I’m half British and half American. My mums dad moved to America from the UK late 70’s to work at a place called MCAS Moffet Field. At this base there was something called the NASA Ames research centre. It was here my grandpa went to work designing the first aero shapes and scramjets for the testbed that they put on the nose of a Pegasus rocket, sling under a b52 and dropped at 50k. I think him and the team there were the grandfathers of scramjets and scramjet powered vehicles. At the time they had both the biggest and fastest wind tunnels in the world there. Mum moved there after she finished university. So I have grandpa and his cool job to thank for being half yank. He also helped design aspects of the Polaris ICBM and the satellite that intercepted Halley’s Comet. True genius of a man.
Cool but no one got scramjets to produce more thrust then drag until Australian Ray Stalker came along. He was head of NASA hypersonics during 80's. has a few awards for it from NASA and USA Aeronautics.
@@FancyPantsOnFire Maybe. even X43A had overheating issues in the scramjet due to being a rectangular inlet design. From research i found Ray Stalker invented Cylindrical inlet helped keep scramjet internals cooler and produced more thrust. DARPA Raytheon and Australian company that all worked together in HIFIRE hypersonic tests now have inward turned inlet designs. DARPA new HAWC cruise missile uses this scramjet. Australian company Hypersonixs will test fly a scramjet drone this year with similar designed scramjet. CEO of this company worked with Ray Stalker and NASA for 10 years designing scramjets.
While hypersonic speeds may limit the ability to deploy some weapons, it opens up the possibility of deploying others. If you're deploying SCRAMJET powered missiles from a hypersonic platform, you no longer have to use boosters since they're already going hypersonic when launched.
@@Spartan1-1 I'm not referring to the hypersonic cruise missiles we're developing/testing now, I'm talking about a new generation of SCRAMJET missiles that don't have boosters. Missiles that are small and lightweight, for air to air, anti-radiation, anti-armor, etc. They wouldn't even need a warhead to destroy most targets, the kinetic energy alone would do the trick.
Thats whats gonna make the u.s king of the skies again in a few years if the sente goes for this asap and put 10 billion in to this company and bull run this shit !!!
The ability to put together seemingly credible information and present it is a way that ordinary people can understand continues to amaze me. Outstanding work, well done.
I was a child when I was fortunate to audit a tour guide's presentation about the X20 Dyna Soar (Dynamic Soaring) vehicle. An engineer on the project; he thought it would work. I was nine, so I believed him. Still love it. When I was 12 their (Lewis') presentation was focused on first gen ion engines, zero gee testing, and the promotional film we were shown during our tour was about the A12 and the nuclear umbrella. Drive straight up at multi-mach to 100,000' and fire missiles! I remember thinking: "where did Dyna Soar go?" It made me sad. I had bought in on the dream of piloting a Mach 20 fighter. Deflated, I turned from engineering to art and have seldom looked back since. Until I watched your video. Cheers.
I'm a huge SR-71 fangirl. I have a photo of myself at 10 years old standing under the nose of one on the Intrepid's deck as part of the Air Museum. I would absolutely LOVE to see an encore to the old Blackbird in the form of a hypersonic SR-72. The OG is the stuff of aviation legend. I think we have the know-how and the resources, and I'm excited to see what kind of innovation and creativity will bring such a beast to life.
@@gokuvegeta7770 People want an SR-71 successor out of nostalgia, but they fail to see the bigger picture of why such an aircraft would be much less capable than subsonic, stealth platforms. There's a reason the Blackbird was an evolutionary dead end - all that speed and the compromises needed to achieve it were a hindrance more than a vital capability.
Happy New Year Alex. I remember that there was a proposal to make the SR-71 a delivery platform for SRAM missiles, the concept was to have an SR-71 make attacks on Soviet IADS nodes with nuclear-armed SRAM missiles. The Missiles would have been carried in empty reconnaissance camera bays, I believe that 3 were specified to be carried. The abstract was in an SR-71 book I used to have.
You are sort of correct, but that actually predates the SR-71. The USAF was going to use the B-70 to do what you describe, but they found that the SR-71's precursor, the A-12, would do it better. So they planned on converting some A-12s to the "B-71", the successor to the B-70. Since it would be able to do both recon and strike missions it would have been designated the RS-71, but (according to rumor) Lyndon B. Johnson misspoke in a conference and called it the SR-71, and since nobody wanted to correct the President, they just said that the SR meant "strategic recon". Conveniently, though, they later ended up dropping the strike capability of the SR-71 due to lack of any real use cases, and the incorrect name became correct again.
Dude, I found a copy of Modern Combat Aircraft in my elementary school library and read the whole thing when I was 6. It was part of what got me into military and aviation history as it talked about things like the Korean War and Six Days War and the roles aircraft played.
Anyone else think it's suspicious that the SR-72/Darkstar started to be talked about as if it had already flown, around the same time that it was revealed the NGAD had already flown?
