It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My name is Bill Yenne, I'm a military and aviation author. Ask me anything.

page: 9
167
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Merlyn2014
 


Billie Woodward? Whew. The concave earth theory was first concocted by Cyrus Reed Teed in the 19th century, and had believers inside Nazi Germany. Of all the unconventional theories that have been disproven over time, this is probably one of the most easily disprovable.




posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   

BillYenne
reply to post by Snarl
 


Thanks for your question. The most interesting thing I discussed with Curtis LeMay?
It's hard to pick just one. We talked about a lot of things over a long period of time, mainly concentrating on WWII. He was very proud of SAC and the men he had commanded. He was pretty emphatic about his dislike for politics and politicians. He specifically told me that he had never seen a flying saucer, captured or otherwise, but he was involved in advanced projects. He was one of the first men to be part of RAND. Picked by Hap Arnold himself, who started RAND with Don Douglas.

Thank you for your candid answer(s).
Having followed this thread closely, your opinions and unique insight would be a welcome permanent addition ... to many. There's some stuff that just doesn't fit between the covers of a book.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Hi Bill,

I have a cousin nearing eighty who flew B-52s right out of flight school. Upon touring one at Boeing Field recently his one question was, "Why is the Air Force letting these kids fly them now?"

My question: Of all the airplanes you have covered in your career, do you have a favorite?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Hi bill hope you're good

I have a question

So the Russians and Chinese are quickly catching up with there 5th gen aircraft programmes, although the J-20 is a carbon copy of the useless F-35 which isn't of much concern to the Russian SU aircraft, and the PAK-FA T50 is an equal to thee F-22A

It seems the US has all but lost its air superiority, and any future conflicts in which a country has purchased the SU-30 37 would see the F-35 outmatched in every sense of the world, the only advantage the F-35 come out on top is its avionics suit,

So my question is, is

How far along is the US in its development of its 6th gen aircraft ?

Was the production of the F-22 shut because of the PAK-FA? And put push along its much needed 6th gen program?



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by cenpuppie
 


Nuclear-powered aircraft. Good question.

Shortly after World War II, as the US Navy was working on plans for nuclear ships and submarines, the US Air Force (USAAF until 1947) got into the act with plans for nuclear aircraft. It was more than interservice rivalry -- a strategic bomber with unlimited range was the ultimate fulfillment of the doctrine of strategic air power. Accordingly, the Nuclear Energy for Propulsion of Aircraft (NEPA) program was initiated in 1946.
In 1947, the Atomic Energy Commission, a United States government agency responsible for the development of nuclear reactors, was created. This organization would work up the initial parameters for the design of shipboard nuclear reactors for the Navy, and it would absorb the activities of NEPA as well.
In turn, the commission established the National Reactor Testing Station. It opened in 1949 in a remote location in the lightly populated high desert country of southern Idaho near the town of Arco.
In 1951, the commission decided that it was theoretically possible to produce a reactor for an airplane. The problem, of course, would be the size and weight of the reactor, as well as its radiation shield and cooling system. Therefore it would have to be a very large airplane.
Because no one had ever designed a nuclear powered aircraft before, the development process would be methodical, moving step by step. Before a nuclear powered strategic bomber could become an operational reality, an nuclear powered experimental aircraft would have to be tested as a proof on concept demonstrator. This aircraft would be built under the designation X-6.
Before the X-6 could fly, however, it was necessary to build and fly a functioning nuclear reactor aboard a conventional aircraft in order to evaluate shielding techniques.
As a reactor test bed for the eventual X-6, the US Air Force chose the largest aircraft in its fleet, the enormous Convair B-36 bomber. First flown in 1946, the B-36 was 162 feet long, with a wing span of 230 feet -- a larger wing span than any other military aircraft ever in service in the United States. It was powered by six Pratt & Whitney R4360 Wasp Major piston engines with 21,000 aggregate horsepower, and later models would also have four General Electric J47 turbojet engines. Even without the jets, the B-36 could take off with a quarter million pounds of gross weight and fly more than 8,000 miles.
Early in 1951, as the Atomic Energy Commission undertook the construction of the first airborne nuclear reactor, designated as R-1, the Air Force ordered Convair to specially modify a B-36 test bed aircraft under the designation NB-36H. Convair was also given the contract to modify a pair of B-36s that would become the first two nuclear powered X-6 aircraft. The NB-36H would simply fly with a functioning reactor aboard. The X-6s would fly under nuclear power, with the R-1 reactor powering General Electric turbojet engines. The total propulsion system, incorporating the reactor and engines, was designated as P-1.
The design of the propulsion system would allow the engines to transition between nuclear power and jet fuel, permitting a conventionally fuelled take off followed by an extremely long cruise under reactor power. Nuclear cruise would easily permit a flight around the world.
Meanwhile, work was underway to construct a test base for the X-6 program. While the NB-36H flights were conducted from Carswell AFB -- across the runway from the Convair factory near Fort Worth, Texas -- the Air Force wanted a location for the X-6 project that was farther from the prying eyes of just anyone. The site chosen for what was to be designated as "Test Area North," was near the small town of Monteview, in the Idaho desert, about 40 miles northeast of the Atomic Energy Commission's National Reactor Testing Station.
The huge hangar that was constructed at Test Area North had thick, lead-lined walls and was designed to contain radiation if necessary. General Electric moved its nuclear powerplant operations here, and installed robotic equipment so that work could be done on the engines and reactors without exposing humans.
The plan was that the first X-6 flight would come in 1957. The first operational nuclear bomber would, in turn, follow the X-6 in the early 1960s. The first operational wing of such aircraft was to be in service in 1964. Not only Convair, but Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed were invited to submit proposals for the development of these bombers.
In 1953, however, the incoming Eisenhower Administration revisited the concept of nuclear powered aircraft and red-lined the X-6 program. The conventional B-60 program would also get the ax, as the US Air Force chose to acquire the Boeing B-52 instead. Once again, though, the NB-36H remained a live program, as did numerous feasibility studies for nuclear powered operational aircraft for the future. While the X-6 was not to be the first of this new breed, the concept of a nuclear powered aircraft remained alive and well.
At Test Area North in Idaho, work on the 15,000-foot runway that was planned for the X-6 program was not begun, but the other work continued. In 1955, the Atomic Energy Commission initiated a series of Heat Transfer Reactor Experiments at Test Area North's big nuclear shielded hangar. These experiments were part of the ongoing development of airborne nuclear powerplants, but the engines tested were many order of magnitude larger than the P-1 that had been earmarked for the X-6. The idea was to refine the concept, then scale down the reactor. The goal was a thermal output of at least 50 megawatts delivered by a reactor the size of the one-megawatt reactor that would be test flown in the NB-36H.
Also in 1955, the NB-36H was finally ready for its debut. Except for a completely redesigned nose section, it was similar in outward appearance to a conventional B-36. Inside was a different story. The gross weight had been pushed up to 360,000 pounds. The one-megawatt reactor itself weighed nearly 18 tons, and the crew shield -- consisting of lead plates and water tanks -- added another 24,000 pounds.
The first flight of the NB-36H occurred on September 17, 1955 and the first top secret flight tests of an airborne nuclear reactor were soon underway. These missions were considered so sensitive that on every flight, the NB-36H was accompanied by a transport aircraft carrying paratroopers. Should the NB-36H have crashed, or been forced to land at a civilian airport because of mechanical difficulties, it would be the job of the paratroopers to surround the aircraft and prevent any unauthorized individuals from reaching it.
During eighteen months of flight testing, all phases of airborne nuclear reactor operations -- from shielding to power output -- were evaluated. When the NB-36H made its 47th and last flight on March 28, 1957, sufficient data now existed to move ahead to the next phase of nuclear aircraft development.
Back in the remote Idaho desert, the Heat Transfer Reactor Experiments continued both during and after the NB-36H flight test program. A test reactor assembly designated as HTRE 1 had been built and first tested in 1955. A water-cooled uranium reactor, it weighed more than a 100 tons and was mounted on a rail car. It also demonstrated a power output in excess of 20 megawatts.
edit on 25-3-2014 by BillYenne because: Length



