Sr-72
- Thread starter Gunfighter14e2
- Start date
Boeing had a pretty nice example as I recall also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-51_Waverider
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-51_Waverider
As far as actually putting boot-to-ass and churning out a practical working model ramjet from all the R&D and theories though.. unfortuately Russia+India beat us to the punch. If youre counting actual deployed weapon systems:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos
Nonetheless, ramjet/scramjet engines seem to be the future of atmospheric weapons/aircraft engines. Nothing beats a good old rocket when you just wanna go fast though IMO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos
Nonetheless, ramjet/scramjet engines seem to be the future of atmospheric weapons/aircraft engines. Nothing beats a good old rocket when you just wanna go fast though IMO.
Last edited:
Reckon one can atleast say fairly soon our Navy will see that ramjet cruise missile, and raise them a auto railgun..?
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/09/21/worlds-first-automatic-railgun-tested-us-navy/
Interesting times were living in..
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/09/21/worlds-first-automatic-railgun-tested-us-navy/
Interesting times were living in..
There is another type of propulsion device but it can only be use in a Vacuum. They say it will/does well for interplanetary, uses no fuel or oxidizers either.
No fuel or oxidizers.. color me puzzled. Only things Ive heard of being tested is ion propulsion. Far as meeting a no fuel requirement tho.. Bussard ramjet maybe? But thats a pretty far fetched design there. Same idea as atmospheric ramjet, but collecting hydrogen molecules instead of air with a GIANT scoop.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussar...et#Feasibility
Theres also ideas for laser ablasion and such. All sounds extremely theoretical tto me. But Im sure the SR-71 probably wouldve too in '61
Rockets are definitely old school, and not nearly efficient enough for future plans. Long distance, peak thrust dont count for shit. Its the amount of time that thrust can be applied with a given amount of fuel, in simple terms..
Last edited:
Considering the fact that MACK III is sixties tech. It would be naive to dismiss MACH X piloted air travel . The technology and equipment to support exists on the shelf . The old saying is that when you find out about the next big thing , they've had it for ten years plus .
20 - 30 years really. and when you do find out id really directed at achieving a strategic goal like imploding the soviet union.
Back when Aurora was breathlessly being covered by AW&ST each week, with new pictures of the string of pearls contrails and rumors of pulse jets... the technology was certainly up to the job. But the likelihood was that operationally, satellites had taken over for the most part. This was c. 1992. I also recall that, at the time, the world leaders in Ramjet and Scramjet technologies were... India. USA wasn't paying much attention.
Whoever said above that the 'next big thing' has been around 10 years... for DoD technology is about right on. Maybe 20 to 30 years. Takes a long time to evolve... at least in peacetime.
Cool story! Damn I hope we can build it. Between retiring Concorde and the SR-71 and Space Shuttle... for the first time in history, mankind is saying to itself "Remember when we could Fly Mach 3? Remember when we had an SST? Remember when we had a space shuttle?" We need some good new advances. It's in our nature!
Cheers,
Sirhr
Similar threads
