6 ms·

To what (I guess future) planes would this engine be assigned to? Is there a new US project after the F35?

by paganel 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
zakary 2y ago
Missiles and Drones. There’s essentially no viable use case for a hypersonic manned jet
- banku_brougham 2y ago
  In the world we have built, the answer to "what purpose will this new technology serve?" is usually dispiriting.
  - TrainedMonkey 2y ago
    A huge portion of modern technology was originally developed for military applications.
  - hoorayimhelping 2y ago
    This isn't the world we've built, it's the world we live in. We didn't create this world, and we aren't yet powerful enough to change the nature of reality, so to blame humanity for the necessity of defense is silly. You'll be a lot less dispirted if you accept that the world we live in isn't a human creation and that we still haven't made it out of the struggle to survive.
    - prewett 2y ago
      There's nothing in the nature of reality that forces us to fight each other, unless you mean human nature. But we have a choice in whether we choose to be self-serving, which inevitably leads to conflict, or we choose to love our enemy. Loving your enemy requires dying to yourself, usually metaphorically, but it is an option. Humanity is entirely complicit. In fact, each person is a microcosm of that dynamic. Each time we sacrifice a little bit of someone else's well-being for our own, we are engaging in a small bit of that warfare. Cut someone off in traffic because you're in a hurry; cheat a little to get ahead; don't clean up your public mess because laziness/rushed. It's all essentially that same dynamic.
      - dotnet00 2y ago
        >There's nothing in the nature of reality that forces us to fight each other The reality that we are each capable of disagreeing with each other and having conflicting priorities, combined with the limited resources we have access to, is the nature of reality that forces us to fight each other.
      - credit_guy 2y ago
        > But we have a choice in whether we choose to be self-serving, which inevitably leads to conflict, or we choose to love our enemy. Sounds very poetic, but how exactly does this apply to the case of Ukraine being invaded by Russia? Do you propose that the Ukrainians should love the invaders? If that should happen, then the Poles and the Romanians should also love the Russians when their time to be invaded comes?
        asdff 2y ago
        If people were not pulling the oars, the galley of war would never leave the harbor. People have to remember there are more of them on the oars than there are those who hold the whips, although this is no easy feat when the incentives to paint this simple truth as some desperate impossibility are so high.
        credit_guy 2y ago
        It’s all so simple until a missile strikes a hospital full of childern. Then what? Do you think you’ll be praised for your wisdom of oars and helms if you talk to the parents who just lost a child a week ago?
    - banku_brougham 2y ago
      I meant "humanity" by "we". I think "we" animals is too broad a category, even mammals TBH. Really just homo sapiens pretty much.
lpcvoid 2y ago
This will hopefully be used to counter russian and Chinese threats in the future.
- preisschild 2y ago
  There is a certain military that is happy to test those weapons against real russian targets :)
  - jabl 2y ago
    I think they wouldn't want to use the absolutely newest and greatest tech there for fear the Russkies will figure out something from the wreckage. There's plenty of not quite the latest cutting edge stuff sitting in storage that could be donated, though.
    - spywaregorilla 2y ago
      And so the war of 1990s tech vs. 1970s tech in the 2020s continues
      - jabl 2y ago
        I'd argue Ukraine would be better served by the ~1000 ATACMS (in service 1991-) sitting in storage with their expiration dates rapidly approaching, than by a small number of some prototype hypersonic missiles.
        spywaregorilla 2y ago
        Sure. And even better served by a suitable number of F16s (in service 1980).
Xss3 2y ago
I think it's likely it'll be used in the sr72. Apparently they had to completely rethink and refocus the project part way though due to new technology becoming available. That tech is probably this rotating detonation dualmode ramjet.
- jabl 2y ago
  From what I read (on that source of all truth, twitter), SR-72 was effectively canceled due to unforeseen technical challenges. But might be that with a functional dual mode ramjet, assuming that was the major holdup, perhaps the project could be on track again?
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  Where are you getting "rotating detonation" from? As far as I know that's an unrelated project/problem.
icegreentea2 2y ago
Hypersonic dual-mode ramjets are not suitable for 'general' applications. What makes them 'dual-mode ramjets' is that a single engine can work at both supersonic and hypersonic speeds. It's still a ramjet and so needs another means to get the engine/vehicle up to supersonic speeds. As sibsling notes, maybe it could go into SR-72 or similar penetrating ISR platform is a reasonable guess. It might go into some sort of missile carrier (the carrier gets the expensive reusable dual-mode ramjet, so it can launch missiles with cheaper disposable scramjets directly at hypersonic speed?).

