Re: Anxiously awaiting Aurora discussion at conference


Message posted by Peter Merlin on April 23, 2009 at 15:27:03 PST:

I am scheduled to give two lectures, an Area 51 historical overview and a set of case studies illustrating how the government responds to top-secret crashes. I'm not sure how I was listed as talking about "Aurora," although I am willing to do so as part of a panel discussion.

Based on my experience with current hypersonic programs and frank discussion with people more intimately familiar with the history of U.S. hypersonic development activities, I think it is safe to say we have a long way to go before there is any sort of operational vehicle with the attributes described for the so-called "Aurora."

Too many people assume that because the SR-71 was retired, there must be a direct (and improved!) replacement. Unfortunately, that is not how aerospace procurement works in the real world. Politics plays a big part, as it certainly did in the demise of the SR-71. Also, even if there is strong advocacy for a development/procurement effort and a seemingly obvious need, it doesn't guarantee that a proposed vehicle will ever go beyond the drawing board. In the case of hypersonics, there is still a lot of work to be done in technology maturation. Numerous research projects have been undertaken with mixed success.

I recommend reading "The History of Hypersonic; or, 'Back to the Future - Again and Again'," by Dr. Richard P. Hallion and "Hypersonics- A Periodic Quest," by Ming Tang. Both papers are available online. If I were going to give a lecture on hypersonic research, it would be based largely on these sources.


In Reply to: Anxiously awaiting Aurora discussion at conference posted by Robert on April 22, 2009 at 22:36:56 PST:

Replies:



[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]