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by TiedDestructor
 


Says Hamlet, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in . . . ."



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


I operate under the fantasy that all things can be explained, though I have not yet arrived at all the explanations...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by McGinty
 


Let me know when you figure it out.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by cenpuppie
 


Following on from my previous longish post about nuclear aircraft. . .

In later years, HTRE-1 was rebuilt several times. In its HTRE-3 configuration, it generated as much as 35 megawatts.
The HTRE-3 was also optimized for weight savings, using light aluminum structural components and hydrided zirconium as a moderator. The HTRE-3 experiments were conducted between April 1958 and December 1960, with the goal being a flight-ready hybrid turbojet-nuclear engine. Built by General Electric, this powerplant reportedly would have been designated as XNJ140, with the three letters standing for "Experimental Nuclear Turbojet."
At this point in history, the next step would have been to select an airframe design from the several that had been submitted by various aircraft makers, and to proceed with the new engine as had been originally planned with the P-1/X-6. However, three months after the HTRE-3 tests ended, the incoming Kennedy Administration ordered the airborne nuclear propulsion program to be terminated. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara had little enthusiasm for manned bombers of any kind. He was fascinated with the potential of ICBMs and wanted the Air Force to pursue this line of strategic thinking.
During the remainder of the twentieth century, nuclear propulsion for aircraft would not again be examined officially in the same depth as it had under the X-6 umbrella. However, late in the Cold War, as single-stage to orbit (SSTO) spaceplanes were being studied, the notion of nuclear power often seemed to worm its way into a footnote here or there. The well-publicized X-30 National Aerospace Plane (NASP) concept, as well as secret programs such as Science Dawn and Science Realm, generally relied on conventional rocket propulsion.
Test Area North remained an active site even as the Cold War finally came to an end., and the National Reactor Testing Station (now known as the Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory) is still in operation.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by BillYenne
 

Cool



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


Thank you for your post, Fred. Regarding the Northrop XST and the Lockheed ATB, there was a lot more cross-pollenization between the two companies in those days than most people realize.

Thank you for your compliments about my book. I am happy that you are enjoying it.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Thanks for your post. It sounds like you are the person to whom I should address MY questions about the H-60 extended family. You probably already know people better qualified that I am to answer such questions.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by StratosFear
 


Thanks for your post. A replacement for the F-22 and F-35? This government cannot even pay for those.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   

BillYenne
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


I operate under the fantasy that all things can be explained, though I have not yet arrived at all the explanations...


Thank you for your replies. I know you are busy trying to get to them all. I understand someone who knows a lot of sensitive information may not be able to officially disclose some things that he/she knows for fear of consequences. So I am going to respect your position and withdraw from further investigation.
edit on 25-3-2014 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SloAnPainful
 


Thanks for your post. Drones eventually making manned aircraft obsolete?
Probably not in our lifetime.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by BillYenne
 


Thanks for the reply Bill.

Simple and to the point, that's what I like.


-SAP-



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by GroomLakePolishFAN
 


Thanks for your post, and from Poland too. My book "Biala Roza Ze Stalingradu" was just published in Polish a few months ago. Check it out if it interests you.

Other programs at Groom Lake in the 1990s? Yes there were, but the time lag on declassifying them is ridiculous. It may take so long that nobody will be left who knows what they were secret in the first place.



new topics

top topics



 
167
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join