Author Topic: NASA Administrator to Make X-Plane Announcement at Reagan National Media Event  (Read 119341 times)

Offline jacqmans

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21709
  • Houten, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 8562
  • Likes Given: 320
February 25, 2016
MEDIA ADVISORY M16-017

NASA Administrator to Make X-Plane Announcement at Reagan National Media Event

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden and Associate Administrator for Aeronautics Research Jaiwon Shin will be at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, Virginia, at 1:30 p.m. EST on Monday, Feb. 29, to discuss with media NASA’s advanced aeronautic concepts. They’ll also make an announcement about the agency’s plan for a series of experimental aircraft.

Bolden and Shin will discuss NASA’s research into green aviation technologies, a critical part of President Obama’s push to build a clean transportation system for the 21st century, and the agency’s New Aviation Horizons initiative, which is a 10-year plan to build a series of experimental aircraft, or X-planes. Models and graphics of potential X-plane designs will be on site for viewing.

Representatives from the Aerospace Industries Association and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics also will attend.

The media event will be held at the south end of Reagan National’s Terminal B on the ticketing level next to the Alaska Airlines/Delta Airlines ticket areas. Reporters should park in the Terminal B parking area for closest entry. If being dropped off, enter through Door 1 on the Departures ramp.

For more information about NASA’s aeronautics research, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/aero
Jacques :-)

Offline TrevorMonty

We tend to forget on this forum that one of the A in NASA stands for Aeronautics.

Offline redliox

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2539
  • Illinois USA
  • Liked: 683
  • Likes Given: 97
We tend to forget on this forum that one of the A in NASA stands for Aeronautics.

True I'll admit.  I would be curious to know what NASA plans to roll out next for a new plane.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline Borklund

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 560
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 140
I for one welcome our new blended wing body overlords.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
The hybrid pusher tail design offers a significant reduction in fuel burn. Lots of near term application. Been some good articles on it recently. Airbus showed a similar concept design recently.

Would love to see Boeing use the concept for either MOM (Middle of Market, the hole between 737-9x and 787-8) or NSA (New Single Aisle, 737 replacement).
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Btw. for the non aviation types, clockwise from the top.

Super sonic boom noise reduction test aircraft.
   2003, initial test with an F-5E with a modified nose, 2007 tests on an F-15b with a modified nose.

Blended body vehicle.   
   X-48 drone tested the concept. Tests started in 2004 and still continuing. Currently testing with the X-48C.

Scalable Convergent Electric Propulsion Technology Operations Research aircraft.
   NASA plans to modify a Tecnam P2006T to explore the system level impacts of distributed electric propulsion.

Hybrid Electric Concept Aircraft
    Placing an electric fan in the trail reduces drag improving the overall fuel burn while allowing a reduction in the bypass ratio of the turbo fans under the winds. The extra weight of the the fan is offset by the smaller turbo fan engines. Cool concept. Also would have better ground clearance. I would love to see Boeing do this with MOM.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
We tend to forget on this forum that one of the A in NASA stands for Aeronautics.

True I'll admit.  I would be curious to know what NASA plans to roll out next for a new plane.

Quiet Boom demonstrator is the top priority at the moment. The design shown in the poster is LM's which was the winning concept.

One interesting vehicle I'll be looking out for is the NASA/LM hypersonic demonstrator. When NASA it was announced were getting LM to do analysis in relation to the SR-72 there was talk then of NASA building a demonstrator.

Quote
If the study is successful, NASA wants to fund a demonstration programme. Lockheed would test the dual-mode ramjet in a flight research vehicle, and try to find solutions to issues like engine packaging and designing the thermal management system, Bartolotta says.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/nasa-launches-study-for-skunk-works-sr-72-concept-407222/

The blended wing body looks very much like the AFRL's design for a future transport aircraft.

http://m.aviationweek.com/awin/lockheed-martin-refines-hybrid-wing-body-airlifter-concept
« Last Edit: 02/26/2016 03:26 pm by Star One »

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
btw. Refound the Aviation Week article on the hybrid pusher concept. To me, it's the class of planes flying in the largest numbers (737, a320) and they are talking something like an 18% fuel burn improvement. It is just the most return on investment.

http://aviationweek.com/technology/nasa-surprised-hybrid-power-study-results

Add in Boeing expected to go forward with MOM in 2017, and they pushed the 737 as far as it can go. You cannot put a larger fan on it. This would be perfect.

One side note. I read a while back on the blended body design something I do not quite understand. During a turn passengers seated out towards the wing will experience higher g loads than those seated in the center. Not sure how that works, is the turn radius that small?

If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Quiet Boom demonstrator is the top priority at the moment.

If the tendency is towards greener aviation I fail to see supersonic flight as top priority with or without boom. Hybrids, solar/battery electric more likely.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quiet Boom demonstrator is the top priority at the moment.

If the tendency is towards greener aviation I fail to see supersonic flight as top priority with or without boom. Hybrids, solar/battery electric more likely.

Quiet Boom has already been stated more than once that NASA along with industry partners regard this as a high priority goal.
« Last Edit: 02/27/2016 05:05 pm by Star One »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Quiet Boom demonstrator is the top priority at the moment.

If the tendency is towards greener aviation I fail to see supersonic flight as top priority with or without boom. Hybrids, solar/battery electric more likely.
Why not both?  8)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline TrevorMonty

Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
The initial market for electric planes is likely to be short haul <500km. In this market their lower operating costs should beat the current twin turboprop aircraft. Electric engines should be considerably cheaper to maintain than complex turboprops.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Why not both?  8)

My koolaidX is too dilluted to believe in supersonic electric jets in any near future.  :)
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris, do you have a projected turn-around time for re-charge on such a design?

~Rob
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline rocx

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • NL
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 144
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris, do you have a projected turn-around time for re-charge on such a design?

~Rob

I strongly suppose that if a fully battery operated airplane enters commercial operation, it would need to come with a quick battery swap option to keep turnaround time low and thermal loads acceptable.
Any day with a rocket landing is a fantastic day.

Online 93143

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 1
I read a while back on the blended body design something I do not quite understand. During a turn passengers seated out towards the wing will experience higher g loads than those seated in the center. Not sure how that works, is the turn radius that small?

Wouldn't that refer specifically to the bank maneuver itself?  The rotation of the vehicle would be much more noticeable that far from the roll axis.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris, do you have a projected turn-around time for re-charge on such a design?

~Rob

I strongly suppose that if a fully battery operated airplane enters commercial operation, it would need to come with a quick battery swap option to keep turnaround time low and thermal loads acceptable.
That's  how I would see it at this point in time (technology) as well.
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Burninate

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 74
I read a while back on the blended body design something I do not quite understand. During a turn passengers seated out towards the wing will experience higher g loads than those seated in the center. Not sure how that works, is the turn radius that small?

Wouldn't that refer specifically to the bank maneuver itself?  The rotation of the vehicle would be much more noticeable that far from the roll axis.

Probably refers to rolling in general.  An already-banked turn that still has rudder involvement will indeed put higher lateral (not vertical) g-loading on the outer edge, but it's likely to be a very small difference because the turn radius is high.
« Last Edit: 02/28/2016 06:21 pm by Burninate »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

any takers on what design concept will be picked?

Quiet Boom.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Hoping for the Hybrid tail fan. Call me a fan ;)
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Online 93143

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 1
I read a while back on the blended body design something I do not quite understand. During a turn passengers seated out towards the wing will experience higher g loads than those seated in the center. Not sure how that works, is the turn radius that small?

Wouldn't that refer specifically to the bank maneuver itself?  The rotation of the vehicle would be much more noticeable that far from the roll axis.

Probably refers to rolling in general.  An already-banked turn that still has rudder involvement will indeed put higher lateral (not vertical) g-loading on the outer edge, but it's likely to be a very small difference because the turn radius is high.

Well, yes, that's what I meant.  The seesaw effect.

Offline Borklund

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 560
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 140
I am rooting for blended wing body. Call me delusional, but I want the future to look (retro)futuristic!

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 862
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 1
Hoping for the Hybrid tail fan. Call me a fan ;)
I am rooting for blended wing body. Call me delusional, but I want the future to look (retro)futuristic!
My koolaidX is too dilluted to believe in supersonic electric jets in any near future.  :)
NASA spent low level $ (aero is less than 4% of NASA's budget) to understand the technology beyond the VG level over the last 6 years.  Actual data guided the system trades.  Some concepts are easier while other concepts provide more overall benefits, and others are very challenging indeed ( a supersonic electric jet  ;D).   With so few resources and the push to raise the TRL on easier concepts, a push to reduce funding on the lower level high risk higher payoff technology is easy to forecast.

Conceptual Design of a Single-Aisle Turboelectric Commercial Transport with Fuselage Boundary Layer Ingestion

Distributed Propulsion Systems to Maximize the Benefits of Boundary Layer Ingestion

Offline gin455res

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • bristol, uk
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 72
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.

Is there any way a hybrid could benefit from using an engine cycle optimised to take advantage of the lower temperature heat sink of frigid stratospheric air. Thinking here of combined-cycle engine with a potentially 70degC (20degC - -50degC,   223K as opposed to 293K) increase in the heat sink dT?  The hybrid would climb to altitude on batteries. (Or would this be better on Titan.)

gas-turbine-> steam turbine -> ORC (organic rankine cycle) turbine -> -50degC atmos.
diesel --> ORC -> -50deg atmos.
steam-piston --> ORC -> -50deg atmos.

[using skylon heat exchangers :) ]

Offline gin455res

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • bristol, uk
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 72
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.

Is there any way a hybrid could benefit from using an engine cycle optimised to take advantage of the lower temperature heat sink of frigid stratospheric air. Thinking here of combined-cycle engine with a potentially 70degC (20degC - -50degC,   223K as opposed to 293K) increase in the heat sink dT?  The hybrid would climb to altitude on batteries. (Or would this be better on Titan.)

gas-turbine-> steam turbine -> ORC (organic rankine cycle) turbine -> -50degC atmos.
diesel --> ORC -> -50deg atmos.
steam-piston --> ORC -> -50deg atmos.

[using skylon heat exchangers :) ]
running the steam condenser at 5bar would give the ORC engine an input temperature of 160degC, (the larger the ORC dT the smaller the heat exchanger?)

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
From https://twitter.com/NASAAero

Bolden: Lockheed Martin team wins $20m contract to develop preliminary design for a supersonic X-plane.

Shin: Congratulations to Lockheed Martin team inc GE Aviation and Tri-Models Inc. on prelim design contract.

Shin: This [X-planes and a 10-year plan] is OUR moon shot.

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
NASA Begins Work to Build a Quieter Supersonic Passenger Jet

The return of supersonic passenger air travel is one step closer to reality with NASA's award of a contract for the preliminary design of a “low boom” flight demonstration aircraft. This is the first in a series of ‘X-planes’ in NASA's New Aviation Horizons initiative, introduced in the agency’s Fiscal Year 2017 budget.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden announced the award at an event Monday at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, Virginia.

“NASA is working hard to make flight greener, safer and quieter – all while developing aircraft that travel faster, and building an aviation system that operates more efficiently,” said Bolden. “To that end, it’s worth noting that it's been almost 70 years since Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier in the Bell X-1 as part of our predecessor agency's high speed research. Now we’re continuing that supersonic X-plane legacy with this preliminary design award for a quieter supersonic jet with an aim toward passenger flight."

NASA selected a team led by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company of Palmdale, California, to complete a preliminary design for Quiet Supersonic Technology (QueSST). The work will be conducted under a task order against the Basic and Applied Aerospace Research and Technology (BAART) contract at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia.

After conducting feasibility studies and working to better understand acceptable sound levels across the country, NASA's Commercial Supersonic Technology Project asked industry teams to submit design concepts for a piloted test aircraft that can fly at supersonic speeds, creating a supersonic "heartbeat" -- a soft thump rather than the disruptive boom currently associated with supersonic flight.

“Developing, building and flight testing a quiet supersonic X-plane is the next logical step in our path to enabling the industry's decision to open supersonic travel for the flying public," said Jaiwon Shin, associate administrator for NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission.

Lockheed Martin will receive about $20 million over 17 months for QueSST preliminary design work. The Lockheed Martin team includes subcontractors GE Aviation of Cincinnati and Tri Models Inc. of Huntington Beach, California.

The company will develop baseline aircraft requirements and a preliminary aircraft design, with specifications, and provide supporting documentation for concept formulation and planning. This documentation would be used to prepare for the detailed design, building and testing of the QueSST jet. Performance of this preliminary design also must undergo analytical and wind tunnel validation.

In addition to design and building, this Low Boom Flight Demonstration (LBFD) phase of the project also will include validation of community response to the new, quieter supersonic design. The detailed design and building of the QueSST aircraft, conducted under the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate's Integrated Aviation Systems Program, will fall under a future contract competition.

NASA’s 10-year New Aviation Horizons initiative has the ambitious goals of reducing fuel use, emissions and noise through innovations in aircraft design that departs from the conventional tube-and-wing aircraft shape.

The New Aviation Horizons X-planes will typically be about half-scale of a production aircraft and likely are to be piloted. Design-and-build will take several years with aircraft starting their flight campaign around 2020, depending on funding.

For more information about NASA’s aeronautics research, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/aero


Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever.

I did the math here, with some assumptions.

For a vehicle like a 737, a 1000km flight will consume 7,500kg of fuel or the energy in a 62,500kg 400Wh/kg battery (with 100% conversion efficiency to shaft power).  Aerodynamic and propulsion efficiency isn't going to close that gap.

To do a 1000km flight, you'll have to go much, much slower with the battery-electric system for comparable weight.

Online robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Well not to stomp on the parade, and this would be Chris' call, but is seems to me this announcement is in the realm of aeronautics, not spaceflight.

(though personally I think it's well overdue to have another supersonic aircraft, and it's wickedly cool stuff)

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2
Larger image:

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Well not to stomp on the parade, and this would be Chris' call, but is seems to me this announcement is in the realm of aeronautics, not spaceflight.

(though personally I think it's well overdue to have another supersonic aircraft, and it's wickedly cool stuff)
Good point. That's what the "report to moderator" button is for, put in a note saying you're not sure if this is on topic or not.

ME, I'm going to plump for leaving it because it's NASA rather than just some random cool plane... when **I** use the "report to moderator" button soon as I hit submit.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Chris Bergin

Yeah, all valid points. I'd say it's cool and if no one's interested no one would post. I say leave it as-is.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Well not to stomp on the parade, and this would be Chris' call, but is seems to me this announcement is in the realm of aeronautics, not spaceflight.

(though personally I think it's well overdue to have another supersonic aircraft, and it's wickedly cool stuff)

Have you forgotten what the 'A' stands for in NASA. This is a personal bugbear for me.
« Last Edit: 02/29/2016 10:06 pm by Star One »

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Well not to stomp on the parade, and this would be Chris' call, but is seems to me this announcement is in the realm of aeronautics, not spaceflight.