@@alexwalker2582 f-x is USAF , f/a-xx is USN. I would assume fx is more likely. ( The Gerald Ford would be the only CVN capable IMHO, (as it has EM cat/arrest system) However I would say that scramjet aircraft would use ground based sub->supersonic launch system. Either, if not both EM & rocket asst takeoff. (Stage 0 ) And boost - (1st) solid rocket for low alt/ supersonic->high supersonic / alt. velocitys. Then like boost-glide ( Merv & other re-entry vehicles) dive back down using gravity to achieve ignition speeds. But my point is I think ngad saying they have already flown is more of a "pav" or flight testing of parts or general conception validity. Imo it would probly be (new ir/irsst/Ram coatings & materials or there application. Just like mirror raptor or f-117, or the new f35 internal data sensor I can't remember it's name. But that n even adaptive engines. I wouldn't be surprised if they have ment the 6th gen aircraft as the b21. As technically everything falls under NGAD program
@@dizzyizzie6354 Couple of things in your comment I want to respond to: 1. No naval fighter program has its first test flights done from a carrier. The F/A-XX will be tested from normal airfields long before it sees a carrier. That said, I do still agree that it was the F-X program's vehicle that was reported mostly because I'm fairly certain it was USAF officials that reported it. 2. There is zero chance in the 21st century that the USN is going to use a rocket engine to boost one of its aircraft to supersonic speeds and using EMALs in that manner is a non-starter as well. Your concept of a glide vehicle is also a non-starter as a fighter because there's no way the USN will want an aircraft that has to *_land on a carrier_* to be a fucking glide vehicle. There is way too much risk in that. Any aircraft that will exceed Mach 3 will likely use a combined cycle engine that has both a turbojet/turbofan and a ramjet. That would be a suitable combination for the type of mission envelope people have talked about. 3. The B-21 does not fall under NGAD but rather the LRS-B program
Successors to the Blackbird have been proposed and studied since the 1960s and even then the designs looked like the SR-72/Darkstar. Nothing suspicious about it because a hypersonic aircraft would be really a bad choice for NGAD.
I am really interested in the design considerations for dropping a payload at hypersonic speeds. It won’t be as simple as opening bomb bay doors in to the air flow. Even just having a cavity open would create a lot of turbulence and drag.
It's a reverse "slide door method "In .5 seconds, aircraft-induced air pressure is absorbed and jettisoned, it is mixed with methane and air at the rear of the platform.
but do not make any mistake there has been version upon version of this kind of platform since the 90s operating over the gulf and the west coast. Two were operational.
THANKS ALEX. SANDBOX, THANKS TO YOU, IS STILL THE PREMIER WARFIGHTING SITE ON THE INTERNET, AS A FORMER AIRCRAFT ENGINEER, I APPRECIATE BOTH THE TECH AND PRACTICALITY OF EVERY POST.
Always take time off to recharge! I did miss last week episode, but that's okay, just shows you how good your channel is! I worked at Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) for 25 years, all my bosses were workaholics, hardly managed to participate in watching my daughter grow up! So I have learned to appreciate stopping to smell the roses!
When you post it's like Christmas once a week., And I am sure I'm not the only person that feels this way. For aviation buffs like me who for medical reasons never got a chance to become a pilot but never lost the dream, Alex hollings air power helps keep the dream alive in a lot of us and for that I say thank you from all of us keep up the great work., And for us continuing to look up and wonder what's happening next
Your apology is not accepted as it is not necessary. Your videos rock and if we have to suffer a week without one so you can keep your sanity we are all happy to do it. Glad you had a good bit of time off. Keep the great videos coming.
There was a time when breaking the sound barrier was the aeronautical unicorn, then space travel, then the moon. It's exciting to think we'll reach an age when an aircraft flying faster than an SR71 without breaking a sweat will be as benign as it is groundbreaking.
These videos may not mean much to some people but I got to tell you Alex. For giggity Fanboy military nerds such as myself, your content is pure gold! Love it! Keep up the good work, looking forward to seeing your future content.
Wonderful times to be an aerospace geek.... the reality of current fantasy is flying under cover of night, and the next unveiling is just behind the sunrise.
Yeah go nailed a few points. The only real limits to these programs are the costs. Getting a cheap, high-strength, high temp, and low heat transfer material is almost impossible. Modern material science can give us some crazy metals and composites, but they cost fortunes
Development has gotten better. keep a eye out on Australian company Hypersonixs who will fly a scramjet drone this year. Named Dart AE . Kratos will help with Drone part. 3D printing their drone and scramjet engine making it cheap and very fast. Asked Alex to research and do videos on it but he seems rude and uninterested. Not very good at researching if he know's nothing about the programme . HIFIRE joint USA,AUS and UK hypersonic tests were very important to USA and the other 2 countries hypersonic programmes. All the big USA companies were involved. Including Ray Stalker known as first to get essence of flight from scramjets. Head of NASA hypersonics during 80's.
Perhaps I’ve been around the military and military contractors for a bit too long, but I’m not buying any of this?! That’s not to say that Alex doesn’t know what he’s talking about, this is actually one of the most coherent videos on US hypersonics I’ve seen in quite some time. That said, I also have to assume that Alex knows that military nomenclature just doesn’t work in such a way that would present us with an aircraft whose nomenclature equals an SR-72. That, for the civilians among us, is just marketing that folks at Lockheed Martin use to impress said civilians. Even military contractors make use of marketing tools. Because contractors often find themselves interacting with civilian politicians and their staff. It also wasn’t lost on me how the Lockheed Martin exec wasted no time in comparing hypersonics to stealth as being equally disruptive, which is debatable. As Alex conveyed here, maintaining hypersonic velocities with air-breathing engines is incredibly difficult. The technical challenges associated with properly igniting a SCRAM or RAMJET engine until the point at which it generates positive thrust are numerous. Providing a platform to carry and launch munitions from, while exceeding Mach 5, is an order of magnitude more complicated than simply achieving HS flight. I still can’t even understand how such a craft would deploy weapons from an internal weapons bay? It may sound silly, but how does one present a bay door made of…..anything to airflow exceeding Mach 5 when anticipated temperatures are well over 1300° F, let alone munitions that house electronics for guidance? These challenges serve as excellent reminders as to why the likes of Russia and China have been beating their hypersonic drums so loudly. Both countries would rely upon asymmetrical weapon systems to deter the US from attacking them. They simply cannot hope to prevail against the US in open military conflict, so they make quite a bit of noise about their investments in these “asym platforms” that threaten to do serious damage to US military assets should they be deployed against these countries in future conflict. Prompting the US to develop similar weapons of their own is simply gravy, as those investments are funds not available to increase the quantity of weapons the US has successfully deployed in recent conflicts. Even so, the US requires a measured approach to developing new weapon systems based upon technology the US abandoned during the 60’s? I simply cannot see the value in HS missiles that cost so much that military commanders may be forced to use them sparingly due to high cost, low yield and questionable effectiveness against specific targets when good old traditional missiles that approach HS speeds will get the job done, especially when those same commands have the option of saturating targets with multiple fire missions that ensure the targets are destroyed. Russia and China also share a storied past of dramatically overstating the effectiveness of their weapon systems. Considering the truly astonishing demise of the Russian military in the Ukraine (I’m still SHOCKED!) and China’s inability to overcome COVID, I would encourage a measured, none-too-hasty approach at developing some very costly hypersonic weapon systems to counter Russia & China, only to discover that they never had any hypersonic capability to speak of.
