Military Review

CONCORDE-2 jerk to hypersound. Is Concorde coming back?

89



In July, 2015, the company Airbus patented the design of the aircraft "CONCORDE-2", which, according to the project, should fly at a speed of 3,435 miles per hour (about 5500 km / h). "Squeeze" from patent information:







It seems to be nothing unusual: a hypersonic passenger plane, a patent (as is customary), again from Tokyo in Los Angeles for three hours of summer, from London to New York in one hour, cruising - 4,5M. Ordinary ...

Some oddities, of course, are present (response to PAK YES? New EU strategist?):

1. The patent owners are: EADS Astrium - a subsidiary of EADS (100% of shares), the largest manufacturer of spacecraft and EADS-EUROPEAN AERONAUTIC DEFENSE AND SPACE COMPANY - the largest European aerospace corporation and defense industry.
Now it's all called EA Airbus Group (Airbus Airbus Defense & Space Airbus Helicopters)

CONCORDE-2 jerk to hypersound. Is Concorde coming back?


EADS is the sole shareholder (100%) of Airbus SAS, a company engaged in the manufacture of passenger, cargo and military transport aircraft. In total, the concern EA Airbus Group owns:

100% Eurocopter (helicopters).
100% EADS Astrium (satellites).
50% ATR (turboprop aircraft).
47% Dassault Aviation (fighters).
46% Eurofighter GmbH (fighters).
40% MBDA (missiles).


EADS is the second largest aerospace vehicle in the world after the Boeing concern, and again the second largest manufacturer of weapons and military equipment in Europe (after BAE Systems.)

2. The patent for some reason states that the liner from Airbus designed mainly for military purposes.

"Airbus intends to use Concorde-2 primarily for military purposes .."

3. The patented "Concord-2" can accommodate 19 passengers only.
"... and would have a passenger limousine of 19 passengers."

Will it be enough? Or am I behind the times?

For all history There were two cases of commercial use of supersonic passenger aircraft:

Tu-144 (First flight 31 December 1968 of the year), 16 units produced, speed up to 2500 km / h, cruising ceiling 20000 m, range up to 5330 km, number of passengers: up to 80 (normal).



I was touched by the cost of a ticket on the route Moscow-Almaty-TOTAL 68 rubles from the nose (on a subsonic aircraft 48 rubles). Nostalgia just the same.

Tu-144LL "Moscow" (record 1999 year.)



Concorde (First flight 2 March 1969 of the year), 20 units produced, speed up to 2 300 km / h, cruising ceiling 18 300м, range to 6 470km, cost of 3,5-hour flight from London to New York did not fall below $ 1500km end - "ALL-THAT" is four times more expensive than a ticket for a Boeing 747, which overcomes the Atlantic in seven to eight hours.

At the beginning of 1980-x operation of "Concord" began to make a profit. In 1983, at Air France, it amounted to 3,1 million dollars, in the following - already 6,3 million. Profit growth was observed in subsequent years. Thus, the British airline British Airways, starting with 1983, began to receive an average of 12-15 million dollars annually.



The tragic but very interesting video of -Air France Concorde flight 4590 takes off with fire: Concorde crash that killed 113



For reference (suddenly, who does not know): 6 December 2010 The American airline Continental Airlines was found guilty by a French court for the unpremeditated murder of 113 people who died in the crash of the 10 supersonic Concord passenger plane near Paris. The court ordered the American company to pay in compensation for damages and fines 1,2 million euros ($ 1,6 million).

-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------

PS "Club Concorde, a volunteer organization, wants to spend 250 million dollars ($ 47millions already seems to have accumulated) to return the original" Concorde "to production by 2019 year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

What is interesting in this patent?


In principle, everything is literally "chewed" in this video:


Who does not understand or who is too lazy to watch until the end, I will try to explain.

CONCORDE-2 is equipped with three types of propulsion systems:
-turbine;
-reactive;
-line supersonic.

Hypersonics takes off from a conventional runway on turbofan engines, then using LRE (H2 + O2), almost vertically rises to a height of 35.000m, while overcoming the supersonic barrier and, overclocking to 4,5M, includes hypersonic uniflowers. Cruising flight, on cruising range on the same hypersonic direct flow. Landing again on the old, tested TRDD. Fuel is hydrogen, oxidizer: oxygen and outside air (for turbofan).

The specially designed shape of the wing and the fins, as well as overcoming the supersonic barrier in vertical acceleration (the propagation of a sound wave parallel to the surface of the Earth) solves the main problem of the SPS (or rather, GPS) - noise.

A dedicated air corridor at an altitude of about 30,5 kilometers, in fact, will help reduce noise and noise and will not disturb the rest of the rest of the western worker.

The SPS (Concord-1) at take-off produced over two times more noise than the Boeing-707 or DC-8. True, no one did the measurements, but this is the main formal argument against the "Concord" in the American sky on behalf of American air transport services.

They also talked about the OBS agency about the increased opacity of Olympus, which supposedly would inevitably lead to an increase in cancer of the American electorate - but this argument does not stand up to criticism even from the US State Department and its employees.

For your information: TRP "Olympus" 593-1 had a higher noise level than the dual-circuit NK-144 installed on the Tu-144.

Ps. Details can be found in the US09079661 patent:

http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=09079661&IDKey=837D3BE4AD88%0D%0A&HomeUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect2%3DPTO1%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526d%3DPALL%2526S1%3D9079661.PN.%2526OS%3DPN%2F9079661%2526RS%3DPN%2F9079661

There is no transfer of all forces, and the "censorship" is unlikely to miss such a volume.

Special for EADS: We are citizens of the Russian Federation do not flatter ourselves with a “paunchy”, purely civilian form of the CONCORDE-2 fuselage (seemingly for sure - this is not the Tu-160 and not the B-1B). Do not buy. Fuel H2 (hydrogen). And we know how to hydrogen, and how to store it.
Therefore, Airbus will not take us through a hypersonic passenger transcontinental airliner on the 19 passengers. We are watching. Here such bison on the "Military Review" are going to quietly push through a hypersonic strategist under the guise of GPS on 19 oligarchs heads will not work. wink

And finally: SupersonicAnd come back?

Around the world, aerospace companies and organizations, including NASA, are intensively developing technology that will allow passengers (or cargo) to fly again faster than the speed of sound. Here are some of them:

Spike S-512 supersonic passenger jet


AERION AS2


LOCKHEED MARTIN'S N + 2


Skreemr: 12 000 km / h from Canadian engineer and inventor Charles Bombardier and designer Ray Mattison


It is noteworthy that this Supersonic is launched from the Earth. using an electromagnetic rail gun with a speed close to 5000 km / h. Then the Skreemr should launch a liquid-oxygen rocket engine, gaining height and speed sufficient to turn on a hypersonic straight-through jet-air engine that uses the speed already reached by the aircraft to compress the incoming air. By burning incoming hydrogen and compressed oxygen, this engine can accelerate the plane to an incredible speed in 12 000 km / h.



Poor 75 passengers (which it is designed for), how will they survive this launch from an electromagnetic catapult? There is no anti-nauseous paper bag. Anti-high-altitude suit suit everyone?

The first of this new generation of supersonic (hypersonic) passenger aircraft have real chances to take off at the beginning of the 2020-s. In the meantime .... In the meantime, a consortium of European aerospace companies is designing a rescue capsule for promising hypersonic passenger aircraft.



Project HYPMOCES (HYPersonic MOrphing for a Cabin Escape System)




Used materials, photos and videos:
http://www.uspto.gov/
http://hypmoces.deimos-space.com/
http://www.theguardian.com/
http://www.express.co.uk/
http://www.pocket-lint.com/
http://www.bbc.com/
http://www.foxnews.com/
http://www.tupolev.ru/tu-144
http://www.youtube.com/
http://www.testpilot.ru/
https://ru.wikipedia.org
Author:
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. SERGEY UI
    SERGEY UI 14 November 2015 06: 46 New
    +6
    Some big-bellied lol
    1. crazyrom
      crazyrom 14 November 2015 07: 02 New
      11
      There will be no 2 Concorde, they already have no brains or resources. The world is on the verge of collapse, the world economy may collapse even this year, although most likely next. There is no time for fat.
      1. Alexdark
        Alexdark 14 November 2015 07: 15 New
        17
        Every year they say this, starting from the fifties ...
      2. Homo
        Homo 14 November 2015 07: 19 New
        0
        Quote: crazyrom
        The world is on the verge of collapse, the global economy could fall apart this year, although most likely next.

        And they expect loot for development before the collapse to get and cut!
      3. Catafract
        Catafract 14 November 2015 15: 56 New
        +1
        Quote: crazyrom
        The world is on the verge of collapse, the global economy could fall apart this year, although most likely next. There will no longer be fat.

        another nostardamus appeared, alilulya, recently the gross national product also excelled, according to him a year ago, the world should have collapsed with oil at a price below 70 bucks per barrel laughing
      4. Down House
        Down House 14 November 2015 20: 03 New
        +1
        Quote: crazyrom
        There will be no concord 2, they already have neither brains nor resources.

        In extreme cases, China will buy everything))
    2. War and Peace
      War and Peace 14 November 2015 08: 30 New
      +9
      according to Tupolev’s principle, only beautiful flying machines fly, but this thing doesn’t look like that, therefore it will not fly ...
      1. wk
        wk 14 November 2015 08: 57 New
        +1
        Quote: War and Peace
        according to the Tupolev principle, only beautiful flying vehicles fly

        in general, due to its "volatility" in comparison with other domestic liners and military aircraft, for some reason an allegory with an ax came to mind! This applies especially to military aircraft!
      2. 0255
        0255 14 November 2015 12: 42 New
        +1
        Quote: war and peace
        according to Tupolev’s principle, only beautiful flying machines fly, but this thing doesn’t look like that, therefore it will not fly ...

        And what do you dislike about what a French project looks like? I didn’t like what the Su-27 and Su-34 look like, and what, does it bother them to fly?
        Quote: crazyrom
        There will be no 2 Concorde, they already have no brains or resources. The world is on the verge of collapse, the world economy may collapse even this year, although most likely next. There is no time for fat.

        Actually, the French have their own school of aircraft construction, their Mirages were excellent aircraft. Or just wanted plus signs and a marshal for a week?
        1. War and Peace
          War and Peace 14 November 2015 14: 23 New
          0
          Quote: 0255
          And what do you dislike about what a French project looks like? I didn’t like what the Su-27 and Su-34 look like, and what, does it bother them to fly?


          you mixed everything in one heap, the su27 looks like a perfect plane, and therefore does what other planes cannot, and the su34 looks like a duck and, therefore, it also looks like a duck, and not a heavy falcon, with a small load, but what you see there, then if you don’t see, then you won’t see ...
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 14 November 2015 14: 59 New
            +4
            In the first picture, obviously not a hypersonic aircraft, with a blunt nose and outboard engines you won’t get hypersound.
            1. Svetlana
              Svetlana 14 November 2015 20: 23 New
              +4
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              with a blunt nose

              The bluntness radius of the nose of a hypersonic aircraft affects the value of its gasification coefficient: the smaller the radius of curvature, the sharper the nose, the greater the vapor pressure of the heat-protective coating on the nose and the higher the plasma temperature behind the shock wave hanging on the nose. The formula for calculating the effect of increasing the pressure of saturated vapors with decreasing radius of the droplet was derived by Laplace several centuries ago. It is thanks to this Laplace effect that small droplets of mercury spilled in a room evaporate much faster than large droplets and are more dangerous. Therefore, the socks of hypersonic airplanes (Shuttle, Burana) are made blunt - so that they evaporate more slowly. And the aircraft mentioned in the article goes hypersound with an almost vertical take-off at an altitude of about 35 km, where the density and air resistance are much lower than at ground level. At the same altitude, hypersound and Soyuz, Proton missiles, in which the head fairings are also blunt, and the outboard side rocket engines outboard
              1. opus
                14 November 2015 22: 30 New
                +2
                Quote: Svetlana
                And the aircraft mentioned in the article goes hypersound at an almost vertical take-off at an altitude of about 35 km, where the density and air resistance are much lower than at ground level.

                about the "stupid nose" is true.
                But not true.
                At hypersound, he goes to hypersonic ramjets, accelerating in horizontal flight.
                In vertical flight, it reaches only less than 2M


                In principle, this is the "beauty"
                And to overcome 35 km at a speed of 0 km / h to 2140 km / h (given that pressure and resistance are 35 km less than 63 times higher than sea level), you can also with a flat nose.
                Threat.
                A rounded ("blunt") nose is needed (important) not for acceleration, but for deceleration from 4,5 m when returning to the dense layers of the atmosphere
                Lt. Air Force stock
                Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
                In the first picture, obviously not a hypersonic aircraft, with a blunt nose and outboard engines for hypersound

                1. Get out. These "go out" not only at the GPZ speed, but almost at the 1st space




                2. About the turbofan engine and rocket engine.
                Watch the video carefully.
                THEY ARE CLEANING (ramjet no).
                There, even the liquid propellant nozzles are closed when moving to horizontal flight (and they open as the turbojet engines stop working)

                1. Lt. Air Force stock
                  Lt. Air Force stock 14 November 2015 22: 43 New
                  0
                  Quote: opus
                  1. Get out. These "go out" not only at the GPZ speed, but almost at the 1st space

                  The missiles are disposable, and no one is interested in fuel consumption, in addition, a rocket engine is used there. A passenger plane must make a large number of flights at hypersonic speed, and if possible use fuel efficiently. Look at the sharp nose of the Tu-144 and thin wings, a hypersonic aircraft should have the same, if not the best aerodynamic qualities.
                  1. opus
                    15 November 2015 00: 06 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    Disposable rockets, and nobody cares about fuel consumption,

                    ha ha ha
                    There EVERY kg of payload is on the account (as soon as they are not repacked).
                    And 1 kg of fuel oil = 109,56 kg of the fuel component (1 to 110)

                    PN "Soyuz" is 2,5 tons (PN of the launch vehicle - 7,1 tons: SC "Soyuz")
                    Soyuz launch weight 307,650 t (dry weight 33,750 t -7,1 t)
                    Mass of fuel components = 273,900t

                    Saturn V
                    Monorail on the trajectory to the Moon ~ 65,5 tons, Launch mass of 2290 tons, fuel mass is 2149 tons.

