Whoop-dee-derp, looks like they aren't trying to make the Skylon an SSTO anymore

[magnemoe]

15 hours ago, Lord_intet said:

It was limited to match 2.02 at the height it flew at where the engines were efficient. With different engines and fueling, say the sabre engine, it could get more height so less air resistance which means less heat so more speed to keep the temperature at or more importantly below 127c.  You guys know this, why am I having to point it out? 

It'll only go mach 25 in the outer atmosphere, till then it will be accelerating and keeping its speed (therefore) heat low enough that it won't blow up.

 

Also I believe we have materials now that can cope with more heat and can be cooled better using similar tech as applied to concorde. specifically moving it's fuel around the craft ro maintain a certain temperature. 

Speed limit was heating of skin, top speed with engines running on max trust and afterburners would be higher than cruising speed, but this would damage the skin.
Temperature would go up if you increase speed unless you increase attitude far faster than speed as in going straight up with low TWR.
Flying an fast plane in KSP exaggerate this issue but its very real, its also not an serious issue as you need to reenter afterwards who is worse
Titanium would not be enough you will need an heat shield, less issue than the shuttle as you have an larger body and wings to spread the load on. 
Today we have better materials making this easier however not back in 1970. 
 

[Val]

26 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Pedantic mode: The Mach number specifically refers to the speed of sound, which depends on air density

Pendantic mode²  : Speed of sound actually depends mostly on temperature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound#Altitude_variation_and_implications_for_atmospheric_acoustics

[Nibb31]

6 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Titanium would not be enough you will need an heat shield, less issue than the shuttle as you have an larger body and wings to spread the load on. 

Actually, one big issue with SSTO is that you want to minimize drag on the way up (so a Concorde-style profile works well), but you actually want to maximize drag to decelerate on the way down (which is why the Space Shuttle, BOR, or DreamChaser have a blunt profile). It's extremely difficult to find an aerodynamic configuration that works well for subsonic lift, hypersonic ascent, reentry, and landing at the same time.

 

[mikegarrison]

10 hours ago, DerekL1963 said:

o.0  I'm not entirely certain what the point is of quoting me and then repeating what I said.

o.0  The UK and France teamed up and put their national pride on the line to build an aircraft for the US domestic market?  What are you smoking?  BOAC in particular was eager to operate them on a wide variety of routes - but sharply increasing costs (both to purchase the aircraft and operational costs) and limiting supersonic flight to overwater pretty much ended those plans.

You think European manufacturers are not interested in the US domestic market? I'm sure that will come as a shock to Airbus.

And your post simply repeated what I said originally anyway.

[DerekL1963]

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

You think European manufacturers are not interested in the US domestic market?

I didn't say they weren't.  I didn't say anything that anyone reasonable could possibly interpret as saying that.  I quite reasonably questioned the sanity of anyone who claims Concorde was designed only for the North Atlantic and US Domestic markets.
 

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

And your post simply repeated what I said originally anyway.

Um, no.   I didn't.  You said 'x'.  I said 'x because y'.   In no reasonable universe and by no sensible individual can the second statement be taken as a repeat of the first.

[Vanamonde]

The Concorde is not the topic of this thread, guys. No need to argue about it.