Audaciously good, even

In most cases it's just "insolent".

😂

Audacious just means bold and unrestrained. Overused words might be awesome, wondrous, and things like that.

Hypersonic means your aircraft has a heat problem, which means it has a reliability problem.

I always believed that we can see air, it kinda mimics another elements reaction when disturbed, I'll stop at that ? Who knows I ate a lot of LSD growing up ?

I have watched every video released in they last year or so, I look at other channels as well but IMHO this channel is popular and well respected because Alex Hollings is very good at his job, which requires being a serious nerd and doing lots of research, gathering information from numerous sources both written and from people directly, historical and new, open source and no-doubt from leaks, then collating this information and reporting on it with the energy and enthusiasm that IMHO comes from his passion on the subjects that he deals with.

He is bad at journalism and research, saying this is the world first reuseable hypersonic drone is misleading as Australian company have one with a scramjet and these guys have world fastest scramjet at mach 12 and have real atmosphere tests of their scramjets during HIFIRE joint USA, AUS hypersonic tests. This company won USA defence contract to build USA hypersonic vehicles and won it over 63 other companies and i would say won it over Hermues also. and first flight of the drone is this or next year. So Alex will look bad if it beats Hermeus and it definitely will beat it in top speed as ramjets are limited in speed.

Also never mentions Australia involvement in USA hypersonics, Yes HACAM and HAWC scramjet missiles were developed through SCIFIRE joint USA, Australia hypersonics. Australia so far advanced in hypersonics China even stole Australian Ray Stalker hypersonic wind tunnel designs and say they improved it and now they have world fastest hypersonic wind tunnels. That is how bad China is and how far behind they are too.

I like him but hes by no means a subject matter expert, go watch real engineering if you want more indepth look at hermeus

@@Th3Shrike Yea don't mind their channel, Alex and i even had a argument on his tiktok over the Australian hypersonic drone, he said it was a Kratos drone buying the Australian scramjet engine for it. Whole thing is Australian only at one point Kratos was going to build the launch system and now i see Rocketdybe are launching it for them.

Spot on, I feel this is why we are seeing poor quality in some parts of the aviation sector mainly commercial uhmmm Boeing, there's no direct interaction they're basically not working as a real team.

The Commercial Hypersonic airliner idea of theirs is... something else to say the least. Like the Concorde, one issue that I imagine Hermeus would have to manage is the Sonic boom such an aircraft would create (if the sonic boom produced by Concorde was loud, I can't imagine how loud a Hypersonic boom would be). I could imagine that it would be less of an issue if they just flew Transatlantic or Trans-Pacific flights, like what Boom Supersonic wants to do. Still though, if they can get commercial hypersonic travel to be as safe and reliable as commercial air travel is now, it could be neat.

@@dx-ek4vr Lots of R&D has gone into this problem from other US agencies esp NASA’s X-59, only a matter of time until r they solve this or, at least, dramatically reduce the BOOM; which X-59 has done.

Vertical integration has become more important for cutting edge tech

Yeah me too LM skunk works is probably light years ahead

LM may have stuff like that but the corporate leaders have forgotten what made them great

Yep

Like SpaceX, they aren't afraid to fail. They actually embrace it as a learning device.

We can only speculate about what the Skunk Works has under wraps. But I do want to offer some sobering thoughts based on my readings of various books, and it's simply this: Even the greatest engineers and scientists have limitations of psychology that prevent them from seeing new possibilities as they go through their careers. Kelly Johnson was extremely gifted in aerodynamics, and Hal Hibber was willing to listen to him, even though he was going against conventional wisdom of the time. So too Ben Rich listened to Denys Overholzer and supported the development of stealth technology. However Kelly Johnson was resistant to stealth design because he felt it could not be made to fly and apparently literally kicked Ben Rich in the ass too for even entertaining the idea. Another quick example: in the realm of supercomputers, Seymour Cray who was one of the greatest engineers ever, could not embrace massive parallelism in high performance computing. So anyway, the point is that sometimes the limitations to continued innovation are psychological more than they are technological, and even the Skunk Works is not immune to this, because innovative teams almost always become risk-averse, as they gain prominence.

It doesn't matter what you can design and create if you can't bring it to public. Many of the most genius creators and their machines were confiscated or destroyed by our own government through the invention secrecy act of 1951.

Not really. The Skunk Works led the development of titanium in sheet form. That metal had been used in forgings and castings - the usual applications - since the mid 1950's. The A-3J used forged titanium in its engine frames.

They co-developed the specific alloy for its improved fatigue and machining properties.

Me too, hope to work there someday.

Check out Real Engineering's take on this.

​@@yevgeniygorbachev5152 if they don't feature goofy faces on thumbnails and silly click bait titles, I might.