To what (I guess future) planes would this engine be assigned to? Is there a new US project after the F35?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

zakary 2y ago

Missiles and Drones. There’s essentially no viable use case for a hypersonic manned jet

banku_brougham 2y ago
In the world we have built, the answer to "what purpose will this new technology serve?" is usually dispiriting.
- TrainedMonkey 2y ago
  A huge portion of modern technology was originally developed for military applications.
- hoorayimhelping 2y ago
  This isn't the world we've built, it's the world we live in. We didn't create this world, and we aren't yet powerful enough to change the nature of reality, so to blame humanity for the necessity of defense is silly. You'll be a lot less dispirted if you accept that the world we live in isn't a human creation and that we still haven't made it out of the struggle to survive.
  - prewett 2y ago
    There's nothing in the nature of reality that forces us to fight each other, unless you mean human nature. But we have a choice in whether we choose to be self-serving, which inevitably leads to conflict, or we choose to love our enemy. Loving your enemy requires dying to yourself, usually metaphorically, but it is an option. Humanity is entirely complicit. In fact, each person is a microcosm of that dynamic. Each time we sacrifice a little bit of someone else's well-being for our own, we are engaging in a small bit of that warfare. Cut someone off in traffic because you're in a hurry; cheat a little to get ahead; don't clean up your public mess because laziness/rushed. It's all essentially that same dynamic.
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      >There's nothing in the nature of reality that forces us to fight each other The reality that we are each capable of disagreeing with each other and having conflicting priorities, combined with the limited resources we have access to, is the nature of reality that forces us to fight each other.
    - credit_guy 2y ago
      > But we have a choice in whether we choose to be self-serving, which inevitably leads to conflict, or we choose to love our enemy. Sounds very poetic, but how exactly does this apply to the case of Ukraine being invaded by Russia? Do you propose that the Ukrainians should love the invaders? If that should happen, then the Poles and the Romanians should also love the Russians when their time to be invaded comes?
      - asdff 2y ago
        If people were not pulling the oars, the galley of war would never leave the harbor. People have to remember there are more of them on the oars than there are those who hold the whips, although this is no easy feat when the incentives to paint this simple truth as some desperate impossibility are so high.
        credit_guy 2y ago
        It’s all so simple until a missile strikes a hospital full of childern. Then what? Do you think you’ll be praised for your wisdom of oars and helms if you talk to the parents who just lost a child a week ago?
  - banku_brougham 2y ago
    I meant "humanity" by "we". I think "we" animals is too broad a category, even mammals TBH. Really just homo sapiens pretty much.

lpcvoid 2y ago

This will hopefully be used to counter russian and Chinese threats in the future.

preisschild 2y ago
There is a certain military that is happy to test those weapons against real russian targets :)
- jabl 2y ago
  I think they wouldn't want to use the absolutely newest and greatest tech there for fear the Russkies will figure out something from the wreckage. There's plenty of not quite the latest cutting edge stuff sitting in storage that could be donated, though.
  - spywaregorilla 2y ago
    And so the war of 1990s tech vs. 1970s tech in the 2020s continues
    - jabl 2y ago
      I'd argue Ukraine would be better served by the ~1000 ATACMS (in service 1991-) sitting in storage with their expiration dates rapidly approaching, than by a small number of some prototype hypersonic missiles.
      - spywaregorilla 2y ago
        Sure. And even better served by a suitable number of F16s (in service 1980).

Xss3 2y ago

I think it's likely it'll be used in the sr72. Apparently they had to completely rethink and refocus the project part way though due to new technology becoming available. That tech is probably this rotating detonation dualmode ramjet.

jabl 2y ago
From what I read (on that source of all truth, twitter), SR-72 was effectively canceled due to unforeseen technical challenges. But might be that with a functional dual mode ramjet, assuming that was the major holdup, perhaps the project could be on track again?
andrewflnr 2y ago
Where are you getting "rotating detonation" from? As far as I know that's an unrelated project/problem.

icegreentea2 2y ago

Hypersonic dual-mode ramjets are not suitable for 'general' applications. What makes them 'dual-mode ramjets' is that a single engine can work at both supersonic and hypersonic speeds. It's still a ramjet and so needs another means to get the engine/vehicle up to supersonic speeds. As sibsling notes, maybe it could go into SR-72 or similar penetrating ISR platform is a reasonable guess. It might go into some sort of missile carrier (the carrier gets the expensive reusable dual-mode ramjet, so it can launch missiles with cheaper disposable scramjets directly at hypersonic speed?).