(though personally I think it's well overdue to have another supersonic aircraft, and it's wickedly cool stuff)

Have you forgotten what the 'A' stands for in NASA. This is a personal bugbear for me.
Unfortunately for many years it is spelled "NaSA"... :(
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Online robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Well not to stomp on the parade, and this would be Chris' call, but is seems to me this announcement is in the realm of aeronautics, not spaceflight.

(though personally I think it's well overdue to have another supersonic aircraft, and it's wickedly cool stuff)

Have you forgotten what the 'A' stands for in NASA. This is a personal bugbear for me.

Not at all. I have also been following this thread. I also follow the yearly budgets and appropriations that define the aeronautics portion of NASA's budget.

However, people also seem to forget the name of this site: NASASpaceflight. This is about all things related to space. Certain relates topics have been challenged before, such as unmanned spaceflight & science, as there are specific sites more appropriate than this one. But it had relevance to space, so it was included over time. This vehicle will not go into space: it is for passenger air travel. It is only with the inclusion of NASA that this topic is being covered.

But Chris has no objections, and that's fine. So let's move on.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
However, people also seem to forget the name of this site: NASASpaceflight.
Not NASASpaceflight ;)

Of course in the old days the S used to be a C, NACA!
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

However, people also seem to forget the name of this site: NASASpaceflight.
Not NASASpaceflight ;)

Of course in the old days the S used to be a C, NACA!

That's going back a bit.;)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Faster planes sound great, but personally I just wish more airlines would offer sleepers in coach - and do it better than using up three seats. There's all this unused space between my head and the luggage bin, and even a little under the seat. It's perfect for bunk beds. All the reasons the DC-6B failed are long gone, bring back the sleeper.

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Oh my, checked whois and NACASpaceFlight.com is available! Quick, hit the mod button and let Chris know!

Kinda bummed it wasn't something that had more near term potential. Like the blended body or the turbo electric hybrid fan. I wonder why they went for sizzle.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris, do you have a projected turn-around time for re-charge on such a design?

~Rob

I strongly suppose that if a fully battery operated airplane enters commercial operation, it would need to come with a quick battery swap option to keep turnaround time low and thermal loads acceptable.
That is an option, but why? A Tesla can recharge to 80% in 40 minutes. Even faster charging is possible and is done with Proterra's fast-charging electric buses in just 5 minutes. So could an aircraft.

If you wanted to keep thermal loads lower (but doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for Teslas), you could hook up to a chiller along with power.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Oh my, checked whois and NACASpaceFlight.com is available! Quick, hit the mod button and let Chris know!

Kinda bummed it wasn't something that had more near term potential. Like the blended body or the turbo electric hybrid fan. I wonder why they went for sizzle.

This one can be spread around to more centers???
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris, do you have a projected turn-around time for re-charge on such a design?

~Rob

I strongly suppose that if a fully battery operated airplane enters commercial operation, it would need to come with a quick battery swap option to keep turnaround time low and thermal loads acceptable.
That is an option, but why?

Do you realize how much power you're talking about here?

Putting, say, 25MWh into a plane in, say, 30 minutes is going to take 50 MW of power.  That's more than comes into the entire airport, most likely.  Now multiply by, say, 40 planes on charge at once.  That's 2,000MW which is about half of the average power consumption in my entire control area.

And do you know what a cable carrying 50MW safely looks like?  It's going to have to be medium voltage.  Let's say it's 13.2kV three-phase.  That's 2,200A.  That's 4 3-conductor 500kcmil mining cables, each one 3 inches in diameter weighing 6 pounds per foot and costing about $50 per foot.
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 12:48 am by Lee Jay »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever.

I did the math here, with some assumptions.

For a vehicle like a 737, a 1000km flight will consume 7,500kg of fuel or the energy in a 62,500kg 400Wh/kg battery (with 100% conversion efficiency to shaft power).  Aerodynamic and propulsion efficiency isn't going to close that gap....
...except that's exactly what NASA aeronautics are proposing. Distributed propulsion and the blended wing concept, sucking the slowed boundary layer into the turbofans can make a huge difference. Some of the concepts are capable of 50% or even 60% reduction in fuel consumption. To take your example, that would mean 31,250kg battery mass versus 85100kg for 737-800 maximum take-off weight.

Consider that long-range jets like the 777 can be 50% fuel by mass. But you could increase that to 60 or even 75% (GlobalFlyer was able to achieve over 80%), combined with improvements in structural mass, perhaps even using the batteries as structural elements, would allow 1000km to definitely be possible with the battery tech I described. I had also done these calculations, I wasn't just making them up.

As I said, you have to be clever which you weren't bothering to do. :)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever.

I did the math here, with some assumptions.

For a vehicle like a 737, a 1000km flight will consume 7,500kg of fuel or the energy in a 62,500kg 400Wh/kg battery (with 100% conversion efficiency to shaft power).  Aerodynamic and propulsion efficiency isn't going to close that gap....
...except that's exactly what NASA aeronautics are proposing. Distributed propulsion and the blended wing concept, sucking the slowed boundary layer into the turbofans can make a huge difference. Some of the concepts are capable of 50% or even 60% reduction in fuel consumption. To take your example, that would mean 31,250kg battery mass versus 85100kg for 737-800 maximum take-off weight.

Consider that long-range jets like the 777 can be 50% fuel by mass. But you could increase that to 60 or even 75% (GlobalFlyer was able to achieve over 80%), combined with improvements in structural mass, perhaps even using the batteries as structural elements, would allow 1000km to definitely be possible with the battery tech I described. I had also done these calculations, I wasn't just making them up.

As I said, you have to be clever which you weren't bothering to do. :)

It's still 4 times the mass of the fuel it replaces, and that's way too much.  It means lower efficiency because you have to carry the batteries around.

Batteries aren't even ready for prime time for cars yet, much less airplanes.

BTW, this is coming from a power EE who has spent 30 year flying all-electric RC aircraft, so it's not like I'm opposed to the technology or something.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever. With lithium-air batteries (which need a lot of process development to get to any kind of decent cycle life) using the newer designs, you could get range comparable to all current jet liners. And potentially supersonic electric flight.
Chris, do you have a projected turn-around time for re-charge on such a design?

~Rob

I strongly suppose that if a fully battery operated airplane enters commercial operation, it would need to come with a quick battery swap option to keep turnaround time low and thermal loads acceptable.
That is an option, but why?

Do you realize how much power you're talking about here?

Putting, say, 25MWh into a plane in, say, 30 minutes is going to take 50 MW of power.  That's more than comes into the entire airport, most likely.  Now multiply by, say, 40 planes on charge at once.  That's 2,000MW which is about half of the average power consumption in my entire control area.

And do you know what a cable carrying 50MW safely looks like?  It's going to have to be medium voltage.  Let's say it's 13.2kV three-phase.  That's 2,200A.  That's 4 3-conductor 500kcmil mining cables, each one 3 inches in diameter weighing 6 pounds and costing about $50 per foot.
No. You actively cool the cables, which allows you to carry a LOT more current in the same physical size. That's exactly what Tesla does for their newer Supercharging stations, so the ~300Amp cable they use is much smaller and lighter than you might suppose if you just look up the number in Handbook of Electronic Tables and Formulas or a website.

And remember that the hose for refueling jets can be ~5 inches in diameter.

Again, this is what is ALREADY done for electric cars. No doubt we'll be /more/ clever about this in the future, not less.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Again, this is what is ALREADY done for electric cars. No doubt we'll be /more/ clever about this in the future, not less.

Batteries have to get about 5 fold better than they are in energy density and cost per kWh before they are ready for this type of thing.  Baring a breakthrough, that's a long way to go.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Hybrids are neat and all, but full-electric is where it's at. Ultra-high-performance lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur can do 300-400Wh/kg, which should do 1000km with some of those advanced designs, if you're clever.

I did the math here, with some assumptions.

For a vehicle like a 737, a 1000km flight will consume 7,500kg of fuel or the energy in a 62,500kg 400Wh/kg battery (with 100% conversion efficiency to shaft power).  Aerodynamic and propulsion efficiency isn't going to close that gap....
...except that's exactly what NASA aeronautics are proposing. Distributed propulsion and the blended wing concept, sucking the slowed boundary layer into the turbofans can make a huge difference. Some of the concepts are capable of 50% or even 60% reduction in fuel consumption. To take your example, that would mean 31,250kg battery mass versus 85100kg for 737-800 maximum take-off weight.

Consider that long-range jets like the 777 can be 50% fuel by mass. But you could increase that to 60 or even 75% (GlobalFlyer was able to achieve over 80%), combined with improvements in structural mass, perhaps even using the batteries as structural elements, would allow 1000km to definitely be possible with the battery tech I described. I had also done these calculations, I wasn't just making them up.

As I said, you have to be clever which you weren't bothering to do. :)

It's still 4 times the mass of the fuel it replaces, and that's way too much.
No it's not.
Quote
It means lower efficiency because you have to carry the batteries around.
Yet you can access any source of electricity, which could be very cheap besides not polluting.

Quote
Batteries aren't even ready for prime time for cars yet, much less airplanes.
As a physicist who drives an electric car every day, I completely disagree. The battery technology is more than ready. It's the battery price that must come down for electric cars to be mass-market, and given the contract that GM has signed with LGChem (not to mention Tesla's Gigafactory), battery prices are well on their way to being cheap enough. But the batteries themselves are MORE than capable.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Again, this is what is ALREADY done for electric cars. No doubt we'll be /more/ clever about this in the future, not less.

Batteries have to get about 5 fold better than they are in energy density and cost per kWh before they are ready for this type of thing.  Baring a breakthrough, that's a long way to go.
To replace long-haul jets, perhaps. But NOT to replace short-haul. 400kWh/kg is enough for that (which we've already achieved in the lab), and initially even the 300Wh/kg we produce today would be interesting for some niches. And the prices are already low enough because you cycle the short-haul jets MANY times a day.

Now is the time to start designing these electric jets, because it takes a really long time for them to go from drawing board to first flight.

And 5 fold improvement is certainly possible using lithium-air batteries. I've seen some lithium-air batteries in person, it's not just a powerpoint idea. Conservatively speaking, we're probably a decade or two from achieving good cycle performance with lithium-air, but that's about how long it takes for a new jet to go from idea to service these days.
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 01:08 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
A $130,000 Tesla P90D couldn't even get me to visit my family, and it's only 2 hours away.  No Superchargers along the way, 290 mile round trip, can't charge there, often have to do it in bitter cold (i.e. -10°F) sometimes getting stuck on the highway for an hour waiting for a wreck to be cleared with the heat blasting.  Definitely not even close to ready for prime time.

My $25,000 Prius makes the round trip and takes me to and from work for a week with no problem.

I generally refuel when my range gets down to about 250 miles, holding that much in reserve.  And my kids are impatient about fueling even when it takes 3 minutes.  40 minutes is a total non-starter.

Don't forget, airplanes have to have a 30 minute flight reserve minimum, usually closer to 45 minutes.  I didn't add that in to my mass estimates.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
The shortest turnaround for a commercial aircraft is about 25 minutes on average for a Southwest 737. Their aim was 10 minutes. Others are about 30-45 minutes.
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
A $130,000 Tesla P90D couldn't even get me to visit my family, and it's only 2 hours away.  No Superchargers along the way, 290 mile round trip, can't charge there,...
Your family doesn't have a 120V outlet? That I find hard to believe. Additionally, the fact there are not superchargers along the way is a temporary problem. And a larger battery could also be used except for the cost. 500 mile range could easily be done with existing batteries.

I don't know what your off-topic anecdote is supposed to mean except that you can find corner cases where electric cars have trouble (but again, no 120V outlet? I don't believe you). (But so would some gasoline cars if there were no gas stations.)
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 01:30 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Let's not go TOO far down the rathole of whether batteries are ready for planes yet...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
A $130,000 Tesla P90D couldn't even get me to visit my family, and it's only 2 hours away.  No Superchargers along the way, 290 mile round trip, can't charge there,...
Your family doesn't have a 120V outlet?

Not outside and not out on the street where I park.  Besides, 4 miles per charge hour would barely make a dent.  Maybe I'd get 30-40 extra miles of range, which is far from enough.

Quote
That I find hard to believe. Additionally, the fact there are not superchargers along the way is a temporary problem. And a larger battery could also be used except for the cost. 500 mile range could easily be done with existing batteries.

I don't know what your off-topic anecdote is supposed to mean except that you can find corner cases where electric cars have trouble (but again, no 120V outlet? I don't believe you).

A supercharger station is not a useful thing anyway.  Too slow.  I can put 7 miles of range in my current car every second.  The effective charge rate is about 5MW - 40 times faster than the highest power supercharger.

I could give you dozens of other cases of places I've been where a P90D couldn't go without a tow back.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
A $130,000 Tesla P90D couldn't even get me to visit my family, and it's only 2 hours away.  No Superchargers along the way, 290 mile round trip, can't charge there,...
Your family doesn't have a 120V outlet?

Not outside and not out on the street where I park.  Besides, 4 miles per charge hour would barely make a dent.  Maybe I'd get 30-40 extra miles of range, which is far from enough.

Quote
That I find hard to believe. Additionally, the fact there are not superchargers along the way is a temporary problem. And a larger battery could also be used except for the cost. 500 mile range could easily be done with existing batteries.

I don't know what your off-topic anecdote is supposed to mean except that you can find corner cases where electric cars have trouble (but again, no 120V outlet? I don't believe you).

A supercharger station is not a useful thing anyway.  Too slow.  I can put 7 miles of range in my current car every second.  The effective charge rate is about 5MW - 40 times faster than the highest power supercharger.

I could give you dozens of other cases of places I've been where a P90D couldn't go without a tow back.
You also cannot drive a combustion engine vehicle indoors due to fumes. You are also completely at the mercy of fossil fuel infrastructure. While I enjoy this nice back and forth, this is off-topic.

Airplanes are hooked up to shore power already while at the gate. There's plenty of time for charging with a properly-engineered system.

I've answered basically all your objections pretty clearly. Yes, you CAN get 1000km range with cleverness, just as I originally said. No, the charging cable DOESN'T have to be 3 inches thick (which is smaller than the 5 inch diameter fueling hoses). Is it possible you are wrong about electric flight?
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 02:06 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Lots of surface area on an aircraft, they could use spayed on Photovoltaic Paint to help generate power continuously during the day...

http://www.nanoflexpower.com/automotive
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Again... vehicle battery range is off topic. Spraying solar cell paint on wings is off topic. Stick to the NASA related aspects here please. NASA announced they are pursuing QueSST  not the other alternatives.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Actually, that's not true. NASA is doing a bunch of X-Planes, the Quiet supersonic transport being just one of them. Many are electric propulsion (usually hybrid as the goal, but will still use batteries, and the early prototypes are all pure electric since that's a lot simpler).
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 03:18 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Oh my, checked whois and NACASpaceFlight.com is available! Quick, hit the mod button and let Chris know!