                    1 kg to The Moon (no atmosphere) = 32,81 kg TC (1 to 33)
                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    in addition, a rocket engine is used there.

                    So what?
                    Efficiency (external) of a chemical rocket engine fuel is negligible, less than 1%.
                    The Soyuz launch vehicle consumes 273,9 tons of fuel to deliver 2,5 tons per 200 km.
                    Any transport aircraft with turbofan engines, having 274 tons of fuel, will deliver 2,5 tons of cargo, 3 times around the Earth.
                    The real efficiency of modern engines (turbojet engines) of aircraft flying in the stratosphere is about 40%.

                    The temperature in the stratosphere, where modern planes fly, is about 200 K; therefore, the theoretical (thermal) efficiency is 1 - 200/2500 = 0,92 or 92%.

                    La having wings and flying in a gas environment using turbofan engines:
                    1.lifting power-freebie (result of flow, friction)
                    2. The oxidizing agent does not need to be dragged on its hump like a ballast.
                    and the stoichiometric ratio (fuel-oxidizer) among other things: 1 to 14 (20)

                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    Look at the sharp nose of the Tu-144 and thin wings

                    Tu-144 flew at an altitude of 20000m.
                    And gaining this height with a pitch angle of 10g, for tens of minutes

                    Kornkord -2 gains a height of 35000m with a pitch angle of 80-85g, in 2-5 minutes, and flies at an altitude of 35000m
                    1.Pressure at a given height (mmHg) 35000m (and therefore the resistance force) = 12
                    2.Pressure at a given height (mmHg) 20000m (and therefore the resistance force) = 71
                    Sea level pressure (mmHg): 760
                    The resistance force is directed against the speed of movement, its value is proportional to the characteristic area S, the density of the medium ρ and the square of the velocity V:
                    https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/9/d/f9dd5d1ba8f9aa961177e8861ec21e79.png


                    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                    the aircraft should have the same, if not the best aerodynamic qualities.

                    Ничего подобного.
                    X-15 stupidly "failed"
                    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/X-15_in_flight.jpg/192
                    0px-X-15_in_flight.jpg
                    1. opus
                      15 November 2015 00: 23 New
                      0
                      pictures do not "stick"
                      Quote: opus
                      The resistance force is directed against the speed of movement, its value is proportional to the characteristic area S, the density of the medium ρ and the square of the speed


                      Quote: opus
                      X-15 stupidly "failed"

                    2. Simple
                      Simple 15 November 2015 00: 26 New
                      0
                      Well, you can’t interfere in one heap the supersonic spatial flow around the blunt bodies of an airplane and a launch rocket!
                      1. opus
                        15 November 2015 01: 02 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Simple
                        supersonic spatial flow around blunt bodies of an airplane and a launch rocket!

                        1. hypersonic.
                        2. Up to an altitude of 35000 and up to a speed of <2M, this "blunt" flies like a carrier rocket, practically
                        Quote: opus
                        Kornkord -2 is gaining a height of 35000m with a pitch angle of 80-85g,


                        Missile-eXperimental, LGM-118A Peacekeeper Fairing Reset at an altitude of about 100 km (there she has a speed of 7,1 km / s)

                        Trident II variant of "Rods from God" ("Arrows of God")


                        - The first step burns out in about 65 seconds.


                        - When the first stage is shot from the device, the second stage is ignited, which also works for about 65 seconds. So the rocket overcomes another 800-1000 km to the target. To facilitate this, the nose cone (blue) is reset. After the second stage is reset, the third stage engine comes into play, which runs for about 40 seconds. This completes the stage of acceleration - the rocket flies freely at an altitude of about 1000 km
                      2. Simple
                        Simple 15 November 2015 01: 12 New
                        0
                        The fact is that such missiles are given a rotational impulse to stabilize the flight path.

                        For manned aircraft, this is not possible for obvious reasons.

                        Therefore, in experiments with the nose of the aircraft, structures asymmetrical along the longitudinal axis are allowed.
                      3. opus
                        15 November 2015 13: 03 New
                        0
                        Quote: Simple
                        The fact is that such missiles are given a rotational impulse to stabilize the flight path.

                        ?
                        what?
                        You do not confuse with SAM PAC-3 ERINT?
                        1.No "rotation"
                        2. What you are observing: pitch, roll, yaw program


                        Quote: Simple
                        For manned aircraft, this is not possible for obvious reasons.

                        they have stabilization with aerodynamic surfaces (as well as many explosive, airborne, tactical and ballistic missiles)
                        or traction wind (main steering wheel)
                        Quote: Simple
                        Therefore, in experiments with the nose of the aircraft, structures asymmetrical along the longitudinal axis are allowed.

                        angle of attack, the lifting force of the fuselage (since you can’t get away from it, why not use it?)
            2. Simple
              Simple 14 November 2015 23: 11 New
              +1
              Quote: opus
              You will come out. These "go out" not only at the GPP speed, but also almost at the 1st space




              You are a little video and computer graphics are misleading.

              What the nose can possibly be shows the screen of the patent, if it is not a stuffing.
              1. opus
                15 November 2015 00: 14 New
                +1
                Quote: Simple
                computer graphics are misleading.

                no. I definitely do not "enter".
                At the thesis, I almost lost my fingers with blowing into the supercritical part of the nozzle ....
                The "dull" nose is needed to lower and extinguish 4,5m when returning to the dense layers of the atmosphere.
                (Buran, Shuttle, there are not exactly insignificant 4,5 m, there is 7,9 km / s)

                Quote: Simple
                screen of the patent, if it is not a stuffing.

                I myself did this screen of the patent.
                who's bothering you, check out


                And the graphics are somewhat inconsistent. But what to take from the "image makers"
                1. Simple
                  Simple 15 November 2015 01: 00 New
                  +1
                  Thank you.
                  What can I say, I'm glad for the Germans. winked


                  Here, if interested:
                  http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vliyanie-formy-nosovoy-chasti-na-aerodinamiches

                  koe-soprotivlenie-sverhzvukovogo-letatelnogo-apparata-s-konicheskim-hvostovym


                  In pdf format:

                  http://sun.tsu.ru/mminfo/2010/000384442/000384442.pdf
                  1. opus
                    15 November 2015 01: 08 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Simple
                    What can I say, I'm glad for the Germans.

                    the French, to a greater extent.
                    Germans are
                    Messerschmitt-Boelkow-Blohm GmbH, MBB
                    и
                    Daimler-Benz Aerospace AG
                    everything was bought (merged) with Aerospatiale-Matra and Spanish CASA in one concern called EADS.
                    Quote: Simple
                    Here, if interested:

                    Was reading.
                    There heights (density of the medium) other
                  2. Simple
                    Simple 15 November 2015 01: 32 New
                    +2
                    Oh.
                    Strategically better than the Americans.


                    Quote: opus
                    There heights (density of the medium) other



                    Right. Throughout the branch, discussions began to scatter fairly large ranges in Mach numbers, as if, after overcoming the sound barrier, it makes no difference whatsoever that 2M, that 4M.
          2. Falcon
            Falcon 16 November 2015 10: 52 New
            +1
            for opus

            Interesting article, thanks Anton! good

            I think this project will remain on paper. Too ambitious, and scary to imagine how much it costs ...
        2. Simple
          Simple 14 November 2015 22: 42 New
          +3
          Quote: Svetlana
          Therefore, the socks of hypersonic aircraft (Shuttle, Buran) are made dull - so that they evaporate more slowly



          Not always.


