NASA's X-Planes, Discovery Through Flight

NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center YouTube channel released 3 videos that showcase some of the flight test they have performed over the course of the X-plane programs that have helped shape the way airplanes are designed and flown. There is some neat footage of some of the more odd X-planes in there that I hadn't seen before.





www.youtube.com...

Great to see Balls 8 not on a pedestal.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah, it is. I wish I got a chance to see her while she was still active.

a reply to: Sammamishman

I used to laugh, because it was a B model, with significantly lower time on the airframe than the newest H model.

a reply to: Sammamishman

The work has a particular relevance to air travel. Currently, certain airplane structures use carbon nanotubes, a strong, lightweight structure that can withstand temperatures up to 450 degrees Celsius. But as this study showed, boron nitride nanotubes, which are similar in function, can withstand 900 degrees Celsius, temperatures that extremely fast airplanes need to be equipped to handle. They are also lighter and better than carbon nanotubes. Planes made from this structure could potentially reach hypersonic speed.

newsweek.com - Will Air Travel Get Faster? Future NASA Planes Could Cross Country in One Hour. (X-43A drawing)

Funny, I just read about "white graphene" (boron nitride) being used in a NASA X-plane in Newsweek of all places! They have an artist's conception of the X-43A with the story (looks kind of like the X-24 in the first vid). They would use the white graphene, in nanotube form, in place of carbon nanotubes because it can handle high temperatures. They also luck out because it is lighter than CNTs. The only thing holding them back is price. The term "hypersonic" is also used.

The article points out that the first "a" in NASA stands for "aeronautic"!

Cool vids!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

The article points out that the first "a" in NASA stands for "aeronautic"!

Cool vids!

NASA stands for Never A straight Answer, you know that. As far as cvil flights getting faster, the Concorde was expensive, prone to runway hazards and scared crap out of housewives, all the way to its destination.

a reply to: intrptr

That is the "Space" part because our fragile little minds and fragile religions cannot handle the truth!

They do a bunch of plane and technology testing which slowly trickles out to the general population. The BN would be a great example if they can make it in bulk quantities.

The leading edge sonic boom is being mitigated. Ever see NASA patents they released to the public? There is one using graphene and carbon nanotubes that disrupts the airflow over the wing enough so after it passes the wing the airstream does not line up to make the sonic boom as "boomy". Well, it does not state it was graphene and CNTs but looking at the drawings with the patent it has hexagonal 2D material connected to tubes standing up off the surface... you can kind of figure it out for yourself what material they are talking about.

a reply to: Sammamishman

First video. X-35c carrier variant does flare to land.

Thanks for those videos. Not much there I hadn't seen, but then I was born before Yeager ever saw the inside of a P-51 cockpit. I've always been fascinated by the switchblade though.

So, is it safe to assume that all, or most of the video we see was taken over Edwards / China Lake area, and not the "other" area?

Can't help wondering I see the F15 stol/MTD/Active version how much of that research ended up in Russia and onto the SU27 family variants.

a reply to: Donkey09

Canards aren't that hard to figure out, neither is thrust vectoring. The first flight of the Su-33, with canards, was a year before the S/MTD program began. First flight of the S/MTD was September 7, 1988, first flight of the Su-33 was August 17, 1987.

a reply to: SonofaSkunk

That would be a safe assumption. NASA doesn't operate out of the "other" areas.