
New NASA X-Plane Construction Begins - rbanffy
https://www.nasa.gov/lowboom/new-nasa-x-plane-construction-begins-now
======
ashleyn
It's disappointing that SST died off the way it did. In the 1960s, the 747 was
originally designed as a stopgap between subsonic and supersonic, which was
viewed as the next inevitable step.

Unfortunately, in a hamfisted effort to study the impact of sonic booms, the
air force created so many over Oklahoma City that the government lost a very
large lawsuit over the damage done to nearby buildings. Regulations ensued,
and that effectively stunted any efforts to minimise the sonic boom in
commercial applications.

I'm hopeful this can kickstart a new effort to renew SST and scale it to where
it was more cost effective than the Concorde tried to be.

~~~
jandrese
Sonic Booms wern't the only problem. It's hard to get around the cost element
since jet fuel is a significant chunk of an airline ticket and SSTs are
necessarily going to burn a lot more of it. Ultimately people largely chose to
save the $1,000 and take the extra 3 hour penalty to their trip. Even for
people willing to pay more you have to consider competition like the luxurious
Emirates A380s that give you a small bedroom for the trip vs. the coach seats
on the Concorde.

~~~
ghaff
It's probably worthwhile to continue researching the space, but it's hard to
see the economics working out--especially outside of small business jets.
There just aren't that many people who care enough about extra hours that they
can already travel in a fair bit of comfort if they're willing to pay for it.
This is especially true if the design can't handle truly long distance travel
like trans-Pacific.

Although it's not quite the same thing, I'd observe that British Airways has
even cut back on its business class-only flights from London to New York.
There just aren't _that_ many people willing to pay thousands of dollars to
either save a few hours or to travel in more comfort for a few hours.

~~~
melling
The United States spent $20 billion for air conditioning during the
Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

[https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/21/air-
conditioning-m...](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/21/air-conditioning-
military-cost-nasa_n_881828.html)

Perhaps in the near term it only makes sense for business jets, but it is a
step forward. It isn’t money down the drain and the research will pay future
dividends.

~~~
chrisseaton
> The United States spent $20 billion for air conditioning during the
> Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

Do you think this is some kind of luxury? Have you got any idea how hot it
gets in an operations room tent in Afghanistan? And some of those tents are
hospitals.

~~~
melling
I was going to simply say that we spent $1 trillion on the Iraq War (another
trillion in Afghanistan).

I was only trying to show how little the research costs in the big scheme of
things.

------
binarnosp
Nasa also has an interesting free ebook about the previous sonic boom
research: [https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/nasa-ebook-quieting-
the-...](https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/nasa-ebook-quieting-the-boom)

------
mhalle
Perhaps someone with more experience can answer this question: is this an
exceptionally large contract ($247 million)? The article implies that it
covers the plane and its delivery, not the whole research project.

~~~
cheeko1234
For aeronautics, it's exceptionally large. For NASA as a whole, it's not (e.g.
James Webb is >$8bn).

This is the later phase of the NASA’s Quiet SuperSonic Technology Preliminary
Design, or QueSST Project.

------
growt
Doesn't this plane have any front facing window in the cockpit? Whats the
reason for that?

~~~
jandrese
I wouldn't be surprised if it's a thermal issue. Front facing windows on
supersonic aircraft get extremely hot. They probably figure they can do better
with good camera/video setup instead. Or maybe the pilot wears VR goggles
attached to an array of cameras around the plane so he gets a virtual
transparent cockpit.

~~~
rbanffy
> pilot wears VR goggles

I would opt for much simpler camera, an already-proven ILS and windows that
allow the pilot to look down on the side of the plane.

The fewer things to go wrong on a brand-new design, the better.

~~~
jandrese
What's the point of X-Planes if you aren't trying out the new toys?

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
The point is to investigate new airframe technologies, not fully integrated
flight systems which the commercial world can handle with DoD contracts.

~~~
rbanffy
Also, to properly investigate something, it's usually better to investigate
only one thing, not a combination of various different things that,with luck,
means something.

