USAF Hypersonic Scramjet Successfully Scrams 201
cold fjord writes "It looks like another milestone for hypersonic flight has been reached. From the story: 'The final flight of the X-51A Waverider test program has accomplished a breakthrough in the development of flight reaching Mach 5.1 over the Pacific Ocean . . ."It was a full mission success," said Charlie Brink, X-51A program manager for the Air Force Research Laboratory Aerospace Systems Directorate. The cruiser traveled over 230 nautical miles in just over six minutes over the Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center Sea Range. It was the longest of the four X-51A test flights and the longest air-breathing hypersonic flight ever. . . This was the last of four test vehicles originally conceived when the $300 million technology demonstration program began in 2004. The program objective was to prove the viability of air-breathing, high-speed scramjet propulsion. The X-51A is unique primarily due to its use of a hydrocarbon fuel in its supersonic combustion ramjet, or Scramjet, engine. ... The use of logistically supportable hydrocarbon fuel is widely considered vital for the practical application of hypersonic flight.'"
Re:Goodness me! Was that a Whooosh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Really?
They supposedly are having trouble buying plain jet engines for their fighters, so they haven't even got to cloning jet engines at a reasonably high level.
I suppose they'll steal the plans for making one once the US perfects it.
Or did you mean that China is close to developing it on their own, in secret?
Way to go! (Score:4, Insightful)
The way you're framing it, you consider the Chinese your opponents (the more "sports-like" view, hopefully) or your enemies (the more military view, less hopefully).
In any way...
I suppose they'll steal the plans for making one once the US perfects it.
you are underestimating your opponents. Mistake number one. Way to go!
Re:Goodness me! Was that a Whooosh? (Score:4, Insightful)
China has an emmense population of genius level citizens and have basically perfected mass production. Hell most of the top talent in the US is Chinese decent. As for the money spent on defense you have to remember China is basically Communist, they don't have to pay your ass to build shit. So just because you heard a news wire that China just built a prop plane pull your head out of your ass and wake up to reality. If this shit does get serious it will become overwhelmly serious quick. The Middle East has problems with the US, the far East has problems with the US and your dumbass is sitting back just playing these guys off.
That my friend is a dumbass thing to do.
Theoretical (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:longest flight.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The SR-71 was the evolution of the Wright Flier pushed to its very limit (well, the ramjet represents a slight break, but not a tremendous leap).
I think you'll find that the jet engine was a "tremendous leap" over the Wright Flier...
Re:Theoretical (sound concept) (Score:4, Insightful)
SABRE is a sound concept which combines proven technologies in a new way, enabled by the novel heat exchanger. Not only has the heat exchanger has been demonstrated, the ESA has thoroughly examined the concept and finds no fault with the engine. The helium (which is not liquid by the way) is not consumed, nor are prohibitively large quantities required.
By your reasoning, there would never be any innovation at all, and we would live in a technologically static world. I do not understand the compulsion of people to endlessly and vehemently complain about the impossibility of perfectly sound concepts. Progress still happens, though probably at a considerably reduced rate thanks to this prevailing mindset.
Seriously, what is with the total lack of vision these days? Why is it that everything that can't already be purchased, is considered to be impossible? If not a sound concept with demonstrated components, what, if anything, will convince people to support innovation? I'm genuinely curious, as this seems to be holding up other critically important innovations such as molten salt reactors.
Re:Goodness me! Was that a Whooosh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, this makes sense because America is the most ethical country on the planet.
Re:Goodness me! Was that a Whooosh? (Score:5, Insightful)
I realize it is fun to shit on America (and America does have its faults) but that wasn't their statement. Their statement was that China is less ethical. Beating up on strawmen is easy but isn't very intellectually stimulating.
Re:Goodness me! Was that a Whooosh? (Score:5, Insightful)
China has an emmense population of genius level citizens and have basically perfected mass production.
This is funny! The Company I worked for sent several china manufacturers clear plans that were accurate for a product, a LED replacement for a 4' fluorescent fixture.
We ordered a case as a trial from 8 different manufacturers there, They knew that we would order 100,000 more if the product was right and good.
7 of the companies made them in the wrong size. 1 inch too long, 1 inch too short, one looked like they used people with hacksaws as none of the cuts on the extruded aluminum was straight. etc.. Pretty much all of them were garbage from all makers. 1 had them the right length but designed them for 120V AC and not the 208 volts that is common in office buildings here and was PRINTED CLEARLY ON THE DRAWINGS and in the specification documentation that was very clear.
I am guessing that the China definition of "perfection" is not what we see in Europe or in the USA.
No they cant manufacture anything "perfect"..
3 for 3 (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not a strawman. (Score:4, Insightful)
He's just pointing out that "lees ethical" is a comparison.
So, less ethical than who or what?
You seem to acknowledge that it's not the USA, with it's faults and all.
Such an acknowledgment would actually recognize the original poster's ethics comment as a strawman.
Cause... If it's not USA and China ethics we're comparing, tossing in ethics is a meaningless digression in a form of a generalization that borders on chauvinist propaganda on one side and racism on the other.
"Chinese have fewer ethics! BAM! We've beaten them on the moral battlefield already!"
A strawman if I ever saw one.
Though, in OP's defense, probably an unconscious one.
Heck, his post is actually praising Chinese an prophesying them as winners or at least on the same level as the USA, in some imaginary battle.
It's just that Chinese have been memed into that position of inherently lower morality through centuries of sinophobic propaganda.
