• sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    16 days ago

    I am willing to believe that this may have actually been developed…

    But a better source sure would be neat.

    Interesting/Wonderful Engineering both claim this was posted on ‘Social Media’ by the Chinese Academy of Sciences… with no link.

    South China Morning Post also claims a video posted by CAS on social media… with no link, no video.

    The english version of the CAS website is updated every couple of days, but this isn’t on it.

    Granted, they could be taking their time doing a proper translation.

    Does anybody know where to see this video?

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 days ago

        I mean sure, thats a related research paper, but that isn’t the same thing as an official press announcement or video saying ‘Hey we actually built this thing, it works, take a look.’

        I know that the CAS has specifically been researching/developing a hypersonic, passenger liner sized craft for around a decade… and the US has been doing the same with the SR 72, both attempting to develop … something like turbo ramjet that transitions to scramjet at high speeds/altitudes.

        But a link to a research paper from 6 years ago is not actually a primary source to what your original link claims, but does not actually source.

          • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            Ok so 24+ hours later and I now see a few different websites I’ve never heard of before that basically have the same article as this:

            https://scienceinfo.net/chinese-hypersonic-aircraft-prototype-reaches-mach-6-speed.html

            Still no actual link to the apparently original source somewhere on some social media site.

            Now whats being said is that this was a flight test that actually occured 3 years ago, and was classified until now.

            And they do provide an image, and credit it to CAS (without an actual link, I still can’t find this on CAS’ english site, but again maybe they are still writing a proper English post?)

            This is a test article, that doesn’t appear to have any intakes for scramjet. I think I can make out two small rocket bells inside the thing, but the image quality is very low.

            It’s just a test article, launched by a rocket, that Inwould guesstimate to have a wingspan of about… 4 meters, ish?

            This new article also mentions that Cui, the team lead, did not mention anything about the current status of the hypersonic passenger jet which this was a test article for.

            So… this test article got up to mach 6.5, 3 years ago.

            Absolutely nothing about whether or not a successful test flight of a passenger jet sized craft achieved hypersonic speeds with an air breathing turbo ramjet / scram jet or something like that.

            Completely different than the originally report.

            … This is why I wanted an actual source.

            If this very poorly sourced article from this random, clickbait style website is more accurate than the OP article (another poorly sourced article from another clickbait style website) is more accurate, that would mean SCMP, and everyone in this thread saying China has built an air breathing hypersonic jet liner is wrong, and everyone saying that this is basically comparable to the X15 is correct.

            (Differences being the X15 was carried up to 45 thousand feet by a B52 instead of a rocket, and the X15 was manned, and this test article is presumably unmanned.)

              • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                14 days ago

                So… then… you agree that this entire Interesting Engineering article you posted is wrong?

                Are you going to apologize to Sarah Brown for calling her a ‘sad racist’ when she expressed doubt as to the veracity of the dubious article you posted?

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  14 days ago

                  That’s assuming that the random article you found is correct, the veracity of which I can’t verify any more than the interesting engineering article, and assuming they’re talking about the same test. Sarah Brown didn’t substantiate the doubts in any meaningful way, so no I’m not going to apologize for my assumption on what those doubts are based on.

                  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    14 days ago

                    So, you just assumed a unsourced, unverified story is true because you have a bias in favor of China, and put the burden of proof onto the other person to disprove it, and are completely fine with calling the other person a ‘sad racist’, despite now admitting that the veracity of the claim they are skeptical of is in fact not well established.

                    This is the argument/personality style of a fanatic, a religious fundamentalist, a QAnon adherent, an Elon Musk simp.

                    This is how we got ‘the Trump assasination attempt was staged!’

                    Please stop posting trash tier misinformation as ‘technology news’, please stop jumping to ‘everyone who disagrees with me is rascist’, this level of unjustified vitriol only makes you appear manic.