          In the case of SHEFEX II, German engineers resorted to a cooling solution similar to the one used on high pressure turbine blades.
        3. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 14 November 2015 22: 50 New
          +1
          Quote: Svetlana
          Therefore, the socks of hypersonic airplanes (Shuttle, Burana) are made blunt - so that they evaporate more slowly. And the aircraft mentioned in the article goes hypersound with an almost vertical take-off at an altitude of about 35 km, where the density and air resistance are much lower than at ground level. At the same altitude, hypersound and Soyuz, Proton missiles, in which the head fairings are also blunt, and the outboard side rocket engines outboard

          A buran has to make single flights, this is not a scheduled vehicle, it does not fly in hours, but minutes in hypersound, the United States has hypersonic aircraft, they are made with pointed noses, this is the most optimal form for hypersonic flying in the atmosphere.
          In addition, look at the SR-71, it flies on 3,2 MAX, if aerodynamics are not important, why didn’t it look like a 747 Boeing?
          1. Simple
            Simple 14 November 2015 23: 06 New
            +2
            The SHEFEX II project is a slightly different league than the subject, but still I will not post a link to the video:

          2. Svetlana
            Svetlana 14 November 2015 23: 50 New
            +1
            Quote: Lt. air force reserve
            why didn’t they make him look like a 747 Boeing?

            Hypersound is when the speed is greater than 5M, when the sock glows, ablates. The SR-71 does not reach hypersound, its sock does not ablate, does not lose mass, therefore it was made more "aerodynamic". Isaac Newton showed that the flow in a rare (rarefied) medium of the stratosphere has features that lead to the choice of blunt socks, in some cases giving a lower coefficient of resistance to hypersonic flow at the same cross section of the compared hypersonic aircraft.
          3. opus
            15 November 2015 00: 18 New
            -1
            Quote: Lt. air force reserve
            he flies on 3,2 MAX, if aerodynamics are not important, why didn’t they make him look like a 747 Boeing?

            flight altitude = 25910 m /
            and he picks it up not vertically, but almost horizontally (with a small pitch angle), and for a long time
            Dependence of air density on height

            The resistance force is directed against the speed of movement, its value is proportional to the characteristic area S, the density of the medium ρ and the square of the velocity V:
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 15 November 2015 17: 27 New
              +1
              At hypersonic speeds, a pointed fairing has less resistance.
              1. Svetlana
                Svetlana 16 November 2015 19: 37 New
                -1
                In The Principles of Natural Philosophy (1687), Newton described the medium (such as rarefied air in the stratosphere), posed and solved the problem
                about when a body formed when a curve rotates around an axis
                when moving in the aforementioned medium, it will experience less resistance than any other body of revolution with the same height and maximum width.
                It turned out that this problem is not calculus of variations, but optimal control. The solution to Newton's problem: the cone of least resistance is actually truncated, blunt, and not pointed. A conical or oval body should be replaced by a blunt one, i.e., make a flat round platform in front, forming an angle with a surface adjacent to the site equal to 135 °
                cm. :
                http://mathemlib.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000040/st010.shtml
                http://new.math.msu.su/department/opu/old_cite/INTERN/mag_il_lect_09.pdf
                http://www.msk.festivalnauki.ru/meropriyatie-festivalya/32244/zadacha-nyutona-i-
                chelovek-nevidimka
  • bastard
    bastard 14 November 2015 16: 07 New
    +1
    Quote: War and Peace
    according to Tupolev’s principle, only beautiful flying machines fly, but this thing doesn’t look like that, therefore it will not fly ...

    And in fact, some raskoryak. With such a wing, what will be the separation-landing speed? And the take-off run? Will the tires withstand? Some dreamer painted, the Indian said. Probably they will produce in China? Horror! Are some cunning dviguns, those under the fuselage and under the wing, and the environmental resistance, especially on the hyper, is no longer taken into account in the enlightened west? Wow, I sketched the lope of amateurish questions!
    This is most likely for the Chinese lure, so they copied urgently, spent the loot. laughing
  • Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 14 November 2015 07: 27 New
    +9
    on the site, next to economics and politics, you need a "fantasy" section to do ... yes
    1. andj61
      andj61 14 November 2015 18: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: Andrew Y.
      on the site, next to economics and politics, you need a "fantasy" section to do ... yes

      And this article is a review of science fiction. And almost all of these projects will never see the sky. Their only purpose is the accumulation of experience by designers. After all, they are made exclusively virtually, without working out at least models in the metal, purging in the wind tunnel is also virtual. Yes, these projects are also needed for the terms of reference for the manufacture of the necessary materials - both structural and elements of planes and engines.
      I think that similar studies are underway in our country too.
  • Sergey Guriev
    Sergey Guriev 14 November 2015 07: 46 New
    +4
    AERION AS2 - F 104 widower, flying coffin ... Maybe it seemed? And so, according to the main picture, I'm certainly not a design engineer, but pot-bellied contours with rounded shapes - this is even for cruising supersonic sound like a hint at an accordion.
  • kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 14 November 2015 08: 18 New
    +7
    Some sort of contours are not hypersonic for him. Take a look at really supersonic planes, then there are needle-shaped noses, a rigid fuselage design without dangling planes, the engines are either hidden in packages or have long fairings. And here at first I thought it was some kind of airship.
    Yes, and the lower arts are drawn clearly due to the lack of experience in designing supersonic aircraft. Just for example, take the Tu-22 and Tu-22M3, although they are essentially different in design, but nevertheless the same purpose aircraft, which I think is actually much more important in this situation. And if you compare Tu-shki's profile with "bionanoeko" art, then the bomber made half a century ago (running on wood wassat ), on old voracious turbojet engines, radio tubes and carbon fiber then only guessed.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. gjv
      gjv 14 November 2015 13: 08 New
      +5
      Quote: kugelblitz
      Some sort of contours are not hypersonic for him.

      Do you think their wind tunnel broke? bully
      It's written -
      almost vertically rises to a height of 35.000m

      See the Energy Buran contours, SLS-Shuttle.
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 14 November 2015 14: 06 New
        +1

        Well this is, nevertheless, missiles designed for a short transit time of the atmosphere. I’m looking at the FAU-2 schedule and everything seems to be fine, but there’s a catch somewhere. Especially given the frequent destruction at the end sites. The Germans then began to fill the space between the casing and the tanks with fiberglass (as I recall). And the FAU-2 is just very close in theory to this hybrid rocket and aircraft. There are too many doubts, although I welcome the innovations in this industry, but still the concept of the Tu-2000 type VKS is more real. Especially in space, the atmospheric resistance is practically absent. And here is the aerodynamics of a subsonic eroplan.
        1. opus
          14 November 2015 15: 28 New
          +4
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Well this is, nevertheless, missiles designed for a short transit time of the atmosphere.

          concorde-2 also rises almost vertically to a height of 35000 m (and passes the sound barrier as it rises), and again on the LRE.
          AS A ROCKET-CARRIER, like a Shuttle or like a Buran, with a similar pitch angle, also a VERY short time.