I agree with most of what you said, but I think the research is still good and lead to great advancements in technology. Ram and scram jets have the potential to be quite cost effective, once they are properly figured out. But getting there is not easy. But even if it does not lead to a good product in the end, a lot of understanding in super/hypersonic flow, plasmaphysics, simulation, combustion etc. Will be gained. These are things that are very much so transferable to other projects.
O man, finally after few weeks of gap, you r back again. I belive you are doing great 👍... Well, my request to you is, do not disappear suddenly, just inform prior to that... because there are N number of people across the globe, praise your videos like crazy... and I am one of those all the way from New Delhi. Stay blessed Dear Alex!!
I was expecting a mostly speculative assessment of hypersonic aircraft. But this program's content was FAR better than that. Thumbs up for a very well detailed cover of the U.S. efforts
I usually skip intros to accounts I subscribe too… but I’m always psyched to hear “ I’m Alex Hollings and this is Air Power” “Fox 1 fox1” Thanks for making amazing content.
Very interesting presentation in the UK. we had many hypersonic R&D programs in the 1960s and 1970s, one of the major efforts being the MUSTARD program at Warton, and then there was HOTOL in the 1980s and early 1990s which I did a bit of work on until it was cancelled like all the rest. We now have a chance with Reaction Engines work which I hope leads to a flying article. All the best on your articles they are all very good.
Fantastic video Alex. It is becoming more obvious that hypersonics are going to have a large role in aviation's future which is an exciting prospect. Maybe we can take the lead for speed.
I’ve seen three aircraft of some type flying information and it look like three stars, moving slowly high in our atmosphere, one broke off and flew over the top of the other two, and it showered sparks around all the aircraft, I remember reading about the antigravity ship called Manta that displays propulsion some thing like that? i’ve also seen a propulsion system that left a donut pattern in the sky and it was moving fast. I’ve read about that experimental plane to ,can you share any light on these black project aircraft or is it something we just don’t talk about” thanks Alex Holley I’ve learned a lot from from your program peace, my friend👍👍🇺🇸🇺🇸
I've never read anything that said the X-20 'Dynasoar' was supposed to be either a hypersonic test vehicle, a bomber, or was supposed to skip off the atmosphere like Sanger's Silverbird concept. I do remember reading about a concept called the RoBo (Rocket Bomber) which was similar though.
Talking about the cooling system on the engine of the SR-72 makes me think of the SABRE engine being developed by Reaction Engines inc. in the UK. It's a combined air-breathing/rocket engine which uses a precooler to cool the intake air at high speeds for low altitude operation, then switch to an onboard oxidizer for operation above altitudes of 28.5 km. REI are known to have had some investment and interest from the US DOD.
really missed my air power over the holidays however if it gave you some time with your Family and a break from the trolls then all is good Best in the new year Alex cheers from Canada !
Considering Lockheed built the SR-71, and conducted hypersonic X-15 and D-21 drone research 70 years ago, it's not a stretch to think they've had real viable designs on the drawing board for quite some time. The only thing holding that progress back, is funding.
One aspect of hypersonic (or supersonic) flight that I’ve not heard discussed, is any Doppler Weather Radar will detect the shockwave produced by above speed of sound aircraft.
It wasn't hypersonic - only went a bit over Mach 3 like the M-21 carrier aircraft. The first hypersonic air-breathing missile was probably the Martin Marietta ASALM which reached a speed of Mach 5.45 during a test flight in 1980. It used a hybrid rocket-ramjet and was intended to be a high speed nuclear tipped cruise missile, and also a conventional variant that would have an anti-radar capability to use against SAM sites and AWACS.
I have an old copy of Compton's Encyclopedia. Old enough with Eisenhower, still as President. It has a section on the X-20, with pictures, in its space article.
Deploying weapons from these hypersonic aircraft sounds fun. My guess is they'll take a page from the new book being written by cargo planes and slide them out the rear of an internal bay on rails and rollers. I don't know what sort of ejection system it would use since gravity doesn't work that way and explosive bolts may not want to be used internally. Perhaps a linear induction motor or compressed air or simply letting the airstream push/pull it out. BTW, I wonder if a LACE or SABRE engine might work as well.
Doesn't flying at hypersonic sheath the aircraft in a plasma "cist" ( I forgot the actual terminology) that prevent the aircraft form using radar and other sensor system (causing it to fly blind and in radio silence) ?
Yes, although the extent of this effect depends on speed and altitude. There's also the problem that manoeuvrability gets much worse the faster you go so flying a mission without violating the airspace of neighbouring countries would be impossible in many regions. Flying that fast also superheats the air which results in massive IR signature, and the trail of ionised air is also radar-reflective and really easy to detect, then as if we didn't have enough things to think about, our plane would have an unmistakable sonic boom that would be heard over an enormous area.
