That would be 8x the speed of sound. It would be significantly faster than the Concorde or common military jets, which only fly at about 2x the speed of sound. It would also be faster than the fairly new hypersonic weapons, for which 5x the speed of sound is the lower limit, but which, unlike simple rockets, should be able to be guided within the atmosphere. We are currently working on a hydrogen passenger jet for around 25 people that will fly 6 times the speed of sound!
Aside from the costs, you have to fly in a much thinner atmosphere to make such speeds possible. The H2 jet is supposed to fly 30 km high instead of the normal approx. 10 km, which means that the pressure drops even more from around 300 mbar to 25 mbar.
8× speed of sound is also approx. 1 of the orbital speed der Earth...Quite a bit of fuel consumption!
It's more about the costs and technical solutions. Even 30 years ago there were people who wanted to offer private shuttle flights from London to Australia or similar in less than an hour. Basically a rocket launch, half a trip around the earth and a landing like the SpaceShuttle, with stubby wings. Whether you can still call the thing an 'airplane' is another matter!
In the 1960s and 70s, everything that was "technically possible" was done immediately, even if it didn't make any technical sense at all. Then you have, among other things: built the Concorde. Since it could never be economical, the nonsense was left behind at some point. This has nothing to do with the accident. And that didn't come as a surprise, because as far as I know it was the twelfth time that a tire part damaged a tank and fuel leaked. This time there was just a lot more and directly into an engine. That's why it wentThe tanks were converted so quickly because they had been thinking and planning for a long time about how to prevent something like that. It was just too expensive.
Yes, it would probably be possible, but it would be moderately stupid.
Just because of the fact that you would break the sound barrier at around 1200km/h.
Nobody could afford that and, as I said, it would be absolutely unnecessary
Could, yes. But it won't.
It would be uneconomical and rather stupid for other reasons.
Such a fireball boy!
Could not be.
Not in the atmosphere. The fastest independently controllable aircraft in the world was the
With a top speed of just under 7,300 km/h. A rocket engine was required to achieve this speed. The x15 was not capable of self-launch, but was brought up to altitude by a B52 and then dropped. The plane had to be specially coated to withstand the heat, even though it flew in significantly thinner air than usual aircraft (50km and higher).
The plane you picture is built for speeds below Mach 1 and would already be at If the speed of sound is exceeded, they break apart in the air.
Break up omg I'm afraid of flying we're supposed to fly next week thanks!!!!!!!
Don't worry, your machine will almost certainly not be pushed to its limits by the pilot.
That doesn't reassure me much.
Physics is just a pig. It really hasReasons why not much has changed in terms of top speed since the V2.
The energy consumption increases immeasurably.
You need energy to overcome the AIR RESISTANCE, but twice as fast means 4x air resistance because it increases as a square.
to put it figuratively Then the air would be like concrete due to the high speed, you would need a material that could withstand extreme heat and extreme pressure, but that would be too heavy and the aircraft would no longer be able to fly.
Due to the high fuel consumption, they would be Tanks empty after just 10 km.