Lockheed Martin SR-72?

Chinese allegedly shot down a D-21 Mach 3 drone more than 30 years ago
Cheers, Woody

Please direct me to rumor source. Fascinating!

Thanks
 
http://www.popsci.com/inside-americas-next-spyplane

sr72_0.jpg


I hope I'm not being pie in the sky but there sure seems to be an accumulation of stories recently pointing to hypersonic weapons/platforms 'in the next five years'
 
They were saying that back in the 80s too. Aurora, X-30, scramjet everything. . . :'(
 
sferrin said:
They were saying that back in the 80s too. Aurora, X-30, scramjet everything. . . :'(
Click to expand...

Cool picture though ;D

I posted elsewhere in different thread (HSSW, X-51, etc.) that with 30 years of $40-$70 billion in 'black budgets' something has to be 'out there' it is just hard to believe a trillion + over 30 years hasn't bought us anything.

And yes I am an eternal optimist with these things (some would say naïve)
 
bobbymike said:
I posted elsewhere in different thread (HSSW, X-51, etc.) that with 30 years of $40-$70 billion in 'black budgets' something has to be 'out there' it is just hard to believe a trillion + over 30 years hasn't bought us anything.
And yes I am an eternal optimist with these things (some would say naïve)
Click to expand...

I'm kinda like you on this particular issue, although there is also a real possibility that all this "black budget" thing could also have been a cover-up for totally different spendings, conveniently hidden under the "black" label so that there would be no need to justify them...
 
Skyblazer said:
bobbymike said:
I posted elsewhere in different thread (HSSW, X-51, etc.) that with 30 years of $40-$70 billion in 'black budgets' something has to be 'out there' it is just hard to believe a trillion + over 30 years hasn't bought us anything.
And yes I am an eternal optimist with these things (some would say naïve)
Click to expand...

I'm kinda like you on this particular issue, although there is also a real possibility that all this "black budget" thing could also have been a cover-up for totally different spendings, conveniently hidden under the "black" label so that there would be no need to justify them...
Click to expand...

Under this administration, that goes without saying. [sigh]
 
Sadly, SR-72 is just a beautiful picture on a magazine nothing else in the real world , we see something like that on the net since 10 years and in reality nothing in the sky since that.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Skyblazer said:
bobbymike said:
I posted elsewhere in different thread (HSSW, X-51, etc.) that with 30 years of $40-$70 billion in 'black budgets' something has to be 'out there' it is just hard to believe a trillion + over 30 years hasn't bought us anything.
And yes I am an eternal optimist with these things (some would say naïve)
Click to expand...

I'm kinda like you on this particular issue, although there is also a real possibility that all this "black budget" thing could also have been a cover-up for totally different spendings, conveniently hidden under the "black" label so that there would be no need to justify them...
Click to expand...

Under this administration, that goes without saying. [sigh]
Click to expand...

To be honest, that statement could be made about any administration over the last thirty years or so.
 
I've noticed some artwork for the SR-72 features 2 separate podded engines. And I've also seen art with a single engine bay. Perhaps LM hasn't pinned down the final configuration yet
 

Attachments

  • SR72 twin engine.jpg
    SR72 twin engine.jpg
    555.2 KB · Views: 388
  • Single engine-full.jpg
    Single engine-full.jpg
    347.8 KB · Views: 332
Another LM released SR-72 image. -SP
 

Attachments

  • SR72-2.jpg
    SR72-2.jpg
    220.1 KB · Views: 328
My theory is that LM had two schools of thought on whether to go single or twin engine for their baseline configuration. I have another theory that maybe the single-engine variant could be a sub-scale demonstrator. It's just theories here and I'm really just taking stabs in the dark.
 
XP67_Moonbat said:
I've noticed some artwork for the SR-72 features 2 separate podded engines. And I've also seen art with a single engine bay. Perhaps LM hasn't pinned down the final configuration yet
Click to expand...

Unless I'm mistaken of the victim of some display bug, the two pics you posted are exactly the same.
 
Hi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFzSDLrDdJk
 

Attachments

  • 14969026644555790452_11n.jpg
    14969026644555790452_11n.jpg
    117.8 KB · Views: 204
  • img_3.png
    img_3.png
    380.4 KB · Views: 234
  • NASA-Funds-Lockheed-for-SR-72-Hypersonic-Spy-drone-3.jpg
    NASA-Funds-Lockheed-for-SR-72-Hypersonic-Spy-drone-3.jpg
    51.2 KB · Views: 403
  • sr72_big.jpg
    sr72_big.jpg
    225.3 KB · Views: 415
HSSW missile.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/high-speed-strike-weapon-hssw.html

http://theaviationist.com/2013/11/07/hssw-image/
 

Attachments

  • HSSW.jpg
    HSSW.jpg
    237.8 KB · Views: 219
Is it another propulsion concept?
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/11/hypersonic-sr72-and-trijet-engine.html
 

Attachments

  • CombinedCycle_Info.jpg
    CombinedCycle_Info.jpg
    140.2 KB · Views: 178
3D model. How about this model?
http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3d-model-lockheed-martin-sr-72/780846
 

Attachments

  • side.jpg
    side.jpg
    25.6 KB · Views: 144
  • plan under.jpg
    plan under.jpg
    65.3 KB · Views: 139
  • plan upper.jpg
    plan upper.jpg
    53.2 KB · Views: 121
blackkite said:
3D model. How about this model?
Click to expand...
Authentic planform view from ADP
 

Attachments

  • SR-72 planform.jpg
    SR-72 planform.jpg
    16.2 KB · Views: 81
I wonder if they're feeling out a reaction engines engine at all, can't deny the synergy between their high mach atmospheric passenger aircraft and this.

I'd be very interested to know about the crew configuration. Obviously no windows so is it going to be a camera and screen layout for two people like the blackbird or maybe optionally manned or even unmanned?
 
blackkite said:
Is it another propulsion concept?
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/11/hypersonic-sr72-and-trijet-engine.html
Click to expand...

TriJet was designed around a Mach 7 cruising speed which dictated a certain inlet capture area for the scramjet.
To prevent unstarts, the turbine would be required to work up to Mach 4. To get around that, they incorporated an
ERJ in a separate duct with its own doors.


IIRC, SR-72 is designed around a Mach 6 cruise which reduces the inlet requirements
allowing you to discontinue the turbine at ~ Mach 3 and obviates the need for the separate ERJ duct + doors.
 
flateric said:
blackkite said:
3D model. How about this model?
Click to expand...
Authentic planform view from ADP
Click to expand...
Thanks. I think this plan form is good. SR-72 has double delta wing.
But tail plan shape is little different from the artisitc impressions.
 

Attachments

  • SR-72 planform.jpg
    SR-72 planform.jpg
    16.2 KB · Views: 701
  • ogee wing plan upper.jpg
    ogee wing plan upper.jpg
    62.9 KB · Views: 667
  • yourfile.jpg
    yourfile.jpg
    29.7 KB · Views: 659
  • yourfile1.jpg
    yourfile1.jpg
    15.2 KB · Views: 639
phrenzy said:
I wonder if they're feeling out a reaction engines engine at all, can't deny the synergy between their high mach atmospheric passenger aircraft and this.

I'd be very interested to know about the crew configuration. Obviously no windows so is it going to be a camera and screen layout for two people like the blackbird or maybe optionally manned or even unmanned?
Click to expand...
SR-72 is an unmanned vehicle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_SR-72
 
marauder2048 said:
blackkite said:
Is it another propulsion concept?
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/11/hypersonic-sr72-and-trijet-engine.html
Click to expand...

TriJet was designed around a Mach 7 cruising speed which dictated a certain inlet capture area for the scramjet.
To prevent unstarts, the turbine would be required to work up to Mach 4. To get around that, they incorporated an
ERJ in a separate duct with its own doors.


IIRC, SR-72 is designed around a Mach 6 cruise which reduces the inlet requirements
allowing you to discontinue the turbine at ~ Mach 3 and obviates the need for the separate ERJ duct + doors.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot.
 
DSE said:
marauder2048 said:
IIRC, SR-72 is designed around a Mach 6 cruise which reduces the inlet requirements
allowing you to discontinue the turbine at ~ Mach 3 and obviates the need for the separate ERJ duct + doors.
Click to expand...


Current testing at UTRC is looking to take the transition down to Mach 2. There is no such thing as a Mach 3 turbine these days which fits the bill.
Click to expand...

