Technology

Here’s a Look at That Scramjet Engine That Could Help Aircraft Hit 3,600 MPH

An unmanned X-51 WaveRider was expected to reach Mach 6 Tuesday when it was dropped by a B-52 bomber and took flight off the Southern California coast near Point Mugu. But just what sort of technology would allow it to travel 3,600 miles per hour? It’s called a scramjet engine.

A Supersonic Combustion Ramjet (scramjet) uses oxygen from the atmosphere to create the combustion in its engine, instead of from an onboard tank according to NASA. This means the aircraft is “smaller, lighter and faster.” So fast, NASA says that researchers think it will reach 15 times the speed of sound making an 18-hour flight from New York City to Tokyo only 2 hours long. The Los Angeles Times reports a trip from Los Angeles to New York would only take 46 minutes.

Another interesting feature of the scramjet engine is that it has no moving parts.

Boeing Tests X 51Xa Hypersonic Aircraft | Shooting for 300 Seconds of Airtime

Ground test of Boeings X-51a scramjet engine simulating Mach 5 conditions. (Image: Wikimedia)

This animation from Space.com shows how the X-51′s scramjet engine works:

Aviation History has more on how the engine functions and how it differs from other engines:

Air entering the intake of a supersonic aircraft is slowed by aerodynamic diffusion created by the inlet and diffuser to velocities comparable to those in a turbojet augmentor. The expansion of hot gases after fuel injection and combustion accelerates the exhaust air to a velocity higher than that at the inlet and creates positive push.

[...]

The scramjet differs from the ramjet in that combustion takes place at supersonic air velocities through the engine. It is mechanically simple, but vastly more complex aerodynamically than a jet engine. Hydrogen is normally the fuel used.

Boeing Tests X 51Xa Hypersonic Aircraft | Shooting for 300 Seconds of Airtime

A diagram of a scramjet engine. (Image: Wikimedia)

Designed by Boeing Co., the X-51 is intended to allow the Pentagon to deliver strikes around the globe within minutes.

During a test last year, it fell for about four seconds before its booster rocket ignited. The aircraft failed to separate from the rocket and dropped into the ocean. Engineers hope X-51 sustains its top speed for 300 seconds in this latest test — twice as long as it’s gone before. After this test flight, the L.A. Times reports WaveRider will break up upon impact with the Pacific Ocean, which is part of the plan.

Boeing Tests X 51Xa Hypersonic Aircraft | Shooting for 300 Seconds of Airtime

X-51 under a B-52's wing (Image: Wikimedia)

“The X-51 is a technology feeder to larger, more sustained flight times,” Darryl Davis, president of Boeing Phantom Works, told the L.A. Times. “The hope is to advance the state of the art.”

The L.A. Times reports NASA and the Pentagon’s DARPA program funding three national centers in hypersonic flight research. The Pentagon itself is funding six programs, spending $10 billion in the last decade on the hypersonic technology.

Update: According to a tweet by Wired’s Danger Room (via Business Insider), it appears the Tuesday test flight failed. Danger Room doesn’t cite where it received this information.

Boeing Tests X 51Xa Hypersonic Aircraft | Shooting for 300 Seconds of Airtime

Reuters reported later on Wednesday the X-51 broke apart within minutes of its test beginning and fell into the Pacific. It notes a problem with the control fin as being the cause of the failure. Reuters goes on to report an Air Force statement noting that one more X-51 remains and it is not decided ”when or if that vehicle will fly at this time.” 

Related:

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Comments (58)

1 2
  • The-Monk
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 3:45pm

    Does anyone here know the mathematical formula for determining the speed of sound at different altitudes? TIA

    Report Post » The-Monk  
    • Baracalypse
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 5:56pm

      Speed of sound changes only by temperature. The formula is 33.5 x the square root of the temperature on the Rankine scale….. to find the temp on the Rankine scale, just add 460 to Fahrenheit.

      Report Post » Baracalypse  
    • Baracalypse
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 6:09pm

      example: 70 degrees + 460 = 530….. Sq rt of 530 is 23.02….. 23.02 x 33.5 = 771.17 (mph)

      Rankine scale is absolute zero scale (zero Rankine is absolute zero) just as 460 below zero Fahrenheit is absolute zero.