On Sunday mornings in California, some very unusual aircraft contrails could be momentarily seen. The planes moved exceptional fast and left a contrail of knots and hyphens. There was no sound or sonic boom. This started approx. 2004.
There are some general physics problems such as atmospheric absorption and scattering. That limits the range. I think the first proper role will be in the CRAM role.. I guess nowadays that includes smaller drones as well.
As you watch, and listen to the end about stealth vs speed, you cannot help but remember how ceramic RAM (radar absorbent materials) would allow speed and stealth.
This video kept reminding me of that one 4chan post about the never ending cycle of Chinese and Russian paper tigers scaring the US into leaping 2 entire generations ahead of everyone else then realizing the paper tigers are made of paper Foxbat moment
After being placed there by 2 SRBs .it was just a glider on reentry... This uploader debunks his own video with the mention of the X15, less than 5 minutes in anyways... A manned, hypersonic aircraft, developed, built, and flown by the US...hence, the FIRST...
I have said over the years, the military does NOT retire a superior air platform without having a better replacement hiding somewhere in the wings. We may not know about it for a period of time like when the SR-71 was first operational, but its replacement was already in development when talks of retiring the blackbird happened. Wouldn't it frost the Chinese to find that Darkstar is real (beyond the movie prop) after all? :^)
Well that adage gets complicated by the fact that the RQ-180 exists and does the same thing. I do slightly struggle to find a situation where some hypersonic aircraft could do recon better than an RQ-180, which makes me doubtful that the "SR-72" exists. If it had a clear use case I would be much less doubtful.
It would be hilarious if the Darkstar wasn't actually a prop but instead just gasslighting people into thinking that aircraft is fake, so any reports of it being spotted are put into doubt for legitimacy
The military has retired loads of air platforms without having a better replacement waiting in the wings. What people fair to understand is that replacing the SR-71 doesn't require a faster, higher flying aircraft that's essentially doing more of the same. The SR-71 had a huge number of drawbacks the limited its usefulness as a recon platform and a faster replacement would be even worse in those respects. What replaced the Blackbirds were upgraded U-2s, drones, and satellites - the latter being able to spy on huge areas of the world that were off-limits to the SR-71. The belief that satellites are disadvantaged because people know when they'll be overhead is also inaccurate because it's incredibly hard to avoid recon satellites - a KH-11 passing over Belarus could be imaging targets in Moscow, or Kaliningrad or anywhere in between at higher resolution than the SR-71 ever achieved, and its targets would have no way of knowing they were being studied. There's a whole constellation of satellites up there including radar imaging birds that can see through the thickest cloud cover and penetrate forest canopies to find vehicles hiding in there so avoiding satellites that are in range multiple times per day is much harder than avoiding a high speed aircraft that's easy to track and takes much longer than normal aircraft to get set up for operations.
I’m half British and half American. My mums dad moved to America from the UK late 70’s to work at a place called MCAS Moffet Field. At this base there was something called the NASA Ames research centre. It was here my grandpa went to work designing the first aero shapes and scramjets for the testbed that they put on the nose of a Pegasus rocket, sling under a b52 and dropped at 50k. I think him and the team there were the grandfathers of scramjets and scramjet powered vehicles. At the time they had both the biggest and fastest wind tunnels in the world there. Mum moved there after she finished university. So I have grandpa and his cool job to thank for being half yank. He also helped design aspects of the Polaris ICBM and the satellite that intercepted Halley’s Comet. True genius of a man.
Cool but no one got scramjets to produce more thrust then drag until Australian Ray Stalker came along.
He was head of NASA hypersonics during 80's. has a few awards for it from NASA and USA Aeronautics.
Located in Sunnyvale CA, rite here outside of San Jose CA were im from
@@anubis032 yeah I grew up and lived the first 13 years of my life in Cupertino before moving to the UK 👍
@@nedkelly9688 perhaps he worked with my grandpa. Wish he was around to ask!
@@FancyPantsOnFire Maybe. even X43A had overheating issues in the scramjet due to being a rectangular inlet design.
From research i found Ray Stalker invented Cylindrical inlet helped keep scramjet internals cooler and produced more thrust.
DARPA Raytheon and Australian company that all worked together in HIFIRE hypersonic tests now have inward turned inlet designs.
DARPA new HAWC cruise missile uses this scramjet.
Australian company Hypersonixs will test fly a scramjet drone this year with similar designed scramjet.
CEO of this company worked with Ray Stalker and NASA for 10 years designing scramjets.
So glad that your channel exists. So hard to find good channels like yours. Great work!
There is a lot of crap on TH-cam,lots nonsense,inane topics.
You've quickly become one of the few channels I'll stop what I'm doing to watch as soon as something comes out.
@@satyamroy1756 Curious Droid is one.
While hypersonic speeds may limit the ability to deploy some weapons, it opens up the possibility of deploying others.
If you're deploying SCRAMJET powered missiles from a hypersonic platform, you no longer have to use boosters since they're already going hypersonic when launched.
As he said their isn’t much point making a missile that’s a $106 million dollars for single use, but a plane would make more sense
@@Spartan1-1 I'm not referring to the hypersonic cruise missiles we're developing/testing now, I'm talking about a new generation of SCRAMJET missiles that don't have boosters. Missiles that are small and lightweight, for air to air, anti-radiation, anti-armor, etc. They wouldn't even need a warhead to destroy most targets, the kinetic energy alone would do the trick.
@@jamesbarca7229 a scramjet missile would be a hypersonic cruise missile. And I bet it would still be super expensive.
