NationStates Jolt Archive

This is truly the fastest war jet in the world.

Thunder Rapid
Speed: Up to Mach 11.2
Engine: Hydrogen-Plasma Turbine
Crew: 3
Maximum Hold Weight: 5 tons.
Actual Weight: 3 ton. (used mostly titanium)
Miliary Purpose: Emergency Air Support
Armments: 3 Plasma Tracking Missiles, 2 Air to Ground Missiles, and 5 Mini Nuclear Air-to-Air Missiles

Price: $450 million English Pounds.

This is truly the fastest war jet in the world.

Thunder Rapid
Speed: Up to Mach 11.2
Engine: Hydrogen-Plasma Turbine
Crew: 3
Maximum Hold Weight: 5 tons.
Actual Weight: 3 ton. (used mostly titanium)
Miliary Purpose: Emergency Air Support
Armments: 3 Plasma Tracking Missiles, 2 Air to Ground Missiles, and 5 Mini Nuclear Air-to-Air Missiles

Price: $450 million English Pounds.

No, not really. YAK-141 can reach supersonic speeds. Sorry.

mach 11.2?!?!
I hope you aren't serious...

Sure he is. His pilots are sandbags. And you can glue the titanium sheets back on afterwards - he's got them numbered just for that purpose.

:headbang:

Aside from the more obvious problems, what on Earth do you need a three-man crew for?

Aside from the more obvious problems, what on Earth do you need a three-man crew for?

Padding http://www.animeleague.net/~berrik/emot-v.gif

This is truly the fastest war jet in the world.
Bull. Crimmond Aerofighters can escape the Earth's gravity to get back to their carriers.

Thunder Rapid
My God that name sucks. I've seen B-Movies named better.

Speed: Up to Mach 11.2
Hope you have Structural Integrity Fields and Inertia Dampeners...

Engine: Hydrogen-Plasma Turbine
And WTF is that, if I may ask?

Crew: 3
Three? THREE?! If you can do all that this plane can, you really don't need one in there. Make it all RC.

Maximum Hold Weight: 5 tons.
I laugh at your puny ass lift capacity.

Actual Weight: 3 ton. (used mostly titanium)
Titanium frame, eh? You poor, poor misguided soul.

Miliary Purpose: Emergency Air Support
Use the F-104 Starfighter.

Armments: 3 Plasma Tracking Missiles, 2 Air to Ground Missiles, and 5 Mini Nuclear Air-to-Air Missiles
Emergency Air Support means you're supporting troops that are in deep sh*t... so let's blow up nukes over their heads! Yeah!

Price: $450 million English Pounds.
Lowball price. Must have realized it was a POS, or you wouldn't be selling it. No nation sells top of the line, brand spanking new, pride of the nation aircraft as soon as they roll of the lines.

In the words of all Crimmond leaders: I should ortillerize you on princible alone.

http://home.earthlink.net/~alpha_zero_usm/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/maximus2.jpg
-General of the Army Maximus Decimus Meridius

Miliary Purpose: Emergency Air Support
Use the F-104 Starfighter.

Better yet, don't.

Price: $450 million English Pounds.

450 million dollars english pounds?

no point in turbines in an HP engine.
at mach 11.2, the wake turbulence would kill anything you could possibly want to support, unless that is the idea..
plasma-trackers would home in on your engines, provided they could evn release at speed, Ag, might work, but it kind of defeats the purpose if your plane is faster than the missles, 5t is awful small for high-hypersonic missles

Who said this jet was high-quality?

Who said this jet was high-quality?

After take-off, the jet itself would cease to exist after a short period of time. Seeing as any human would be killed going Mach 11.2, the plane itself would probably fall apart.

Humans have gone Mach 25 before encased by aluminum and tin foil... although that was in a vaccum

Humans have gone Mach 25 before encased by aluminum and tin foil... although that was in a vaccum

Thats the thing, in a vaccum there is no air pressure, and here there would be enough air pressure to compress the whole jet to a size of a coin.

However both Russia and US have designes for hypersonic planes, so there must be a way to make this work, somehow.

that was my point. the fastest in the atmosphere has been about mach 10? and that was from the reentering space shuttle. To make a hypersonic jet theasable you would need some sort of armor close to that of the space shuttle. The most effieceint way to reach that speed to to skip outside of the atmosphere for short intervals to escape friction. Reentering would be neccesary to refill oxygen in the engine. To actually make a hydrogen/plasma engine theasable you would need to head the hydrogen to over (correct me if i'm wrong) 10,000 degrees which would be impractical.

