9-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Nvm.


edit on 20-9-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Even with advances in tech and manufacturing I'll believe they can make it work when it flies.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
You dont think the Lockheed bird isnt already flying?
They finished building the big southern hangar at Groom three years ago and started pitching the SR-72 a year prior.
They should have something in the air at this point.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

There are other ways besides a TBCC to get speed out of an aircraft.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58 Yeah sure, but i also dont think they build the hangar for the other bird zipping around since the Bush years. As i understand it, the combined cycle effort is the entire reason for Lockheeds program.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

They're not going to go straight for a TBCC. They're going to have other ways to go fast, just in case it doesn't work. They haven't been able to get one working well yet, so they're going to have a backup in case this one does the same thing every other one did.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Does TBCC even make sense? Its amature at best of a concept. Lets strap a bunch of engines together and only use one at a time making a lot of deadweight to carry aloft. Well, how will we save weight?....i know well use the same air intake.? The TBCC is just silly.

Id go for something a little more radical. Something that addresses many issues. Maybe i shouldnt have taken down my prior post so quickly.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 02:56 PM
link   
We must not forget Aerojet´s Trijet concept; when it was aired it got a wide press coverage.
But Bass is right, never mind.

edit on 20-9-2017 by Fastmover because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Oh, by the way, now Sonicblue Aerospace´s web site has vanished like Hypermach¨s one.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Fastmover

Ive had PDFs disappear from places like oxford and Princeton after i mention them on ats. Like literally a few days later never to be seen again on the internet.

Hypermach probably pointed too many people in the right direction. Although i propound lockheeds program does a little (read a lot) more than Hypermach. But its not a topic ill go into.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

More like they're both so far behind schedule, and have so radically alerted programs they were offering that they decided to kill their Web pages until they are farther along.
edit on 9/20/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join