Thats whats gonna make the u.s king of the skies again in a few years if the sente goes for this asap and put 10 billion in to this company and bull run this shit !!!
@@Spartan1-1 No no think MBDA meteor but delete the rocket booster.
The ability to put together seemingly credible information and present it is a way that ordinary people can understand continues to amaze me. Outstanding work, well done.
I was a child when I was fortunate to audit a tour guide's presentation about the X20 Dyna Soar (Dynamic Soaring) vehicle. An engineer on the project; he thought it would work. I was nine, so I believed him. Still love it.
When I was 12 their (Lewis') presentation was focused on first gen ion engines, zero gee testing, and the promotional film we were shown during our tour was about the A12 and the nuclear umbrella. Drive straight up at multi-mach to 100,000' and fire missiles!
I remember thinking: "where did Dyna Soar go?" It made me sad. I had bought in on the dream of piloting a Mach 20 fighter.
Deflated, I turned from engineering to art and have seldom looked back since. Until I watched your video. Cheers.
Yes, I rremember the Dyna Soar from reading about it - I think in Jr. High went it was an actual program then- I wondered what happened to it later.
I'm a huge SR-71 fangirl. I have a photo of myself at 10 years old standing under the nose of one on the Intrepid's deck as part of the Air Museum. I would absolutely LOVE to see an encore to the old Blackbird in the form of a hypersonic SR-72. The OG is the stuff of aviation legend. I think we have the know-how and the resources, and I'm excited to see what kind of innovation and creativity will bring such a beast to life.
they already announced a new variant and im sure thats not even close to what we have that is not talked about
@@gokuvegeta7770 People want an SR-71 successor out of nostalgia, but they fail to see the bigger picture of why such an aircraft would be much less capable than subsonic, stealth platforms. There's a reason the Blackbird was an evolutionary dead end - all that speed and the compromises needed to achieve it were a hindrance more than a vital capability.
I am very happy every time Sandboxx discusses hypersonic craft.
i've loved following Hermeus' journey, i cant wait to see what they can achieve this coming year!
same, I so hyped for quarterhouse's first flight
Don't fall for it.
@@halos4179 I’ll believe it when I see it, but I’m hopeful
Absolutely, I have no skin in the game other than an interest in aeronautics, but they’re looking competent 😁👍
@@halos4179 how so? You keep making that claim without offering any information or sources to back it up.
Happy New Year Alex. I remember that there was a proposal to make the SR-71 a delivery platform for SRAM missiles, the concept was to have an SR-71 make attacks on Soviet IADS nodes with nuclear-armed SRAM missiles. The Missiles would have been carried in empty reconnaissance camera bays, I believe that 3 were specified to be carried. The abstract was in an SR-71 book I used to have.
You are sort of correct, but that actually predates the SR-71. The USAF was going to use the B-70 to do what you describe, but they found that the SR-71's precursor, the A-12, would do it better. So they planned on converting some A-12s to the "B-71", the successor to the B-70. Since it would be able to do both recon and strike missions it would have been designated the RS-71, but (according to rumor) Lyndon B. Johnson misspoke in a conference and called it the SR-71, and since nobody wanted to correct the President, they just said that the SR meant "strategic recon". Conveniently, though, they later ended up dropping the strike capability of the SR-71 due to lack of any real use cases, and the incorrect name became correct again.
Dude, I found a copy of Modern Combat Aircraft in my elementary school library and read the whole thing when I was 6. It was part of what got me into military and aviation history as it talked about things like the Korean War and Six Days War and the roles aircraft played.
Anyone else think it's suspicious that the SR-72/Darkstar started to be talked about as if it had already flown, around the same time that it was revealed the NGAD had already flown?
Which NGAD? The Navy or the Air Force? They both have a 6th gen aircraft program named NGAD (probably for anti-espionage purposes).
@@alexwalker2582 AF
@@alexwalker2582 f-x is USAF , f/a-xx is USN.
I would assume fx is more likely. ( The Gerald Ford would be the only CVN capable IMHO, (as it has EM cat/arrest system)
However I would say that scramjet aircraft would use ground based sub->supersonic launch system. Either, if not both EM & rocket asst takeoff. (Stage 0 ) And boost - (1st) solid rocket for low alt/ supersonic->high supersonic / alt. velocitys. Then like boost-glide ( Merv & other re-entry vehicles) dive back down using gravity to achieve ignition speeds.
But my point is I think ngad saying they have already flown is more of a "pav" or flight testing of parts or general conception validity.
Imo it would probly be (new ir/irsst/Ram coatings & materials or there application. Just like mirror raptor or f-117, or the new f35 internal data sensor I can't remember it's name. But that n even adaptive engines. I wouldn't be surprised if they have ment the 6th gen aircraft as the b21. As technically everything falls under NGAD program
@@dizzyizzie6354 Couple of things in your comment I want to respond to:
1. No naval fighter program has its first test flights done from a carrier. The F/A-XX will be tested from normal airfields long before it sees a carrier. That said, I do still agree that it was the F-X program's vehicle that was reported mostly because I'm fairly certain it was USAF officials that reported it.
2. There is zero chance in the 21st century that the USN is going to use a rocket engine to boost one of its aircraft to supersonic speeds and using EMALs in that manner is a non-starter as well. Your concept of a glide vehicle is also a non-starter as a fighter because there's no way the USN will want an aircraft that has to *_land on a carrier_* to be a fucking glide vehicle. There is way too much risk in that. Any aircraft that will exceed Mach 3 will likely use a combined cycle engine that has both a turbojet/turbofan and a ramjet. That would be a suitable combination for the type of mission envelope people have talked about.
