Message posted by Mark Lincoln on August 15, 2011 at 17:40:10 PST:

If HTV-2 were not charting unknown territory it would indeed be worthless.

We have been flying hypersonic maneuvering vehicles for over 40 years but this is the first time that radical changes in flight profile have been attempted. Nor is hypersonic aerodynamics and control the only things being investigated.

I am not as impressed by the achievement in using GPS for positioning data. I am impressed at maintaining two-way communications in the mach 22-17 regime. That is an accomplishment given ionization effects (see Saha's Equation).

We have learned that the models that allowed us to design ASSET, MaRV, PRIME, ABRES and the Shuttle had limits.

I guess you didn't think about the effort put into design of Boost Glide Reentry Vehicle and Defense Suppression Weapon/Vehicle when folks were telling you tales about the potential weapons benefits. We have looked into these things before and have some understanding of the real-world benefits vs pie-in-the-sky predictions.

Davy Crockett was sold as a necessary 'arrow' in our quiver until the reality of command and control was finally (belatedly) considered. Just because something seems like a neat idea does not make it a viable weapon (see Zalinski Dynamite Gun, Fort Hancock, Fort Wright, and Fort Winfield Scott).

DARPA has returned immense benefits for it's efforts. Witness the internet we are using to communicate upon. I would rather see lots of stuff axed before it suffers.

In Reply to: Re: DARPA - we have a problem ... posted by Peter Merlin on August 13, 2011 at 15:38:47 PST:

Replies: