NASA/LockMart "Supersonic Green Machine"

Orionblamblam

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: USAP
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
5 April 2006
Messages
11,814
Reaction score
9,405
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_1698.html

464922main_image_1698_800-600.jpg
 
Perhaps proving once again that a fantastic SST could be built even today... but computer graphics are less risky.

How 'popular' would be the airline to put a few shiny new SSTs into service? I'd pay (some) extra to fly on it!

One of the reasons this forum is so great is because the actually built projects are boring (787 anyone?).
 
 
I looked at the picture and thought it was more than a little reminiscent of Thunderbirds and lo and behold the AW article referenced above includes:

d920425b-b66b-4df4-827a-e9e6b76f1f66.Large.jpg
 
Note that the artist's impression of this Lockheed Martin concept has no windows. Can we presume that video cameras would relay external views to video monitors, probably LCDs, for the flight crew and passengers? Or did the artist omit this detail?

I also wonder why NASA continues to fund civil SST design projects with the US aircraft industry. Do they expect to provide supersonic transport to economy passengers or first and business class passengers? Or do they expect passengers to pay a speed premium for SST travel above first and business class fares?


FutureSpaceTourist said:
I looked at the picture and thought it was more than a little reminiscent of Thunderbirds and lo and behold the AW article referenced above includes:

d920425b-b66b-4df4-827a-e9e6b76f1f66.Large.jpg
Click to expand...

Though Fireflash was hypersonic, atomic-powered, and much larger than the NASA/Lockheed Martin concept with a lounge built in the wing.
 
I figured it out, the green parts are stolen! ;D You've got the NATF-23's forward fuselage and canard, half of the F-5A's wingtip fuel tanks...yeah, I know, too much time on my hands.
 
higher resolution
http://www.aeronautics.nasa.gov/images/content/nra_awardees_3generations_lg.jpg
 
A lot of the N+3 renders have no windows -- I'm sure it's just a question of not spending the effort to define windows in an aerodynamics model.
 
Interestingly, the PopSci image moves the engines from the top to the bottom of the main wing. Now, the NASA press release describes the original design as "an inverted V engine-under wing configuration" but I think they're talking about engines "under" that curved upper airfoil, not engines under the main wing as shown in PopSci. So is the PopSci image via LM or was it made from scratch for PopSci and got the engine placement wrong?
 
TomS said:
A lot of the N+3 renders have no windows -- I'm sure it's just a question of not spending the effort to define windows in an aerodynamics model.
Click to expand...

Or perhaps it is a way to better influence top brass about the military potential of the concept? A sort of X-30 in reverse.
 
fightingirish said:
Artwork from Nick Kaloterakis for Popular Science May 2012
... with windows. ::) ;)
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link. I was beginning to wonder if the "Supersonic Green Machine" had video displays and TV cameras rather than windows.

lippischh said:
it reminds me, Dr Alexander Martin Lippisch works on deltas, especially the canard on the first picture.
Click to expand...

It is also a continuation of Lockheed Martin's research into box-wing aircraft.
 

Attachments

  • NK_supersonic_1.jpg
    NK_supersonic_1.jpg
    48.4 KB · Views: 277
  • NK_supersonic_2_2048.jpg
    NK_supersonic_2_2048.jpg
    71.1 KB · Views: 279
Are these pics from Lockheed or are they from Nick Kaloterakis and PopSci? I'm asking because I would still like to know if the engines were moved from the top of the wing to he underside by the design team or if this is an error by the artist.
 
TomS said:
Are these pics from Lockheed or are they from Nick Kaloterakis and PopSci? I'm asking because I would still like to know if the engines were moved from the top of the wing to he underside by the design team or if this is an error by the artist.
Click to expand...

Nick Kaloterakis
 
Triton said:
Nick Kaloterakis
Click to expand...

Thanks. So it looks like he relocated the engines (for aesthetics?). Kinda reinforces how questionable PopSci is as a source of aircraft imagery.
 
Triton said:
Part of NASA's N+3 studies of concepts for supersonic commercial aircraft that could enter service in 2030-35.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a9512b314-6106-4f30-a92a-ff45e91fb888&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
Click to expand...

Just tried to look at the blog post and got a "Custom Error" message, what was the title of the Blog post?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom