| Welcome to Modena. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Hypersonic | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 7 2011, 12:41:32 AM (76 Views) | |
| Alsatia | Dec 7 2011, 12:41:32 AM Post #1 |
|
Noticed the argument in the US thread. Hypersonic isn't a new phenomenon, the Space Shuttle traveled at Hypersonic speeds. |
![]() |
|
| United States of Alkatine | Dec 7 2011, 01:01:50 AM Post #2 |
![]()
|
I don't know about the space shuttle (though that would make sense -- I know it would have to at least be supersonic) -- but remember that all ballistic missiles travel at hypsersonic speeds. In fact only ballistic missiles are weapons that travel to hypersonic speeds. But no, hypersonic isn't meant to be new; the concept for the X-51 is. Specifically, its desired ability for a "strike anywhere" capability The design specifications for the US of Alkatine's X-51 and capabilities are word to word to word the same as the real world X-51 DARPA Also comparable to NASA's X-43 -- The point of the X-51 is again, to kill things far away, really fast (As in, we know where a target is, within the hour, we need him dead kind of situations), really accurately It is not a replacement for the trident (which was mentioned in the same post as the X-51 might I add) The real USAF only has a prototype for this. Alkatine's USAF is richer than the real USAF But I think what people aren't appreciating is the fluid mechanics of the shape of the X-51 -- it looks weird for a reason. It's virtue of speed is uniquely given by its form. PS: I notice going back that at certain instances the Hypersonic Missile was mislabeled as the X-37. This is incorrect. It is supposed to be the X-51. For more information on the X-51: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/4203874 http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/weapons/global-strike-hypersonic-glider-lost-at-sea The wikipage; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-51 And, if you're feeling really mil-nerdy, here's DARPAs statement on the project's recent crash http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/data/FalconHTV-2FactSheet-1.pdf Yes, this is what me and my friends talk about in lecture -- like the cool rebellious kids we are!
|
![]() |
|
| Alsatia | Dec 7 2011, 08:17:36 PM Post #3 |
|
The X-51 in my opinion is a boon doggle attempt at bring the US's strike anywhere capability into the new era of instant gratification. As for the Space Shuttle, Hypersonic is constituted as March 5 and above...the speed of sound at 20 degrees Celsius (room temp) is 343 m/s. The Space shuttle traveled at 8,000 m/s or Mach 23...so.... |
![]() |
|
| United States of Alkatine | Dec 7 2011, 08:18:51 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
Yeah, I never really learned much about the space shuttle, but yeah that makes sense. Considering it has to go to space and all that |
![]() |
|
| Alsatia | Dec 7 2011, 08:23:46 PM Post #5 |
|
and not just go into space but carry 23,000 pounds of equipment with it into space.... I'm just finding it funny that people (especially the RP Mods here) see a new term and instead of researching it instantly call it witch craft and burn the likes of you and I on a cross. P.S. You gonna fill my A-10A Order? Edited by Alsatia, Dec 7 2011, 08:25:16 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| United States of Alkatine | Dec 7 2011, 08:32:18 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
You ordered warthogs? where? |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Out of Character · Next Topic » |







10:14 AM Jul 11