Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Falcon down

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Falcon down

    Falcon HTV-2 is lost during bid to become fastest ever plane | World news | The Guardian

    Bummer!

  • #2
    not surprised, new tech doesn't come easy, it wont be the last loss, till they get it right, most important imo, would be to find out the reason what and how went wrong, building new plane wont be that hard.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by omon View Post
      not surprised, new tech doesn't come easy, it wont be the last loss, till they get it right, most important imo, would be to find out the reason what and how went wrong, building new plane wont be that hard.
      Not to sure they will get another shot a this project.


      "In April last year, the first Falcon test flight, HTV-1, ran into trouble after nine minutes when computers picked up a glitch and steered the aircraft into the sea as a safety precaution.

      Darpa only built two Falcon prototypes and has no plans to manufacture any more. This test flight was their last shot at success before the project is considered for closure".

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by dave lukins View Post
        Not to sure they will get another shot a this project.


        "In April last year, the first Falcon test flight, HTV-1, ran into trouble after nine minutes when computers picked up a glitch and steered the aircraft into the sea as a safety precaution.

        Darpa only built two Falcon prototypes and has no plans to manufacture any more. This test flight was their last shot at success before the project is considered for closure".
        too bad.
        "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

        Comment


        • #5
          If this would have succeeded, how would they have intended to land this thing? I would think that would be a later challenge. They say it could go to New York and Los Angles in 12 minutes, how about the loiter time available to slow its speeds down?
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Dago View Post
            If this would have succeeded, how would they have intended to land this thing? I would think that would be a later challenge. They say it could go to New York and Los Angles in 12 minutes, how about the loiter time available to slow its speeds down?
            controlled dive into the ocean is what i saw.

            Comment


            • #7
              Correct for the test. However in the future, didn't they intend to have this as a platform, and land?
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                they didn't figure that out yet, lol, thou why can't it land like shuttle does. thou it is true landing would be longer than flight.
                did they really think they would get it right with only 2 prototypes?????
                "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

                Comment


                • #9
                  Apparently they got 9 minutes of flight data before they lost control, which was better than the first try.

                  The plan was for 30 minutes of flight after separation.
                  "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dago View Post
                    Correct for the test. However in the future, didn't they intend to have this as a platform, and land?
                    No, this was a testbed to learn how to control the aircraft in the flight regime.

                    The project is part of Prompt Global Strike, the landings will involve a big boom.
                    "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by highsea View Post
                      No, this was a testbed to learn how to control the aircraft in the flight regime.

                      The project is part of Prompt Global Strike, the landings will involve a big boom.
                      Obviously, but I would think there would be a combination of loiter time with the deployment of a canopy? I mean, those speeds, are pretty intense. You would need a canopy to be effective and withstand that type of stress and be light enough. I guess its mute, since the project will be scraped now?
                      Last edited by Dago; 12 Aug 11,, 01:54.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Loitering at Mach 20?

                        Negative. PGS means you have positive ID on the target, you need to hit it before it moves.

                        This was only one phase of development. PGS isn't scrapped.

                        Falcon was a telemetry truck. It wasn't a weapon prototype, it was never intended to evolve into a weapon. It was just one step along the way.
                        Last edited by highsea; 12 Aug 11,, 03:09.
                        "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by highsea View Post
                          Loitering at Mach 20?

                          Negative. PGS means you have positive ID on the target, you need to hit it before it moves.

                          This was only one phase of development. PGS isn't scrapped.

                          Falcon was a telemetry truck. It wasn't a weapon prototype, it was never intended to evolve into a weapon. It was just one step along the way.
                          I was referring to a vehicle which goes mach 20 and has reentry capability. As for the greater PGS project, we'll which route does it go from here? That now that the vehicle part of the project is scrapped, or at least this portion, go with another slower platform, or go with missiles?

                          What's the next step?

                          And yes, I was referring to reentry and landing. I guess it would glide, deliver it's payload, and fly CONUS? It wouldn't have the speed to go back into orbit or low space, and I just wonder how it would slow its speed slow enough to land? Deploying a canopy at MACH 20?
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Dago View Post
                            I was referring to a vehicle which goes mach 20 and has reentry capability. As for the greater PGS project, we'll which route does it go from here? That now that the vehicle part of the project is scrapped, or at least this portion, go with another slower platform, or go with missiles?