Kinda bummed it wasn't something that had more near term potential. Like the blended body or the turbo electric hybrid fan. I wonder why they went for sizzle.

Because it's the most viable and far along as an idea & probably the easiest to translate to the commercial world. The others are kind of further out from this stage.

This article seems to have a bit more detail on this announcement & history.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/nasa-selects-lockheed-martin-to-design-supersonic-x-422539/
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 06:53 am by Star One »

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2
Well not to stomp on the parade, and this would be Chris' call, but is seems to me this announcement is in the realm of aeronautics, not spaceflight.

(though personally I think it's well overdue to have another supersonic aircraft, and it's wickedly cool stuff)

Have you forgotten what the 'A' stands for in NASA. This is a personal bugbear for me.

Not at all. I have also been following this thread. I also follow the yearly budgets and appropriations that define the aeronautics portion of NASA's budget.

However, people also seem to forget the name of this site: NASASpaceflight. This is about all things related to space. Certain relates topics have been challenged before, such as unmanned spaceflight & science, as there are

A useful skill that I have developed over time is that if it doesn't interest me, I ignore it. Saves much more time than complaining.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Actually, that's not true. NASA is doing a bunch of X-Planes, the Quiet supersonic transport being just one of them. Many are electric propulsion (usually hybrid as the goal, but will still use batteries, and the early prototypes are all pure electric since that's a lot simpler).

OK but long anecdotes about Tesla and Toyota vehicles are clearly off topic. You know I hate to delete things. Humor me by staying on topic, k?
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
It would be easier to acknowledge that this news contains no spaceflight related topic to stay on.  :)
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
If people keep arguing with me, I guess I'll change my mind and stump that it be closed instead of that it stay open.

Take Blackstar's advice and let it go. Arguing with moderators is boring and tiresome. Even if you're right and they are wrong.
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 10:38 am by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
I'm not arguing, just pointing the obvious. Anyhow, what is on topic now in this thread? Is it the announced quiet boom X plane only or other concepts illustrated in FP?

IMHO the quiet boom choice was strange when they seemed to emphasize greener stuff. Boom or no boom supersonic flight causes a lot worse passenger miles per gallon figures than conventional speeds. Or passenger miles per kWhr too if one dreams of electric flight. I fail to see how trying to enable very expensive overland supersonic trips for a few HNWIs is greener act. Concorde was economic flop despite heavy subsidies and investment write-offs by France and UK.

Could this enable supersonic Roc overland launches? Maybe. But I think Vulcan Aerospace will soon fold even as is.

Shove the HNWIs into near vacuum metal tube to travel quickly from coast to coast.  ;)
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
I'm not arguing, just pointing the obvious. Anyhow, what is on topic now in this thread? Is it the announced quiet boom X plane only or other concepts illustrated in FP?

IMHO the quiet boom choice was strange when they seemed to emphasize greener stuff. Boom or no boom supersonic flight causes a lot worse passenger miles per gallon figures than conventional speeds. Or passenger miles per kWhr too if one dreams of electric flight. I fail to see how trying to enable very expensive overland supersonic trips for a few HNWIs is greener act. Concorde was economic flop despite heavy subsidies and investment write-offs by France and UK.

Could this enable supersonic Roc overland launches? Maybe. But I think Vulcan Aerospace will soon fold even as is.

Shove the HNWIs into near vacuum metal tube to travel quickly from coast to coast.  ;)

SST has always been the next logical step in air transport for the civil aviation industry, it is purely the issue of the noise overland that has held it back. I imagine this will be particularly attractive to the biz jet sector where already a conventional SST is being developed.

Anyway this is just the first amongst a number of concepts that are likely to reach reality from this NASA programme.
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 12:20 pm by Star One »

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
I'm not arguing, just pointing the obvious. Anyhow, what is on topic now in this thread? Is it the announced quiet boom X plane only or other concepts illustrated in FP?

You're arguing :)  How do I know? Because I said so... :) :)

Specific things that the NASA press release, or speakers at the announcement, spoke about are on topic. General aviation stuff is not. Battery tech is not. Electric vehicle range is not. Charge points for electric vehicles are not. Telling other people they don't understand the topic is not (and violates be excellent too).

I trust you all to do your best here. I'm probably gonna trim out all this meta after a few posts that are on topic again because who wants to read it later? Not me...  Straighten up and fly right.
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 12:15 pm by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Can I just point out only one of the two electric planes uses batteries.

The Hybrid is directly powering the tail fan from generators on two lower bypass ratio turbo fans. The latest studies show the plane will have the same mass as an equivalent high bypass turbo fan model. It is not charging and lugging around extra battery mass. The extra mass of the tail fan, structure, and electronics is offset by the smaller and lighter turbo fan engines (which have the same output power and the large diameter fans).

The dirty secret of high bypass ratio turbo fans, while they have better fuel burn, they also weigh more than low bypass turbo fans. Works out great on long haul, but you do not gain as much on short haul. Case in point, the 787 has a ~20% burn advantage over the 767. In reality, depending on the routes flown airlines have reported between 18% (LAN, mostly shorter haul) and 24% (ANA, much longer haul).

As for the pure electric, several patents from both Airbus and Boeing have floated over the years for quick change battery packs. It is a solvable problem.

NASA selected between a Prius, Nissan Leaf, UHaul, and a Lamborghini. They went the mid-life crisis route ;)

I for one am now looking forward to our new Son of Concord Over Lord.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 862
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 1
Specific things that the NASA press release, or speakers at the announcement, spoke about are on topic. General aviation stuff is not. Battery tech is not.  Straighten up and fly right.
Battery technology as it relates to space should be on topic...or if space battery tech spinoffs too.  Yes space could use a 500 whr/kg battery at the 'system' , not component, level too and its a good spinoff either way.  Is this not a major reason for space, spinoffs?

The other factor is if the airplane is used as the first stage of a rocket to orbit (e.g. the 747 assist).  How about an airplane used to fly around Mars?

Speaking of electric airplanes, check out the short video on the Boeing SugarVolt, which was an earlier study supporting this announcement.  "Electric Airplanes" everyone laughed, yet 5 or so years later, a hybrid concept that helps reduces fuel emerges, simply by thinking out of the box.  Some of the best engineers at Boeing have worked both As in NASA.

Any common hardware elements/techonology from the lower fuel burn airplanes to 'space' should be on topic, especially if folks want NASA to return to a NACA role since 'everything else' is done better in private companies.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Any common hardware elements/techonology from the lower fuel burn airplanes to 'space' should be on topic, especially if folks want NASA to return to a NACA role since 'everything else' is done better in private companies.
I don't know, quite spike with all the new tech they are adding is reminding me of the X-33. I hope it doesn't go the same way. This airframe is more than just the airframe. Thrust vectoring, enhanced vision, ect...

Also, industry has been doing pretty good with fuel burn improvements on commercial airliners. The 787 has a 20% block burn advantage over the 767 it replaced, Same with the a350, Pratt's new geared turbo fan seems to be a game changer (If you are willing to wait for it to start), You are starting to see 3D printed parts in jet engines, The laminar flow tail Boeing added to the 787-9, ect. I think planes like MOM and NSA that we should see in the near future where incorporate many of these improvements. 
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 02:08 pm by kevin-rf »
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 862
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 1
Any common hardware elements/techonology from the lower fuel burn airplanes to 'space' should be on topic, especially if folks want NASA to return to a NACA role since 'everything else' is done better in private companies.
I don't know, quite spike with all the new tech they are adding is reminding me of the X-33. I hope it doesn't go the same way. This airframe is more than just the airframe. Thrust vectoring, enhanced vision, ect...

Also, industry has been doing pretty good with fuel burn improvements on commercial airliners. The 787 has a 20% block burn advantage over the 767 it replaced, Same with the a350, Pratt's new geared turbo fan seems to be a game changer (If you are willing to wait for it to start), You are starting to see 3D printed parts in jet engines, The laminar flow tail Boeing added to the 787-9, ect. I think planes like MOM and NSA that we should see in the near future where incorporate many of these improvements.
Note sure i follow...laminar flow, geared turbofan would not be space topics, right?  unless it applies to Mars aircaft?   Perhaps if one flies an LNG aircraft on Mars it would a space topic--many common technologies.   The geared turbofan cannot reach the 70% fuel burn reduction goal BTW, the gearbox has to become electrical.  At less than 4% of NASA's budget...there will not be many topics anyway.  Okay, back to err...wow too many party threads....which are not off topic....go figure ???
« Last Edit: 03/01/2016 02:50 pm by muomega0 »

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Spaceflight is part of the aerospace industry. Does discussing non-spaceflight aspects of NASA qualify as a hobby? Maybe it should be moved to the Spaceflight Entertainment and Hobbies section. Eh, maybe not, it's just a thought.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
An air-breathing SSTO, please! I'm sure that technology has reached the point where that is practical, even if it is a sort of a 'stage and a half' with separate turbo/ramjets as a first stage and rockets for final ascent.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Thorny

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 894
  • San Angelo, Texas
  • Liked: 300
  • Likes Given: 457
Those of you in the Cape Canaveral area may be interested to know that the DARPA "Shaped Sonic Boom Experiment" aircraft (a modified F-5E) is outside the Warbird Museum at TiCo Airport. Here is a photo I took of it around Christmas...

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2
SST has always been the next logical step in air transport for the civil aviation industry, it is purely the issue of the noise overland that has held it back. I imagine this will be particularly attractive to the biz jet sector where already a conventional SST is being developed.

I think your first statement is not accurate, but your last one is.

"The next logical step" is really the wrong way to think of civil aviation. There is a constant and longstanding interest in both higher fuel economy and quieting. That's persistent and it is not going to go away, and one could argue that it should be NASA's primary focus (although I'm not going to make that argument without caveats). One could also argue that the "next logical step" is really increased automation. If we're going to have driverless cars on our roads in large numbers in 10-20 years (and who here thinks that that is not going to happen?), then why do we need pilots in the cockpit? Arguably, NASA could be putting emphasis on that too.

Where quiet boom is likely to have an effect is in bizjets, where the cost is not nearly as important as it is for commercial passenger aviation.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
If we're going to have driverless cars on our roads in large numbers in 10-20 years (and who here thinks that that is not going to happen?)

Me. Instead of autopilot you'll get driver assistance and crash avoidance. Technology advances rarely in the direction of visionaries (especially uninvolved visionaries). We still have train drivers, a job that was automated in the 60's.

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
It would be easier to acknowledge that this news contains no spaceflight related topic to stay on.  :)
At least it's got the "spacey-looking" NASA meatball... ;D
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2

IMHO the quiet boom choice was strange when they seemed to emphasize greener stuff. Boom or no boom supersonic flight causes a lot worse passenger miles per gallon figures than conventional speeds. Or passenger miles per kWhr too if one dreams of electric flight. I fail to see how trying to enable very expensive overland supersonic trips for a few HNWIs is greener act. Concorde was economic flop despite heavy subsidies and investment write-offs by France and UK.


I think those are all legitimate points (indeed, I have heard them made by a very smart top aeronautical scientist who works for one of those companies that puts engines on big jets).

And a legitimate related point is why did NASA choose this particular technology to advance at this time? Well, I don't know the specifics of the decision, but I am familiar with some of the background. Several years ago an independent study recommended that NASA start conducting more flight research (meaning actually flying aircraft).

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/13384/recapturing-nasas-aeronautics-flight-research-capabilities

Look at the findings and recommendations in the summary there. The options included environmentally responsive aviation, low boom supersonics, and hypersonics. Hypersonics is a bugaboo, with other issues. I think that low boom supersonics is something for which there is clear industry interest, although it is a niche. There's interest in ERA as well, so it would not surprise me to see NASA implement a flight research project in that area soon too. And autonomy has really become a big deal in the past few years, so maybe NASA will do some flight research in that area.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
I work at one of the aeronautics centers, (but not in an aeronautics area) and, before this announcement, I definitely got the feeling that NASA had been studying these cool concepts for decades but really no progress had been made because no one was actually BUILDING them.

In fact, I literally mentioned to the aeronautics people (something I can get away with as I still look like an intern) that someone needs to actually BUILD this boomless supersonic jet, this blended wing body craft, or really any of the more exotic green aviation concepts that we've been passing around for decades (or if we don't make any progress on them, then stop spending money just studying them!).

So the announcement of this series of X-planes (of which the Quiet SST is just one) couldn't please me more.

...but this isn't just about the QuietSST.
And I'd like to point out that ALL the scale prototypes for the hybrid propulsion projects use batteries.

I'm sick of decades of stagnation in aerospace (the only advances being structural carbon fiber, higher bypass ratios, wingtips, but nothing exotic or game-changing), and I couldn't be happier that NASA is finally bringing X-planes back.
« Last Edit: 03/02/2016 01:26 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2

I'm sick of decades of stagnation in aerospace (the only advances being structural carbon fiber, higher bypass ratios, wingtips, but nothing exotic or game-changing)

"Decades of stagnation"?

Well, if you don't count the pretty impressive improvements in fuel efficiency, or materials, or reduction in mean time between failures, or UAVs...

And NASA was behind a lot of that.

There has not been stagnation. There have been a lot of important developments, and NASA has been responsible. That doesn't mean that everything is great (read the report that I linked above), but it's a myth that aviation has not improved much in a long time. If you simply compare the fuel economy and the noise of a 787 to the 737 (or more dramatically, the 707), you'd be amazed.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Don't forget safety. NASA has been at the forefront of it. Today's CRM grew out of industry work with NASA. In the US we have gone from a few fatal commercial crashes a year to close to none. The last three where in 2013, then you have look back to 2009. Since 9/11 there have only been 9 fatal US crashes. Contrast that with 1985.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline pippin

  • Regular
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2575
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 45
It's normal that progress in a more mature technology field looks like it's slower than in nascent areas.
That's partly because all the low-hanging-fruit developments have already been done and partly simply because compared to an impressive status quo even fundamental breakthroughs don't look as dramatic.

That doesn't mean nothing is happen ending or being achieved, actually typically quite the opposite is true.

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11181
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7404
  • Likes Given: 72484

IMHO the quiet boom choice was strange when they seemed to emphasize greener stuff. Boom or no boom supersonic flight causes a lot worse passenger miles per gallon figures than conventional speeds. Or passenger miles per kWhr too if one dreams of electric flight. I fail to see how trying to enable very expensive overland supersonic trips for a few HNWIs is greener act. Concorde was economic flop despite heavy subsidies and investment write-offs by France and UK.


I think those are all legitimate points (indeed, I have heard them made by a very smart top aeronautical scientist who works for one of those companies that puts engines on big jets).

And a legitimate related point is why did NASA choose this particular technology to advance at this time? Well, I don't know the specifics of the decision, but I am familiar with some of the background. Several years ago an independent study recommended that NASA start conducting more flight research (meaning actually flying aircraft).

