NASA Development: Flying At Mach 5 Would Reduce 21-Hour Flight To 2.5 Hours
Travel News — By Carlo Alcos on November 19, 2010 at 12:03 pmWhat’s the longest non-stop flight you’ve ever been on? Last July I flew from LA to Bangkok, a mind-numbing 17 hours. Luckily I had an entertaining seatmate, and the spectacular service by Thai Airways (plus the ample legroom) made it bearable. The flight from New York to Sydney is 21 hours. Ouch. But imagine doing that in 2.5 hours — not even enough time to watch Australia in full.
Because this might become a reality one day. According to The Daily Mail, NASA is working on an aircraft that will escape the earth’s atmosphere and fly at five times the speed of sound. In comparison, the Concorde flew at Mach 2, two times the speed of sound. It’s being developed as a means of having a re-usable aircraft that can fly to Mars and back, but as with many of NASA’s developments, it could have huge implications on passenger travel here on earth. $15 million is being spent over there years to make this a reality.
NASA’s proposal contains the following challenges to this project:
The hypersonic heating environment, coupled with the emphasis on reusability, creates additional severe technology challenges for materials, material coatings, and structures that not only carry the aerodynamic loads of the air but also repeatedly sustain high thermal loads requiring long-life and durability while minimizing weight. Space access launch vehicles must be lightweight, fully reusable and easily maintained if low-cost access to space is to be achieved.
Earlier this year, an experimental craft called a “scramjet” reached speeds of Mach 6 — more than 4500 mph — for a few minutes. Recently Richard Branson took his new baby, the Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo, on its first solo flight. He is hoping this will be the first chance at space tourism, with tickets coming in an an “affordable” price of $200,000.
Space travel might be closer than you think.
[Image: mikebaird / Flickr]
1 Comment
no matter what the result it won’t be cheap, wouldn’t research be better invested in alternate energy sources for current modes of flight