3. The B-21 does not fall under NGAD but rather the LRS-B program
Successors to the Blackbird have been proposed and studied since the 1960s and even then the designs looked like the SR-72/Darkstar. Nothing suspicious about it because a hypersonic aircraft would be really a bad choice for NGAD.
Another awesome video, thanks Alex!
I am really interested in the design considerations for dropping a payload at hypersonic speeds. It won’t be as simple as opening bomb bay doors in to the air flow. Even just having a cavity open would create a lot of turbulence and drag.
Was just thinking about this. Maybe the aircraft would slow down to deploy munitions? Doesn’t sound right to me though.
It's a reverse "slide door method "In .5 seconds, aircraft-induced air pressure is absorbed and jettisoned, it is mixed with methane and air at the rear of the platform.
but do not make any mistake there has been version upon version of this kind of platform since the 90s operating over the gulf and the west coast. Two were operational.
@@e.s.5529 - There were more than 2 versions operating, and they were doing it long before the 90's...
Go higher with less air around>
THANKS ALEX. SANDBOX, THANKS TO YOU, IS STILL THE PREMIER WARFIGHTING SITE ON THE INTERNET, AS A FORMER AIRCRAFT ENGINEER, I APPRECIATE BOTH THE TECH AND PRACTICALITY OF EVERY POST.
Always take time off to recharge! I did miss last week episode, but that's okay, just shows you how good your channel is!
I worked at Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) for 25 years, all my bosses were workaholics, hardly managed to participate in watching my daughter grow up! So I have learned to appreciate stopping to smell the roses!
When you post it's like Christmas once a week., And I am sure I'm not the only person that feels this way. For aviation buffs like me who for medical reasons never got a chance to become a pilot but never lost the dream, Alex hollings air power helps keep the dream alive in a lot of us and for that I say thank you from all of us keep up the great work., And for us continuing to look up and wonder what's happening next
Welcome back! Happy new year!
Thanks once again!! Always grateful for your effort
Fascinating video. Thanks for posting this.
Thanks for your compelling coverage !
This is a great history class nobody knew about, even me, thanks to providing so much new technology in this matter
I love this channel always something awesome thank you
Your apology is not accepted as it is not necessary. Your videos rock and if we have to suffer a week without one so you can keep your sanity we are all happy to do it. Glad you had a good bit of time off. Keep the great videos coming.
best cross over in a minute Doc Chris Combs and sandbox!
There was a time when breaking the sound barrier was the aeronautical unicorn, then space travel, then the moon. It's exciting to think we'll reach an age when an aircraft flying faster than an SR71 without breaking a sweat will be as benign as it is groundbreaking.
These videos may not mean much to some people but I got to tell you Alex. For giggity Fanboy military nerds such as myself, your content is pure gold! Love it! Keep up the good work, looking forward to seeing your future content.
This video is brilliant… well put together
Alex Hollings… You are absolutely my favorite airplane geek!
Always informative and well sourced. Thanks!
Bet!!! Stoked for a new vid 💪🏼
The X-15 is pretty well documented.
Wonderful times to be an aerospace geek.... the reality of current fantasy is flying under cover of night, and the next unveiling is just behind the sunrise.
Alex, I always enjoy your videos thanks
Awesome work!!!!
Yeah go nailed a few points. The only real limits to these programs are the costs. Getting a cheap, high-strength, high temp, and low heat transfer material is almost impossible. Modern material science can give us some crazy metals and composites, but they cost fortunes
Development has gotten better. keep a eye out on Australian company Hypersonixs who will fly a scramjet drone this year. Named Dart AE . Kratos will help with Drone part.
3D printing their drone and scramjet engine making it cheap and very fast.
Asked Alex to research and do videos on it but he seems rude and uninterested.
Not very good at researching if he know's nothing about the programme .
HIFIRE joint USA,AUS and UK hypersonic tests were very important to USA and the other 2 countries hypersonic programmes.
All the big USA companies were involved.
Including Ray Stalker known as first to get essence of flight from scramjets.
Head of NASA hypersonics during 80's.
I hope this information is in the ballpark we may need it in the next 20 years, enjoyed your presentation 😊🌏
Perhaps I’ve been around the military and military contractors for a bit too long, but I’m not buying any of this?! That’s not to say that Alex doesn’t know what he’s talking about, this is actually one of the most coherent videos on US hypersonics I’ve seen in quite some time. That said, I also have to assume that Alex knows that military nomenclature just doesn’t work in such a way that would present us with an aircraft whose nomenclature equals an SR-72. That, for the civilians among us, is just marketing that folks at Lockheed Martin use to impress said civilians.
Even military contractors make use of marketing tools. Because contractors often find themselves interacting with civilian politicians and their staff. It also wasn’t lost on me how the Lockheed Martin exec wasted no time in comparing hypersonics to stealth as being equally disruptive, which is debatable.
As Alex conveyed here, maintaining hypersonic velocities with air-breathing engines is incredibly difficult. The technical challenges associated with properly igniting a SCRAM or RAMJET engine until the point at which it generates positive thrust are numerous. Providing a platform to carry and launch munitions from, while exceeding Mach 5, is an order of magnitude more complicated than simply achieving HS flight. I still can’t even understand how such a craft would deploy weapons from an internal weapons bay? It may sound silly, but how does one present a bay door made of…..anything to airflow exceeding Mach 5 when anticipated temperatures are well over 1300° F, let alone munitions that house electronics for guidance?
These challenges serve as excellent reminders as to why the likes of Russia and China have been beating their hypersonic drums so loudly. Both countries would rely upon asymmetrical weapon systems to deter the US from attacking them. They simply cannot hope to prevail against the US in open military conflict, so they make quite a bit of noise about their investments in these “asym platforms” that threaten to do serious damage to US military assets should they be deployed against these countries in future conflict. Prompting the US to develop similar weapons of their own is simply gravy, as those investments are funds not available to increase the quantity of weapons the US has successfully deployed in recent conflicts.
