Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the behavior of airspeed (Mach number) before and after a compression shockwave during supersonic flight. Participants explore the possibility of creating aerodynamic shapes that could increase the speed of the airflow to a Mach number greater than the freestream Mach number, while avoiding the use of expansion waves. The conversation touches on theoretical, experimental, and practical aspects of supersonic aerodynamics.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Debate/contested
- Technical explanation
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- Some participants propose that after a compression shockwave, the airspeed is always reduced, questioning the feasibility of increasing it beyond the freestream Mach number without using expansion waves.
- Others argue that while certain aircraft designs, like the Four 593, can achieve high speeds internally, replicating this effect externally on an aircraft would require significant energy input and may not be practically achievable.
- A participant mentions that combusting fuel externally to reduce shockwaves would be inefficient and may not eliminate the shock entirely, depending on the intended outcome.
- There are references to historical proposals, such as Barnes Wallis's trans orbital aircraft concept, which involves burning hydrogen fuel in the wake of controlled oblique shock waves.
- Some participants express skepticism about the theoretical possibility of creating an "expansion shock," citing the second law of thermodynamics and the intrinsic nature of compression shocks in supersonic flight.
- Discussion includes the idea that atmospheric air behaves differently than a van der Waals gas, and that compression shocks are unavoidable when moving through a gas at supersonic speeds.
- References to ongoing research in sonic boom reduction and the involvement of companies like Aeron and NASA in exploring these concepts are mentioned.
- Some participants reflect on the challenges of eliminating shock waves, emphasizing their role in wing lift aerodynamics at supersonic speeds.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a mix of viewpoints, with some agreeing on the challenges of eliminating shockwaves while others propose various theoretical approaches. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the feasibility of increasing airflow speed beyond the freestream Mach number or eliminating shockwaves.
Contextual Notes
Limitations include the dependence on specific aerodynamic shapes, the theoretical nature of proposed ideas, and the unresolved status of certain mathematical and physical claims regarding shockwave behavior.