He presents himself as an analyst / reporter. People who have to yell at their audience are NOT analysts. His award went to his head. He needs to include a discussion about the difference between DARPA studies and building combat capable solutions. The US is NOT going to adopt rules of engagement that turn loose what are essentially R&D toys. Proof of concept. He knows that. Organizations like this bring in the BIG idea and the DoD procurement system takes the essential information and turns it into a viable, deployable military system. Companies like this get you Cyber trucks site bad designs and kill their owners. Try taking your “state is the art” Tesla truck through a car wash. Have a flat tow on speed dial and a big bank account cause you just bricked your penis enlarger and they will NOT warrantee it. America does not send out autonomous vehicles to kill other humans. Period. A human must be in the loop. I first was involved in studies of cooperative loitering unmanned aircraft in about 2001. It went nowhere because the use case failed to close. It’s fun to get a little stiffie thinking about how wonderful it is to have these paradigm changing geniuses out there creating but in the end it’s got to be militarized. It needs a full logistical tail. It needs to be operated by an Airman 3 or 4. These are a few of the reasons this whole story is crap. 40+ years in the business. Air breathers, UAVs. Satellites, launch vehicles, ICBMs. Armored vehicles ALCM. Been there. Done that. The whole pre is of this “story” is fatally flawed. Go do better

Yeah do you really believe that? Nothing you see or hear is real. According to main stream media russia is getting its ass beat, except they haven’t lost a foot of ground and they are not grabbing guys off the street and their average age for the army isn’t 42!

Technically correct is the best kind of correct 😂

i disagree they shared their plan and it completely makes financial sense

@@PedroHenriquePS00000 Their cost per flight hour is gonna be somewhere north of a quarter million. Nobody needs same-day mail THAT badly. Concorde & Tu-144 were both much cheaper to develop & operate, and neither of those are still operating. A lot of their investment capital is through the DoD, which is "curious" about it, and at minimum wants 'dibs' on any tech developed in the R&D process, as well as enough investor leverage to veto some details of publishing info. Sure it's technically a civilian project, but it's been pretty heavily co-opted. In the 1950's if you designed something "militarily significant" and wanted to sell it (or details about it) to the public, humorless people with matching suits would come and take everything, and tell you to keep your mouth shut "or else". But over the years, it has become apparent that you get more flies with honey than vinegar. So DARPA has "bought in", rather than "shutting down".

agree more or less on the first sentence (at least for now), as for the second sentence i disagree, Hermeus' technology/aircraft/engines actually seem more affordable than other Hypersonic projects

@@Yuki_Ika7 "More commercially viable than other civilian hypersonic projects" That's a statement which is technically true, but it's a _very_ loaded statement.

@@kathrynck the USAF does tho

AND THIS IS AIR POWER!!!

And I am here to talk and forget to ask questions relating to the very premise of what I want to talk about... Yes, that was harsh, maybe too harsh, but I find it strange that he didn't ask the Hermeus people about the comparison at all. It would have been a whole lot better journalistically to have them talk about what, if anything, they have chosen to adopt from the way Skunkworks was run early on. Maybe he asked, and maybe they think there aren't any similarities and he left it out. Or maybe he didn't ask for some reason or the other. Maybe this premise came later which can happen and they were too busy for a second or third interview or maybe he just likes to be the one talking the most. Which is kind of an American way to conduct "journalism" whereas in other countries that would be the last resort. Granted, he is both the researcher, interviewer, expert and presenter rolled into one so the roles are less clear. But on this particular occasion with this premise, he should ideally have let Hermeus do way more of the talking.

His name is Robert Paulson.

@@PermanentExile Hehe, good one. Well, to nitpick, if you will allow me, Robert Paulson only had a name (and recognition?) in death. HOLLINGS makes sure we know who he is before getting to the story. Joke aside and trying to no shit on what Hollings is doing, it's a matter of personal preference and culture. I like the content, I just grew up in a place where journalists were never front and center of the subjects they reported on, so it irks me. But this very much how it's done in America where star reporters is a thing and I guess when you marry that with social media, then we get this. It's ok, it's free and I should stop complaining. Cheers.

Compression lift concept from Eggers & Syvertson. Let's ride the wave baby!

2 many

No he isn't he is pretty bad at it and is USA biased too much. does not tell truth of all projects and when other countries are further ahead then USA he will not mention it. Australia is a head in hypersonic drones and ahead of USA in scramjet technology. But will not mention it, Australia played a huge part in USA hypersonic missiles. HACAM and HAWC scramjet missiles were developed under SCIFIRE joint USA, AUS hypersonics, also HIFIRE helped a lot.

USA funded Australia and there research! since were allies...So You got the Audacity to say there ahead! when not really! we gave em planes!😂🤦‍♂️

@@nedkelly9688 You are a jealous 🤡

I lead a small team of volunteers at my local Air Museum. This has been my guiding principle as we accomplish our preservation projects. I adopted the principle that I was not the source of all knowledge on processes. As you state above, everyone on the team has an equal voice in the projects. We have adapted and conquered every obstacle, together. Paraphrasing one of the directors, "...my team has completed more preservations in the last five years than the museum had accomplished in the previous 20 years."

All America needs to be blessed is less god.