Even so, the US requires a measured approach to developing new weapon systems based upon technology the US abandoned during the 60’s? I simply cannot see the value in HS missiles that cost so much that military commanders may be forced to use them sparingly due to high cost, low yield and questionable effectiveness against specific targets when good old traditional missiles that approach HS speeds will get the job done, especially when those same commands have the option of saturating targets with multiple fire missions that ensure the targets are destroyed.
Russia and China also share a storied past of dramatically overstating the effectiveness of their weapon systems. Considering the truly astonishing demise of the Russian military in the Ukraine (I’m still SHOCKED!) and China’s inability to overcome COVID, I would encourage a measured, none-too-hasty approach at developing some very costly hypersonic weapon systems to counter Russia & China, only to discover that they never had any hypersonic capability to speak of.
I agree with most of what you said, but I think the research is still good and lead to great advancements in technology. Ram and scram jets have the potential to be quite cost effective, once they are properly figured out. But getting there is not easy. But even if it does not lead to a good product in the end, a lot of understanding in super/hypersonic flow, plasmaphysics, simulation, combustion etc. Will be gained. These are things that are very much so transferable to other projects.
Great work! Wow nice to know about all this. Information is the key to be knowledgeable in everyday life.
Alex, no need to apologize for the wait. We’re all glad you enjoyed it!
O man, finally after few weeks of gap, you r back again. I belive you are doing great 👍...
Well, my request to you is, do not disappear suddenly, just inform prior to that... because there are N number of people across the globe, praise your videos like crazy... and I am one of those all the way from New Delhi.
Stay blessed Dear Alex!!
Excellent stuff bro
I was expecting a mostly speculative assessment of hypersonic aircraft. But this program's content was FAR better than that.
Thumbs up for a very well detailed cover of the U.S. efforts
Great report Alex!
I usually skip intros to accounts I subscribe too… but I’m always psyched to hear “ I’m Alex Hollings and this is Air Power”
“Fox 1 fox1”
Thanks for making amazing content.
Very interesting presentation in the UK. we had many hypersonic R&D programs in the 1960s and 1970s, one of the major efforts being the MUSTARD program at Warton, and then there was HOTOL in the 1980s and early 1990s which I did a bit of work on until it was cancelled like all the rest. We now have a chance with Reaction Engines work which I hope leads to a flying article. All the best on your articles they are all very good.
Fantastic info, great channel...
Top marks
Fantastic video Alex. It is becoming more obvious that hypersonics are going to have a large role in aviation's future which is an exciting prospect. Maybe we can take the lead for speed.
Love your content, Alex. Can't wait until the next one.
Outstanding Alex
Very nice, like always!
I’ve seen three aircraft of some type flying information and it look like three stars, moving slowly high in our atmosphere, one broke off and flew over the top of the other two, and it showered sparks around all the aircraft, I remember reading about the antigravity ship called Manta that displays propulsion some thing like that? i’ve also seen a propulsion system that left a donut pattern in the sky and it was moving fast. I’ve read about that experimental plane to ,can you share any light on these black project aircraft or is it something we just don’t talk about” thanks Alex Holley I’ve learned a lot from from your program peace, my friend👍👍🇺🇸🇺🇸
OT: can we get a rundown on that stack of books from your intro? There’s gold there for sure.
I think that happened way back on June 8,1959 with the X-15....not much of a race if you ask me! Nice to see it in the video :)
I'm new, this was an incredible video all around
Great video! As usual. 👍
I've never read anything that said the X-20 'Dynasoar' was supposed to be either a hypersonic test vehicle, a bomber, or was supposed to skip off the atmosphere like Sanger's Silverbird concept.
I do remember reading about a concept called the RoBo (Rocket Bomber) which was similar though.
Thanks for another secrets-filled video! I promise not to tell my wife who immigrated from China 2 years ago. Really love your drops.
Good on ya Alex
man 20:50 your voice and explaining is *sooo good!!!!*
thanks alex for the great content as always!!
Talking about the cooling system on the engine of the SR-72 makes me think of the SABRE engine being developed by Reaction Engines inc. in the UK. It's a combined air-breathing/rocket engine which uses a precooler to cool the intake air at high speeds for low altitude operation, then switch to an onboard oxidizer for operation above altitudes of 28.5 km. REI are known to have had some investment and interest from the US DOD.
America's first hypersonic aircraft was the X15 in 1959
Very creative technology video review....!
It's been known for years that manufacturing limitations were the problem, not design limitations, when it came to propulsion.
Great video
Great job! Thanks!
really missed my air power over the holidays however if it gave you some time with your Family and a break from the trolls then all is good Best in the new year Alex cheers from Canada !
I knew Pete Knight, one of the the original X-15 pilots. Pretty cool when he got his astronaut's wings.
Excellent video!
Where did you get the Modern Combat Aircraft book? I had it as a teenager and would love to find a new copy of it.
Considering Lockheed built the SR-71, and conducted hypersonic X-15 and D-21 drone research 70 years ago, it's not a stretch to think they've had real viable designs on the drawing board for quite some time. The only thing holding that progress back, is funding.
Great video & very informative! 👍🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Great coverage and although I did really miss last weeks video, You should take the brakes you need brother !!
Glad to see the higher quality contents, upload rates aren’t that important.
One aspect of hypersonic (or supersonic) flight that I’ve not heard discussed, is any Doppler Weather Radar will detect the shockwave produced by above speed of sound aircraft.
ANOTHER EXCELNT VID.
Excellent!