Besides.... at mach 11.2.... you can basically go in a straight line...and that’s about it. Its impractical (im not even touching the impossible ability of this) to have a fighter/bomber go this fast, if its lending support, it needs to be able to come around on the target numerous times, not one shot and its already half way across the world.

Crimmond, though untactful, already nailed the point…if you providing CAP, you cant be dropping nukes on the battlefield, even a one kt nuke is still going to obliterate everything in the area.

This...thing, would be better suited as a bomber...though...im not sure what tech you're working with, but, no aircraft can achieve those speeds, not without a scramjet type engine, or better....the fastest bomber the US ever deployed (excluding the Area, since its not official) was the XB-70, whose top speed was mach 2.53

I think the casualty rate of the poor pilot, doesn’t need to be expanded upon, yes a human went mach 25 straight up, into space. However, the way they have to be strapped in….makes them pretty combat ineffective, since they really couldn’t maneuver much

That raises a good point, the only place you would need a fighter that fast is in space combat. And although I am new to NS, i don't suppose alot of that goes on in MT.

This plane is a bit...sad. A jet, using RC piloting and Scramjets, could be built with a similar or faster speed. It would only really be useful as a bomber, with a low number of bombs, but you couldn't really get anything much better than that anyways. This is neither impressive nor effective.

I've got one with a max speed of Mach 16. The max safe speed that guarantees the plane won't overheat and explode while you're in it is Mach 12. Even then, I don't advise anyone to touch it for a few days.

that was my point. the fastest in the atmosphere has been about mach 10? and that was from the reentering space shuttle.

Try Mach 25.

http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/mach.html

Mach 12 is well within the hominid survival range. Of course, some hominids are tougher than others.

To make a hypersonic jet theasable you would need some sort of armor close to that of the space shuttle.

Not really. You just need a really efficient heat-to-energy conversion system. However, I would advise materials designed to resist higher pressures and higher heat combined with very good atmosphere controls inside the plane instead.

The most effieceint way to reach that speed to to skip outside of the atmosphere for short intervals to escape friction. Reentering would be neccesary to refill oxygen in the engine.

Nope. There's a more efficient method than that, and it doesn't require as much of an altitude. Strap a miniature nuclear reactor to the back of the airplane and use it for thrust as well.

To actually make a hydrogen/plasma engine theasable you would need to head the hydrogen to over (correct me if i'm wrong) 10,000 degrees which would be impractical.

If you're already going Mach 16 or higher, it's not. However, in this case, it's not only impractable but not all that feasible.

Crimmond, though untactful, already nailed the point…if you providing CAP, you cant be dropping nukes on the battlefield, even a one kt nuke is still going to obliterate everything in the area.
OOC: I take that as a compliment. As would the good General.

Now, about the speed... F-16 engines are capable of sustaining well abov Mach-11 and have proven so in thrust tests. It's no problem to build an engine that can operate at such speeds, it's building an airframe that can withstand the friction, air pressure and shear force on it.

And I have to admit, it's gutsy for HI to admit the plane sucks and is just a sad attempt to scam eager nations out of money. You got promise, kid... I like the idea of designing something that looks great at first glance(sorta) and then selling it, knowing full well that it's a peice of crap.

Actually, comfort wise for the people inside it doesn't matter what speed they're going at, its the acceleration to that speed that causes artificial gravity(g forces), so as long as it accelerated over a long period of time, it wouldn't be any different than standing still.

Except for the fact that the plane wouldn't survive at the godawful speed he has here. And a disintegrating plane isn't comfortable at all.

Actually, comfort wise for the people inside it doesn't matter what speed they're going at, its the acceleration to that speed that causes artificial gravity(g forces), so as long as it accelerated over a long period of time, it wouldn't be any different than standing still.

Except for the fact that the plane wouldn't survive at the godawful speed he has here. And a disintegrating plane isn't comfortable at all.
Very true... but that means that the troops are SOL with this plane coming to the rescue... Oh... right. They were allready, what with the nukes and all.

I'm surprised no one's commenting on the obvious scam the jet design I am talking about is. A nuclear reactor for an engine and a max speed of Mach 16. I'm thinking of actually selling it to people to see how many will buy it.