          35000m.
          Pressure at a given height (mmHg): 12
          Sea level pressure (mmHg): 760
          63,3 times smaller

          The resistance force is directed against the speed of movement, its value is proportional to the characteristic area S, the density of the medium ρ and the square of the velocity V:
          https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/9/d/f9dd5d1ba8f9aa961177e8861ec21e79.png
          accordingly, the drag force of the aircraft will be 63,3 times less
          Quote: kugelblitz
          The Germans then began to fill the space between the casing and the tanks with fiberglass (as I recall).

          ?
          at FAU-2 Oxidant - liquid oxygen (boiling point 90,188 K (−182,96 ° C)), refuel in the lower tank.
          The space between the tanks and the casing was densely filled heat insulator (fiberglass).
          The FAU-2 has a supporting body (can withstand the weight of fuel components, acceleration, overload, the passage of the atmosphere at speeds up to 1,7 km / s and suspended TP.)
          The suspension tanks were INFLATED with 1,4ATM overpressure (which is decent) to give hardness
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Especially given the frequent destruction at the end sites

          was not, practically.
          out of 4300 missiles launched, more 2000 exploded on the ground or in the air at launch, or crashed in flight
          1. kugelblitz
            kugelblitz 14 November 2015 15: 43 New
            0
            I will not argue, because of the over-innovativeness of this project, since the idea here is interesting in itself. But a little aerodynamics would be fixed. In the manner of the second stage A9 / A10 at least. wassat
            1. opus
              14 November 2015 16: 30 New
              0
              Quote: kugelblitz
              But a little aerodynamics would be fixed.

              Hydrogen. Although liquid, it has a VERY low density - 0,07 g / cm³ (and cryogenic properties with a freezing point of 14,01 K (−259,14 ° C) and a boiling point of 20,28 K (−252,87 ° C )))
              Even liquid oxygen (has a density of 1,141 g / cm³ at −222,65 ° C) is a gift, compared to H2

              Hydrogen expansion coefficient when the state of aggregation changes to a gaseous componentt 848: 1 at 20 K.
              / Solid hydrogen has a minimum density of 0,08667 g / cm³ (at 14,16 K) among solids. At elevated pressure up to(≈75 ÷ 150 GPa)
              Metallic hydrogen - missile dreams:
              so far received only shock compression in 1996:
              short-term (about 1 ms) a pressure of more than 100 GPa (10 ^ 3 atm.) was reached, a temperature of the order of thousands of degrees Kelvin when the density of the substance is about 600 kg / m ^ 3
              ----------> SUPER.
              The trouble here is P. Louviere and R. Letoulet (2002) successively approached to the pressures observed in the center of the Earth (324-345 GPa), but still no phase transition was observed.

              The volume of a physical body of mass {m}, consisting of a homogeneous density substance {\ rho}, can be calculated by the formula

              No where to go.
              1. Either diameter
              2. Either the length (will break by aerodynamic forces)
  • kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 14 November 2015 08: 33 New
    +1
    I will add separately, as a parallel, real flying design, which was also developed on accounting accounts. The dawn of overtones, it’s not clear how large planes will behave (before that, small fighters and rocket planes flew). We look at the profile. After that, we draw conclusions on how all these designs will flutter in the figures.
  • lilian
    lilian 14 November 2015 09: 00 New
    +5
    It is also difficult to believe that supersonic aviation will revive in the next 10-15 years.
    The paunchiness of this project can be compensated by a large flight altitude, more than 20km. MiG-25 seems to cope with a height of 25-30km.
    But I’m not yet mature, I think, now airplanes are more competing with each other for economy, which airlines will want to buy this headache?
  • sa-ag
    sa-ag 14 November 2015 09: 22 New
    0
    "... We won't buy. The fuel is H2 (hydrogen). And we know xy from hydrogen, and how to store it."

    Yes, here they are some kind of backward, they launched oversized and heavy loads on hydrogen for 30 years, using fuel with the highest specific impulse could only have guessed there :-)

    And about pot-belliedness and hypersound, the shuttle also picks up speed vertically, and the eight-meter tank with hydrogen doesn't really bother him
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 14 November 2015 10: 46 New
      +2
      The main question is different - how much does 1 cubic meter of liquid hydrogen cost in comparison with the same volume of kerosene, and there will be no problems with the storage of hydrogen, cryogenic fuel tanks were created for us long ago when we worked on the OVKS Tu 2000.
      1. andj61
        andj61 14 November 2015 18: 26 New
        0
        Quote: Vadim237
        The main question is different - how much does 1 cubic meter of liquid hydrogen cost in comparison with the same volume of kerosene, and there will be no problems with the storage of hydrogen, cryogenic fuel tanks were created for us long ago when we worked on the OVKS Tu 2000.

        Everything matters here - both cost and TWO cryogenic components of the fuel - oxygen and hydrogen. More profitable to have only one! Oxygen has a boiling point of -183 ° C, and a melting point of -218,8 ° C;
        hydrogen has a boiling point: -252,9 ° C, melting point: -259,2 ° C., that is, very close to absolute zero. Oxygen alone is much easier and more economical to use. Therefore, in our rocketry we also use a pair of oxygen - kerosene: cheap - compared to a pair of oxygen-hydrogen - and angrily.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 14 November 2015 09: 34 New
    +2
    Like passenger, supersonic planes are too expensive, too complex, too gluttonous. And hypersonic ones, in general. All that is said is raised to the n-th degree. Well, what is a sensible passenger to cut the trip by a few hours into this powder keg?
    What happens to such aircraft at such speeds (well, almost at such speeds) was shown by the shuttle crash over Texas. Then, as a result of damage to the thermal insulation, the shuttle collapsed and burned, along with the crew.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 14 November 2015 10: 49 New
      +1
      Already new materials have been created that will withstand large thermal loads, and this plane can fly in 15 years.
  • S. TALIN
    S. TALIN 14 November 2015 09: 36 New
    +2
    Some duck! And the paws are red laughing
  • bubla5
    bubla5 14 November 2015 09: 36 New
    -2
    Is such a sausage soar
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. gjv
      gjv 14 November 2015 13: 18 New
      +4
      Quote: bubla5
      Is such a sausage soar

      Sausages, and they fly ...

      Airbus A300-600ST Beluga


      BOEING 747 DREAMLIFTER


      Aero Spacelines 377-SG Super Guppy
  • Simple
    Simple 14 November 2015 11: 10 New
    +1
    I think that hypersonic passenger aircraft will never appear.

    For many reasons, including due to the physiological characteristics of a person.

    In air passenger transportation over long distances (in other cases, there is no need for hyperspeeds), the trend is towards an increase in the number of passengers carried per flight. In this aspect, the traditional fuselage layout has exhausted itself (for example, Airbus A380). Flying wing type assemblies are practically possible (which is what they are doing now).

    The development of supersonic business-class aviation is entirely possible.
    1. lilian
      lilian 14 November 2015 12: 52 New
      +2
      I think that hypersonic passenger aircraft will never appear.


      When M.K. At a meeting of the Academy of Artillery Sciences, Tikhonravov made a report "Ways to implement long firing ranges", the audience was agitated and honored the engineer with a storm of negative and even caustic responses and speeches, while there were very few votes in support of M.K. Tikhonravov's fundamental ideas.