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/13384/recapturing-nasas-aeronautics-flight-research-capabilities

Look at the findings and recommendations in the summary there. The options included environmentally responsive aviation, low boom supersonics, and hypersonics. Hypersonics is a bugaboo, with other issues. I think that low boom supersonics is something for which there is clear industry interest, although it is a niche. <snip>
Has anyone studied the potential sales of low-boom SST airline tickets?  Trans-oceanic international flight can be onerous, particularly trans-Pacific.  (No personal experience here, but summarizing some comments that I've heard from frequent-fliers.)

If the restrictions on supersonic land over flight are eased or removed due to low sonic boom, I could envision a (large?) niche market for international frequent fliers--people who might be willing to pay more (2x?) for faster transit.  Time is $$$.

That market is definitely larger, and going more places, than it was in the 70s.

Just a thought.
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
Quieting sonic booms allowing overland travel would open up a large transcontinental business. Flights between the US east and west coasts are about five hours. Cutting that down would be useful for business.

Offline Bubbinski

I could also see military applications for quiet sonic booms.  A supersonic bomber or tanker/transport flying over "denied territory", on a strike mission or troop deployment for example.
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2
I could also see military applications for quiet sonic booms.  A supersonic bomber or tanker/transport flying over "denied territory", on a strike mission or troop deployment for example.

But it would still likely have a big radar signature.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
But it would still likely have a big radar signature.
Speed is the new stealth ;) Get in and out before the other side can shoot you down...

Also, who says the shape isn't stealth compatible.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2
I did not watch the Monday press conference/announcement, but did they say anything about initiating future flight projects? Are they perhaps thinking about starting a new one each year for the next several years?

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
I did not watch the Monday press conference/announcement, but did they say anything about initiating future flight projects? Are they perhaps thinking about starting a new one each year for the next several years?

Funny you should mention that, aviation week just had an interesting article about Lockheed's counter to the Blended Wing Body aircraft. Looks like an X competition in the 2020 time frame between Boeing's Blended Wing and Lockheed's Hybrid Wing Body.

You have to register with Av Week to read it, but it is not behind the paywall...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/next-lockheed-low-speed-hwb-airlifter-flight?NL=AW-05&Issue=AW-05_20160310_AW-05_389&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_2&utm_rid=CPEN1000001746081&utm_campaign=5247&utm_medium=email&elq2=034e6511888f40a2b32ce2f9176c3f36

Here is the interesting quote at the end of the article as it relates to X planes:
Quote
Lockheed is pursuing the HWB concept with funding support from the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) under its Revolutionary Configurations for Energy Efficiency program, which ends in 2017. The company will complete a study for AFRL of a manned HWB demonstrator this fall, he says. A commercialization study for NASA, looking at a freighter variant, will finish around the same time.

NASA has unveiled budget plans to fly a 50%-scale hybrid wing body demonstrator after 2020 as the second in a proposed series of large-scale X-planes. To date, the agency’s definition of HWB has been synonymous with Boeing’s Blended Wing Body configuration, but Lockheed plans to propose its HWB concept, and NASA says selection of the X-plane will be an open competition. “We do qualify to play in the HWB plans, and are working with NASA to make sure that we do,” says Hooker.

If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
I could also see military applications for quiet sonic booms.  A supersonic bomber or tanker/transport flying over "denied territory", on a strike mission or troop deployment for example.

But it would still likely have a big radar signature.

Yeah. So you are going to lit up the ground surveillance and target acquisition radars like beacons for the Anti-Radiation missiles of the strike package to home in on. Will be interesting.

However quiet supersonic strike aircraft will be useful to take out targets without radar capability. Since the target will have little or no warnings from picket observers listing for noise from approaching aircrafts.



Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
I could also see military applications for quiet sonic booms.  A supersonic bomber or tanker/transport flying over "denied territory", on a strike mission or troop deployment for example.

But it would still likely have a big radar signature.

Yeah. So you are going to lit up the ground surveillance and target acquisition radars like beacons for the Anti-Radiation missiles of the strike package to home in on. Will be interesting.

However quiet supersonic strike aircraft will be useful to take out targets without radar capability. Since the target will have little or no warnings from picket observers listing for noise from approaching aircrafts.
I will ask my question again, what says that the shape is not stealth compatible?

Part of the issue of networked ground defense systems is they talk to each other. Stealth doesn't mean you are invisible to radar, just you can get closer to the radar before detection. The goal is to get in and out before the other side has time to react. Stealth reduces the reaction time. That's why there is interest in other detection methods, visual, IR, sound. A quite supersonic stealth aircraft fits this bill. A sonic boom is a very sharp sound event that is easy to pull out of the background. Networked gun shot locator systems exist today to pin point the origin of gunshot noise. Police departments across the US are using them. Nothing keeps them from being integrated with an air defense queuing system allowing earlier detection and a longer reaction time. Stealth can be defeated if you know where to look.

I wonder if a non civilian reason to want to get around the sonic boom is to "help" stealth. While the F-22 and F-35 are stealthy, they are not quite and leave quite a boom... If they can track the boom, stealth vehicles are limited to subsonic speeds, giving the adversary a longer reaction time. But I digress, quite boom really sounds like a dual use technology.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Not the selected concept, but an article on aditional research NASA is doing with Boeing on truss braced wings (Bi-Planes!!!) for improved fuel economy.

http://aviationweek.com/space/truss-braced-wings-may-find-place-transonic-aircraft
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Skunk Works Refines Quiet Supersonic Design

Aviation Week & Space Technology
Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works is beginning a fast-paced year of preliminary design work on a low-boom demonstrator for NASA that the agency is increasingly optimistic will pave the way for environmentally acceptable supersonic business jets and airliners. The single-engine Quiet Supersonic Technology (QueSST) aircraft is designed to test whether the shockwave signature of potential future Mach 1-plus vehicles would be acceptable to the public, clearing the way for supersonic flight ...

http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-refines-quiet-supersonic-design
« Last Edit: 06/14/2016 07:47 pm by Star One »

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 1096
What an ugly duck - I suppose this is the price to pay for no sonic boom. Forward pilot vision won't be good - although cameras may help. Or a submarine periscope. Oh, and when ejecting, beware not to be sucked into the air intake (like the vilain in Die Hard 2  )
And how many control surface that thing has ? canards, a tail, and a small tail ontop of the fin ?!
« Last Edit: 06/15/2016 09:40 am by Archibald »
Han shot first and Gwynne Shotwell !

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
It explains in the article that the pilot may have to use something like an adapted F-35 helmet and also why it has so many control surfaces.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15289
  • Liked: 7827
  • Likes Given: 2
There are a number of different aspects to this project which I'd summarize as:

-technical feasibility
-regulation (how much noise is allowed)
-commercial interest and feasibility

NASA is tackling aspects of the first two, but they're complex. For instance, if they can prove the concept on this test vehicle, can that be scaled up to a larger vehicle that can carry passengers? And the regulation is a multi-pronged issue too, because the noise will vary based upon altitude, humidity, other atmospheric issues. I heard a NASA guy explain how he had been on the ground during a supersonic flyover by a military jet and never heard a sonic boom at all because the atmosphere had mitigated it. So there's a lot of factors that go into how the noise is detected and even defined.


Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
There are a number of different aspects to this project which I'd summarize as:

-technical feasibility
-regulation (how much noise is allowed)
-commercial interest and feasibility

NASA is tackling aspects of the first two, but they're complex. For instance, if they can prove the concept on this test vehicle, can that be scaled up to a larger vehicle that can carry passengers? And the regulation is a multi-pronged issue too, because the noise will vary based upon altitude, humidity, other atmospheric issues. I heard a NASA guy explain how he had been on the ground during a supersonic flyover by a military jet and never heard a sonic boom at all because the atmosphere had mitigated it. So there's a lot of factors that go into how the noise is detected and even defined.
Right. I think this is why they went with an actual piloted vehicle instead of a more subscale robotic one.

A crewed vehicle makes this a lot more /real/ to commercial interest and investors. It's also a camel nose under the tent of regulators, as you can start doing real cross-country demo flights.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Right. I think this is why they went with an actual piloted vehicle instead of a more subscale robotic one.

A crewed vehicle makes this a lot more /real/ to commercial interest and investors. It's also a camel nose under the tent of regulators, as you can start doing real cross-country demo flights.

They have already done subscale camel noses on the F-5 and F-15. Time to go larger.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Right. I think this is why they went with an actual piloted vehicle instead of a more subscale robotic one.

A crewed vehicle makes this a lot more /real/ to commercial interest and investors. It's also a camel nose under the tent of regulators, as you can start doing real cross-country demo flights.

They have already done subscale camel noses on the F-5 and F-15. Time to go larger.
That's right. This is a full vehicle capable of shaping the whole boom, not just half of it.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline gosnold

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 572
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 2116

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
So one of the other designs that didn't get selected has just been given the X-57 designation.

http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-hybrid-electric-research-plane-gets-x-number-new-name

NASA Hybrid Electric Research Plane Gets X Number, New Name
With 14 electric motors turning propellers and all of them integrated into a uniquely-designed wing, NASA will test new propulsion technology using an experimental airplane now designated the X-57 and nicknamed “Maxwell.”

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden highlighted the agency’s first X-plane designation in a decade during his keynote speech Friday in Washington at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) annual Aviation and Aeronautics Forum and Exposition, commonly called Aviation 2016.

“With the return of piloted X-planes to NASA’s research capabilities – which is a key part of our 10-year-long New Aviation Horizons initiative – the general aviation-sized X-57 will take the first step in opening a new era of aviation,” Bolden said.

As many as five larger transport-scale X-planes also are planned as part of the initiative. Its goals – like the X-57 – include demonstrating advanced technologies to reduce fuel use, emissions and noise, and thus accelerate their introduction to the marketplace.

The X-57 number designation was assigned by the U.S. Air Force, which manages the history-making process, following a request from NASA. The first X-plane was the X-1, which in 1947 became the first airplane to fly faster than the speed of sound.

“Dozens of X-planes of all shapes, sizes and purposes have since followed – all of them contributing to our stature as the world’s leader in aviation and space technology,” said Jaiwon Shin, associate administrator for NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. “Planes like the X-57, and the others to come, will help us maintain that role.”

Its original wing and two gas-fueled piston engines will be replaced with a long, skinny wing embedded with 14 electric motors – 12 on the leading edge for take offs and landings, and one larger motor on each wing tip for use while at cruise altitude.

NASA’s aeronautical innovators hope to validate the idea that distributing electric power across a number of motors integrated with an aircraft in this way will result in a five-time reduction in the energy required for a private plane to cruise at 175 mph.

Several other benefits would result as well. “Maxwell” will be powered only by batteries, eliminating carbon emissions and demonstrating how demand would shrink for lead-based aviation fuel still in use by general aviation.

Energy efficiency at cruise altitude using X-57 technology could benefit travelers by reducing flight times, fuel usage, as well as reducing overall operational costs for small aircraft by as much as 40 percent. Typically, to get the best fuel efficiency an airplane has to fly slower than it is able. Electric propulsion essentially eliminates the penalty for cruising at higher speeds.

Finally, as most drivers of hybrid electric cars know, electric motors are more quiet than conventional piston engines. The X-57’s electric propulsion technology is expected to significantly decrease aircraft noise, making it less annoying to the public.

The X-57 research started as part of the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate's Transformative Aeronautics Program's Convergent Aeronautics Solutions project, with the flight demonstrations being performed as part of the Flight Demonstration Concepts project in the Integrated Aviation Systems Program.

For more information about NASA's electric propulsion research, go to:

http://go.nasa.gov/1S55SPP

-end-
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA Aims For Supersonic Airliners As Quiet As Subsonic

Quote
After minimizing sonic boom, reducing airport noise is seen as the next biggest barrier to commercially viable future supersonic transports. As it works toward flying an X-plane in 2019 to demonstrate low-boom design technology, NASA is conducting ground tests of an engine nozzle that could make a small supersonic airliner as quiet as current subsonic transports.

The model tests underway at NASA’s Glenn Research Center will validate design tools and concepts for an integrated propulsion system that would enable a quiet supersonic airliner with the seating capacity of a regional jet to have a cumulative noise level 10 EPNdB below current Chapter 4 limits.

http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/nasa-aims-supersonic-airliners-quiet-subsonic

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Aurora D8: Nasa spending $2.9m to revitalise 'double bubble' subsonic twin-hull planes by 2027

Quote
Nasa has decided to invest $2.9m (£2.19m) in order to realise an innovative plane concept invented by MIT and Aurora Flight Sciences in 2008 which could make subsonic planes much more efficient than they are today.

The Aurora D8, which flies at a speed of Mach 0.764 (582 mph, 936 km/h), was originally developed by Aurora Flight Sciences and MIT as part of Nasa's N+3 Program, which provided funding of technologies for new aircraft that would be substantially more efficient to aeroplanes today, that would be put into service in the 2030s.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/aurora-d8-nasa-spending-2-9m-revitalise-double-bubble-subsonic-twin-hull-planes-by-2027-1581718

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Lockheed Martin HWB-X hybrid wing-body demonstrator.

https://twitter.com/TheWoracle/status/819211718576443395

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
New NASA press release

The QueSST for Quiet

Can you imagine flying from New York to Los Angeles in half the time?

Think about it. Commercial flight over land in a supersonic jet would mean less time in-flight; less time in a cramped seat next to your new, and probably unwanted, best friend; fewer tiny bags of peanuts; and more time at your destination.

Couldn’t Concorde do that? Nope. Concorde, which last flew in 2003, utilized 1950s technology, was only supersonic over the ocean and was deemed too noisy to fly over people. It also burned a lot of fuel and was an expensive ticket. Approximately $15,000 for a round-trip seat in today’s dollars! That makes our wallets hurt.

QueSST experimental aircraft in the 8’ x 6’ wind tunnel
QueSST experimental aircraft in the 8’ x 6’ wind tunnel.
Credits: NASA
Ok, so just build a new Concorde with new technology that saves fuel. Well, it’s really not that easy. Since 1973, supersonic flight over land has been forbidden in the United States because of the noise from sonic boom. A new supersonic commercial airplane needs to beat the boom problem and be efficient as well.

That’s what NASA’s Commercial Supersonic Technology Project is trying to do. After years of work, we think we can bring something new to the table that produces acceptable in-flight noise to communities along flight paths. We are ready to prove it, and that is where the Quiet Supersonic Technology (QueSST) experimental aircraft (X-plane) concept being developed by NASA and partner Lockheed Martin comes in.

