Approved Discussion on Hypersonic Aircraft

[DeSchaine]

I don't think anyone has speculated (outside of classified reports) about the specific payload capacity, but I would guess based on specs compared to those of a B-1, it would be somewhat similar to the 125,000 lb payload of the Lancer, maybe a bit more, more likely a bit less. There is every possibility that it would have to slow down before opening the bay doors to make a strike. As for the recon department, nothing big there. It would make use of the same tech as that used in the Blackbird.

The NeoSoviets supposedly have a working design in the pre prototype stage, the PAK-DA.

[Rommy]

The Scimitar engine variant is entirely in the atmosphere, so it does not contain stores of oxygen like the Spaceplane version; so it would be able to carry more fuel explaining the longer range as noted by the Sydney to Brussels. For the most part it does follow a conventional flight path, however it would include in that flight path large portions where it would be at a higher attitude for hypersonic flight as to not interfere with commercial traffic, as the amount of maneuverability would be limited at such speeds, which is why thrust vectoring would be used to help with that somewhat.

As DeS noted earlier, the payload would be closer to the Rockwell B-1 Lancer, as well as its actual size for the design me and Lom are imagining would be similar to the B-1 Lancer as well. However due to the stealth nature of the bomber, for most missions requiring optimal stealth the payload would be limited to its internal storage of 75,000lbs this would also be required in order to reach hypersonic velocities, as other external payloads would increase the drag too much. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_B-1_Lancer)

While the civilian variant of the aircraft is going to be limited by normal regulations for civilian aircraft, the military aircraft would be able to have a service ceiling above 60,000 feet, closer to 80,000 to 100,000 Feet (as noted on the companies website). However, while the military aircraft would travel at hypersonic velocities mostly over the ocean depending on the target, and the location of origin, Singan and Lomarre would be applying new aerodynamic techniques that in RL are being worked on by NASA and is within a few years of real world application. The constructional features would be the implementation of a long nose to the aircraft, with multiple surface area control wings as well as small canards, together these would work together to ensure individual pressure waves that on normal aircraft converge together to make sonic booms, well you know...don't converge. Making it as the article I found says "more of a car door being slammed shut". This would allow the aircraft to fly at hypersonic velocities with little to no disturbances over populated areas. (https://www.cnet.com/news/supersonic-without-the-boom/)

[Ayzek]

How does the aircraft's hypersonic speed influence its stealth? I was under the impression that hypersonic aircraft give off a notable heat signature and would consequently not be especially difficult to detect and track.

Additionally, how does the special shape needed to avoid producing sonic booms influence the craft's radar cross section?

[Rommy]

The RCS of the aircraft would be obviously not the greatest or as extreme as for example the F-22 Raptor; however shape does not matter nearly as much as during the 1980s when the initial design phases of stealth aircraft were being sent out; with materials being able to take up a lot more slack now and a lot more cost effectively.

So all stealth aircraft have major heat signatures, that is why the Russians are able to take pictures of the F-22 Raptor over Syria, however the speed of the aircraft at near Hypersonic velocities make infrared tracking much more difficult without other methods of direct detection. Though even to handle the speeds of hypersonic velocity, heat absorption materials would be implemented, with cooling tubes focused on the front of the aircraft connected to the same cooling system that the Engines operate would help slightly with the heat signature. Another implementation is to cool the exhaust gas of the engines, which will great help with rear-on infrared detection.

[Ayzek]

How does the hypersonic speed make it more difficult to track?

[Rommy]

Current IRST systems vary greatly on performance based on things like target attitude, cloud cover, target speed, air temperature etc. Most importantly its speed is key, most IRST systems ground based, and airborne based have limited ranges, the bomber theoretically would be in and out of the detection zone within seconds, even if it was detected, operational range as to lock on is nearly halved of detection range.

Space borne infrared detection systems which are meant for ICBMs and the like are meant for objects that can be relatively predictable, an aircraft traveling at hypersonic velocities has the ability to easily change course, therefore throwing off the computations that have been established for decades. That is why China developing hypersonic aircraft and missiles is so dangerous, the technology is not entirely there yet for countering them effectively. Essentiall the speed while offering a major disadvantage that could be developed into a suitable detection method over time, the speed combined with heat reduction methods should prove enough for the current times to avoid major issues.

[Ayzek]

Some of that is almost the exact opposite of what DeS argued in the thread on hypersonic aircraft.