      But he proposed the idea of ​​a multi-stage rocket with an intercontinental flight range and hinted at an artificial Earth satellite. These were R-7 developments, on which Russia still sends astronauts to the ISS.

      I mean that you can’t evaluate human genius so low who knows what else they’ll come up with.
      1. Simple
        Simple 14 November 2015 17: 01 New
        +1
        Quote: lilian
        I mean that you can’t evaluate human genius so low who knows what else they’ll come up with.


        request


        I still can’t appreciate the human genius who at least minimized the gravity and resistance of our Earth’s atmosphere in the space of movement of the air body.

        Even if you apply in one design the capabilities of all the necessary existing technologies, it is not cost-effective for passenger traffic.

        For military purposes - perhaps. But rather (and more practical) to create an autonomous aerial object capable of reaching hypersonic speeds than managed by the crew.
    2. Gani
      Gani 14 November 2015 13: 39 New
      0
      In this aspect, the traditional fuselage layout has exhausted itself (for example, Airbus A380). Flying wing type assemblies are practically possible (which is what they are doing now).

      As I understand it, the traditional layout - a cylinder - makes it easier to cope with the difference between internal and external pressures (only a sphere is better), so any other is obviously heavier, which means more expensive to manufacture and operate. And in a flying wing, you can "save" on the wings.
      Why can't the "catamaran" scheme be used? two cylinders side by side))
      1. Simple
        Simple 14 November 2015 17: 03 New
        +1
        Quote: Gani
        Why can't the "catamaran" scheme be used?



        And why don't we watch them? No.
    3. opus
      14 November 2015 15: 02 New
      +2
      Quote: Simple
      I think that hypersonic passenger aircraft will never appear.

      in fact, this is a military project, as it is directly stated in the patent.

      Quote: Author
      EADS is the second largest aerospace manufacturer in the world after the Boeing concern, and again the second in Europe manufacturer of weapons and military equipment (after BAE Systems.)

      2. For some reason, the patent states that the Airbus airliner is designed PREVIOUSLY for military purposes.

      "Airbus intends to use Concorde-2 primarily for military purposes .. "




      Well, at least dual-use.

      Quote: Simple
      In long-distance aviation passenger traffic (in other cases, there is no need for hyper speeds), the trend is towards an increase in the number of passengers carried per flight

      fly on 16 hours without landing ... understand.
      1n time is enough.
      and if several times a month?
      So after all not to realize?

      yes
      --------------------------------
      Although, in something you are right.
      Modern telecommunication facilities provide a virtual presence anywhere in the world in real time.
      But to deliver quickly and accurately striking ammunition or special forces, no.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 14 November 2015 16: 13 New
        +2
        Quote: opus
        1n time is enough.
        and if several times a month?

        If it’s normal in the business class, everything is fine with media entertainment systems, wide comfortable chairs, and unlimited food and drinks.
        1. opus
          14 November 2015 17: 11 New
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          Food and drink are all excellent.

          Well, yes.
          But 3 hours in a chair is better than 16 hours in someone else's bed.
          is not it?
          1. andj61
            andj61 14 November 2015 18: 28 New
            +2
            Quote: opus
            But 3 hours in a chair is better than 16 hours in someone else's bed.
            is not it?

            good And then add another 600 minutes in your bed! fellow
        2. Simple
          Simple 14 November 2015 17: 16 New
          +1
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          If it’s normal in the business class, everything is fine with media entertainment systems, wide comfortable chairs, and unlimited food and drinks.



          If a person is able to pay for a ticket on a hypothetical hypersonic plane, then

          pay for a "regular" transcontinental flight in business class ONCE. wassat



          Then I agree with opus:

          Quote: opus
          ... deliver quickly and accurately the ammunition ...



          For special forces, of course spectacularly bully but rather out of the realm of fantasy yes .

          In general, such a concept is good as a reusable booster block for putting payload into low Earth orbit.
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 14 November 2015 21: 47 New
            0
            Quote: Simple

            If a person is able to pay for a ticket on a hypothetical hypersonic plane, then

            pay for a "regular" transcontinental flight in business class ONCE.

            Not all and not always, for example, a ticket to the first class costs 2-3 times more expensive than a business class, and a business class costs 2-3 times more expensive than a ticket to economy class. There is a difference and it is tangible.
            For example a ticket Moscow-Los Angeles:
            Economy class = 50000 rubles
            Business class = 100000-150000 rubles
            First class (in Russia, no, only with transfers) = about 300000 rubles (if you fly through Dubai, Qatar, etc., etc.)
            Some people need comfort for money, but they are not ready to throw them right and left even with money.
            A flight on a hypersonic plane will cost at least a flight in the first class, or even higher, I doubt that for each flight 100 people will be recruited ready to pay 300000 rubles.
            1. Simple
              Simple 14 November 2015 22: 19 New
              +1
              I think they would be.

              These are both employees of large companies and government employees.

              The point is the technical solution to the issue of creating such an aircraft.

              Only one thing can be said with certainty. The impetus for the creation of a "business version" (up to a hypersonic version) will be served by developments in the military field in this area.
            2. opus
              17 November 2015 01: 15 New
              0
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              I doubt that for each flight 100 people will be recruited ready to pay 300000 rubles.

              Concord-2 is designed for 19 seats
      2. Simple
        Simple 14 November 2015 17: 33 New
        0
        Quote: opus
        fly on 16 hours without landing ... understand.



        Familiar three times flew to Cuba.

        I once. And that is not due to the fact that for a long time.

        "Businesses" and "supersonic" are enough for the eyes.
        1. opus
          14 November 2015 18: 02 New
          +2
          Quote: Simple
          Familiar three times flew to Cuba.

          I flew a lot.
          For 10-12 hours this is the norm, I flew to Mexico and (oh my God) to New Zealand ...
          I fly in principle FSUs. I sleep (with breaks for feeding).
          But the legs are numb, the back and neck are the same. Growth. Do not fit.
          but better than 3 hours for 4,5M than "FSU" with sleep and feeding
          .
          Quote: Simple
          "Businesses" and "supersonic" are enough for the eyes.


          Quote: Author
          Concorde .... speed up to 2 km / h, cruising ceiling 300 m, range up to 18 km, cost 3,5 hour flight from London to New York did not fall below $ 1500 one way - "JUST" is four times more expensive than a ticket for a Boeing 747, overcoming the Atlantic in seven to eight hours.


          Time is money

          According to experts, most money in one minute Microsoft CEO Bill Gates earns $ 6659.

          In second place was investor Warren Buffett, who earned $ 5594 every minute. The top three closes the telecom magnate from Latin America Carlos Slim Halu with 3995 dollars.

          In the world of show business, everything is much more modest. Director Steven Spielberg receives only 632 dollars per minute, NTV reports. He is slightly inferior to the lead Howard Stern 575 dollars and a colleague, director George Lucas - 447 dollars.
          For comparison, the American family’s every minute income is 8 cents.


          Bill gates fly, american family no
          1. Simple
            Simple 14 November 2015 18: 13 New
            0
            Quote: opus
            Bill gates fly, american family no



            Well, science does not pull all sorts of "Wishlist" people like Bill Gates. Even for money.
          2. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 14 November 2015 21: 51 New
            +1
            Quote: opus
            Time is money

            According to expert estimates, the head of Microsoft, Bill Gates, earns the most money in one minute - $ 6659.

