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.

 

West Texas Spanloader

page: 24
16
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

CiTrus90 has some excellent drawing skills. The last picture was a nice touch.

: )
edit on 25-2-2015 by TAGBOARD because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I ran across this patent created by William R. McDonnell:

Patent: Oblique Blended Wing Body Aircraft


I thought the name sounded strangely familiar - a McDonnell living in the St. Louis area, who designs advanced aircraft. So I looked into into it further and found the following:

Popular Mechanics September 1980 (page 104)

Until 1979, that is, when a 27-year-old aeronautical engineer named William R. McDonnell…McDonnell, son of McDonnell Douglas Corp. president Sanford N. McDonnell…

McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Since 1920, Volume 2 (page 407)

Since its formation, the Super Team has been led by MDHC executives with William R McDonnell becoming the first Super Team Director…

Clearly this is Mr. McDonell's son. If the oblique blended wing aircraft can or has been executed, it’d handle supersonic Mach numbers unlike the B-2. Perhaps a huge breakthrough in dash-loiter capability required by more advanced ISR/Strike missions. It does not appear to me as a low risk, currently available technology to be used on the LRS-B. In addition, I understand that Lockheed is the design agent for the Boeing/Lockheed LRS-B entrant anyway.

Anyone suppose this patent was to address the 2037 Bomber?
edit on 25-2-2015 by TAGBOARD because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: TAGBOARD


what a strange/cool looking form.

it reminds me on that plan form that some students/nasa made that could change directions in flight to utilize different geometry.

I think there are things in the works that will/do look more like your typical triangle, and I would assume that is what they will be using around 2040. maybe what you have here is some sort of drone. I know the new long range bomber is going to use allot of drones to help it out.



posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 04:33 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Interesting to note the "tumbling" and nice skills again by Citrus.

Didn't the resident black triangle expert provide a name for it at the time....(i'm thinking Phantasm but cant be sure?).

He said the plasma bloom was a countermeasure (why is a countermeasure visible I wonder?) but if it were to mark your retina as suggested- that would make sense in a draw curtains/hide under bed/put wet towel round head kind of way.


Edit:
I think I know your answer to this but could this just be a test of some sort of sky projection/holographic technology.....the plasma bloom/lights/fuzzy edge etc seem out of place for something that is supposed to be stealthy?



edit on 26-2-2015 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Jukiodone

He did call it Phantasm. But that could have been the BS part. Although I suspect if the name Phantasm or a similar name is regarding a real life program that it could be for something inside or on the triangle, not the crafts it's self name.

As far as counter measures. Probably a plasma bloom of some sort. probably generated by lasers or microwaves or radio beams or something. Where they converge the bloom happens making it steerable and controllable. Maybe it's used like a shield to zap incoming missiles and short them. Maybe it's like a counter measure that fools the missile or makes the missile chase it instead. Maybe it can short enemy aircraft if it gets too close.

That Iranian pilot had an encounter with something like that. What about the Foo fighters of WW2. maybe they were something similar too. I really have no idea.

Personally I think they were doing it for show since it was over an area where I doubt they would have hostile action taken against it. ( Low altitude over a west los angeles neighborhood. )



posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

The 4 light was not nuts and bolts. It dissolved into a filament and got absorbed or something. I say plasma.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 06:35 AM
link   
In awe of it all.Just rewatching the first series of the XFiles when the Triangle appears in Ep3..Cant believe its 25 years old now.Chris Carter had some "interesting" info for storylines.



posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 11:10 PM
link   
An article was posted today by U.S. DoD beat journalist Loren Thompson:

USAF Bomber isn't as Secret as it Seems

Some highlights include the author's position on LRS-B:

- Range > 5,000 nm
- Payload Weight < B-2
- Dash Mach Number < 1
- Unit Cost > $550 M
- Pilots > 0
- Production > 100
- Contractor = Boeing

