Lockheed Martin SR-72?

[blackkite]

Hi! Perhaps better longitudinal propotion.
Fore fuselage is large. Hypersonic area rule?
Vertical tail stabilizer area is very small. It's a CCV? 　

 

[blackkite]

SR-72 is a son of Blackbird.
D-21 was a daughter of Blackbird.

Lockheed D-21 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMyC2urCl_4

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHuBsBOF4R8

 

[blackkite]

Hi! Mach6 scramjet engine.
Fuel of X-51 is JP-7.(Same as SR-72?)

JP-7 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fuel of X-43 is LH2.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNasb3-BFP8

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZUwKX3_uE4

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K_rzuSuqIg

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
Scramjet Thermal Management

http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA593050

 

[flateric]

Blackie, please keep on topic.

 

[blackkite]

Of course I do so.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmeQ0T4VyeU

 

[liaomh]

A slide by Dr. Mark T. Maybury, USAF Chief Scientist, in April this year shows "Mach 5-6 is where speed alone is sufficient" and Mach 3.5 is where both speed and signature equally contribute to survivability. EADSIM model was used to get this result.

do u have the paper? or PPT something? Thanks very much.

 

[liaomh]

... might realise the SR-72 is not as new as it seems.

Aerojet has shown this aircraft (see picture 1 below) as the TriJet concept (Link here)
in the summer of 2011. The main difference to the SR-72 is the engine, which then consisted of three instead of two components: a turbine, an ejector ramjet and a dual-mode ramjet (see picture 2 and 3).

Perhaps this is the reason why the engine nacelles seem so huge!

No Page Found! do anyone have that article?
i doubt that the pic is so said Trijet concept? it was actually HTV-3X concept。 the picture below is from lockheed website.

 

[liaomh]

Of course I do so.

NICE!
it is different from what Pop Science show some days ago，espacially the tail cone。

 

[flateric]

No Page Found! do anyone have that article?

Aerojet Unveils TriJet For Reusable Hypersonic Power | Aviation Week Network

Aerojet is proposing development of a novel combined-cycle propulsion system for reusable hypersonic vehicles which packages current technology to achieve a seamless transition from a standing start to Mach 7 plus.

aviationweek.com

 

[blackkite]

... might realise the SR-72 is not as new as it seems.

Aerojet has shown this aircraft (see picture 1 below) as the TriJet concept (Link here)
in the summer of 2011. The main difference to the SR-72 is the engine, which then consisted of three instead of two components: a turbine, an ejector ramjet and a dual-mode ramjet (see picture 2 and 3).

Perhaps this is the reason why the engine nacelles seem so huge!

No Page Found! do anyone have that article?
i doubt that the pic is so said Trijet concept? it was actually HTV-3X concept。 the picture below is from lockheed website.

What a beauty!!!

 

[liaomh]

No Page Found! do anyone have that article?

http://aviationweek.com/awin/aerojet-unveils-trijet-reusable-hypersonic-power

Thanks very much.
I found this article before, but there is not the picture there.
can you send me the article you found? liaomh@gmail.com. thanks a lot.
i just want to confirm where does the picture come from actually.

 

[liaomh]

Not sure this is the best place for this, but here goes.

R--INDUSTRY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT OF HYPERSONIC PROPULSION
Solicitation Number: NNC1554918Q
Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Office: Glenn Research Center
Location: Office of Procurement

Synopsis:
Added: Jun 04, 2015 7:56 am

NASA/GRC is refining its hypersonic portfolio to ensure that it is most effectively aligned to support national priorities to utilize research, computational tools, and experimental capabilities in support of technology and system development as well as flight test in support of national needs. NASA/GRC is issuing two contracts where each will conduct a study on future US hypersonic propulsion capability needs from the hypersonic propulsion industry viewpoint as well as their companys perspective. The initial national needs are primarily defense related and NASA/GRC intends to purchase the services from Aerojet Rocketdyne and Orbital ATK because both of these companies are presently working under DoD hypersonic programs and have the highly specialized knowledge and expertise to effectively and economically provide NASA/GRC with the requested information.

This is not a request for quote. This is a sole source synopsis.

Interested organizations may submit their capabilities and qualifications to perform the effort in writing to the identified point of contact no later than 4:30 p.m. local time on June 12, 2015. Such capabilities/qualifications will be evaluated solely for the purpose of determining whether or not to conduct this procurement on a competitive basis. A determination by the Government not to compete this proposed effort on a full and open competition basis, based upon responses to this notice, is solely within the discretion of the government.

yes, the two companies did the job from Darpa/AF FaCET and MoTr program.

 

[liaomh]

... might realise the SR-72 is not as new as it seems.

Aerojet has shown this aircraft (see picture 1 below) as the TriJet concept (Link here)
in the summer of 2011. The main difference to the SR-72 is the engine, which then consisted of three instead of two components: a turbine, an ejector ramjet and a dual-mode ramjet (see picture 2 and 3).

Perhaps this is the reason why the engine nacelles seem so huge!

No Page Found! do anyone have that article?
i doubt that the pic is so said Trijet concept? it was actually HTV-3X concept。 the picture below is from lockheed website.

What a beauty!!!

so, go get a job from Skunk Work. maybe you still have a chance.... ;D

 

[Steve Pace]

I believe it's time to remove the question mark from after SR-72. It appears to me that it will be built. -SP

 

[phrenzy]

You believe they will do studies and might issue RFP's, or that it will be built?

 

[sferrin]

I believe it's time to remove the question mark from after SR-72. It appears to me that it will be built. -SP

That eventually we'll get to this point I have little doubt. In my lifetime......... ? I'm not betting my 401K.

x2. And it won't be called the SR-72, be built be Lockheed, or be built in the US.

 

[flanker]

You put waaaaaaay too much faith into the Chinese. The same Chinese that had its most modern attack helicopter outsourced to kamov and its most modern transport plane outsourced to Antonov. The same Chinese that made a direct copy of F-22 canopy and put it on a frame that was atleast influenced by ex MiG people.

 

[sferrin]

The same Chinese that made a direct copy of F-22 canopy and put it on a frame that was atleast influenced by ex MiG people.

Have wondered about that frame. The canopy is obviously strong enough for the F-22, and just as obviously they snaked the complete design package. I wonder what prompted the addition of the frame.

edit: Just noticed we're talking about two different frames. ;D

 

[blackkite]

Hi!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn7ggx8U5Qg




Lockheed Martin SR-72
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2013/11/lockheed-martin-sr-72-specification-technical-data.html
Role Unmanned, Stealth, hypersonic, Strategic reconnaissance aircraft
National origin United States
Primary users USAF
Manufacturer Lockheed Martin
First flight 24/11/2028
Introduction 30/12/2030
Status Design proposal
Number built N/A
Program cost Unknown
Unit cost Unknown
Length 100 ft / 30 m
Wingspan 55 ft / 16 m
Height 18 ft / 5 m
Wing area Unknown
Empty weight Unknown
Maximum payload Unknown
Maximum takeoff weight Unknown
Powerplant Two HTV-3X
Fuel
Maximum speed Mach 6.0
Ferry range 2,900 nmi (5,400 km)
Combat radius
Service ceiling
Rate of climb
Thrust/weight
Guns
Air to ground loadout
Hardpoints

 

[liaomh]

what reference seriously do these numbers come from???

 

[flateric]

Please don't bring this what-if shit numbers here.
Absolutely no-authority source site.

 

[VH]

You put waaaaaaay too much faith into the Chinese. The same Chinese that had its most modern attack helicopter outsourced to kamov and its most modern transport plane outsourced to Antonov. The same Chinese that made a direct copy of F-22 canopy and put it on a frame that was atleast influenced by ex MiG people.

And these are the same Chinese that cannot produce a modern hi-performance jet engine to equip their J-20

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Those "reference" numbers, though!!!

 

[blackkite]

How about these data? Not a bad guess?
Length 100 ft / 30 m
Wingspan 55 ft / 16 m
Height 18 ft / 5 m

 

[flateric]

All official numbers on SR-72 dimensions are:

"SR-72, is a twin-engine unmanned aircraft over 100 ft. long. “It will be about the size of the SR-71 and have the same range, but have twice the speed,” he adds.

http://aviationweek.com/defense/skunk-works-reveals-sr-71-successor-plan
SR-71A lenght w/out nose boom is 32.74 m, which is already almost 10% more than "30 meters"

 

[blackkite]

Thanks a lot.

Lockheed SR-72 - 1:144 Model Kit by Fantastic Plastic

It's different in all images a little. What image should I believe? :-\

 

[Orionblamblam]

Thanks a lot.

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/LOCKHEEDSR-72.htm

It's different in all images a little. What image should I believe? :-\

This one:

 

[blackkite]

Excellent! 3 side view please.
And next video. Enjoy!
SR-72 need very long main landing gear which is installed at the wing.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnqC9hTMC54

 

[blackkite]

Hi! My image for SR-72 plan outline shape. Tail seems to be short.
The precondition ; Length 30m, Span 16m and attached three pictures are reliable.

 

[blackkite]

Hi My image for SR-72 plan view and other images.
I see various drawings and think desperately, and being no contradiction, I tried to write a drawing. A drawing which resembles the drawing indicated in the second very much has been completed after all.

 

[flateric]

Scott's planform is correct, while yours - not. Do not believe PopSci renders, they are made by artist, not an engineer, and plain wrong in many aspects.
Read something about Mach cone and its relation to airframe OML.

 

[blackkite]

Scott's planform is correct, while yours - not. Do not believe PopSci renders, they are made by artist, not an engineer, and plain wrong in many aspects.
Read something about Mach cone and its relation to airframe OML.

Oh! Anyway thanks a lot.
You mean that span 16m is error?

 

[flateric]

I said it before already. BW planform view is likely of single-engine demonstrator.

 

[blackkite]

The angle of the Mach wave is determined from:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1445.15.html

HmHmHm...
arcsin(1/6)=9.594degree.

 

[blackkite]

Hmmm...any way.....

 

[blackkite]

I think if the length of SR-72 is 30.48m(100ft), wing span is 14.02m(46ft),Wing sweep back angle : 81°/72°/50°
I modify my plan view, because I set wing span as 16m at first.
In the long run the last drawing I made has resembled the bottom one. ;D
If the length of the bottom colored drawing is 100ft, wing span is 47ft(14.3256m).
I feel bottom one is good.

 

[blackkite]

If the length of this model is 100ft, the height is 13ft(3.96m).
Doesn't anyone have this model front view?
I think that the main dimention of SR-72 is as follows.

Overall length : 100ft(30.48m)
Wing span : 46～47ft(14.02m～14.33m)
Height : 13ft(3.96m)

 

[blackkite]

Tail of this side view is little short. ;D
Turbine engine is J58?

 

[flateric]

THIS IS NOT SR-72. THIS IS FRV.