            In second place was investor Warren Buffett, who earned $ 5594 every minute. The top three closes the telecom magnate from Latin America Carlos Slim Halu with 3995 dollars.

            In the world of show business, everything is much more modest. Director Steven Spielberg receives only 632 dollars per minute, NTV reports. He is slightly inferior to the lead Howard Stern 575 dollars and a colleague, director George Lucas - 447 dollars.
            For comparison, the American family’s every minute income is 8 cents.

            Bill gates fly, american family no

            The dependence of earnings per minute and flight duration is not clear. Bill Gates, even if on a cruise ship floats at low speed, will not stop making $ 6659 per minute. It is generally not clear how the speed of movement of directors depends on the development of the company's business. Important negotiations are not so frequent and there is time to get to your destination on an ordinary airplane, and you describe as if the directors were touring on an airplane for negotiations.
            1. opus
              17 November 2015 01: 25 New
              +1
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              even if the cruise ship floats at low speed, it will not stop earning $ 6659 per minute.

              The most long-range aircraft fly 12 thousand kilometers. Such a flight takes about 14-15 hours.
              Traveling (on business) on the America-New Zealand ferry for Bill Gates is not realistic at all (2 weeks?)

              For the same almost money, use Concord-2 and be there in 3 hours?
              Who will refuse?

              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              and you describe it as if the directors were touring on a negotiating plane.


              - And how many planes are working in Russia now?

              Embraer representative, Nikolay Golovizniny, Sales Director for the company in Russia, the CIS and Baltic countries.
              - I evaluate today's fleet from 500 to 550 private jets. Of these, most are medium and medium-large class aircraft.
              I advise you to visit the line "Vnukovo-3"
              / Compared to America, where it is privately owned almost 15 thousand business jets, in Russia a rather modest park.
              almost a thousand sides - registered in the states of Texas, California and Florida, and least of all - about a hundred aircraft - in Alaska.


              John Travolta, according to American media, owns a whole fleet of aircraft - 11 boards, including Boeing 707.

              Private jets in the United States "have a turnover" of $ 150 billion annually, and the business jet industry itself supports more than a million jobs in America.

              China (where everything is cheap): annual maintenance of a small, designed for 10 passengers private jet, will cost $ 400 thousand. This includes maintenance, pay parking, crew salaries. The cost of the flight should also be added to this amount: on average in China it is about $ 400 per hour (In the USA, an average flight costs about 4 to 9 thousand dollars for an owner on a private plane with all the amenities on average.)
  • Terminolol
    Terminolol 14 November 2015 11: 37 New
    +1
    If it does, then it will be a plane for private flights and make it easier and more meaningful.
    1. NIKNN
      NIKNN 14 November 2015 14: 16 New
      +3
      Terminol SU Today, 11:37 AM

      If it does, then it will be a plane for private flights and make it easier and more meaningful.


      It will be a military apparatus, I don’t know what purpose, and a cruise missile is already in trials. lol
  • Forest
    Forest 14 November 2015 11: 38 New
    +2
    I wonder how many kilometers to pull the runway for such a miracle? Judging by the size of the wing, either the take-off speed should be below 500-600 km / h and with a normal speed set will take off after 2-3 km of run, or the acceleration is ala deck fighter and health restrictions for passengers.
    1. opus
      14 November 2015 17: 25 New
      +2
      Quote: Forest
      Judging by the size of the wing, or take-off speed should be under 500-600 km / h and with a normal set

      Tu-144 could land and take off at 18 airports of the USSR, while the Concord, whose takeoff and landing speed was 15% higher, a separate landing certificate was required for each airport.

      =====================

      Tu-144 and NK-144A Sr = 1,81 kg / kgf hour on a cruising supersonic thrust of 5000 kgf, Sr = 1,65 kg / kgf hour on takeoff afterburning mode of thrust of 20000 kgf, Cf = 0,92 kg / kgf / h at a cruising subsonic thrust of 3000 kgf and at maximum afterburner mode in transonic mode received 11800 kgf.
      1. Forest
        Forest 14 November 2015 20: 06 New
        +1
        Only Concord and 144 have a larger wing area and a smaller sweep angle. In the design of this Concorde, the 2 wing looks more like a Tu-160 with torn turning planes.
  • dvg79
    dvg79 14 November 2015 11: 46 New
    +1
    I didn’t understand what was so new about XNUMX years that they patented-like designs for lunch.
  • egor1712
    egor1712 14 November 2015 13: 12 New
    +3

    They suggested combining different engines in one product. You can think of it, but to combine them in the work will be very difficult. Different engines, different modes. The device, moving from one mode, must turn off one engine and turn on another. Everything should be in sync. Again, fuel. Different types. How to store, how to serve. A bunch of questions. While this is a fantasy of science fiction.
    1. opus
      14 November 2015 17: 17 New
      0
      Quote: egor1712
      You can think of it, but to combine them in the work will be very difficult. Different engines, different modes. The device, moving from one mode, must turn off one engine and turn on another.

      It is simple (but not very beneficial in terms of overall efficiency).
      Much simpler than the 3-in-1 remote control.
      Jet engine


      Even 2 in 1 is very difficult:




      Quote: egor1712
      Again, fuel. Different types. How to store, how to serve. A bunch of questions. While this is a fantasy of science fiction.

      the same fuel: liquid H2
      Oxidizing agent: for turbofan engines and hypersonics, external air outside.
      For LRE liquid O2
  • Samarin
    Samarin 14 November 2015 13: 24 New
    +2
    Supersonic is launched from Earth using an electromagnetic rail gun at a speed close to 5000 km / h.

    this is all from the realm of pseudoscientific fiction - in order to accelerate the "body" to 5000 km / h with acceleration, say 3g, you need an electromagnetic "rail" only 30 km long ..., but if 6g - then even less - 15 km.
    1. opus
      14 November 2015 14: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: Samarin
      this is all from the field of pseudoscientific fiction - in order to accelerate the "body" to 5000 km / h with acceleration, say 3g, you need an electromagnetic "rail" only 30 km long ...,

      1. Somehow you made a strange calculation.
      Even without body weight, so immediately and 30km?
      2. And if, together with the EM rail, a rocket engine, rocket engine is used, as in the diagram ...

      How long is the "rail"?

      ====================
      what do you think :
      - What is the mass of these trains? HOW MANY TIMES does the mass of trains exceed the mass of the GPP LA?
      - in which section do they reach a cruising speed of 500 km / h (the separation speed of the aircraft from the GDP is about 300 km / h)
      What is the acceleration?
      Quote: Samarin
      it's all from the realm of near-science fiction
      Seriously?









      well and smaller:
      1. Samarin
        Samarin 15 November 2015 13: 04 New
        +1
        learn physics, nothing to do with body mass, speed = acceleration * time, distance = half acceleration * time squared - to calculate the path traveled with acceleration
  • mvg
    mvg 14 November 2015 15: 02 New
    0
    Quote: gjv
    Quote: bubla5
    Is such a sausage soar

    Sausages, and they fly ...

