• cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Uhh OK, they’ve matched something the X-15 was doing 65 years ago. What’s the endgame here? Build a ludicrously inefficient passenger aircraft?

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Seems like it. No mention of the fuel efficiency either, which leads me to assume it’s significantly worse than existing flights.

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        It probably is, the whole reason supersonic passenger flight looked feasible for a bit was that turbine technology hadn’t caught up so slower jets weren’t that much less efficient than supersonic jets.

        But fuel concerns aside, it’s kinda silly to compare a billion dollar fighter jet built with 60s technology to a 747-sized aircraft built for passenger flight with modern technology. Just wildly different environments, purposes, and resources.

        • cygnus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          Based on the renderings (as there are no actual photos of this thing, other than the blurry-ass pic of what appears to be a rocket taking off vertically) it’s nowhere near the size of a 747. It actually looks rather like an elongated SR-71, which makes me very skeptical that it can actually hit Mach 6.5 because ramjet engines have a hard limit due to something called “physics”. That fact, plus the rocket-like takeoff, are why I think this is more like the X-15 and can’t sustain its top speed for long.

    • Eezyville
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      The X-15 was a rocket propelled aircraft. This is an air breathing aircraft.