Here’s the lowdown on the project:

Although the overall goal is improved quality of life for those on the ground and those in the air, the big step in the near term is to show we can beat the boom. To accomplish this, a unique X-plane, one that uses distinctive shaping – a long nose, highly swept wings, etc. – is being designed. This piloted X-plane will look to prove that sonic booms can be turned into sonic thumps, and eventually help make the case for updating the rule against supersonic flight over land.
What’s QueSST? QueSST is a preliminary design concept of that unique X-plane. It’s not an airliner. The design relies mostly on computer models to ensure all the pieces will come together for a future real airplane.
To verify the aerodynamic performance predictions of the fuselage shape, control surfaces and engine inlet the NASA-Lockheed team has built a scale model of the QueSST design for wind-tunnel testing. NASA Glenn Research Center’s 8’ X 6’ wind tunnel was selected for this testing because of its size and unique capability to test at a large range of speeds.
So, what’s next? NASA will review the test data and complete the preliminary design review. If data is positive and approval is obtained, then a contract for the design, fabrication and testing of a single-seat flight demonstration X-plane could be awarded. Flight testing could begin as early as 2021.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/the-quesst-for-quiet

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Supersonic X-plane Takes Next Step To Reality
Aviation Daily

DENVER—NASA has issued a draft request for proposals for development of its Quiet Supersonic Transport (QueSST) low-boom flight demonstrator, starting the clock ticking toward first flight of the new X-plane in early ...

http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/supersonic-x-plane-takes-next-step-reality
« Last Edit: 06/08/2017 11:21 am by Star One »

Offline laszlo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 920
  • Liked: 1235
  • Likes Given: 530
Flying in 1/2 the time is less interesting to me than eliminating the traffic jam to the airport, the screwing around with parking and shuttle buses, the endless lines at security, the time to disrobe, get searched and to put all jackets, belts, shoes, change, keys, computers, etc. back together again, the mile long walk to the end of the terminal so I can then catch a train or bus to the actual terminal (and walk a mile to the gate) as well as the actual boarding process. Then at the other end there's deplaning, the interminable trip to baggage claim,  the endless wait for baggage, the rental car counter and the traffic jam leaving the airport. Because of all this BS, we are still averaging DC-3 speeds door to door.

Rather than chasing supersonic flight with quiet sonic booms, wouldn't it be more effective for NASA to be working on an integrated travel infrastructure that eliminates these bottlenecks? As long as getting from home to the aircraft and the aircraft to the final destination is not considered part of air travel, supersonic flight will not speed up the process. The problem these days is not slow planes, it's a kludged-together transport system.

That said, I once had the opportunity to go from San Diego to Chicago at over 700 mph groundspeed (300 mph tailwind, so no sonic boom) and it was an amazing experience to see the ground go by at supersonic speeds. So it definitely would be exciting.

On the other hand, the system bit us at the end. We spent a significant portion of the saved time on the ground in front of the terminal waiting for a gate since we were hours early for our scheduled one.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428

Rather than chasing supersonic flight with quiet sonic booms, wouldn't it be more effective for NASA to be working on an integrated travel infrastructure that eliminates these bottlenecks? As long as getting from home to the aircraft and the aircraft to the final destination is not considered part of air travel, supersonic flight will not speed up the process. The problem these days is not slow planes, it's a kludged-together transport system.

Not NASA's task.  That is in DOT's basket

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 14
Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but wouldn't reducing or eliminating the sonic boom also improve the efficiency of the aircraft's flying characteristics?

     As I understood it, the boom is the result of the aircraft essentially creating pressure waves behind it from passing the speed of sound.  These pressure waves would tend to act as drag to the aircraft and rob it of velocity.  By limiting or neutralizing the pressure waves, you limit or eliminate the drag caused by the pressure waves.

 
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline adrianwyard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1140
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 367
I'm not an expert, but I don't believe so. The sharp booms are caused because the pressure disturbances caused by a supersonic aircraft tend to align and accumulate as they head to the ground. AIUI the objective here is to create disturbances that don't accumulate - are still spread out in time - when they reach the ground, so 'thump' rather than 'clap' and boom.

In fact, rather than less drag I suppose low-boom shapes could create more drag than boomy shapes.
« Last Edit: 06/08/2017 01:52 pm by adrianwyard »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA completes preliminary design review for supersonic X-plane

Quote
NASA will soon ask companies to bid for a contract to build a supersonic X-plane whose preliminary design review was completed on 23 June by Lockheed Martin.

Quote
It also will serve as a testbed for other technologies. Instead of a forward windscreen, the X-plane pilot will view the aircraft’s forward path from a ultra high-definition video produced by a camera installed in a fuselage-mounted fairing, says David Richwine, who managed the preliminary design project called the Quiet Supersonic Transport (QueSST).

Quote
A newly-released rendering of Lockheed’s preliminary design reveals other features of the highly-swept, delta-wing jet. A row of eight vortex generators are arrayed over the top of the fuselage just aft of the cockpit and a set of moving forward canard surfaces.

Image in the article.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/nasa-completes-preliminary-design-review-for-superso-438822/

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA’s Slower X-Plane Pace Could Have An Impact On Industry

Quote
NASA remains committed to its goal of returning to X-plane flight demonstrators, but at a slower pace that has some in industry concerned about their priority and relevance.

When the agency unveiled its New Aviation Horizons initiative in 2016, it planned a sequence of X-plane programs initiated as frequently as 18 months apart. But NASA did not receive the significant boost in aeronautics funding it sought, and its fiscal 2018 budget request is lower still.

The $624 million sought in 2018 is sufficient to launch the first X-plane, the Quiet Supersonic Technology (QueSST) low-boom flight demonstrator planned to fly in 2021. But under current plans the first of a series of Ultra-Efficient Subsonic Technology (UEST) X-planes will not follow it into the skies before 2026.

Quote
The agency is taking a similar approach to the first subsonic X-plane, having begun with contracts to define system requirements for five different configurations. Under current plans, a draft request for proposals (RFP) for the “UEST1” X-plane is to be released in fiscal 2018, says Fay Collier, IASP associate director for flight strategy.

The final RFP is to follow in fiscal 2019, with the intent to competitively select two concepts to take through to preliminary design reviews. One configuration will then be selected for the X-plane. First flight is planned for fiscal 2026, but “we are looking at ways to bring that to the left a bit, somewhere between fiscal 2024 and 2026,” Collier says. A second “UEST2” X-plane would follow five years later.

Quote
The slowing of the X-plane initiative highlights a growing tension between the pace with which industry is evolving and the speed at which NASA can respond. The agency is looking at how it can support the emerging urban air mobility market, and the earliest it could have a dedicated program in place is fiscal 2021, says Jaiwon Shin, associate administrator for aeronautics. This contrasts with Uber’s ambitious plans for experimental flights in 2020 and commercial service by 2023.

http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/nasa-s-slower-x-plane-pace-could-have-impact-industry

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Supersonic X-plane's unusual inlet performs well in wind tunnel

Quote
A series of wind tunnel tests revealed the unusual engine inlet positioning for NASA’s supersonic X-plane meets the performance goals for the Lockheed Martin-designed aircraft, a NASA Glenn Research Center aeronautics engineer says.

Quote
A series of wind tunnel tests revealed the unusual engine inlet positioning for NASA’s supersonic X-plane meets the performance goals for the Lockheed Martin-designed aircraft, a NASA Glenn Research Center aeronautics engineer says.

The quiet supersonic transport (QueSST) X-plane demonstrator will begin a series of flight tests in 2020 with an inlet placed atop the fuselage and behind the cockpit, a rare configuration for a supersonic aircraft not seen since early 1950s designs, such as the Douglas X-3 Stiletto and Convair F2Y Sea Dart.

The unusual engine placement is driven by the purpose of the QueSST demonstrator, explains Ray Castner, a NASA Glenn engineer, speaking at the Experimental Aircraft Association’s annual event in Oshkosh, Wisconsin on 25 July.

Quote
“Most supersonic aircraft have the engines near the front on the nose or underneath in the clean air flow,” Castner says. “We now have our engine up top and that’s for boom-shielding. That way, the disturbance from the engine goes up, and does not propagate down to the ground and contributes to boom signature.”

NASA’s Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio, performed 73h of testing of a model of the X-plane in the facililty’s 8ft X 6ft wind tunnel, the first such laboratory tests of such an engine inlet position for a supersonic aircraft of which the agency is aware.

The result satisfied NASA’s engineers that the X-plane’s unique inlet position will work.

“This inlet is actually more efficient than I thought it would be,” Castner says. “It was about 96-98% efficient, so that’s pretty good.”

Quote
Although the positioning was different, the nature of the NASA’s QueSST demonstration allowed Lockheed to use a relatively simple inlet design. NASA plans to have the aircraft take-off, make two passes over a city at Mach 1.4, then land. The design includes a diverterless bump to steer boundary layer airflow away from the inlet, but requires no moving pieces required for supersonic aircraft designed to cruise at higher speeds.

“It’s a [sonic] boom demonstrator. It’s not an inlet demonstrator. There is a higher performing inlet that we could have chosen, but a lot of those inlets have moveable parts,” Castner says.

NASA’s concerns about boundary layer flow over the top of the fuselage with the inlet’s placement drove other design decisions, he adds. After Lockheed completed the preliminary design, NASA released an image of the demonstrator with six vortex generators set between the cockpit canopy and the engine inlet. Lockheed placed the vortex generators there to energise the boundary layer flow and prevent the inlet from ingesting that relatively stagnant air, he says.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/supersonic-x-planes-unusual-inlet-performs-well-in-439849/

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
New Supersonic Technology Designed to Reduce Sonic Booms

Quote
Residents along Florida’s Space Coast will soon hear a familiar sound — sonic booms. But instead of announcing a spacecraft’s return from space, they may herald a new era in faster air travel.

NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida is partnering with the agency’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in California, Langley Research Center in Virginia, and Space Florida for a program called Sonic Booms in Atmospheric Turbulence, or SonicBAT II. Starting in mid-August, NASA F-18 jets will take off from the Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) and fly at supersonic speeds while agency researchers on the ground measure the effects of low-altitude turbulence on sonic booms.

Quote
According to John Graves of NASA Flight Operations in Kennedy’s Spaceport Integration and Services, for projects such as SonicBAT, NASA coordinates with Space Florida who manages the facility’s schedule.

“Working with representatives from the Armstrong center, we go through Space Florida to request use of the runway,” he said. “It’s an arrangement that works very well.”

The F-18 will begin flights on Aug. 21, flying two to four times a day over a period of ten days. But the actual test window may be two weeks to allow for weather and other possible delays.

Graves explains that SonicBAT is an unusual test in that it uses a typical military aircraft with its loud sonic boom to help engineers better understand the sounds from future quiet supersonic aircraft

“We’re hoping we can eventually lower sonic booms to a low rumble,” he said. “The goal is to eventually accommodate jets that can fly from New York to Los Angeles in two hours.”

Armstrong started SonicBAT investigations at Edwards Air Force Base last year. This will be the second round of tests.

“Edwards is a hot, dry environment,” he said. “The team at the Armstrong center wants to now try to collect similar data in the hot, humid climate we have here.”

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/08/02/supersonic-technology-designed-reduce-sonic-booms/

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Interesting discussion, but I am a little confused. Why are they saying this is the first time an above the fuselage supersonic inlet has been tested. Does the Mach 2 capable F-107 not count?
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline StarryKnight

  • Member
  • Posts: 97
  • Virginia
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 22
Interesting discussion, but I am a little confused. Why are they saying this is the first time an above the fuselage supersonic inlet has been tested. Does the Mach 2 capable F-107 not count?

The article says "a rare configuration for a supersonic aircraft not seen since early 1950s designs, such as the Douglas X-3 Stiletto and Convair F2Y Sea Dart." F-107 was designed in the 1950s. The author gave two examples and just didn't include the F-107 as one of the examples where this feature was employed.
In satellite operations, schedules are governed by the laws of physics and bounded by the limits of technology.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
must have speed read over that part, my bad..
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
New video from NASA Armstrong featuring X planes, Orion parachute test, Dream Chaser amongst many others.


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA Moves Electric-Propulsion Components Closer To Reality

Quote
Lightweight megawatt-scale drive systems are essential if electric propulsion is ever to succeed in commercial aircraft. Systems much more powerful than those in cars and far lighter than in ships are required. NASA has launched research into electric motors and power converters at the megawatt level, as these could support the near- or medium-term development of partially turboelectric and hybrid-electric propulsion systems for aircraft up to single-aisle airliner size. Hardware is already ...

http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/nasa-moves-electric-propulsion-components-closer-reality

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Past and future X-Planes.


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Electric X-Plane Nears Crucial Battery Test

Quote
NASA is preparing to test a redesigned lithium-ion battery module for its first electric propulsion demonstrator, the X-57 Maxwell, as it moves toward a maiden flight planned for early in 2018. The ground test will replicate one performed in December that resulted in a destructive thermal runaway and required the packaging to be redesigned. That test involved deliberately initiating a short circuit in one battery cell to ensure the overheating did not spread to other cells—but it ...

http://m.aviationweek.com/business-aviation/electric-x-plane-nears-crucial-battery-test

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Success With Low-Boom X-plane Critical To NASA’s Aeronautics Vision

Quote
We may not recall them all, but those we do remember hold special places in aviation history. The X-1 in which Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier in 1947. The X-15 in which Pete Knight reached Mach 6.7 in 1967. The X-43 that hit Mach 9.6 on scramjet power in 2004. They are the X-planes. Aviation afficionados will recall even more: the X-5 that pioneered variable wing sweep, the X-24 lifting bodies, forward-swept-wing X-29 and thrust-vectoring X-31—the international X-plane. Then ...

http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/success-low-boom-x-plane-critical-nasa-s-aeronautics-vision

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA X-Plane Gets Closer to Electric Flight

Quote
NASA's next X-plane, the all-electric X-57 Maxwell, is getting closer to its maiden flight. Engineers at Scaled Composites in Mojave, California, along with prime contractor on the program Empirical Systems Aerospace (ESAero), are preparing to integrate electric systems into a Tecnam P2006T to convert it to the X-57. The first electric version of the aircraft, known as Mod II, will replace the P2006T's gas-driven Rotax engines with electric motors and a battery pack to power the plane.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/a21564893/nasa-x-plane-gets-closer-to-electric-flight/

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA’s Experimental Supersonic Aircraft Now Known as X-59 QueSST

NASA’s newest experimental aircraft, designed with quiet supersonic technology and intended to help open a new era in faster-than-sound air travel over land, will forever be known in the history books as the X-59 QueSST.
The U.S. Air Force, which is the government entity responsible for assigning X-number designations and the popular name associated with the aircraft, officially informed NASA of their decision on June 26.

“For everyone working on this important project, this is great news and we’re thrilled with the designation,” said Jaiwon Shin, NASA’s associate administrator for aeronautics.

“I’m confident that the contributions the X-59 QueSST will make to our nation and the world will ensure its place among the greatest NASA X-planes ever flown,” Shin said.

The X-plane number designation continues a tradition of naming important experimental aircraft and rockets that dates back to 1947 and the X-1, the rocket-powered airplane that Chuck Yeager flew to become the first human to fly faster than the speed of sound.

