Skunk Works unveil SR-72 concept

[gf0012-aust]

I'm not going to get into a dick waving contest

I've worked on these projects - and I've worked on projects where the temp ranges for the A12 are the same as hypersonic tests ranges

you do realise that close to half of all the current hypersonic progs curr in play are tested or developed in Aust and have been since 2004?

Anyway, you obviously have a different view and I have no intention disabusing you of the notion of what needs to be done

and for goodness sake, using X51 as an example when there are 4 other projects which have been run out of this country involving a myriad of different partners is not as stellar example of the actual costs involved in weapons hypersonics, unmanned hypersonics and then manned assets

so the other progs are going fine.

one swallow doesn't make a summer

 

[StobieWan]

I was a bit surprised that the concept shown doesn't use compression lift, as with the Rapier and Valkyrie designs given how efficient the lift/drag ratio was but they've obviously got their numbers crunched and feel there are better ways to do it.

 

[colay]

I was a bit surprised that the concept shown doesn't use compression lift, as with the Rapier and Valkyrie designs given how efficient the lift/drag ratio was but they've obviously got their numbers crunched and feel there are better ways to do it.

They certainly appear confident that they have achieved a breakthrough with a dual-engine configuration comprising high-speed jet turbine with a ramjet/scramjet.

SR-71 and SR-72 Engine Cycle Comparison

[...I]Lockheed has run scaled tests on components. “The next step would be to put it through a series of tests or critical demonstrations,” Leland says. “We are ready for those critical demonstrations, and we could be ready to do such a demonstration aircraft in 2018. That would be the beginning of building and running complete critical demonstrations. As of now, there are no technologies to be invented. We are ready to proceed—the only thing holding us back is the perception that [hypersonics] is always expensive, large and exotic.”

The 2018 time line is determined by the potential schedule for the high-speed strike weapon (HSSW), a U.S. hypersonic missile program taking shape under the Air Force and Darpa (see page 36). “We can do critical demonstrations between now and then, but we don’t believe it will be until HSSW flies and puts to bed any questions about this technology, and whether we can we truly make these, that the confidence will be there.” In spite of the recent success of demonstration efforts, such as the X-51A Waverider, Leland observes that “hypersonics still has a bit of a giggle factor.”
[/I]

 

[StobieWan]

Hypersonics still have the Thunderbirds are go aura about 'em. But by God, they looked good - the Valkyrie, the Blackbird, wow..and they were a mere Mach 3.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Hypersonics still have the Thunderbirds are go aura about 'em. But by God, they looked good - the Valkyrie, the Blackbird, wow..and they were a mere Mach 3.

The unfort thing about hypersonics is that you invariably end up with the same ill informed debate that you get with respect to VLO/LO or C5

 

[StobieWan]

The unfortunate thing about [The internet] is what you meant

 

[gf0012-aust]

They certainly appear confident that they have achieved a breakthrough with a dual-engine configuration comprising high-speed jet turbine with a ramjet/scramjet.

Compound engines have been successfully tested for quite a while - the main issue has been about moving beyond the multi-engine integration issues into making them effective within the nominal mission profile

 

[gf0012-aust]

The unfortunate thing about [The internet] is what you meant

I despair every time I look at some of the "insights" found on the broader web. Seriously, some of those kids need to discover what real research is rather than cut and paste from the web, and then they still don't understand the issues.

I've had a few eye bleeding moments

 

[StobieWan]

I despair every time I look at some of the "insights" found on the broader web. Seriously, some of those kids need to discover what real research is rather than cut and paste from the web, and then they still don't understand the issues.

I've had a few eye bleeding moments

You and me both. First lesson to learn (I found) is that the path to true wisdom can only be walked in the light of understanding one's own ignorance.

Otherwise, you're left with PLASMA STEALTH! RUSSIA...STRONG..

 

[StingrayOZ]

I wonder with the development of deployed hypersonics if as a counter measure - orbital missile platforms? Rather than trying to shoot up, your shooting down. Given the altitudes involved? Shooting a hypersonic plane, might be easier coming in at 8 kms-1 and slowing down to hit it. I wonder what is adaptable with ABM capability in this regard.

 

[My2Cents]

A company whose name I forget now in Germany is or was experimenting with the laser deposition machines mounted on wirelessly networked robots that would work with a set of beacons to mark their boundary and give datum. From that, if it works you have a 3-D printer factory that if you tried hard enough could build a truck, a building, even a ship. Limited only by the size of the flat floor and the range of your robot/beacon combination. I think it is still conceptual but might point where things head.

I suspect that there is a relationship between boundary size and minimum tolerances that limit it, and there are always those items under tension or compression as assembled. So there will always have to be some small parts fabricated on smaller machines to be inserted in final assembly and surfaces that have to be machine polished. Most of the electronics will probably still have to be fabricated by other machines as well.