My theory is that they have onboard LOX to:

1. inject pre-compressor for cooling (DARPA RASCAL style which had P&W F100s running @ Mach 3.5+ with LOX + water )
2. use as oxidizer for the Ejector Ramjets in the DMRJ
 
Thanks a lot. Very interesting information. B)
Main structural material is Titanium alloy, Inconel alloy or heat resistant composite?
Fuel is JP6?
SR-72 will be a prototype of HSBJ or HST?
I'm irritated with a slow subsonic passenger plane such as Boeing or Airbus for a long time indeed. ;D
Please deal with someone somehow.
 

Attachments

  • signature72_png38626aa3-fbed-44e7-869f-f958824709a5Original.jpg
    signature72_png38626aa3-fbed-44e7-869f-f958824709a5Original.jpg
    413.4 KB · Views: 241
  • 10_NWS_25_FLYING_383506a.jpg
    10_NWS_25_FLYING_383506a.jpg
    381.4 KB · Views: 743
Hi!
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/features/2015/sr-72.html

http://aviationweek.com/blog/meet-son-blackbird-2013
 

Attachments

  • 1432754349110.jpg
    1432754349110.jpg
    144.6 KB · Views: 170
  • o0a1qa.jpg
    o0a1qa.jpg
    34.9 KB · Views: 176
  • 001ec94a25c513e193da01.jpg
    001ec94a25c513e193da01.jpg
    381.5 KB · Views: 176
  • da69d958-9963-4b2b-9f49-191ade101611_Full.jpg
    da69d958-9963-4b2b-9f49-191ade101611_Full.jpg
    73 KB · Views: 114
http://www.popsci.com/inside-americas-next-spyplane

SKIN

Aerodynamic friction at speeds exceeding Mach 5 will heat an aircraft’s exterior to 2,000 degrees. At that point, conventional steel airframes will melt. So engineers are looking at composites—the same kinds of high-performance carbon, ceramic, and metal mixes used for the noses of intercontinental ballistic missiles and space shuttles. Every joint and seam must be sealed: Any air leak at hypersonic speed, and the in-rushing heat would cause the aircraft to collapse. (That’s what doomed the space shuttle Columbia).
 

Attachments

  • 0_0_525_1_70__covers_popsci_20150527115926_PSC0615_001.jpg
    0_0_525_1_70__covers_popsci_20150527115926_PSC0615_001.jpg
    68.2 KB · Views: 119
  • SIDE VIEW.png
    SIDE VIEW.png
    136.5 KB · Views: 102
  • PLAN VIEW.png
    PLAN VIEW.png
    127.9 KB · Views: 86
  • SR-72 PIC1.png
    SR-72 PIC1.png
    137.9 KB · Views: 92
  • SR-72.png
    SR-72.png
    144.8 KB · Views: 95
Good thing I didn't spend $4.99+tax for 2 measly pages! I got all I need here!
 
Hi!
I already ordered this book to Amazon. ;D
 

Attachments

  • 1432754349110.jpg
    1432754349110.jpg
    144.6 KB · Views: 74
blackkite said:
But tail plan shape is little different from the artisitc impressions.
Click to expand...
It fits single engined demonstrator though. PopSci renders are complete crap in terms of planform view accuracy
 
You mean this one?
 

Attachments

  • 5a466d21-e757-4887-91d8-92bee071ffaf_Full.jpg
    5a466d21-e757-4887-91d8-92bee071ffaf_Full.jpg
    289.5 KB · Views: 102
Hi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8U_w-MiX-A
 

Attachments

  • SR-72 PIC1.png
    SR-72 PIC1.png
    203.4 KB · Views: 120
  • SR-72 PIC2.png
    SR-72 PIC2.png
    195.3 KB · Views: 133
  • SR-72 PIC4 (1).png
    SR-72 PIC4 (1).png
    220.6 KB · Views: 127
  • SR-72 PIC4 (2).png
    SR-72 PIC4 (2).png
    217.2 KB · Views: 129
Hi!
Certainly, the figure of the length direction of the whole fuselage about this picture may be destroyed by perspective intentionally.
 

Attachments

  • SR-72.jpg
    SR-72.jpg
    879.3 KB · Views: 628

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom