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.

 

Welcome to the jungle - US super/hypersonic programs

page: 1
10

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Hey all

Keeping track of various military R&D efforts can be challenging at times.
Keeping everything straight with regards to US effort in the super/hypersonic arena – white world and beyond – is nigh impossible, at least for me.
So I made a chart recently, just covering the most important stuff as I see it.

Maybe some of you will find it helpful too.



files.abovetopsecret.com...

This is not the gospel, obviously its incomplete and subject to change as new info becomes available.

Some programs are without description for *reasons*. Feel free to speculate, *believe* it or don’t. Also tell me what i got wrong of course.

And just one thought - kinda funny how there are a dozen programs aiming at developing a strike capability but basically nothing in the white on the ISR side.

Cheers
edit on 22-8-2018 by mightmight because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-8-2018 by mightmight because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Interesting chart...

Do you have a key for the color coding?


a reply to: mightmight



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor

yeah of sorts but i didnt stress out about colors.

Purple: Falcon and relatives
Light Green: Related rockets
Blue: Ramjet/Scramjet Research effort

rest, well…



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:57 PM
link   
A helpful chart to figure out how various projects connect to each other.




posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That's a bit unfair, Zaph.

I have a few on there I have doubts about, but MM isnt too far off on a good chunk.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha
dont hesitate to point out stuff you doubt, i'm open to any constructive input
but Zaphod is not wrong, its a tangled web, too complex to show all connections in two dimensions

edit on 22-8-2018 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Not really. Between the non DoD agencies that have programs that overlap, and the sudden jumps in capabilities the classified map looks about like that.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Hate to see the Chinese one..



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

some fun pics







and just a fun bonus one and a cool PDF


edit on 22-8-2018 by penroc3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

True enough. Even normal project plans look a lot like that on the big scale when you zoom out. It's...nuts...how many different interdependencies there are.

for mighmight:


“The Army’s warhead had worked much better than the Air Force’s….So we’re going to take the Army warhead, put it on an Air Force booster, launch it off of a B-52, while the Army is developing on the ground and the Navy wants to put it on the deck of a ship.”



breakingdefense.com...



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha
Yeah the Armys Advanced Hypersonic Weapon worked better than the HTV-2 which was used as a basis for the Tactical Boost Glide Weapon (which today is the AGM-183A ARRW). The Army blew it at one point though, and after a failed testflight the program was given to the Navy. Which took the warhead but adapted the booster for submarine launch and successfully flew the thing as Intermediate Range Conventional Prompt Strike – Alternative Re-Entry System.
And don’t forget the Conventional Strike Missiles, which too will use the AHW glide body but put it on an modified Peacekeeper/Minotaur missile (which very well already might have happened).

So its all in the chart basically.



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 05:27 AM
link   
Could something like this be retrofitted to something like an AMRAAM?



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 05:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

You could probably use the AMRAAM booster to get a Waverider to ignite the Scramjet. The resulting vehicle would be pretty similar to the X-51, so 4000lb +. Realisticly the booster wont have enough power though.
Fitting a scramjet engine into a two stage missile comparable in size to the AMRAAM is way off. If its even possible which i doubt.
HCSW is all about getting an operational scramjet weapon. But i dont think it will any be smaller or lighter than the X-51.

Combining an HGV with the AMRAAM booster would be pointless. You simply need a bigger rocket for a decent flight profile, 5000lb range probably.
ArcLight was a DARPA program looking into pairing HGVs with RIM-161 booster. The AGM-183A should be in the same weight class.
edit on 23-8-2018 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 06:16 PM
link   
some oldies:









not so old:




and a cool model of nasa's idea of a near space glider



some of these models i have posted looks like they are using some type of aerospike, or is that just a placeholder for the outlets?



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Cant forget HiFiRE
awin.aviationweek.com...



new topics




 
10

log in

join