Good point! If it boomed it must have gove supersonic.
I think there were three new design principles were need to transition to effective supersonic flight;
1 As discussed the wing needed a design that minimized migration of the center of pressure. The original P-38 was a bad actor in this regard as it was designed with a thick “interceptor” wing that went trans sonic at as slow as 460 kts. After killing I think three test pilots it was released to combat without a fix. Ultimately a “dive brake” that stabilized the CoP, and ultimately a new wing, fixed the problem.
2 The stabilator which has been discussed in its various iterations. and
3 The Area Rule Law which requires that the entire longitudinal x-section of a plane –including the wings- be near constant. The fix is manifested as the coke-bottle shaped fuselage. This requirement is easier to meet in a car.
Will there be a way, or need, to test the rocket in-motion? I assume they can do stationary burns. Or will Andy Green be pressing the big red button marked "ROCKET" on the day-of, and hope for the best?
Good point! If it boomed it must have gone supersonic...
1 As discussed the wing needed a design that minimized migration of the center of pressure. The original P-38 was a bad actor in this regard as it was designed with a thick “interceptor” wing that went trans sonic at as slow as 460 kts. After killing I think three test pilots it was released to combat without a fix. Ultimately a “dive brake” that stabilized the CoP, and ultimately a new wing, fixed the problem...
Actually, the production/service P-38 never got that new wing, & was dive speed limited to ~440 mph IAS,
even after the 'dive flaps' enabled control to be regained..
This low combat Mach capability of ~0.65 really hindered the P-38 - in the ETO against the Luftwaffe 109/190's,
& was a major reason why the USAAF 'glamour' outfit, the 8th AF - replaced them - with new P-51 Mustangs..
Re: Bloodhound SSC
Posted: 28 Oct 2017, 13:01
by Tommy Cookers
over 50 years ago British pilot and motor racer 'Dizzy' Addicott apparently acquired a Swift jet fighter to convert for the LSR
unusually and handily for this, the Swift iirc had an afterburner
iirc he pioneered (outside the USA anyway) the use of the production all-aluminium Buick V8 in race cars intended for 4 cyl engines http://www.manikllc.com/library/Lotus_1 ... 010-05.pdf
this GM (pushrod) engine design of course (when abandoned by Buick and purchased by Rover) was made and developed for another 30 years eg WTC
and Oldsmobile blocks (Buick-brother, more head studs) used with Irving-designed sohc heads etc by Brabham's team, won WDC and WCC in 1966/67
of course the pushrod Oldsmobile engine was used to some effect in early Can-Am by the McLaren car
I just watched this video on LSR racing. It mostly focuses on the British teams but it really gives you a feel for how batshit crazy the early racers were.
From my understanding Bonneville was not chosen for the record attempt because of the hardness of the ground and the havoc it could potentially wreak on the bottom of the vehicle by bouncing shock waves back up to it.
late quote on this but Bonneville is no where near long enough. Best course we have had in years has been 12 miles this is probably ok for 500 mph maybe a little more but no where near 1000mph. What will really be interesting is how much time they will burn slowing down and still get the car back through the timed mile in under an hour.
probably not in its current state. Its been hit or miss the last few years.
Re: Bloodhound SSC
Posted: 31 Oct 2017, 01:41
by strad
Back in 80 I had the chance to take my C/ED to the salt.
However the people around me at the time talked me out of it.
I thought it would be good fun. I now wish I'd done it.