And while that famous X-1 was nicknamed the Glamourous Glennis, for Yeager’s wife, today’s X-59 takes its QueSST nickname from the quiet supersonic technology the aircraft will be equipped with.

Now under construction by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company at its famed Skunk Works plant in Palmdale, Calif., the X-59 QueSST is designed so that when flying supersonic, people on the ground will hear nothing more than a sonic thump – if anything at all.

Once fully tested and pronounced safe to fly within the National Airspace, the X-59 in late 2022 will begin making supersonic flights over select communities to measure residents’ reactions to any noise they might hear.

The scientifically valid data gathered from these community overflights will be presented to U.S. and international regulators, who will use the information to help them come up with rules based on noise levels that enable new commercial markets for supersonic flight over land.

Jim Banke
Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate

Last Updated: June 27, 2018

https://www.nasa.gov/aero/nasa-experimental-supersonic-aircraft-x-59-quesst/

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA Prepares for Future of Supersonic Experimental Flight


Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
NASA Prepares for Future of Supersonic Experimental Flight



safe flights...and good fortune...and "like" button :)

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
A Look Inside the X-59 QueSST Cockpit

The pilot of NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology, or QueSST, aircraft will navigate the skies in a cockpit unlike any other. There won’t be a forward-facing window. That’s right; it’s actually a 4K monitor that serves as the central window and allows the pilot to safely see traffic in his or her flight path, and provides additional visual aids for airport approaches, landings and takeoffs. The 4K monitor, which is part of the aircraft’s eXternal Visibility System, or XVS, displays stitched images from two cameras outside the aircraft combined with terrain data from an advanced computing system. The two portals and traditional canopy are real windows however, and help the pilot see the horizon. The displays below the XVS will provide a variety of aircraft systems and trajectory data for the pilot to safely fly.

The XVS is one of several innovative solutions to help ensure the X-59’s design shape reduces a sonic boom to a gentle thump heard by people on the ground. Though not intended to ever carry passengers, the X-59 boom-suppressing technology and community response data could help lift current bans on supersonic flight over land and enable a new generation of quiet supersonic commercial aircraft. Click here to learn more.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
NASA Prepares for Future of Supersonic Experimental Flight

And it's being built by LM.

I'm not sure how long it's been since LM did a civilian crewed aerospace programme after the X33.

Let's hope it's more X-15 than X33 in terms of success.

And let's also remember this is due to a blanket ban on M1 flying over civilian areas which was based on little or no data beyond. "M1 makes sonic boom. Sonic boom bad." :(
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
X-59 is only barely civilian. This subscale one is basically a weirdly shaped fighter jet.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline RotoSequence

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2208
  • Liked: 2068
  • Likes Given: 1535
X-59 is only barely civilian. This subscale one is basically a weirdly shaped fighter jet.

It's not much of a fighter jet (with all those stabilators and canards and no signature control, it would never be allowed to fly), but there's little doubt that Lockheed's interested in the less-civil applications of quiet, sustained supersonic flight.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
X-59 is only barely civilian. This subscale one is basically a weirdly shaped fighter jet.

It's not much of a fighter jet (with all those stabilators and canards and no signature control, it would never be allowed to fly), but there's little doubt that Lockheed's interested in the less-civil applications of quiet, sustained supersonic flight.

I am not sure that’s totally true as I am sure I read something this about LM thinking about developing this into a civilian airliner.

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Does LM currently produce any civilian products? Lockheed crashed out of civilian air transport about 50 years ago, and I wouldn't think it's commercial reflexes would have been sharpened by decades of NASA/military contracting.
« Last Edit: 06/22/2019 06:26 pm by Proponent »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Does LM currently produce any civilian products? Lockheed crashed out of civilian air transport about 50 years ago, and I wouldn't think it's commercial reflexes would have been sharpened by decades of NASA/military contracting.

Assuming you mean commercial (NASA is civilian for example), Sikorsky does which Lockheed Martin owns.

edit: They apparently are introducing a commercial variant of the C-130 called the LM-100J.
« Last Edit: 06/22/2019 06:43 pm by ncb1397 »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Yeah, a supersonic jet would be kind of another category, like freighters or twin turboprop passenger aircraft (both of which Lockheed sells commercially). So it's not crazy that Lockheed would make a commercial supersonic jet.


...but it also isn't a guarantee, either. I love x-planes, but they have to transition to operational aircraft eventually.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Nighthawk117

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Ledyard, CT
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 22
NASA Prepares for Future of Supersonic Experimental Flight

And it's being built by LM.

I'm not sure how long it's been since LM did a civilian crewed aerospace programme after the X33.

Let's hope it's more X-15 than X33 in terms of success.

We know one thing for certain.....The track record of LMSW far exceeds that of REL...or any other British aerospace company.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
It's not much of a fighter jet (with all those stabilators and canards and no signature control, it would never be allowed to fly), but there's little doubt that Lockheed's interested in the less-civil applications of quiet, sustained supersonic flight.
Indeed. "Silent but deadly," to coin a phrase.  :)

Paradoxically none of the countries it overflew ever seemed to have complained about the boom from the M3 SR71 overflights.

I guess they stop being a problem at 80 000 ft in the way they are at 40 000 ft. Maybe some research on that phenomenon would have been a good idea?

In principle any (so far hypothetical) "quiet" fighter would still generate a detectable sound (not as objectionable as the double "crack" but detectable with modern signal processed sensors) and the air heating would continue to light up the display on IR sensors  (standard equipment on most modern combat aircraft IIRC)

Then of course you've got the engine problem. Concorde super cruised for 3 decades without afterburner, and was viewed as a bit of a fuel hog, back when oil was $3/barrel (yes really  :o ). 4 decades later and it will have to do even better.

Not visible on radar <> not visible on other sensors 
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Didn’t imagine it as found a news article about it.

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/supersonic-airplane-qsta-lockheed-martin/index.html
Curious. Most of the studies done after Concorde was introduced reckoned it's problem was not that it was too big, but that it was too small.

I guess those studies were looking to capture the top 10% of the market, whereas LM looks more like it's after the top 1% of the market.

The rest of us will be going subsonic, or video calling people.  :(

What we do know about LM is it's remarkable adeptness for extracting money from the USG.

Time will tell if this one off experimental aircraft gets built and (much more problematic) wheather LM goes on to build any kind of commercial follow on.  IIRC the last time this story was run it was with the X33. Nothing ever flew but LM hoovered up about $1.1Bn to implement a very high risk design, cutting off the funds to substantially lower risk concepts and preserving their launch business.  Let's see what story they tell this time.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2019 09:35 am by john smith 19 »
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
What we do know about LM is it's remarkable adeptness for extracting money from the USG.

Time will tell if this one off experimental aircraft gets built and (much more problematic) wheather LM goes on to build any kind of commercial follow on.  IIRC the last time this story was run it was with the X33. Nothing ever flew but LM hoovered up about $1.1Bn to implement a very high risk design, cutting off the funds to substantially lower risk concepts and preserving their launch business.  Let's see what story they tell this time.

NASA spent $992M and LM $357M. The X-33 project required some skin in the game from the contractor.

The Clinton administration did go for the highest risk and most expensive design.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
NASA spent $992M and LM $357M. The X-33 project required some skin in the game from the contractor.
Small change compared to protecting their existing ELV business.
Quote from: RonM
The Clinton administration did go for the highest risk and most expensive design.
NASA went with the highest risk design.

I doubt "The Clinton administration" had any clue of how the competition was run or why the LM design won.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
NASA Prepares for Future of Supersonic Experimental Flight

And it's being built by LM.

I'm not sure how long it's been since LM did a civilian crewed aerospace programme after the X33.

Let's hope it's more X-15 than X33 in terms of success.

We know one thing for certain.....The track record of LMSW far exceeds that of REL...or any other British aerospace company.
LM built a passenger carrying supersonic transport?

When was that exactly?
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
NASA has successfully tested a large microphone array in California’s Mojave Desert as part of a flight series in preparation for the agency’s quiet supersonic X-plane, the X-59.

Flying at speeds faster than Mach 1, the speed of sound, typically produces a loud sonic boom heard on the ground below. NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology X-plane, or X-59 QueSST for short, will fly over select communities around the U.S. to demonstrate the ability to reduce that sonic boom to a quiet thump. The data from these flights will be turned over to the Federal Aviation Administration to possibly establish new sound-based rules for supersonic flight over land. This could open the door to future faster-than-sound commercial cargo and passenger air travel.

Before these community overflights take place, however, the X-59 will first undergo an acoustic validation phase, during which NASA will deploy an approximately 30-mile-long array of specially-configured microphones to measure the X-59’s thumps, to verify that they are as quiet as predicted.

The recently-completed Carpet Determination In Entirety Measurements flight series, or CarpetDIEM, was NASA’s “first practice” for the X-59’s acoustic validation flights.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/features/NASA-Tests-Microphone-Array-for-X-59.html

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
NASA’s first large scale, piloted X-plane in more than three decades is cleared for final assembly and integration of its systems following a major project review by senior managers held Thursday at NASA Headquarters in Washington.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-x-59-quiet-supersonic-research-aircraft-cleared-for-final-assembly


Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Quote
NASA’s first large scale, piloted X-plane in more than three decades is cleared for final assembly and integration of its systems following a major project review by senior managers held Thursday at NASA Headquarters in Washington.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-x-59-quiet-supersonic-research-aircraft-cleared-for-final-assembly
That's... kind of stretching "first" here. X-57 will be before X-59 and will be capable of carrying more people (at least, the base version was). Wingspan of the X-57 will be larger, too... Seems to me they're about the same "scale" unless you're specifically drawing the line of "large scale" to exclude X-57 but allow X-59...

Can tell it was X-59 folk who penned this press release... ;)
« Last Edit: 12/22/2019 01:31 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
More Pieces of the X-59 are Coming Together

The wing and cockpit sections of NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology (QueSST) are coming together at Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works factory in Palmdale, California. Major structural components still to be added include the long, forward nose and rear section – known as the empennage – that includes the tail and single jet engine. Nearby, although not seen in this picture, Lockheed Martin technicians and engineers are completing other assembly tasks, with fabricating the composite wing skins with the help of a sophisticated robot already done.

When complete, Lockheed Martin and NASA will put the X-59 through a series of ground and test flights to ensure not only its air worthiness, but also its ability to create a sonic boom that can barely be heard – if at all – by people on the ground while it flies supersonic at a cruise altitude overhead.

The X-59 will then be flown over select communities in the United States – still to be chosen – so residents can help provide information to NASA about their reaction to the sound of the sonic “thump.” This scientifically gathered data will be presented to regulators with the hope they will change rules that currently prohibit commercial supersonic air travel over land.

Last Updated: June 16, 2020
Editor: Lillian Gipson

https://www.nasa.gov/aeroresearch/more-pieces-of-the-x-59-are-coming-together

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39215
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32735
  • Likes Given: 8178
Here's the image that went with the release.
« Last Edit: 06/18/2020 10:26 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Here's the image that went with the release.
Still looks a long way from done to me.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline ncb1397

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3497
  • Liked: 2310
  • Likes Given: 29
Here's the image that went with the release.
Still looks a long way from done to me.

Getting the parts in is probably the bigger part of the schedule than bolting everything together. Speaking of parts...

Quote
Mark the big one-of-a-kind engine, designed and built just for NASA, as delivered.

Nearly 13 feet long, three feet in diameter, and packing 22,000 pounds of afterburner enhanced jet propulsion, the F414-GE-100 engine is now at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center on Edwards Air Force Base in California.

There it will be checked out and inspected before it is transported to nearby Palmdale for eventual installation into NASA’s X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology airplane, which is now under construction at Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works factory.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-takes-delivery-of-ge-jet-engine-for-x-59

The article says one-of-a-kind, but there is actually two of them (primary and backup).
« Last Edit: 08/21/2020 05:35 am by ncb1397 »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA Marks Continued Progress on X-59

Quote
For now, assembly of X-59 is taking place at Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works facility in Palmdale, California, where with each construction milestone, the airplane is taking shape – literally.

One of those milestones is with the X-59’s eXternal Vision System, or XVS, which is a forward-facing camera and display system that allows the pilot to see outside the aircraft via augmented reality.

The XVS is NASA’s solution to the aircraft’s lack of a forward-facing window – a result of the need to place the cockpit lower and farther back on the airplane because of its unique, elongated nose and fuselage profile.

The innovative XVS system underwent successful flight tests in August 2019 and passed several rounds of qualification testing in January of this year.

Major progress was also made on the aircraft’s wing thanks to the Skunk Works’ Combined Operation: Bolting and Robotic Auto-drill (COBRA) system. This advanced robotic technology enhances production by drilling and inspecting hundreds of holes on the wing that are part of the assembly process.

Quote
NASA now expects the X-59’s assembly to be complete and major ground testing to begin in summer 2021, leading to a target date for first flight in summer 2022.

https://www.nasa.gov/aeroresearch/nasa-marks-continued-progress-on-x-59

« Last Edit: 09/26/2020 03:49 pm by Star One »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
« Last Edit: 10/30/2020 07:19 pm by Star One »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA Centers Collaborate to Advance Quiet Supersonic Technology During Pandemic

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/features/teamwork-advances-quiet-supersonic-technology.html

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Update video on the X-59.


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
NASA has announced that technicians working on assembling the X-59 airplane completed a major milestone in its construction back on November 5. On that day, technicians were successfully able to close up the airplane’s wing, encasing interior components that will never be touched by human hands again.

https://spaceexplored.com/2020/12/14/nasa-completes-crucial-part-of-x-59s-wing-assembly/amp/

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Summer 2021 recap on the X-59:


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
U.S. arms maker Lockheed Martin Corp has released a photo of the first prototype of its supersonic X-plane, the X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology (QueSST), during ​the beginning of the final assembly process.

https://defence-blog.com/lockheed-martin-unveils-prototype-of-its-promising-supersonic-plane/

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
We (quietly) rung in the new year with the gift of speed.

The X-59 QueSST arrived in Texas, wrapped and topped with a bow. The aircraft is undergoing structural tests before returning to Skunk Works’ headquarters for completion, first flight and delivery to
@NASAaero
.

https://twitter.com/LockheedMartin/status/1478410913178923017

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
Here's the pic:

Quote
NASA’s X-59 Kicks Off 2022 in Texas for Ground Testing

2021 saw significant milestones achieved in the assembly of NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology aircraft (QueSST), and all eyes now look forward to a pivotal 2022. Following the X-plane’s temporary move from Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works in California to their facilities in Texas, the X-59 is set to start 2022 with critical ground testing, as progress continues toward NASA’s target of the aircraft’s first flight later this year.

While in Texas, ground testing of the X-59 will be done to ensure the aircraft can withstand the loads and stresses that typically occur during flight. The team will also calibrate and test the fuel systems before the X-59 makes the journey back to California for more tests and completion.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/image-feature/x59-ground-testing.html
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Taming the Boom

NASA hopes the ban on commercial supersonic flight over land can be lifted by replacing the loud sonic boom with a softer sonic “thump.” A sonic boom happens when the shock waves from an object traveling through the air faster than the speed of sound merge together before they reach the ground. Sonic booms generate enormous amounts of sound energy, about 110 decibels, like the sound of an explosion or a thunderclap.

Through the unique design of the X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology (QueSST) airplane, NASA aims to reduce the sonic boom to make it much quieter.

Engineers with the agency’s Commercial Supersonic Technology (CST) project recently used a small-scale model of the X-59 in NASA Glenn's 8- by 6-foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel to visualize the agency’s boom-reducing technology and validate its boom-predicting capabilities.

“This is the team’s opportunity to get data at the low sound levels produced in the tunnel,” said Clayton Meyers, deputy project manager of the CST project. “It all comes down to our ability to measure the thump.”

The model—measuring about a foot and a half in length—was subjected to weeks of testing in the tunnel, producing shock waves that were captured by special cameras mounted outside the test section and by a unique sensor array inside. The unique schlieren images from the cameras provide engineers with a visualization of the shock waves and their positions as air passes around the model. The sensor provides detailed measurement of the strength of the shocks. Results from the tests are encouraging, as the shock waves produced by the model were a match, in both position and strength, to those from earlier computer models for quieter supersonic flight.

Schlieren imagery and pressure measurement are both critical to NASA’s ability to compare wind tunnel data with computer modeling. These capabilities improve the team’s capacity to understand and predict actual sonic thumps during future X-59 flights. NASA has also developed schlieren imaging capabilities for flight that will also be used during upcoming flight campaigns.

“With the X-59, we want to demonstrate that we can reduce the annoying sonic booms to something much quieter, referred to as ‘sonic thumps,’” said John Wolter, lead researcher on the X-59 sonic boom wind tunnel test. “The goal is to provide noise and community response data to regulators, which could result in new rules for overland supersonic flight. The test proved that we don’t just have quieter aircraft design, but that we also have the accurate tools needed to predict the noise of future aircraft.”

The model will travel to Tokyo in March for additional wind tunnel verification testing with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency and Boeing.

NASA and Lockheed Martin are currently finalizing the build of the X-59 at the Skunkworks facility in California. In late 2022, NASA and Lockheed Martin will begin initial flight tests to prove airworthiness. Following flight testing, NASA will then verify that the aircraft’s quiet supersonic technology performs in flight as designed before transitioning to the community overflight phase. 

Top Image: A schlieren image of the X-59 small-scale model captured inside NASA Glenn’s 8- by- 6-foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel. These images are used to predict sonic booms and verify computer-based modeling.

Doreen Zudell with Jimi Russell
NASA Glenn Research Center

Last Updated: Jan 25, 2022
Editor: Kelly Sands

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/glenn/2022/taming-the-boom
« Last Edit: 02/12/2022 09:47 am by Star One »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA’s X-59 Calls on Texas for Key Testing

It appears the road to enabling a future that includes convenient commercial supersonic air travel over land demands a substantial pit stop in Fort Worth, Texas.

Who knew?

Aeronautical innovators at NASA and Lockheed Martin did. They have long planned for this milestone in assembling and testing the X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology (QueSST) airplane.

Although the X-59 QueSST is being built by Lockheed Martin at their Skunk Works facility in Palmdale, California, the airplane needed to be moved to another Lockheed facility in Texas for a series of important structural tests before returning it to the West Coast.

But let’s back up a bit.

NASA’s X-59 is a one-of-a-kind airplane designed to fly at supersonic speeds without making annoying, if not alarming, sonic booms below.

Instead, because of its unique shape, the X-59 is expected to produce quieter sonic “thumps” that can barely be heard on the ground – if at all.

Current rules prohibit aircraft from flying faster than the speed of sound over land. Those rules are based on speed, not noise. If the X-59 can publicly demonstrate that a plane can fly supersonic at an acceptable noise level, then those rules could be changed.

If that happens, NASA technology from the X-59 could be applied to new aircraft designs so commercial airlines might introduce faster-than-sound flights capable of speeding people coast-to-coast in half the time.

“That’s what we’re all working so hard to make possible,” said Walter Silva, a senior research scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia. He is also NASA’s structures lead for the X-59, so he is directly involved in the airplane’s Texas visit.

OK, so what’s happening in Texas?

Construction of the X-59 in California had made enough progress where all the major structural pieces – the wing, main body, tail, and nose – were assembled and power could be turned on to the vehicle for the first time.

The next major task was to make sure the airplane structure wouldn’t break apart in flight when exposed to stresses small and extreme.

Mike Buonanno, a Lockheed Martin aerospace engineer who is the company’s vehicle lead for the X-59, explained why wrapping up the X-59 and shipping it by truck to Texas in late December was the best way to prove that.

“Our Texas site has existing facilities to perform the kinds of tests needed. It would have been expensive and time consuming to design and build them from scratch in Palmdale. But in Fort Worth they’ve got the perfect facility with a full control room and all the support equipment needed to do those tests very efficiently,” Buonanno said.

The company’s Fort Worth facility is where the F-16 Fighting Falcon was built for many years. Test equipment still available needed some modifications to handle the X-59’s longer nose compared to the F-16, but those changes didn’t get in the way.

“Our folks in Fort Worth were able to hit the ground running from the moment the airplane arrived from Palmdale,” Buonanno said.

Feeling the Pressure

NASA has three goals for the X-59’s stay in Texas in terms of the structural proof tests.

“The first goal is to make sure that the airplane can handle the anticipated loads during flight,” Silva said.

Loads, in this case, mean anything that would put pressure or stress on the aircraft’s structure. Typically, these kinds of stresses come when the airplane experiences rough air, makes quick turns, and during landing – among others.

Since the airplane isn’t actually flying, tests are done with the aircraft sitting on hydraulic jacks that are connected directly with the structure. Arms that press down on areas of the airplane, such as the top of the wing, also are used.

A panoramic side view of NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology airplane.
This panoramic side view of NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology airplane shows the aircraft sitting on jacks at a Lockheed Martin test facility in Fort Worth, Texas.
Credits: Lockheed Martin
How much stress is too much? Buonanno explained the loads applied to the X-59 are 25 percent greater than any load the airplane was designed to ever see in actual flight.

Because the X-59 isn’t a prototype for a series of aircraft, none of the tests are designed to see how much stress a part could take before it breaks. This type of “test to destruct” is seen only in large production runs where one airplane can be pulled away and sacrificed.

“In any case, there are all sorts of safety features built into the testing so that if anything we don’t want happening is detected everything shuts off and the whole thing goes into a safe position,” Silva said.

The second goal is to calibrate the sensors built into the X-59 that are designed to tell the pilot how much stress is being measured at that point on the airplane. This is done by comparing what the sensors say with the known amount of stress being applied during a test.

“The third goal is to take the data and compare it with the computer models we used in designing the airplane in the first place and make sure what we thought was going to happen turned out to be accurate and the airplane is built as designed,” Silva said.

As of the last week of January about 80 percent of the structural tests were completed, and all is well.

“Everything is passing with flying colors, and nothing is bending in a way we didn’t expect,” Buonanno said.

Still Ahead

Once all the structural tests are complete, the team – which includes NASA and Lockheed Martin representatives from Palmdale – will turn their attention to performing fuel tank calibration tests.

The X-59’s gas tanks will be filled, and fuel-remaining sensors inside will be checked, not only with the airplane sitting level but with it pitched and rolled.

When that work is completed, the X-59 will be returned to Palmdale. The exact timing of that return remains unknown for now.

“We will be in Fort Worth as long as we need to be there, until we think the data is good, and everything has been performed to everyone’s satisfaction.” Silva said.

Once back in Palmdale, the X-59 will see the rest of its major systems and subsystems installed – its GE engine, landing gear, cockpit displays, etc. – with the hope of having it ready for first flight late this year.

When that happens, the world’s focus will be on the California high desert where once again aviation history will be made.

Jim Banke
Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate

https://www.nasa.gov/aeroresearch/nasa-x-59-calls-on-texas-for-key-testing

Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
This thread is irrelevant to the scope of this forum because the X-59 QueSST, as a supersonic experimental aircraft, is not designed for suborbital space travel and is meant to test technologies to reduce sonic booms generated by a new-generation SST.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
This thread is irrelevant to the scope of this forum because the X-59 QueSST, as a supersonic experimental aircraft, is not designed for suborbital space travel and is meant to test technologies to reduce sonic booms generated by a new-generation SST.

This thread has existed on this forum for multiple years without comment as to its existence for your information. Plus the X-59 as are the other X planes NASA projects.
« Last Edit: 02/13/2022 06:27 pm by Star One »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Learn the latest about the X-59:


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Mar 21, 2022

Ames' Contributions to the X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology Aircraft

Not much has changed in commercial aircraft design and technology for the last 50 years. That's about to … well … change thanks to efforts to design future commercial aircraft capable of hushing sonic booms to a mere thump as they fly faster than the speed of sound.

Supersonic travel is as cool as it sounds. Imagine flying aboard an aircraft cruising faster than the speed of sound, cutting your coast-to-coast travel time in half. Currently such a thing only exists in the dreams of aircraft designers. And while no passenger will ride aboard NASA’s X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology, or QueSST, the experimental aircraft is bringing the agency ever closer to making the quiet commercial supersonic travel over land a reality.

NASA's Ames Research Center in California's Silicon Valley has decades of experience researching supersonic flight, including numerous efforts under the Commercial Supersonic Technology project, or CST – a lot of which has gone into the unique design of the X-59. These efforts cover several areas related to supersonic research, including the use of cutting-edge visualization technology to study shockwaves, and use of unique wind tunnels, supercomputing facilities, and systems engineering expertise. These are but a few of the many areas of research into realizing the goal of CST and of the X-59 QueSST, which includes the eventual demonstration of quiet supersonic flight over land.

Computational Fluid Dynamics

As Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California, finalized the X-59 airplane’s design, they ran their ideas using an Ames-developed high-resolution, 3D simulation software on multiple supercomputers at Ames – the Pleiades, Electra, and Endeavour. Recent improvements in the software have enabled engineers to get simulation data about the flight characteristics and noise levels even faster – sometimes five times as fast.

With no X-59 flight data – yet – computer simulation is the next best thing to build confidence in the predictions for its supersonic performance. Teams at Ames and NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, worked together to ensure that multiple software codes would make similar predictions about how loud the X-59 will be in different environments. For example, they know the boom's loudness changes based on the cloud cover and humidity of the areas below a flight path, and can give the pilot information in the cockpit that can help guide the aircraft to areas where the boom may be quieter. Computational fluid dynamics simulations also create visualizations of the X-59 aircraft concept and help researchers determine which features of the aircraft generate shockwaves that contribute to the sonic thump sound below the aircraft.

NASA is working closely with Lockheed Martin to create a large database of computational fluid dynamics simulations to verify the aircraft’s supersonic performance. The database includes simulations for all possible combinations of settings that a pilot uses to control the aircraft and the flight conditions that may be encountered. This database is crucial for supplying data for a flight-planning tool that is being used to assist and teach pilots how to fly the X-59, before it even flies. From there, researchers can determine the best flight conditions to reduce noise when they begin piloted test flights over select U.S. cities. These flights also will provide opportunities to collect, verify, and validate data about community responses. NASA will share the data with U.S. and international regulators which will use it when considering new sound-based rules for supersonic flight over land. New rules could enable new commercial cargo and passenger markets in faster-than-sound air travel.

Wind Tunnel Testing

Some researchers think of computational fluid dynamics as a virtual wind tunnel test. Luckily, Ames has run thousands of hours of supersonic tests using actual wind tunnels since the 1950s. The 9- by 7-foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel facility is part of the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel complex at Ames where generations of commercial and military aircraft and NASA space vehicles, including the space shuttle, have been designed and tested.

One way to make sure the X-59 will work as intended is to “fly" smaller versions of the real thing in a wind tunnel. While supersonic air flows over precisely crafted small models, engineers can take measurements of the pressure waves and be sure the plane behaves as expected. Some models measured as little as five inches long, while others stretched to more than six feet in length.

But even in the 21st century, with all our technical know-how, measuring supersonic airflow over an airplane model in a wind tunnel is an uncertain process. Even running the same test with the same model can produce slightly different results on different days because the airflows in the tunnels are not perfect. Put the model in another wind tunnel and you’ll get a slightly different version of the data.

This is why Ames continues to contribute its expertise to wind tunnel operations in support of the X-59. Ames contracted a model-building company, Tri Models, Inc. of Huntington Beach, California, to design and fabricate a small 19"-long model of the X-59 for sonic boom wind tunnel testing. The first test of this model took place in 2021, in NASA's Glenn Research Center's 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel in Cleveland. The second test will take place in 2022 in the supersonic wind tunnels at the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, or JAXA, under a recently-announced collaboration, which will allow researchers to compare results from tests of the same small-scale model.

Systems Engineering

Systems engineers are responsible for looking at all of the parts of a complex system and then figuring out how these parts can be interconnected. In short, they are looking at the big picture. Systems engineers are responsible for the design, setting and tracking the requirements, implementation and evaluation, technical management, operations, and end-life of a system. Without them, a project like X-59 won't leave the ground, much less the drawing page.         

At Ames, systems engineers are focused on ensuring that the different systems such as the life support subsystem – that provides the pilot with oxygen – and the crew escape system – that would eject the pilot seat in case of an emergency – as well as systems for controlling the distribution of power and recording data are "talking" to each other and working as intended. Additionally, mass, airworthiness, and qualification of flight components are managed and tracked by systems engineers at Ames. 

Test Component Manufacturing

Engineers at Ames manufactured specialized mounts to test some of the X-59 Life Support Systems flight components one at a time in specialized test chambers at the Environmental Laboratory at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in Edwards, California. The mounts enabled engineers to test how well Life Support System components performed under the vibration, pressures, and temperatures that the aircraft could experience. These parts are not on the final aircraft, but enabled engineers to qualify components for flight.

Milestones:

NASA plans to deliver results of the community overflights to the International Civil Aviation Organization and Federal Aviation Administration in 2027. With that information in hand, regulators will be able to decide if a change should be made in rules that prohibit supersonic flight over land – a decision that would be expected in 2028
NASA plans to fly the X-59 QueSST over select communities to gather information about how the public perceives the quiet noise the X-59 is designed to produce (early 2024)
NASA will conduct acoustic validation flights (2023)
Major ground testing will conclude in early 2022, leading to a target date for first flight (late 2022)
NASA and JAXA agreed to take independent wind-tunnel measurements of the same small-scale model of the X-59, and compare results (2022)
NASA and Lockheed Martin completed the X-59 assembly (2021)
Wind tunnel testing at Glenn (September 2021)
Construction continued in earnest as the project passed its Critical Design Review in October 2019 and another key program management review (December 2019)
The initial machined parts were delivered to Lockheed Martin Skunk Works (November 2018)
Quiet Supersonic Flight series research campaign took place over Galveston, Texas (November 2018)
NASA completed the preliminary design review of its QueSST aircraft design. QueSST is the initial design stage of NASA’s planned X-59 experimental airplane (June 2017)
NASA selected a team led by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company of Palmdale, California, to complete a preliminary design for QueSST. The work was conducted under a task order against the Basic and Applied Aerospace Research and Technology (BAART) contract at Langley. The Lockheed Martin team includes subcontractors GE Aviation of Cincinnati and Tri Models Inc. of Huntington Beach, California.  (February 2016)
NASA began a series of supersonic wind tunnel tests of Lockheed Martin’s and Boeing’s Phase I supersonic aircraft concepts using Ames' 9- by 7-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel as part of the project’s Experimental Systems Validations for N+2 Supersonic Commercial Transport Aircraft effort (2010 through 2013)
Collaborators:

Taken together, this mission work is spread across three projects within NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. They include the Commercial Supersonic Technology project managed out of NASA Langley, the Flight Demonstrations and Capabilities project managed out of Armstrong, and the Low Boom Flight Demonstrator project, responsible for the X-59 aircraft itself, managed out of NASA Headquarters in Washington.

Elements of NASA's Low-Boom Flight Demonstration mission are organized within two of the agency's aeronautics programs -- the Advanced Air Vehicles Program and the Integrated Aviation Systems Program -- and overseen by a mission integration office whose members span both programs and all four of NASA's aeronautical research field centers: Langley, Glenn, Ames, and Armstrong.

X-59 also relies on the expertise of international collaborators at JAXA as well as contractors here at home, including Lockheed Martin, which is constructing the aircraft at its Skunk Works Facility in Palmdale, California, and a team of subcontractors at GE Aviation of Cincinnati and TriModels Inc. of Huntington Beach, California.

Learn more:

NASA web special: X59
NASA webpage: Low-Boom Flight Demonstration
NASA image feature: Model Planes: Studying NASA’s Quiet Supersonic Aircraft Before It Flies (Feb. 3, 2022)
NASA release: NASA and JAXA to Work Together on Testing X-59 Model (Feb. 17, 2021)
NASA image feature: Aeronautical Artwork, Computer Simulation, or Both? (Dec. 1, 2020)
NASA image feature: NASA Supercomputers Visualize Quieter Supersonic Flight (Nov. 17, 2020)
NASA feature: NASA Interns Compete Against Clock to Develop X-59 Simulation (Oct. 1, 2019)
NASA video: X59 QueSST: Quiet SuperSonic Technology (July 19, 2019)
NASA web feature: NASA Captures First Air-to-Air Images of Supersonic Shockwave Interaction in Flight(March 5, 2019)
NASA feature: New NASA X-Plane Construction Begins Now (April 3, 2018)
NASA video: NASA EDGE: Low-Boom Flight Demonstration (April 3, 2018)
NASA feature: 70 Years of Supersonic Flight: NASA Continues To Break Barriers (Oct. 12, 2017)
NASA news release: NASA Completes Milestone Toward Quieter Supersonic X-Plane (June 26, 2017)
NASA news release: NASA Begins Work to Build a Quieter Supersonic Passenger Jet (Feb. 29, 2016)
NASA web feature: NASA Centers Team Up to Tackle Sonic Boom (March 16, 2014)
NASA web feature: Sonic Boom Heads for a Thump (May 8, 2012)
For researchers:

CART3D Software: https://www.nas.nasa.gov/publications/software/docs/cart3d
Computational Framework for Launch, Ascent, and Vehicle Aerodynamics: https://www.nas.nasa.gov/publications/ams/2014/06-10-14.html
9- by 7-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel Facility Overview (https://www.nasa.gov/aeroresearch/programs/aavp/aetc/supersonic/9x7)
CFD Support for Enabling Commercial Supersonic Flight: https://www.nas.nasa.gov/SC20/demos/demo3.html
The NASA Advanced Supercomputing Division’s Launch, Ascent, and Vehicle Aerodynamics (LAVA) software: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S127096381630178X
Minimizing Sonic Boom through Simulation-Based Design: The X-59 Airplane: https://www.nas.nasa.gov/SC19/demos/demo20.html
Banner Image: An illustration of the X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology (QueSST) aircraft in flight. Image credits: Lockheed Martin

For news media:

Low-Boom Flight Demonstration press kit
Members of the news media interested in covering this topic should reach out to the Ames newsroom.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/x-59

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
Welcome back, X-59!

The X-59 has returned to Skunk Works headquarters in California after finishing ground testing in Texas. The tests confirmed the aircraft’s ability to handle the intense stresses of supersonic flight.

https://twitter.com/LockheedMartin/status/1516069069233000452

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Related video to the above:


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA’s X 57 Maxwell Powers Up


Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
NASA’s X 57 Maxwell Powers Up


The X-57 is the first electric-powered aircraft to receive a designation in the X-for-Experimental series, and if case anyone's aware, ESAero was contracted to build the X-57 by modifying the fuselage of a Tecnam P2006T (an Italian high-wing four-seat light aircraft) with electric power systems, particularly replacing the piston engines with electric motors mounted at the wingtips (similar to how Charles Zimmermann had the engines placed at the wingtips of the Vought V-173 and XF5U pancake-shaped aircraft).

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
01/31/2023

Flying (Not Quite) Blind: Ultra-high-definition video switcher for supersonic X-plane takes off in commercial aviation

Most pilots would be concerned if their plane didn’t have a front window. But Jim Less, NASA test pilot, is looking forward to flying the X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology experimental plane. A new External Vision System (XVS) replaces the pilot’s direct line of sight, and it can sometimes help pilots spot other aircraft faster than they could through a regular windshield, according to Less.

Two cameras, image-processing software, and a computing system with two processors bring together new and existing technologies to support an augmented reality display that “is going to be almost like looking out the windows,” said Less. And he should know as one of the crew using the XVS flight simulator during flight training.

The goal of the X-59 is to lower the sound of the sonic boom associated with traveling faster than the speed of sound. If successful, the test flights could lead the way to dramatically reducing flight times with the resumption of overland supersonic flight.

The sleek design of the aircraft includes a 38-foot nose that will help diminish the volume of the sonic boom to a thump. But it also means the pilot will sit closer to the middle of the plane without a front-facing windshield.

A critical piece of the innovative technology needed to enable an ultra-high-definition display was developed by Van Nuys, California-based Eon Instrumentation Inc. The DP-25 high-speed DisplayPort switcher delivers the video streams from the processor – linked to both the takeoff and landing and in-flight cameras – to a 4K monitor, that is, one that has about four times the resolution of traditional high definition.

As part of the XVS pallet, or “brain,” that routes the video, NASA specifications required the video switcher to communicate seamlessly with all system components, according to Kemper Kibler, NASA’s XVS lead hardware engineer. Switching channels could not cause a visible interruption, like it does on a television, and the switcher could add no more than a millisecond’s delay between the video processors and the pilot’s monitor, to keep display as close to real time as possible. The agency wanted to eliminate any lag time or disruption to maintain the pilot’s visibility.

“We needed the DP-25 to accept video from both XVS computers and route the active video to the monitor,” Kibler explained. The minimum requirement for the switch time was 16 milliseconds, but such hardware didn’t exist until Eon Instrumentation agreed to take on the challenge.

A longtime agency contractor, Eon was selected to create the part by NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. Although the agency would only purchase a few units, Jeff Norsen, president of Eon Instrumentation, saw the commercial potential. Even when NASA added a new requirement – to simultaneously send the video to real-time flight recorders for later review – the company was willing to invest its own internal funds to make it work.

In addition to switching between the two feeds in five milliseconds – the speed of a single honeybee wing flap – the device supports multiple recording technologies.

The X-59 hasn’t left the ground yet, but the company now includes the new high-speed DP-25 switcher and two other models built on the same technology, the VMS-22 and VMS-24 switchers, in its inventory. And commercial aviation companies are adding them to their aircraft.

An international helicopter manufacturer is using the switch to add a 4K video display to a number of its models, making it easier for pilots to see other aircraft in their airspace. These helicopters are used for emergency medical services, public services, offshore energy, commercial transport, and private aviation.

“Eon appreciates working with NASA in order to pioneer breaking-edge technologies made for rugged applications, and we’re willing to push boundaries in the avionics and aerospace industries, just as NASA does,” said Norsen.

https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Flying-Not-Quite-Blind
« Last Edit: 02/08/2023 03:11 am by su27k »

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6104
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9329
  • Likes Given: 39
Is there a more comprehensive overview of the XVS system design available? It appears to already be conducting some image fusion (4K XVS cam + fuselage fill from FVS cam) but it's not clear if this is just bog-standard video feed mixing or if there is reprojection occurring to account for local geometry, and if the image is static on the display or parallax corrected to account for viewer head movement.
There are existing aircraft vision systems that perform both these functions feeding a head-mounted display, but not as safety critical systems (used as a substitute for a NVS monocular/binocular and to 'view through' the aircraft fuselage looking down) and as far as I can tell XVS has only been evaluated for use at altitude where parallax is only a small factor rather than ground level and near-ground where it is significant.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
X-59 Finally unveiled in hanger rollout:


Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
X-59 Finally unveiled in hanger rollout:

Finally seen side on.. just whoa!  :o

I for one (a) sure wouldn't want to try any tight turns in that thing ('cause it probably won't) and (b) expect it'd have to line up to land from a very, very long way out!  Plus, a bird strike would be pretty bad for the bird.
 
« Last Edit: 07/26/2023 04:11 am by CameronD »
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline Stan-1967

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1128
  • Denver, Colorado
  • Liked: 1183
  • Likes Given: 614
I'm thinking it will be re-named "The Platypus"?  Love that front profile.

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
I'm thinking it will be re-named "The Platypus"?  Love that front profile.

Maaate, with the nose on that thing, that ain't no Platypus!!

I'm thinking "Pinocchio" and guessing they'll sharpen it with a whetstone before every mission.
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
I'm thinking it will be re-named "The Platypus"?  Love that front profile.

Maaate, with the nose on that thing, that ain't no Platypus!!

I'm thinking "Pinocchio" and guessing they'll sharpen it with a whetstone before every mission.
Someone said it reminds them of the F116 from Joe 90.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
X-59 Finally unveiled in hanger rollout:

Finally seen side on.. just whoa!  :o

I for one (a) sure wouldn't want to try any tight turns in that thing ('cause it probably won't) and (b) expect it'd have to line up to land from a very, very long way out!  Plus, a bird strike would be pretty bad for the bird.
 
The X-59 is a Chimera of the experimental F-16 blended wing airframe with a DC-10 like dorsal engine nacelle along with a slightly enlarged version of the DARPA's STAR/space cruiser as the nose.

However it should be more maneuverable than a standard F-16 due to more wing surface area and larger tailerons.

Lining up for landing will have to be aided by cameras and/or FLIR imagers on the bottom of the plane for a regular landing approach.

link to the DARPA's STAR/Space Cruiser video posted on the forum thread covering the videos by Hazegrayart on youtube:  Hazegrayart Master Updated thread

« Last Edit: 07/26/2023 09:22 am by Zed_Noir »

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6104
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9329
  • Likes Given: 39
X-59 Finally unveiled in hanger rollout:

Finally seen side on.. just whoa!  :o

I for one (a) sure wouldn't want to try any tight turns in that thing ('cause it probably won't) and (b) expect it'd have to line up to land from a very, very long way out!  Plus, a bird strike would be pretty bad for the bird.
 
The X-59 is a Chimera of the experimental F-16 blended wing airframe with a DC-10 like dorsal engine nacelle along with a slightly enlarged version of the DARPA's STAR/space cruiser as the nose.

However it should be more maneuverable than a standard F-16 due to more wing surface area and larger tailerons.

Lining up for landing will have to be aided by cameras and/or FLIR imagers on the bottom of the plane for a regular landing approach.

link to the DARPA's STAR/Space Cruiser video posted on the forum thread covering the videos by Hazegrayart on youtube:  Hazegrayart Master Updated thread


It has no relation to the 'Star Cruiser', either in development history, materials, or planform (STAR is an axisymmetric cone, QueSST has a flat nose and asymmetric profile). Nothing beyond "pointy".

The camera system is a requirement not just for landing, but for all modes of flight, as it is the only forward vision option, the XVS.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
Flying from New York City to London up to four times faster than what’s currently possible may sound like a far-off dream, but NASA is exploring whether the commercial market could support travel at such speeds.

NASA recently investigated the business case for supersonic passenger air travel aboard aircraft that could theoretically travel between Mach 2 and Mach 4 (1,535-3,045 mph at sea level). By comparison, today’s larger airliners cruise at roughly 600 mph, or about 80% of the speed of sound.

The NASA studies concluded potential passenger markets exist in about 50 established routes that connect cities. Since the U.S. and other nations prohibit supersonic flight over land, the studies’ findings covered transoceanic travel, including high-volume North Atlantic routes and those crossing the Pacific.

Quote
NASA’s Advanced Air Vehicles Program (AAVP) is now moving into the next phase of the high-speed travel research, which includes issuing two 12-month contracts to companies to develop concept designs and technology roadmaps. The roadmaps will explore air travel possibilities, outline risks and challenges, and identify needed technologies to make Mach 2-plus travel a reality.

Boeing is leading the first team, with partners Exosonic, GE Aerospace, Georgia Tech Aerospace Systems Design Laboratory, Rolls-Royce North American Technologies, and others. Northrop Grumman Aeronautics Systems lead the second team, with partners Blue Ridge Research and Consulting, Boom Supersonic, and Rolls-Royce North American Technologies.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/glenn/2023/is-a-Mach-4-Passenger-Jet-Possible-Nasa-Industry-Explore-Idea
« Last Edit: 08/23/2023 04:37 pm by Star One »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Quote
@NASA
 and Skunk Works will reveal the X-59 quiet supersonic flight demonstrator on January 12. Get ready for the first look at the future of supersonic flight.

https://twitter.com/LockheedMartin/status/1741836680020017281

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11172
  • Enthusiast since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 8802
  • Likes Given: 7821
NASA, Lockheed Martin Reveal X-59 Quiet Supersonic Aircraft

NASA Presser



Quote
NASA’s X-59 quiet supersonic research aircraft sits on the apron outside Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works facility at dawn in Palmdale, California. The X-59 is the centerpiece of NASA’s Quesst mission, which seeks to address one of the primary challenges to supersonic flight over land by making sonic booms quieter.
Photo Credit: Lockheed Martin Skunk Works
« Last Edit: 01/12/2024 09:26 pm by catdlr »
Tony De La Rosa, ...I'm no Feline Dealer!! I move mountains.  but I'm better known for "I think it's highly sexual." Japanese to English Translation.

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1