Perhaps he sees this tipping point since contractors Northrop won the RQ-180, and Boeing has empty assembly lines. Not considering other black programs, of course.
edit on 9-3-2015 by TAGBOARD because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: TAGBOARD

To bad Boeing doesn't have an entry. Lockheed is the lead, with Boeing as a subcontractor. And he's completely wrong on some of that.
edit on 3/9/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
With the descripiion of Mr Thompson the LRS-B look less capable of a B-2 no sense.


edit on 10-3-2015 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

Like I said. He's wrong on several points. He's got several things right, but he's putting it together based on public information.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I think he got the Range, the cost and the unit number right.

Wait scratch that. For range he could be right but that doesn't make sense for it to have less range than the B-2. if the new bomber come equipped possibly with the new ADVENT engines then wouldn't the thing have really great range like more in the 7000+ miles area?

But I would hope the payload is bigger than the B-2. I'd like it approach that of the B-1. But that could be wishful thinking on my end.

Personally I'd like it to piloted with a unmanned option.

I'd also like it to cruise between .7 and 1.2 mach with a dash maybe up to 1.5 but again that could be wishful thinking. Would be sweet if it had some sort of super cruise.

From what I believe, the new Lockheed/Boeing bomber is going to be pretty darned cool.

I personally want it to be able to fulfill the roll of the B-2 and the B-1. B1 sized payload and speed. Agile and aggressive. B-2 style capabilities in stealthyness and penetration abilities. But, again, just my personal desires and speculation. And I'd want it to have a posse of support craft that are all equally as bad ass. A rq-180, a P-AEA, and a drone or two to act as either guard dogs/sentries for the bomber or possibly outfitted with unique or special skills that expand the bombers tool kit.





edit on 10-3-2015 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I think it will also have some tech that will be seen as breakthrough. Stuff that has been around a while that nobody knew about and they won't tell anyone is on the jet.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

possibly something we won't Hear about anytime soon.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Unfortunately, most likely.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

yes, yes very unfortunate we won't be hearing anything. Oh well.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TAGBOARD

To bad Boeing doesn't have an entry. Lockheed is the lead, with Boeing as a subcontractor. And he's completely wrong on some of that.


I've been looking at Northrop, Boeing and Lockheed stock prices the last few days. Usually they track very closely (statistical arbitrage effects no doubt). Boeing has diverged upward, relatively.

Then again, it could be the reporter at Forbes talking to his hedge fund buddies first.
edit on 10-3-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

Boeing has released some very interesting and promising news from the commercial side in the last few days.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

My guess is that the aerodynamic design/planform is going to mostly have Lockheed DNA, as well as relying heavily on L-M low observable technology, avionics, etc, but that manufacturing as well as the design work on some of the heavier mechanical systems will be handled by Boeing.

As for performance:
Range: Greater than the B-2, likely by a significant margin due to using two higher-efficiency engines instead of 4.

Speed: Marginally faster than the B-2, most likely in the near-transonic ranges a la the sonic cruiser or the citation X+. Trasonic/supersonic is a no-go due to the presumed flying wing planform and the desire to hit that range.

Flight ceiling: Most likely to be a little less ambitious than the B-2's crazy ceiling, though if this thing has as much Quartz./AARS DNA in it as I think it will, you never know... Lockheed always liked high-altitude designs

Weapon capacity: Similar volume to the B-2, though with a lower load capacity since this one will be designed in the age of stand-off missiles and precision munitions, and will likely NOT be designed as a nuclear platform first and foremost as the B-2 was.

Fleet size: They'll ask for 80-120, and the USAF will end up with 40-80 when all is said and done, with the difference to be made up by rebuilt and re-engined BUFFs.

It's all just hunches, but that's what my gut tells me...
edit on 10-3-2015 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-3-2015 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

Lockheed has room at Marietta or Plant 42 for construction slots. Marietta has tooling for RAM. That's where the F-22 was built.
edit on 3/10/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join