They've been yellow peril and godless commies for generations (and if that doesn't mean they have no morals...).
It's perfectly understandable that they are also nothing but thieves and copiers of other people's tech and makers of cheap junk practically incapable of creativity.
And that they would fight harder and with fewer ethics - i.e. fight dirty.
Re:It's not a strawman. (Score:5, Insightful)
It appears obvious that the comparison was the ethics of the United States in comparison with those of China. Given the state of affairs and some of the ethics violations going on (or in the recent past) here in American government it is a truly sad statement when I am able to point out that China's ethics are demonstrably worse than America's.
I mean, yeah, I get it - more so than people may think. America has had some serious ethical violations recently and I believe our country is less because of them. I am ashamed and dishonored on behalf of my country. What we have done is horrific and may have consequences for years to come. I believe that our continued meddling as self-designated World Police is going to continue having detrimental effects well into the lives of my grand children and perhaps even great grand children (longer if we don't make some serious policy changes soon).
However, yeah, China is demonstrably worse than America by every possible metric one can come up with. The only way one could be convinced it is otherwise is to be completely delusional or intellectually dishonest.
Either way, it appeared to be an obvious comparison of ethics between the United States and China and that's where I was going from.
Finally, I am unable to decide which is worse. If their strawman was unintentional then that's rather ignorant. If their strawman was intentional then that's pretty dishonest. I see strawmen and a lot of people assuming either/or (I can't recall the Latin name of the logical fallacy at the moment) being tossed around /. lately. I haven't any states and it could be confirmation bias on my part but I'm seeing an increase in both of those here as of late and that's a drawback in my opinion.
I guess that wasn't the final bit - I feel obligated to continue though it is off-topic.
Anyhow, as I mentioned, I've noticed a lot of those logical fallacies lately and I'm disappointed. One of the things I pride myself on is being open to debate and to being able to change my mind when I'm faced with new information. That's something that was re-enforced by Slashdot actually. In the days of old I came to Slashdot and I made my argument and, sometimes, I got my ass handed to me as people piled on with the various logical arguments that they had. They'd debate with well-reasoned and well articulated responses quite frequently.
From this, from you, I learned to be more logical myself. I learned to view my arguments with suspicion and to examine them more clearly before postulating them.
These days it seems those debates and learning experiences are rare. Seldom do experts opine from behind their obscure education. It seems that there are fewer posting who have a profession in academia while more people are posting with little thought to accuracy, honesty, and logic. The signal to noise ratio has increased and reasoned debate is rarer. Fewer people are willing to change their views even when shown the faulty logic and the accurate conclusions.
It is disappointing though it isn't disappointing enough for me to do the whole threaten to leave or whine about it thing. (I hope it doesn't seem like whining, I'm just observing and reminiscing.) No, I'll remain here and continue posting and learning. The chances to learn may be less in number but they are still there. I make it a point to be grateful and to make my gratitude known when someone posts something of considerable value. I also have excellent karma and get an abundance of mod points so I try to moderate fairly and use that to help with the signal to noise ratio. So, there's that.
Re:It's not a strawman. (Score:2, Insightful)
China isn't demolishing several countries in the world as we speak, while loudly proclaiming to be the paragon of peace. US is.
If that doesn't make it far more unethical, I don't know what you mean by "ethics" but it sure doesn't come from a dictionary.
Re:It's not a strawman. (Score:5, Insightful)
I come from a country that stayed neutral during cold war and therefore avoided much of propaganda brainwashing you were clearly subjected to. As a result I have quite a bit of insight of the outsider that can see all the countries through the same lens, rather then an insider seeing "my side and their side". To me, there is no "good West" and "bad East" that you were clearly raised with. There were merely two huge evil empires that sought to pervert everyone caught in the middle to be their pawns in one way or the other, and we had to balance our relations with both not to get hit hard.
And from my point of view, US is currently the most unethical country on the planet by a large margin, simply due to its power projection being all over the world, and much of this being military projection. Which is always unethical, as it is aimed to force its own goals onto others at a barrel of a gun. It is also understandable, because in terms of realpolitik, they have by far the most military and financial power in the world and such power has always corrupted the wielder, no matter how good intentions he started with.
In comparison, China's power projection is currently mostly soft power. The main reason why they're expanding their circle of influence so fast is because they basically do not bring their ideology on the barrels of their guns like US and USSR likes/liked to do, but through economic incentives and power of its trade. Many of the current conflicts, such as Libya were largely caused by China getting a solid foothold in what Europe and US used to think of as their back yard being essentially taken over by Chinese interests. And the answer is more often then not a military one, which is again, far less ethical then commercial.
And frankly, while their culture is far more alien to me then that of US, due to a mix of US culture being mainly sourced from mainland Europe and subsequent massive cultural invasion from US-influenced mass media after WW2, I'm not at all convinced that it's actually worse. Different, yes. Worse, perhaps, perhaps not. We'll see in a couple of decades when they get enough progress to be able to get a proper military muscle to see if they start imitating US in exporting their ideology at a barrel of a gun. Considering what I know about their culture, this is possible but somewhat unlikely. I suspect what they will end up with is something that is even more Westernised then what they have now, because that's the direction they've been heading to culturally for last thirty or so years and as a result, even more comfortable for me to cohabit with.
But they are not doing the military projection now. And that is far more damning then any argument about "potential threat in the future".
Re:Way to go! (Score:4, Insightful)