                            What's the next step?

                            And yes, I was referring to reentry and landing. I guess it would glide, deliver it's payload, and fly CONUS? It wouldn't have the speed to go back into orbit or low space, and I just wonder how it would slow its speed slow enough to land? Deploying a canopy at MACH 20?
                            PGS is a doctrine, not a weapon system. It will have a multiple elements. None of the hypersonic vehicles are expected to return home- they are expendables. There are more tests of the X-51 scheduled, DARPA may build another vehicle similar to Falcon, there are a bunch of projects related to the PGS initiative underway.

                            Falcon was strictly a telemetry vehicle- it wasn't ever going to be a component of PGS. The Falcon program ended 20 minutes early. That's about the extent of it.

                            We are just beginning to learn about this flight regime. It's unknown territory, and very challenging. The intent is to have something other than ICBM's to deliver conventional strikes on short notice. Avoid WW3 and all that...
                            "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I admit I am completely ignorant of global strike, I understood it to be a doctrine, just wasn't up to date on all the platforms, last time I read about it, there was some vision of an ICBM filling that role, how expensive? And then yes the conspiracies of "Aurora" and supersonic bombers.

                              So, you are certain, there was no intent on this development leading to a bomber vehicle and reentry? I mean you said it your self, these were all trial demonstrators, but I never knew that the program was being lead to expendable vehicles.

                              Before you can go on with development of other hypersonic, you need to make sure the demonstrator is aerodynamically capable. I guess they can go another route, but alot of thought, and engineering, went into this one, obviously they thought this would be successful, and maybe it is, maybe it was only a minor glitch nonetheless the result of whether it can be aerodynamically capable we'll have to wait and find out.

                              Also the Next-Generation Bomber is in limbo.

                              Originally posted by highsea View Post

                              We are just beginning to learn about this flight regime. It's unknown territory, and very challenging. The intent is to have something other than ICBM's to deliver conventional strikes on short notice. Avoid WW3 and all that...
                              Yeah the last time I read about it, I remember ICBM's being considered. Why not a platform that flys a trajectory into orbit with rentry, where it pops up on the other side of the world, drops it's payload of RAMJET powered missiles, or another type that utilizing the speed of the platform, and having that platform land back in the US CONUS? Being remoteness nonetheless.



                              The DARPA Falcon Project (Force Application and Launch from Continental United States)

                              FALCON

                              The overall FALCON program announced in 2003 had two major components: a small launch vehicle for carrying payloads to orbit or launching the hypersonic weapons platform payload, and the hypersonic vehicle itself.


                              Follow on hypersonic program

                              Following the Phase 2 contract, DARPA and the US Air Force continued to develop the hypersonic vehicle platform.The program was to follow a set of flight tests with a series of hypersonic technology vehicles.


                              The FALCON project includes:
                              X-41 Common Aero Vehicle (CAV) — a common aerial platform for hypersonic ICBMs and cruise missiles, as well as civilian RLVs and ELVs.
                              Hypersonic Technology Vehicle-1 (HTV-1) — a test concept, originally planned to fly in September 2007, now canceled.[8]
                              HTV-2 — first flew on 22 April 2010, but contact was lost soon after booster separation[9][10][11]
                              HTV-3X — Blackswift, now canceled
                              Small Launch Vehicle (SLV) — a smaller engine to power CAVs, now complete
                              The Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle (HCV) would be able to fly 9,000 nautical miles (17,000 km) in 2 hours with a payload of 12,000 lb (5,500 kg).[12] It is to fly at a high altitudes and achieve speeds of up to Mach 6.



                              The first powered flight of the X-51 was planned for 25 May 2010, but the presence of a freighter transiting a portion of the Naval Air Station Point Mugu Sea Range caused a 24 hour postponement.[21] The X-51 completed its first powered flight successfully on 26 May 2010 by flying for over 200 seconds and reaching a speed of Mach 5; it did not meet the planned 300 second flight duration, however.[1][2] The flight had the longest scramjet burn time of 140 seconds. The X-43 had the previous longest flight burn time of 12 seconds,[2][22][23] while setting a new speed record of Mach 9.8 (12,144 km/h, 7,546 mph).
                              Last edited by Dago; 12 Aug 11,, 05:12.
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X