Breakthrough in 'detonating' hypersonic propulsion
thedrive.com
thedrive.com
The best tech is not presented to the public.
What happened with the NDAA makes it clear that defense contractors are hiding advanced technology related to UAPs.
The UAP Disclosure Act unanimously passed the Senate. When it got to the House, it was completely gutted by the man who is Lockheed's #1 Lobbying Recipient (Mike Turner). Here is the response from the Senate when the House killed the bill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0HoXkQXpVE
So it's clear, defense contractors have advanced technology that not even Congress or the President can learn about.
Who would they sell it to? And why is any of what you said a bad thing?
Without controlled navigable flight, "hypersonics" are much simpler, as you basically just have a ballistic missile, which can still be intercepted by traditional air defense (Russia's Kinzal being an example of this kind of so-called hypersonic missile).
Hence getting to mach 5 requires solving two problems that don't really need to be solved for slower speeds.
"A typical air-breathing DMRJ propulsion system can only begin operating when the vehicle achieves supersonic speeds greater than Mach 3. In fact, since ramjet (and scramjet) engines don’t have rotating parts (compressor and turbine) as turbojet and turbofan engines, they rely on specially designed air inlets to compress the air to the pressure required for the combustion.
The efficiency, however, only gets sufficiently high when the speed reaches at least Mach 2, due to the higher temperature and pressure obtained in the combustion chamber. This is why ramjets usually need other means to reach the minimum speed for ignition, such as rocket boosters or, in the SR-71 Blackbird, dual cycle turbo-ramjet engines."
from https://theaviationist.com/2023/12/16/ge-aerospace-demonstra...
That would be bad for Taiwan.
This is due to the simple fact that you can only carry so much AA ammunition and restocking ammunition on a ship takes significantly longer than it does on land.
This isn’t even touching on drones, both flying and boats, as well as torpedos and mines.
Taking out an aircraft carrier isn’t difficult. It’s just that luckily, no country with the capacity to do so has been crazy enough to start ww3.
In practical aerospace, hypersonic generally means anything significnantly faster than the sr71, the mach 4-5 range being the low end and orbital velocities the high (mach 10).
That's fine. With the exception of routes that go from Europe to East Asia over the continent, there is no shortage of gruelingly long flights between South America and Australia, New Zealand and Europe that are done mostly over the ocean.
And that doesn't take into account the recent developments in reducing sonic booms.
I also assume there's less market these days for flying NYC to London to shake hands and sign a deal over lunch and be back home for dinner.
"But Hindenburg’s potentially most innovative features were never actually implemented. Hindenburg was originally designed for helium, which was too difficult to obtain and too expensive to be vented to compensate for the weight of fuel burned during flight. To avoid the need to valve helium, several innovative solutions were proposed. One involved a set of inner hydrogen gas cells to be installed at center of 14 of the ship’s 16 helium cells. The flammable hydrogen would be protected inside the larger cell containing inert helium, and when it was necessary to valve lifting gas, hydrogen, rather than helium, could be released. When it became obvious that helium would not be made available by the Americans, and that the ship would be inflated with hydrogen, the inner cells were abandoned, but Hindenburg did retain the axial catwalk at the center of the ship that was installed to provide access to the valves for these inner cells."
Btw, they are also VERY loud.
The description seems to say that there's also a rde turbine to handle subsonic and low supersonic flight.