      Report Post » Baracalypse  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 6:23pm

      @Baracalypse

      Thank you very, very much. : )

      Report Post » The-Monk  
  • Eaglesnest
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 2:56pm

    This technology has been around for a while. I know in college back in the late 1980s, we were working on this scramjet and ramjet technology for the National Aerospace Plane project (NASP), which was eventually cut by Clinton in 1993. The idea was to have a plane to take off from a standard runway, fly out over the ocean, go into ramjet and scramjet stages, hit escape velocity and into orbit. The plane would then return, much like the shuttle did, land on the runway and be available for a 48 hour turnaround. This was originally supposed to eliminate the need for launches and replace the shuttle fleet as a returnable vehicle for the ISS missions.

    Report Post » Eaglesnest  
    • Theleftisda
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 7:14pm

      we have been at mach 10 for a long time we use pulse detenation engines/way better than scrams

      Report Post » Theleftisda  
  • blair152
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 2:15pm

    Robert A. Heinlein, and the other writers of the Golden Age of Science Fiction, would have had orgasms
    over this.

    Report Post »  
  • pap pap
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 1:56pm

    How could you control something going 3,600 miles per hour ?

    Damn with a question like that I must be getting old.

    Report Post »  
  • lembrandt
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 12:59pm

    Someone said, if Obama is elected again, this will be the last achievement of private industry in the country – or something like that…

    Forget that, if Obama is elected again, he will just give the technology to the Chinese under the guise of being fair just to make sure we don’t stand out from the other countries of our wonderful world.

    Report Post »  
    • Government_Goodies
      Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:20pm

      If Obama’s re-elected I wouldn’t be surprised if he bowed and handed them the deed to America.

      Report Post » Government_Goodies  
  • Constantine Ivanov
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 12:11pm

    A dilettante question:
    This scramjet “uses oxygen from the atmosphere”.

    Question 1: How much oxygen will be taken out from the atmosphere that we moronically use for breathing?

    I tried not to breath (my last stage of emphysema willingly offers me such a service: no ability to breath normally, without oxygen tube in my nose), but I can’t succeed more than 1 minute.

    Question 2: How much time will it take to completely suck the oxygen out from the atmosphere if a fleet of such oxygen-thirsty scramjets will be built?

    Just asking, out of curiosity… Will my grandchildren still enjoy some oxygen…

    Report Post » Constantine Ivanov  
    • Halgar
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 1:15pm

      You do realize… I hope… that oxygen is created, destroyed and created again naturally.

      You can “use” oxygen by burning or breathing it. Most of that is converted into a waste product called carbon dioxide.
      Carbon dioxide is then used by plants and covert it into a waste product called oxygen.

      Increasing the levels of carbon dioxide will accelerate plant growth, hence accelerating the conversion of carbon dioxide into oxygen, hence maintaining an equilibrium.

      Report Post »  
    • K Chad Roberts
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 1:56pm

      All combustion engines use Oxygen. Petroleum, Diesel, Turbine, Scram… they all burn Oxygen.

      Report Post »  
    • US-First
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 5:51pm

      In this case Hydrogen is the fuel, oxygen is the catalyst. Plenty of both around and always being generated as long as we don’t lose all the plants and water on earth.

      Report Post »  
    • DonMak
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:53pm

      I think Constantine is worried that something that travels so fast must use huge quantities of oxygen. The truth is the plane flies at such great altitudes where the air is very very thin and a small percentage is oxygen. Also, the plane can use no more oxygen than is necessary to combine with its hydrogen gas fuel it carries aloft. And the result is dihydrogen oxide; water.

      Report Post »  
    • K Chad Roberts
      Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:59pm

      To answer your second question, even a fleet of 10,000 of these scram jets could never burn all of the oxygen, while running 24/7. It’s thoroughly impossible with the amount of plant life (surface and water) on the planet, and the level of natural diffusion of H2O –> H2 + O2

      Report Post »  
  • DarthMims
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 12:02pm

    I really need to pay more attention when I read, I thought it said that an “unmanned X-51 waveRUNNER” hit Mach 6. I would hate to try skiing behind that sucker.