I'm sure you can figure out why it is a rejected design.

I'm surprised no one's commenting on the obvious scam the jet design I am talking about is. A nuclear reactor for an engine and a max speed of Mach 16. I'm thinking of actually selling it to people to see how many will buy it.

I'm sure you can figure out why it is a rejected design.

That would work actully. See here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto)
But it would have to be unmanned unless you had really, really advanced and lightweight shielding. And it wouldn't be Mach 16, Mach 3/4 wopuld be more likely.

I'm surprised no one's commenting on the obvious scam the jet design I am talking about is. A nuclear reactor for an engine and a max speed of Mach 16. I'm thinking of actually selling it to people to see how many will buy it.

I'm sure you can figure out why it is a rejected design.
Well. Another scam to bilk money out of unsuspecting buyers. I'm gaining a whole new appreciation for the next generation of nations. I thought the devious ones all got cocky and were annexed.

That would work actully. See here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto)
But it would have to be unmanned unless you had really, really advanced and lightweight shielding. And it wouldn't be Mach 16, Mach 3/4 wopuld be more likely.

It uses jet engines to get up to Mach 7 and then the nuclear reactor as a booster. This thing also requires quite a bit of uranium, as all it is doing is generating a nuclear reaction and pushing the reaction out of the back of the plane for thrust. Incredibly dangerous.

Also, a bit of lead is mixed in with the metals used. This gives the illusion of protection, but doesn't change the fact the craft will still overheat and then kill you as it explodes, which should be enough to trigger a nuclear reaction. Of course, I won't tell customers that.

It uses jet engines to get up to Mach 7 and then the nuclear reactor as a booster. This thing also requires quite a bit of uranium, as all it is doing is generating a nuclear reaction and pushing the reaction out of the back of the plane for thrust. Incredibly dangerous.

Also, a bit of lead is mixed in with the metals used. This gives the illusion of protection, but doesn't change the fact the craft will still overheat and then kill you as it explodes, which should be enough to trigger a nuclear reaction. Of course, I won't tell customers that.

Thats insane, but still pretty damn cool. Thats kinda like a fission-fragment rocket but in the atmosphere, would make for a cool photo op.

Obviously, what is really needed is a helicopter with a nuclear reactor.

But it would seriously suck when you launch the sucker to fight some invader and it explodes while in your nation.

Edit: The above was for Izistan.

It appears we need a faulty aircraft store. SAR Industries is known for its faulty aircraft, so they would do as the fallguys.

Try Mach 25.

http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/mach.html

Mach 12 is well within the hominid survival range. Of course, some hominids are tougher than others.

Dont mean to nitpick,
Fastest Manned Vehicle: Apollo 10 capsule on re-entry

~ 24,790 mph (39,885 km/h) Mach 36

26 May 1969



^_^

never the less, this "Thunder Rapid Mach 11.2 War Jet" is post-modern technology at best.......

actually you guys are all wrong Speed doesnt kill people - its the accelleration that gets them up to that speed - I trust a pilot would have some sort of throtle control and it would be computer aided so as not to take you over the critical acceleration point.

You could be going Mach 50 and not feel a thing so as long at the speed is constant.

You would need more information to decide weather this is dangerous or not - like the thrust in Newtons or pounds.

actually you guys are all wrong Speed doesnt kill people - its the accelleration that gets them up to that speed - I trust a pilot would have some sort of throtle control and it would be computer aided so as not to take you over the critical acceleration point.

You could be going Mach 50 and not feel a thing so as long at the speed is constant.

You would need more information to decide weather this is dangerous or not - like the thrust in Newtons or pounds.
No... the speed does kill them. At Mach 50, no aircraft in existance on NS or otherwise will remain intact. And if, if, you survive that, you won't survive the air pressure or the friction at that speed. It'd rip your limbs off, your skin off your skull, your intistines though your back and your brain would be chunky chili in the back of your head...

that was my point. the fastest in the atmosphere has been about mach 10? and that was from the reentering space shuttle. To make a hypersonic jet theasable you would need some sort of armor close to that of the space shuttle. The most effieceint way to reach that speed to to skip outside of the atmosphere for short intervals to escape friction. Reentering would be neccesary to refill oxygen in the engine. To actually make a hydrogen/plasma engine theasable you would need to head the hydrogen to over (correct me if i'm wrong) 10,000 degrees which would be impractical.
Except the shuttle isn't built to maintain that in atmosphere. And it probably would fall apart after take off as it accelerates and then is torn apart by the amazing power of G-forces. Unless he is somehow:
A. Taking-off from space
or
B. creating a vaccuum around the aircraft to eliminate friction (very impractical)

actually you guys are all wrong Speed doesnt kill people - its the accelleration that gets them up to that speed - I trust a pilot would have some sort of throtle control and it would be computer aided so as not to take you over the critical acceleration point.

