Came across a ram/scramjet review paper from the Stanford Center for Turbulence Research & it is an absolute treasure trove of wonderful illustrations related to hypersonics
A quick thread of my favorites, but first I got distracted w this simulation of scramjet combustion
Here’s a closer look at that animation, with links to the paper and YouTube source
What you’re seeing is an overlay of temperature, density gradient (analogous to schlieren), and velocity in a scramjet cavity at Mach 6.5
A schematic of the HIFiRE-2 scramjet configuration with lots of great technical specs/details
Similarly, this is the HyShot-2 cavity
On a more fundamental level, this is a great overview of the engineering/physics challenges related to hypersonic flight for air-breathing propulsion systems
A related summary for tactical boost-glide systems—notice the similarities? And the differences?
Last but certainly not least, this is an excellent figure highlighting the differences in flight profiles and trajectories of a variety of systems, from cruise missiles to ballistics to traditional LEO rocket launches
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So, if I understand correctly, it sounds like GE has successfully tested a turbine-based combined-cycle engine that incorporates: 1) gas turbine; 2) rotating detonation engine; 3) ramjet; 4) scramjet 🤯
As we approach what may be a historic Starship flight test, this Reuters report is really, really bad
No excuses: as arguably the number one launch provider *in the world* the safety culture at SpaceX has to be better. They should be setting the standard (in a good way)
If we are going to continue giving them billions annually in taxpayer dollars, they can’t keep treating workers like disposable meat puppets
And yes before you ask these numbers are much worse than industry averages
This is an absolutely total systematic failure that goes beyond SpaceX—NASA has some explaining to do about how they allowed SpaceX to operate in their own backyard allowing a > 20% injury rate
If you're ever frustrated by someone with a PhD acting like a know-it-all outside their niche field of study, just remember that Albert Einstein tried to design an airfoil but it performed so poorly during testing it's flight characteristics were compared to a "pregnant duck"
HT to @milan_tomicc for reminding me of this the other day
For a bit more technical insight, bottom line is that Einstein designed this entirely using Bernoulli theory.
Stall at 12deg AoA @ 92 L/D
He later confessed he was "ashamed" and "this is what can happen to a man that thinks a lot but reads little"
Am I being unreasonable in thinking that "clearing the launch pad" (that everyone knew would be destroyed) is a bit of a low bar for arguably the most successful launch company *ever*?
There are tons of insanely smart, hard-working, talented people there
NASA needs Starship to put boots on the moon
So I expect more than what we got yesterday
When some brand new startup or a university rocket club sends their rocket into a death spiral at T+4min we all pat them on the back and say "space is hard" and "you'll figure it out"
I hold SpaceX (and NASA) to a much higher standard. SpaceX is better than this. It wasn't ready
Some quick notes about this images: first, this is from a technique called schlieren imaging and what you are seeing are density gradients in the flow. helps to visualize shock waves, expansion fans, etc.