    Report Post » DarthMims  
  • FaithfulFriend
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:59am

    I still prefer to use teleportation, as soon as it’s available.

    Report Post » FaithfulFriend  
    • DarthMims
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 12:08pm

      Still waiting on the Hisenberg compensators to be developed, then we can have teleporters.

      Report Post » DarthMims  
    • lefty5005
      Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:23am

      I think we will have replicators before teleporters…or should. I would like to think I could replicate some bacon and eggs before I want to replicate myself from one point to the other. This is an opinion though and I‘m just adding to the conversation because unlike liberals I don’t have the arrogance to feel I am always right but I can admit when I am wrong.

      Report Post »  
  • TheMajority
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:55am

    I like the engine. Simple, often is very effective.

    Just like Individualism vrs collectivism. It really does not get any more simple than that, as far as saving our Republic goes.

    Report Post »  
  • NILAP
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:36am

    Instead why don’t we just buy some UFOs from the aliens.

    Report Post » NILAP  
    • TheMajority
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:58am

      It is not like Boeing is owned by the government like GM. We did not pay a dime for Boeing to develop this engine, like we did for the chevy volt.

      Report Post »  
  • red_white_blue2
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 9:51am

    Yes, let’s waste another 10 billion. Yeah, we’re good for it..right!!!?

    Report Post » red_white_blue2  
    • eagle2715
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 10:58am

      Waste huh?

      I would hate to see what you consider good investment…

      Report Post » eagle2715  
    • Quester55
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:48am

      Bigger?, Faster?, Meaner?, Why the worry, Dead is Dead, In this case it makes little difference whom hits their target first, Nuclear Warheads don’t Discriminate ! And someone is always watching You.

      Didn’t those years of the Cold War Teach any of you nothing?, When it comes to Nuclear Weapons or Biological Weapons, Everyone is the Loser’s !

      Report Post » Quester55  
    • lembrandt
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 12:56pm

      Waste? For technology that could change the way we defend our country, vastly for the better?

      Wait I’ve got a better idea, why don’t we pour that money down the solar energy rat hole, or into the trillion dollar morass Obamacare creates, or maybe we should give it to the drug users so they can buy more cocaine, or maybe we should just give it to illegals in our country who just came here to “get a better life for my child” …yeah, ALL of those would be a better use for the money….

      Waste?????

      Report Post »  
    • Government_Goodies
      Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:23pm

      Someone‘s gotta be the bug and somebody’s gotta be the windshield. I think $10B is a bargain to retain America’s windshield status.

      Report Post » Government_Goodies  
  • 666Sucks
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 9:45am

    Not totally up on Scramjet, however I understand the big hold up is a metal that can withstand the heat. This tech would put us light years ahead of our enemies. To develop that type of metal, you would probably need a total vacuum, you know, like the kind found on the ISS. Now if I was the enemy of the United States, I would do everything in my power to shut down that laboratory to stop that type of research!! WHAT, did I say something wrong?!?!

    Report Post » 666Sucks  
    • eagle2715
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:00am

      Its the main hurdle they have openly discussed. The other hypersonic vehicle tested earlier is designed to test materials and aerodynamics, while this one is designed primarily around testing the propulsion system.

      Report Post » eagle2715  
    • TheMajority
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:52am

      I hear Hank Reardon has such a metal. :)

      If obama wins again, you can look at this engine as the last achievement made by private industry for the aircraft/spacecraft industry. We all know, with out the efforts of the Individuals in private industry, the government(s) could not figure things out them selves, and we would all be picking potatoes to fund it.

      Report Post »  
  • Bohump
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 9:41am

    But it would take 4 hr. to get to the loading lounge!

    Report Post »  
  • JasonGoldtrap
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 9:35am

    This is incredible unstabble technology. I remember Reagan discussing it in 1983. By 1994 it would be flying. I think the record is 30 seconds from launch to explosion.

    Report Post » JasonGoldtrap  
  • TX_45_ACP
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 9:23am

    The real question is? Who built that?

