The 1950's Jet Launching Tiny Satellites

The company: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cubecab.com&#x2F;technologies.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cubecab.com&#x2F;technologies.html</a> Also check out <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;generationorbit.com" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;generationorbit.com</a> and of course pegasus <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wikiwand.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;Pegasus_(rocket)#&#x2F;Launch_profile" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wikiwand.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;Pegasus_(rocket)#&#x2F;Launch_profile</a> Are there others pursuing air-launch?

Very cool. Would be nice to know how much they charge for one cubesat, and how high orbit they can shoot one to (and how long the cubesat stays there)

&gt; Less than a decade after test pilot Chuck Yeager first broke the speed of sound, it became the first jet to fly more than twice the speed of sound.<p>Flying faster than the speed of sound has physical significance, because there are major changes in the way the air and the plane interact as you pass the speed of sound.<p>If there anything physically significant about twice the speed of sound, or is that just special psychologically?

Aside from the acres of hyperbole in this article: getting to the bottom of this article, this approach seems strange to me. Why bother with the F104? Feels like you&#x27;d want to maximize speed-at-cieling and weight-to-ceiling for an air based rocket launch. Something like a MiG-25 could take a heavier rocket much faster at the same altitude (Mach 3.2 vs 2.0 for the F104).

These planes seem like they would be good candidates for a fly-by-wire conversion, or at least a redesigned Starfighter II.<p>Probably not practical, since they don&#x27;t bank-n-yank well, but they would sure look cool :-)