But when you think of the changes that this technology means for conventional economies, the words frightening and exciting probably are equally applicable.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I wonder with the development of deployed hypersonics if as a counter measure - orbital missile platforms? Rather than trying to shoot up, your shooting down. Given the altitudes involved? Shooting a hypersonic plane, might be easier coming in at 8 kms-1 and slowing down to hit it. I wonder what is adaptable with ABM capability in this regard.

well, it blunt terms, it means that the focus on BMD gets some re-attention

Thats always been the issue, eg we've seen similar debate over "stealth" where the detractors see "stealth" as a single construct - and fail to comprehend that LO/VLO is already at 6th gen and will no doubt be at 7th-8th by 2020

the threat/detect/kill construct is under constant evolution - so the arguments about dealing with specific technologies that you see elsewhere demonstrate a profound lack of awareness of what those techsets were in the first place,

hypersonics, UAS, laser defence all fall under the aegis of misunderstood solutions IMO

it reinforces the general defprof frustration (esp on DT) about some focusing on singular tech and ignoring the system of systems construct

 

[t68]

I wonder with the development of deployed hypersonics if as a counter measure - orbital missile platforms? Rather than trying to shoot up, your shooting down. Given the altitudes involved? Shooting a hypersonic plane, might be easier coming in at 8 kms-1 and slowing down to hit it. I wonder what is adaptable with ABM capability in this regard.

Would that be deemed as weaponising space?
If I remember correctly that their was a treaty of some sort to stop exactly that.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Would that be deemed as weaponising space?
If I remember correctly that their was a treaty of some sort to stop exactly that.

that horse bolted long ago

 

[t68]

that horse bolted long ago

So it seems,
Weapons in Space? | Arms Control Association

 

[Shanesworld]

I suspect that there is a relationship between boundary size and minimum tolerances that limit it, and there are always those items under tension or compression as assembled. So there will always have to be some small parts fabricated on smaller machines to be inserted in final assembly and surfaces that have to be machine polished. Most of the electronics will probably still have to be fabricated by other machines as well.

But when you think of the changes that this technology means for conventional economies, the words frightening and exciting probably are equally applicable.

Yeah it was something I heard over a couple of beers and never heard anything of after.
Do you mean particle boundary layer? I have heard of I think one of Z corps machines doing down to 4 micron sphere's and that is beyond what I can imagine frankly. Little machining required post print.
But yeah tolerances would be an issue for that Robot idea. The need for rigidity when talking tens of microns would make you think it has to be a plant machine, very bulky and solid. I think the idea for that was to be either multiple little robot vehicles dedicated to a particular material or just fabbing up say a chassis and like you say multiple assemblies being brought together by a manual or supervised fit to it. Not really sure.

It really is. Every day I am looking at things I would normally do by hand or CNC and think nah! Print it and any issues modify and reprint. Makes a person lazy but it leads to all sorts of funky things.

 

[Shanesworld]

So it seems,
Weapons in Space? | Arms Control Association

That's quite disturbing. I honestly had no idea. Is this common knowledge?

 

[StingrayOZ]

well, it blunt terms, it means that the focus on BMD gets some re-attention

Well I can't see it declining into the night. Some of the BMD systems have shown great adaptability and possible repurposing. Of course with orbital platforms, ASAT comes into its own. Launching from a hypersonic plane would also be an interesting idea.

Thats always been the issue, eg we've seen similar debate over "stealth" where the detractors see "stealth" as a single construct - and fail to comprehend that LO/VLO is already at 6th gen and will no doubt be at 7th-8th by 2020

Well it will be laying the foundation for future generations. Previous advances usually build on existing technologies and abilities. And single party tricks usually don't last, as a single party trick is easily countered. I for example don't see the F-35 big party trick as being LO, but its networking and systems technology, LO just really further enables that advantage.

hypersonics, UAS, laser defence all fall under the aegis of misunderstood solutions IMO

Well anything new is not going to be well understood. The worry is people who don't know, confidently fill in with erroneous understanding, then lecture others.SR-72 no doubt will spawn some interesting threads.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Well I can't see it declining into the night. Some of the BMD systems have shown great adaptability and possible repurposing. Of course with orbital platforms, ASAT comes into its own. Launching from a hypersonic plane would also be an interesting idea.

true, I didn't intend my prev to mean that BMD as a construct was dead - more like the issue that instead of focus on silver bullet solutions, people will need to refocus their belief systems.

Well anything new is not going to be well understood. The worry is people who don't know, confidently fill in with erroneous understanding, then lecture others.SR-72 no doubt will spawn some interesting threads.

if the definition of interesting also includes "misunderstanding" then the internet will go through 6-8 years of more rubbish - the same as all the confident predictions that were made about VLO/LO and the invincibility of LF radar and plasma stealth as a counter...

 

[gf0012-aust]

Do you mean particle boundary layer?

moreso reynolds effect issues.......