Awesome channel content! No need to apologize for taking time off. Everyone NEEDS time off to recharge.
Wasn't the D21 drone the first? Which was one of the J58 engines from the blackbird with blended wings on it?🤔
It wasn't hypersonic - only went a bit over Mach 3 like the M-21 carrier aircraft. The first hypersonic air-breathing missile was probably the Martin Marietta ASALM which reached a speed of Mach 5.45 during a test flight in 1980. It used a hybrid rocket-ramjet and was intended to be a high speed nuclear tipped cruise missile, and also a conventional variant that would have an anti-radar capability to use against SAM sites and AWACS.
Could you share the books you got? Would love to read some
Share the names obviously
I have an old copy of Compton's Encyclopedia. Old enough with Eisenhower, still as President. It has a section on the X-20, with pictures, in its space article.
Deploying weapons from these hypersonic aircraft sounds fun. My guess is they'll take a page from the new book being written by cargo planes and slide them out the rear of an internal bay on rails and rollers. I don't know what sort of ejection system it would use since gravity doesn't work that way and explosive bolts may not want to be used internally. Perhaps a linear induction motor or compressed air or simply letting the airstream push/pull it out.
BTW, I wonder if a LACE or SABRE engine might work as well.
I love to collect the Hobby Master 1:72 die-cast models. They are highly detailed.
Doesn't flying at hypersonic sheath the aircraft in a plasma "cist" ( I forgot the actual terminology) that prevent the aircraft form using radar and other sensor system (causing it to fly blind and in radio silence) ?
Yes, although the extent of this effect depends on speed and altitude. There's also the problem that manoeuvrability gets much worse the faster you go so flying a mission without violating the airspace of neighbouring countries would be impossible in many regions. Flying that fast also superheats the air which results in massive IR signature, and the trail of ionised air is also radar-reflective and really easy to detect, then as if we didn't have enough things to think about, our plane would have an unmistakable sonic boom that would be heard over an enormous area.
On Sunday mornings in California, some very unusual aircraft contrails could be momentarily seen. The planes moved exceptional fast and left a contrail of knots and hyphens. There was no sound or sonic boom. This started approx. 2004.
Top notch report. Bravo Zulu
I feel the need!
Haven't seen an update on weaponized lasers lately. I am sure they have gotten smaller and more powerful!
There are some general physics problems such as atmospheric absorption and scattering. That limits the range. I think the first proper role will be in the CRAM role.. I guess nowadays that includes smaller drones as well.
Ya, i want a death star but iam fine with a blaster or whatever ugh
Why did you choose the Home Depot commercial OST as your background audio
Is it just me or does that Skunk Works symbol on the tail of that SR72 look totally COOL?
How is that different from the Space Shuttle system where the boosters send the Orbiter high up and it can glide back down at hypersonic speeds?
What advancements need to be made to support crew at these speeds?
As you watch, and listen to the end about stealth vs speed, you cannot help but remember how ceramic RAM (radar absorbent materials) would allow speed and stealth.
No need to apologize friend. Cost us exactly nothing for you to take a well deserved break from YT. Great vid btw.
This video kept reminding me of that one 4chan post about the never ending cycle of Chinese and Russian paper tigers scaring the US into leaping 2 entire generations ahead of everyone else then realizing the paper tigers are made of paper
Foxbat moment
Hi Alex, thanks for your videos...I over the details... re what else is of interest... I'm Always up for coverage on f-35 block 4...
The space shuttle reentered the atmosphere at Mach 25.
After being placed there by 2 SRBs .it was just a glider on reentry...
This uploader debunks his own video with the mention of the X15, less than 5 minutes in anyways...
A manned, hypersonic aircraft, developed, built, and flown by the US...hence, the FIRST...
I have said over the years, the military does NOT retire a superior air platform without having a better replacement hiding somewhere in the wings. We may not know about it for a period of time like when the SR-71 was first operational, but its replacement was already in development when talks of retiring the blackbird happened. Wouldn't it frost the Chinese to find that Darkstar is real (beyond the movie prop) after all? :^)
Well that adage gets complicated by the fact that the RQ-180 exists and does the same thing. I do slightly struggle to find a situation where some hypersonic aircraft could do recon better than an RQ-180, which makes me doubtful that the "SR-72" exists. If it had a clear use case I would be much less doubtful.
It would be hilarious if the Darkstar wasn't actually a prop but instead just gasslighting people into thinking that aircraft is fake, so any reports of it being spotted are put into doubt for legitimacy
❤Aurora 🇺🇲
The military has retired loads of air platforms without having a better replacement waiting in the wings. What people fair to understand is that replacing the SR-71 doesn't require a faster, higher flying aircraft that's essentially doing more of the same. The SR-71 had a huge number of drawbacks the limited its usefulness as a recon platform and a faster replacement would be even worse in those respects. What replaced the Blackbirds were upgraded U-2s, drones, and satellites - the latter being able to spy on huge areas of the world that were off-limits to the SR-71. The belief that satellites are disadvantaged because people know when they'll be overhead is also inaccurate because it's incredibly hard to avoid recon satellites - a KH-11 passing over Belarus could be imaging targets in Moscow, or Kaliningrad or anywhere in between at higher resolution than the SR-71 ever achieved, and its targets would have no way of knowing they were being studied. There's a whole constellation of satellites up there including radar imaging birds that can see through the thickest cloud cover and penetrate forest canopies to find vehicles hiding in there so avoiding satellites that are in range multiple times per day is much harder than avoiding a high speed aircraft that's easy to track and takes much longer than normal aircraft to get set up for operations.
The SR-71 used a hybrid turbo/RAM jet engine with a system for the RAM air to bypass the turbine.