Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Supersonic Flow, Kinetic-Heating And Sturdiness  
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4618 times:

One problem which I've heard about on supersonic airplanes, particularly ones that spend long amounts of time at supersonic speeds, like supersonic bombers (XB-70, B-1A, Tu-160), high-speed recon aircraft (SR-71), and supersonic-transport concepts (L-2000, B-2707, HSCT, AST).

Now, I know airframe shape plays a significant role in the kinetic heating of the plane. A highly-streamlined clean design doesn't reach as high a temperature for the same mach number as one that's not as cleanly designed. But I'm wondering if it's more than that why fighter planes can do Mach 2.5 or so with aluminum skin and an SST to achieve Mach 2.5 would need at least some titanium in it's design. Especially considering that fighter planes actually are not as cleanly designed as a larger supersonic aircraft to the best of my knowledge, relying more on extreme thrust to weight ratio than extroardinary aerodynamic cleanliness except some old interceptor designs not that they are high-drag designs.

My only guesses are that

-Fighter planes are a hell of a lot sturdier, with thicker skin, and a thicker internal support structure -- they're designed to pull 9 G's or more, in the olden days it was 7.33 G's: Way more than an airliner which requires at least 3.75 to 5.0. The guess is that since fighters are so much sturdier, that even as they weaken a bit, there's still so much strength there that it still will hold up until a higher speed.

-Large supersonic-aircraft fly much longer at supersonic-speeds than fighter-sized and as a result fully heat-soak when fighters don't. But the thing that has me wondering is if fighters are smaller and less massive than the larger planes, wouldn't they heat-soak faster?

Andrea Kent

3 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4612 times:

Well heat is measured in either joules per second or BTU's per hour, so yeah more time spent in a high heat environment (like the compressed air in a mach cone) means the vehicle/object will get hotter. But to a point; you cannot boil a gallon of water with a 10W heat source, the water will absorb to a point and maintain a contant temperature above ambient as the water would radiate the rest of the heat. Does it happen to metals and ceramics and composites, sure and they are certainly mass/surface area dependant.

While fighters are much smaller than those few supersonic airliners we know of, they rarely go supersonic, much of their flight and mission profiles are subsonic. Supersonic is only for dashing or intercept or aborting a mission.

Add to the fact that because fighters aren't designed to sustain supersonic flight for much longer than as much fuel they carry, I'd suppose they don't need to worry about overheating the fuselage. Think about it, say I'm in an F-15 doing 0.8 and throttle up to 1.6, the stagnant compressed air temp out there is 34% higher, but that doesn't mean jet will immidiately reach that temp, it takes a bit of time to heat up.

No doubt, the design of the aircraft will vary the effect of compressed air as the heat source and vary the time required to heat up the plane.

The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineFlipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1811 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 1 day ago) and read 4582 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

You'll find that the tech specs of a high speed military aircraft will state that their maximum loads will be lower at high supersonic speeds than at subsonic speeds. The typhoon for instance is only going to let you pull 6g at 1.6M whereas it will do over 9g at .9M. I dont think the heating will be much of an issue for the main structural parts but remember the comet that had the nose cone dent in when it was in flight? I think the skin around the nose would be the biggest worry in this case.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 34066 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 22 hours ago) and read 4567 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would expect the parts most quickly to heat (nosecone, leading edges, etc.) are designed with more heat-resistant materials then other areas (general fuselage, wing panels) for aircraft designed to "dash" at supersonic speeds versus maintain sustained supersonic cruise.

Your best shot at seeing the differences are likely between the supersonic cruise B-1A and the supersonic dash B-1B since it the same airframe (in general) designed for two separate supersonic operating envelopes.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Supersonic Flow, Kinetic-Heating And Sturdiness
No username? Sign up now!

Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Flow Control And "Tower Enroute" posted Sun Oct 1 2006 23:22:19 by CptSpeaking
Supercritical Flow / Confusion posted Mon Dec 31 2007 10:13:10 by Blackbird
Early JT8D And JT9Ds? posted Mon Dec 31 2007 09:59:38 by BR715-A1-30
The End Of Tube-And-Wing Aerodynamics? posted Sun Dec 30 2007 02:10:24 by Faro
MD80s And Limited Visibility posted Fri Dec 21 2007 22:24:28 by National757
Older Cable-Planes And Control-Tabs posted Fri Dec 21 2007 21:11:38 by Blackbird
Descent Starting And Ears Pain posted Sun Dec 16 2007 08:26:36 by F.pier
Fuel, Wt, And Emergency Landing Question posted Sat Dec 15 2007 02:36:26 by Davescj
How Did The B-707 And DC-8 Influence Each Other? posted Fri Dec 14 2007 14:23:35 by Blackbird
767 And Winglets posted Mon Dec 10 2007 09:23:16 by Hush-Kit

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format