It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection
From the diagram of the engine layout it looked like the ramjet function of the engine intake and exhaust was pretty close to coaxial. It was the turbine engine that was not on the same plane as the ramjet which seams to be pretty much SOP for stealth aircraft now a days.
reply to post by Sammamishman
And what is the SR-72 supposed to be an offshoot of?
The path to the SR-72 would begin with an optionally piloted flight research vehicle (FRV), measuring around 60 ft. long and powered by a single, but full-scale, propulsion flowpath. “The demonstrator is about the size of the F-22, single-engined and could fly for several minutes at Mach 6,” says Leland. The outline plan for the operational vehicle, the SR-72, is a twin-engine unmanned aircraft over 100 ft. long (see artist’s concept on page 20). “It will be about the size of the SR-71 and have the same range, but have twice the speed,” he adds. The FRV would start in 2018 and fly in 2023. “We would be ready to launch the SR-72 shortly after and could be in service by 2030,” Leland says.
reply to post by Zaphod58
IF, and its a big if really, the 72 employees turbine to ramjet and then ram to scram then how in the living zombie would they manage to bypass all of the heat buildup issues! that was one of the biggest problems of the 71 IIRC
reply to post by weavty1
I meant that the air intake and exhaust looked like they were on the same geometric plane as the ramjet (straight in, straight out) and the turbine was mounted above that plane.
Is that not accurate?
reply to post by Zaphod58
reply to post by Weavty1
OK lets think.. In 53 years(if going by 1960) they have developed better more efficient and more powerful engines privately to be used in these projects.. They've also more than likely found a way around some of the heat buildup issues, but this is mach 20 we're talking about..
On the xb70 valk: During a Mach 3 cruise the aircraft would reach an average of 450 °F (230 °C), although there were portions as high as 650 °F (340 °C).
if thats just mach 3, lets think about 6-7x that speed would develop. Although it wouldnt be a linear graph most likely, we're still looking around 2-3000°F right?
To put that in perspective, its the same temperature lava flows at.. LAVA!
Failure of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory's HiSTED program to produce a small turbojet capable of speeds up to Mach 4 helped doom DARPA's Mach 6 Blackswift. Now AFRL is proposing a follow-on TBCC demonstrator that would be built instead around an off-the-shelf fighter engine. That raises the issue of how to bridge the thrust gap.