------
BrandonMarc
> _For the first time in decades, NASA aeronautics is moving forward with the
> construction of a piloted X-plane_

That plane doesn't look very pilot-able. How can the pilot see forward? I know
it's an early render, but still ...

~~~
THE_PUN_STOPS
Charles Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic in 1927 in this cockpit:

[https://airandspace.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/slides...](https://airandspace.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/slideshow_lg/public/images/exhibitions/hero-
images/2001-136h.jpg)

Note the lack of front window. A periscope was installed at the last minute at
the behest of a sponsor, (much to the chagrin of Lindbergh) but there's no
evidence that it was ever used.

And that was before cameras and in-cockpit AR!

~~~
digi_owl
Interesting. I can't find any sort of artificial horizon, but i suspect the
two "spirit levels" at the bottom (T shape) serve much the same purpose.

Given that it was an ocean crossing he would probably be watching the
airspeed, altimeter and compass for most of the journey anyways (instrument
flight rules?).

------
wiz21c
with carbon emissions rising, I don't think a supersonic jet is something
earth needs... I really wonder why Nasa invests in that. Is there some other
research to be made on that prototype ?

~~~
astrodev
This. We need farmers, not engineers.

~~~
eloff
We don't need farmers. We've had too many farmers for the last 100 years.
That's still going the way of consolidation and increasing automation.
Engineers on the other hand are in high demand.

~~~
letslightafire
I think it was a reference to Interstellar

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E792RxIpnU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E792RxIpnU)

~~~
eloff
I saw the movie, but I missed the reference. My comment applies to the guy in
the movie. He needs engineers too, not farmers. You don't raise agricultural
output with more hands, you raise it with better tech.

------
ambicapter
I hope that nose is really light. Reminds me of the X-3 Stiletto which, from
what I read, has been called an awful plane to fly (My intuition would say
that its due to inertial characteristics, same reason the F-104 was so
dangerous to fly).

~~~
jandrese
It would have to be. Look how far back the nosewheel is. That nose is going to
be like a baseball bat when this thing is taxiing around.

It's so comically long that you kind of want them to put a hinge on it way
back at the cockpit so it can swing upright and let the pilot see where he is
going when he's on the ground.

~~~
ceejayoz
These days, rather than a Concorde-style hinge, you'd probably just put a
stereoscopic pair of cameras in the nose and use a VR headset.

~~~
jandrese
That wouldn't solve the giant club problem. Or you'll have the disorienting
sensation of turning the wheel and having your POV swing sideways instead of
pivoting. Possibly barf inducing since your body would be pivoting.

------
amirhirsch
When I saw the title, I was hoping for a scramjet or ideally a scramjet/rocket
hybrid with a railgun launch pad.

~~~
vanadium
I've been dreaming of a viable scramjet since the X-30.

~~~
theothermkn
Ugh. The X-30! What a boondoggle! Nobody had any idea how to get that done. In
every aero/astro engineer's undergrad fluid dynamics class, they teach you
about heat addition to subsonic and supersonic flows. The _biggest_ takeaway
is that adding heat to a moving fluid _destroys total pressure (aka stagnation
pressure), the measure of useful work a fluid can do_. The amount of total
pressure destroyed depends on the amount of heat and the flow velocity. Half
the job of a diffuser and/or compressor is to raise the pressure of the
incoming flow, but the other half is to slow the flow down so that heat
addition can be done without destroying too much total pressure. The very idea
of "supersonic combustion," the "sc" in "scramjet," is antithetical to engine
efficiency.

At some point,even a theoretical scramjet becomes a drag-producing device,
instead of a thrust-producing device. Real scramjets will always crap out long
before orbital velocity, which is around M=30.

To end on an optimistic note, dream of a rocket-based combined cycle engine,
instead. They may or may not ultimately be viable as SSTOs, but at least
there's room to dream, there!

------
bitrazor123
We need a bio-bird. Zero emission, self sustainable

~~~
quantized1
Only if Pigs can fly

------
avs733
[Pedantry warning]

Can someone fix the title please? It uses X-Plane in the singular 'X-Plane
construction begins' rather than the title from the article which is more
clear about this being the newest among many explains over the years.

Maybe something like "NASA begins construction of new Super Sonic test plane"

~~~
dang
The submitter used the HTML doc title, which is usually fine, but sure, we've
changed the article title.

~~~
avs733
Thanks! And thank you for deleting this as well. There was no need for my
comment to stay open to discussion once it was addressed. No need to give us
all more space to go down a rabbit hole.