I'm inclined to agree with Des, regarding the craft's heat signature. While flying within the atmosphere, the aircraft's hypersonic speed would likely produce some semblance of a plasma sheath. The aircraft could certainly be protected against the effects of such a sheath but I'm skeptical it'd be able to suppress that sheath's temperature. I also doubt the craft would be able to suppress the temperature of its heat exhaust, as even the SR-71 had trouble with that.

I know that we're agreed on these points, but I just want them written down in the thread for the reader's sake. Including future-Me. However, I disagree that the bomber would be "in and out of the detection zone". The SR-71 itself was ultimately detected, but simply had the advantage of being fast enough to outrun everything.


Regardless, I also dispute the assertion that "an aircraft traveling at hypersonic veolocity has the ability to easily change course", because that's simply incorrect. The faster you're going, the less maneuverable you are. Mind, this doesn't mean you can only go forward--just that you can turn slower. But even simply turning would possibly throw off dumber systems--it apparently worked like that for the SR-71. But you're going way faster.

So while the aircraft might be able to have its way with less advanced countries, it's not likely to have the same success against a foe with advanced radar/IR detection. Especially considering we have missiles that can shoot down satellites nowadays.

I don't think designing one to hit a hypersonic aircraft flying at an altitude under 30 kilometers is a stretch, aye, DeS?

[DeSchaine]

Well, lets look at a few related things. Firstly, it is NOT a simple matter to change course at supersonic speeds, let alone hypersonic. You're not going to be pulling a Split S, a Herbst or an Immelmann with any great effect at Mach 5. Just not going to happen. Because physics:


So, for an intercept comparison, lets use the Shahab-3. It's a Medium Range Ballistic Missile produced by Iran with a 1200 mi range and a top speed of about 2.4km/s and supposedly has rocket nozzle controls that allow it to change trajectory during re-entry and terminal phases. To defend against this, and other BM threats, Israel came up with the Arrow series of interceptors.

The Arrow 2 has a top speed of 2.5km/s with an operational range between 55 and 100 miles, with a dual mode IR and radar seeker based guidance system operating thrust vectoring and flight control fins. Because of this, it is considered to be an exoatmospheric capable weapon. The Arrow 2 has had around a dozen successful tests and in March of 2017, intercepted and destroyed a Russian made S-200 SAM that was fired at Israeli fighter aircraft.

Not good enough you say? Ok, the US and Japan have deployed the RIM-161 SM-3 Block IIA, a missile designed to work hand-in-glove with the Aegis system to defend against all BM threats. Operational Range is 1350 mi with a top speed of 4.5km/s and a similar guidance system setup.

Now, using Aegis in conjunction with other types of detection and tracking systems, developed from weather tracking technology of all things, Raytheon and Lockheed demonstrated to the DoD in 2000 that it is possible to detect, track and target a supersonic aircraft using temperature differential and air displacement as a guide for conventional tracking systems.

Rommy mentions that Chinese development of hypersonic tech is problematic, and this is true in comparatively short range engagement situations like attacks on ships. With long range strike missions, like those given to the B-1 and B-2 aircraft, possibility of detection becomes greater.

Something else to consider: as with any other first-strike capability, opposing systems would be directed to monitor facilities known to house those capabilities. Whiteman AFB in Missouri (home of the B-2s) is estimated to have as close to zero breaks in coverage as is technologically possible. Ditto Anderson AFB on Guam and Diego Garcia in the IO. When one of those things moves, there is a high probability that Moscow is watching where it's going.

[Rommy]

I think DeS' points are valid, and show why the porposed bomber wouldn't work against a player like HLE or Nyland who probably have these kind of major defenses, but just like how even though the F-22 is all aspects stealth does not make it an end all be all solution, I see the same thing for this bomber. It is not designed for Nyland, it's destined for medium defenseive targets who do not have the capabilities to deal with it yet.

Much like how the F-117 was a stepping stone for the use of stealth aircraft in combat, it was far from perfect, I see the same situation here. Singan wants a timely solution with repeatable results with it's it local area of interest, which needless to say is far from the most developed region in the word.

Either way, I want all the flaws to be ironed out, and for there maybe to be a situation in RP where it's own flaws are used against it. I look forward to the directorate's answer.

[Ayzek]

I merged this new request from Rommy's thread to Carp's thread, given that the discussion ended up as more about hypersonic aircraft than a specific engine. I'll be issuing a resolution shortly.