    Report Post » TX_45_ACP  
  • THXll38
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:59am

    The SR-71 was doing this in the 70s. That said, I am pretty sure it wasn’t very luxurious.

    Report Post » THXll38  
    • BOMUSTGO
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 9:44am

      The SR-71A only went Mach 3+ and operated on a Ram Jet principle.This is a Scram Jet and much faster.

      Report Post » BOMUSTGO  
  • 80mesh
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:58am

    this wont fall from the sky in flames …

    http://blog.powerblocktv.com/?p=4312

    Report Post » 80mesh  
  • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:51am

    “The Los Angeles Times reports a trip from Los Angeles to New York would only take 46 minutes.”

    And still no one will want to wait in line for 2 hours to get sexually molested by a TSA agent to make that trip.

    Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • eagle2715
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:02am

      Indeed, but it would vastly decrease the need for many military assets around the world. If you can put a cruise missile anywhere on the planet in 1 to 2 hours it limits the need for missile cruisers are all over the planet.

      Also, when you have something traveling at that speed the need for explosives becomes almost unnecessary. The kinetic energy alone is enough to decimate anything it comes in contact with.

      Report Post » eagle2715  
    • West Coast Patriot
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 12:24pm

      Yes, it makes you wonder why we are so worried about Iran. We could pull all troops home, leave the Navy patrolling the seas, and if anyone attacked us, we could obliterate the target in less than two hours. This is where I do not understand the warmongers theory that we have to be the police of the world and allow the U.N. or NATO to direct our President when and where to attack. If someone attacks us, the President has the power to defend us, then he goes to Congress, gets a Constitutional declaration of war, then we hit with all we have. Simple Constitutional principles is where we need to get back to.

      Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
  • MrObvious
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:42am

    Old story new test. … Sounds like there close, once again, to applying the tech in a useful way.

    Report Post »  
  • ZaphodsPlanet
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:33am

    I don’t think the engine is what is all that new, what makes this special is whatever it‘s made out of since at the speeds indicated the exterior of the aircraft get’s so hot it has usually melted off the skin of the aircraft, this has been the limitation until now. I can‘t believe they’re just letting this thing fall into the ocean, no matter how many parts it explodes into….. it should be retrieved as we’re just giving away more technology to Russia/China by doing that. But what else should we expect with the criminal Obama in the White house. He gave one of our best drones to freaking Iran. If you were stupid enough to vote for that traitor…. Thanks a lot for screwing us all.

    Report Post » ZaphodsPlanet  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:09am

    What else is new here? There have been accounts of the scramjet/ramjet technology being deployed in what is called 6th Generation Warfare.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • Anonymous T. Irrelevant
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:29am

      SCRAMjets have been around since before the 60′s. I’m not sure why they are bringing them back.
      Imagine hitting another object going MACH 15?

      Report Post » Anonymous T. Irrelevant  
  • alpha2omega47
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:08am

    Where are the jobs? Enough of Obama ~ he has screwed up America and our government more than any other president in American history. Obama is the worst president so far ~ even worse than Jimmy Carter.

    Report Post » alpha2omega47  
  • The Jewish Avenger
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 8:00am

    Any word about commerical planes being able to support a couple of these puppies without destroying the plane in the process?

    Report Post » The Jewish Avenger  
  • historyguy48
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 7:41am

    They have been working on this technology since the end of WWII. It appears that the advances made are proving that the theories will work but they must still get the engine up to its working speed for it to actually work.
    Sci Fi authors have used these engines to propel Earth to orbit spacecraft since before I was born. Perhaps they will finally actually be used.

    Report Post » historyguy48  
  • teddrunk
    Posted on August 15, 2012 at 7:35am

    Why the story, the scram-jet is old technology. We’ve had it for decades.

    Report Post »  
    • eagle2715
      Posted on August 15, 2012 at 11:05am

      Thats like saying ‘warp drive’ is old tech because it’s been in the movies for decades.

      The theory has been in existence for many years, but the ability to sustain those kinds of speeds has only recently been achieved…

      Report Post » eagle2715  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love