You could be going Mach 50 and not feel a thing so as long at the speed is constant.

You would need more information to decide weather this is dangerous or not - like the thrust in Newtons or pounds.
And how is he gonna get it airborne without accelerating I wonder.

And how is he gonna get it airborne without accelerating I wonder.

Accelerate slowly. If you go 0 - Mach 10 in 5 seconds, it's going to hurt. If you go from 0 to Mach 10 in 3 hours, it won't hurt nearly as much.

But note the simple fact that this is an emergency air support craft. Minutes are what the time frame for that type of aircraft should be.

I say just stick with Starfighters, Harriers, Eagles, Nighthawks and Thunderbolt IIs. If you can't get top of the line stuff, make Thunderbolt IIs, F4s and Puffs.

Hell, just use Puffs. They can stick a Howitzer shell through your window from three miles.

Accelerate slowly. If you go 0 - Mach 10 in 5 seconds, it's going to hurt. If you go from 0 to Mach 10 in 3 hours, it won't hurt nearly as much.
Fuel. This amazing thing that no matter what all aircraft run out of eventually. If he took that long to accelerate then having the aircraft as an emergency support aircraft is pointless because he could be destroyed in that time frame and it would run out of fuel flying in a holding pattern slowly accelerating for 3 hours. I agree with Crimmond, he should stick with said aircraft. Unless he makes this thing a UCAV that is launched from another aircraft or ground launcher. In those situations its just overkill, not a great way to kill your worst pilots.
Haven't we argued/met/been in the same thread before?

Deceleration as well. Whats the point in moving at mach 10 if it takes you 2.8 hours to reach decent speeds again?

Deceleration as well. Whats the point in moving at mach 10 if it takes you 2.8 hours to reach decent speeds again?

Good point, though I'm not as generally concerned about that as about not dealing with the outraged nations who had their fighters blow up that they bought from me. Slowing down isn't a requirement if you're a blazing ball of death.

Humans have gone Mach 25 before encased by aluminum and tin foil... although that was in a vaccum

....pete how do u know that do you STUDY the milatary R and D programs :p

....pete how do u know that do you STUDY the milatary R and D programs :p
It's documented fact.

Fuel. This amazing thing that no matter what all aircraft run out of eventually. If he took that long to accelerate then having the aircraft as an emergency support aircraft is pointless because he could be destroyed in that time frame and it would run out of fuel flying in a holding pattern slowly accelerating for 3 hours. I agree with Crimmond, he should stick with said aircraft. Unless he makes this thing a UCAV that is launched from another aircraft or ground launcher. In those situations its just overkill, not a great way to kill your worst pilots.
Haven't we argued/met/been in the same thread before?

3 hours was just a random length i picked. In his case, it would be impractical, but I believe that is what the US is doing with it's hypersonic program.

Im no expert really, but at that speeds, wouldnt you be unconscious??? or am i wrong...?

Im no expert really, but at that speeds, wouldnt you be unconscious??? or am i wrong...?
Naw, just immobile. in flight, it's G forces pulling blood from your brain that knocks you out. At 11.2 Mach, you would be fine(if you assume the plane survives). Try to bank and then you're in trouble(again, assuming the plane survives).

Naw, just immobile. in flight, it's G forces pulling blood from your brain that knocks you out. At 11.2 Mach, you would be fine(if you assume the plane survives). Try to bank and then you're in trouble(again, assuming the plane survives).
lol, i knowm you go unconsious after you pull i think its 9Gs, ive pulled only about 3...ohhh(ive been flying a few time myself, me wanna be pilot, :D)

Pilots coming off super carriers from the catapults go uncosious, lol for a few hundred feet, and the fastest jet...im not so sure about it anyway!