    Airbus A300-600ST Beluga


    BOEING 747 DREAMLIFTER


    Aero Spacelines 377-SG Super Guppy

    I always knew that not all weed is useful.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 14 November 2015 18: 12 New
      +1
      [img] http://i.artfile.ru/1024x768_364820_ [www.ArtFile.ru] .jpg [/ img]
      Quote: mvg
      I always knew that not all weed is useful.

      the main thing: to apply correctly! laughing
  • TOR2
    TOR2 14 November 2015 15: 58 New
    +2
    Oddly enough, supersonic in passenger aircraft is needed for our country. Many residents of the Far East have been to China many times and not once in the European part of their own country. Therefore, as soon as it becomes possible to work on reconciling, you need to resume. It will not be easy, such a plane at some moments behaves differently than its subsonic relatives. An interesting story of test pilot Evgeny Goryunov at the 39th minute of the film about TU 144
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w73qouhz6U&feature=youtu.be
    Fuel also has a lot of work to do. Obviously, hydrogen is indispensable. First you need to make it safe for storage. And only passing through the installation of training from would acquire all its inherent qualities and was fed into the engine of the aircraft. If we can create such a technology, then it will be possible to apply it not only in aviation.
  • 33 Watcher
    33 Watcher 14 November 2015 16: 29 New
    +1
    “Oddly enough, supersonic in passenger aviation is needed for our country. Many residents of the Far East have been to China many times and never in the European part of their own country.”

    So here it is not the duration of the flight, but the price of the ticket laughing Well, and on the sound of the sound, I think ordinary mortals never fly at all, even if they go on the line tomorrow ... laughing
  • diglator
    diglator 14 November 2015 18: 35 New
    0
    5000 km / h on an electromagnetic catapult? "From the Cannon to the Moon" :)

    Please explain, here in the photo of the Tu-144, what are these pins (rods?) For at the wingtip intended for? Not to dissipate static charge?
  • serverny
    serverny 15 November 2015 00: 51 New
    0
    The supersonic trains in pipes designed by the Mask project look more realistic and cost-effective.

    Well, yes, this project of "hypersonic sausages" is clear that it is never civil, if the work is going seriously.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 15 November 2015 17: 34 New
      0
      This aircraft for an air launch is the most it will be.
  • Evgeniy30
    Evgeniy30 15 November 2015 12: 37 New
    +1
    The first such aircraft we did. The whole world thinks that the French, the Americans bought the patent from the French. It's a shame.
  • 9lvariag
    9lvariag 24 November 2015 03: 53 New
    +1
    The article is not new and not very revealing. In the 90s, they already took up the supersonic ATF truck.
    1) Yes, damn it, stupid francs decided to disperse the KR with a thermonuclear warhead to 8,7M.! The frog clowns did not think who needs such a CD! It is on the radar screens, it will be visible for several thousand km. on the plasma trail. Do such a CR for ranges less than 500km. just nonsense, she will not be able to maneuver (the strength of the GTD-21 glider was no more than 3,5G). And when approaching the target, such a missile will slow down to 1,5M, otherwise it will not hit the target. And less speed and less kinetic energy of warheads. And what they will cool the JBCH, this is generally a moment. At this speed, it will heat up to 1500 degrees. They will put an ablative coating of amides and fluoroplastics, in 10cm. thick?

    2)No one has written in the comments that all "Archangels", "Drones", "Valkyries", "Blackbirds", "Concords", "Super Sonic", "Sotki" are single-mode aircraft. Those. they have a flight and more or less economical (if you can call it an aircraft where 70% of the load is fuel) - only one speed range! It was not possible to create a flying multi-mode high-speed aircraft, not a single consortium is likely to succeed. wink

    3) Research on the design of planes and airframes can take tens of years. We did the same for Sotku and the object “Two hundred”, “Lapotok”. Moreover, neither Boeing, Lockheed, NASA, nor RosKosmos, MAP, and MiG are eager to share the backlog of practical calculations and purges. Many of these materials are still state-owned. secret of the USA, RF, Kazakhstan! WITHmaking apparatus with planes with transformers is the number one difficulty. Even "Spiral" and "Bor" were vehicles with one flight mode. Albeit with a variable angle of installation of planes for re-centering the shuttle. Who does not believe watches how all the Aerospace Forces including "Buran" flew and landed in the atmosphere.

    4) Bullshit with 3 types of remote control - know-how! As it will switch, without a subsidence of the aircraft on the flight level and pitch, the fuel system of this pregnant mammoth is simply terrible. All who are interested will remember a couple (at least) of serious emergency situations during tests with aircraft with add. Rocket engine. Already a fuel explosion, on a plane with a liquid propellant rocket engine at the tester Vasin - everyone probably knows this. Just do not have to troll - the scoops were all stupid and bad. Have amers rockets with LRE not exploded last year? This clearly violated the rule of the name of one of our missile launchers (Arkhip Lyulka IMHO) - no more than 9 dviglov per step!
  • 9lvariag
    9lvariag 24 November 2015 03: 54 New
    +1
    5) All engines have different pressures of hydrogen in the main lines, the highest for the liquid-propellant engine and the lowest for the scramjet engine. How are these boobies going to compensate for the pressure surges in the lines after the hydrogen booster pumps? A HZ! How to control pitches during fuel production? Indeed, in the present. Aircrafts - they pump fuel through ballast tanks, but here what to pump? How to control thrust throttling in such a heterogeneous package of engines !? Let's say you sit down and you need to switch from a scramjet engine to a turbojet engine? If it were liquid-propellant rocket engines, then besides the excessive consumption of fuel, at low gas - yes, figs would be with them. But before the start of the turbojet engine, it is necessary for the electronics to open the shields in the air intake duct, spin the compressor and feed it to the NVD and the afterburner stage, special. fuel. And at the same time to avoid surging (which was more than once in the case of amers) and spontaneous combustion of fuel. And then the plane also drops its flight speed. The clever, mighty heads of the USSR did not bring a turbojet engine running on hydrogen vapor to the "50 -50" - why did the little firms sculpt what they got instead of the shuttles? Who does not believe reads about Myasischev M.19 - a shuttle with booster LRE and marching NRE.

    6) Have the French women thought about the safety of passengers? Few of those who burned out in the "Concorde" by their foolishness and hands from the ass of American technicians? They will order spacesuits and PPKs in the Russian Federation, half a year before the flight? And take in flight only the past VLK? Fuck you fools. And the runway, whatever it rolls out, this miracle will be built in the deserts, 15 km each. long and without bends of the strip in height. It would be better to tell what glide path and landing pitch angle their "miracle wunder" will have, and if a repeated circle? That knocks out the glass in the area 360 km.!

    7) Calculations that a vertical start will tailor, for this aircraft over and hypersonic impact - just laughter. Practice shows the opposite. And counting on the fact that the altitude of the flight level of the aircraft to protect people from its impact can only be a sucker who is not familiar with the history of hypersonic flights and an Airbus marketer! Any student knows. that a hypersonic strike during the acceleration of American aircraft was felt even from a distance of 40 km.! This is at a flight level of 17 - 22 km, and the memorable flight of the X-15 was seen and heard in half of the United States. And here in the air there will be a pot-bellied cow many times larger than the "Archangel". laughing am