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.

 

Boeing Delta-winged hybrid airship

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   
I was doing some research into hybrid rigid airship flying wings and came across this patent from Boeing. I'm not sure if this one has been posted before or not, I just wanted to give some of my thoughts on it and get everyone elses. Heres the patent URL:

www.google.com...

Some of the parts I thought were particularly interesting:


...there is a need for airborne platforms that are able to carry high power directed energy devices as a payload...


... to operate such airborne platform at high altitudes out of reach for anti-aircraft threats and above the effects of atmospheric weather systems...


Summarized, this aircraft is designed to address the following issues:


  1. large enough wing area to carry high power directed energy devices as a payload
  2. high endurance
  3. can be operated at very high altitudes
  4. does not depend on conventional runways for launching and landing
  5. used for intelligence-gathering, surveillance, reconnaissance, and communications relay missions over an extended period of time
  6. operate at altitudes high enough to make the aerial vehicle survivable against anti-aircraft threats, to maximize the line-of-sight radius for sensors and communications equipment
  7. operate above the effects of atmospheric weather system
  8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle
  9. combines the advantages of heavier-than-air technology and lighter-than-air technology
  10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells




posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Sounds like they are gonna hang nuclear power plants above our heads to power their directed energy weapons...just great.....not



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Well, that would perfectly explain the very large and silent triangular aircraft seen by so many



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

My thoughts exactly.



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 04:13 AM
link   
a reply to: JJRichey
Uhh, I was about to chastise another poster about bringing up nuclear reactors when I noticed you contradicted yourself and therefore left the way open for any speculation.

JJRichey


8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle

Ok no problem so far.. then.


10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells

So whch is it? Yo cant say on one point that it doesn't have fuel cells, and then four and a half lines later claim it does

LEE.



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: JJRichey


Thanks i was wanting to have a look at drawings of one of those, the Neutral Buoyancy Helium filled platforms do provide the best explanation for any credible reports of large and silent floating black triangles, particularly with regards to extensive surface area being a positive for any such craft, the bigger the better in many ways, and a powerful propulsion system on a Helium filled platform would i expect give rapid acceleration, i also like the idea of the most secretive of Black Op's Projects simply being about balloons.



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

Agreed.

Like this one from the late 60's. I don't know if this one was ever tested, but, it would explain "sightings".




Source
ed it on 09/02/2012 by KaelemJames because: Grammar



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 06:34 AM
link   
One facet of the BBT's is their alleged maneuverability, both in forward flight and altitude change so there are still a significant number of questions relating to how this might be achieved if you think they are possibly Aerostats.

COSH (Control Of Static Heaviness) seems to have come on in leaps and bounds meaning internal ballasting might be able to account for any alleged high maneuverability in terms of ups and downs but I still haven't seen anything that could explain the air speeds reported (or allegedly filmed).

Causing a temporary phase change in the atmosphere to reduce friction along the crafts projected flight paths might hold promise but the power requirements would probably be prohibitive.

If a craft could reach Space, purge its LTA gasses and replace with the free vacuum of space, then descend using the Earths atmosphere as ballast (would require brittle ceramic compartments to maintain structural integrity and lightness)- this might offer hope as a vacuum balloon is theorised to have 8 times the atmospheric vertical thrust potential of Helium in a similar sized craft.

One thing that stands out to me in the BBT mythology is the presence of lights and I wonder if someone has built a relatively conventional Aerostat out of a strong and light rigid material that enables pivot-able fan rotars (probably not the right term!) to be built into the body of the craft and these lights serve to hide them?



edit on 11-2-2015 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: thebozeian
a reply to: JJRichey
Uhh, I was about to chastise another poster about bringing up nuclear reactors when I noticed you contradicted yourself and therefore left the way open for any speculation.

JJRichey


8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle

Ok no problem so far.. then.


10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells

So whch is it? Yo cant say on one point that it doesn't have fuel cells, and then four and a half lines later claim it does

LEE.



A "fuel cell" and a "solar cell" are completely different things.

"Fuel cell" refers to a 'hydrogen fuel cell' which relies on a consumable tank of hydrogen.

"Solar Cell" is more often referred to as a 'solar panel' and do not require refuelling .



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

But the source refers to "solar/fuel cells". That sounds to me like an either/or situation. No one refers to solar cells as solar fuel cells or fuel cells.



posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: JJRichey




  • all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells




  • Apparently, some do.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 11:42 AM
    link   

    originally posted by: Psynic

    originally posted by: thebozeian
    a reply to: JJRichey
    Uhh, I was about to chastise another poster about bringing up nuclear reactors when I noticed you contradicted yourself and therefore left the way open for any speculation.

    JJRichey


    8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle

    Ok no problem so far.. then.


    10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells

    So whch is it? Yo cant say on one point that it doesn't have fuel cells, and then four and a half lines later claim it does

    LEE.



    A "fuel cell" and a "solar cell" are completely different things.

    "Fuel cell" refers to a 'hydrogen fuel cell' which relies on a consumable tank of hydrogen.

    "Solar Cell" is more often referred to as a 'solar panel' and do not require refuelling .


    The typical fuel cell combines Hydrogen and Oxygen to produce electricity and water. The water can be recovered and turned back into water through electrolysis using electricity from solar cells. It's a closed, regenerative cycle that uses sunlight as the primary energy source. It's basically just like a rechargeable battery, except that a well designed fuel cell system can be lighter than an equivalent battery system (Boeing has been pouring some money into development of fuel cells for UAV propulsion, lately). This relies on the ability to collect more energy during the sunlit hours than you need for flight and store the excess as Hydrogen and Oxygen, which is then consumed at night.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 12:42 PM
    link   

    originally posted by: Psynic

    Apparently, some do.



    Not if that sentence means powered by solar cells or fuel cells.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 01:10 PM
    link   
    a reply to: Jukiodone
    The electric propulsion system would be a perfect explanation for the sudden acceleration of BBTs. Electric engines just zoom.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 02:16 PM
    link   

    originally posted by: 1947boomer

    originally posted by: Psynic

    originally posted by: thebozeian
    a reply to: JJRichey
    Uhh, I was about to chastise another poster about bringing up nuclear reactors when I noticed you contradicted yourself and therefore left the way open for any speculation.

    JJRichey


    8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle

    Ok no problem so far.. then.


    10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells

    So whch is it? Yo cant say on one point that it doesn't have fuel cells, and then four and a half lines later claim it does

    LEE.



    A "fuel cell" and a "solar cell" are completely different things.

    "Fuel cell" refers to a 'hydrogen fuel cell' which relies on a consumable tank of hydrogen.

    "Solar Cell" is more often referred to as a 'solar panel' and do not require refuelling .


    The typical fuel cell combines Hydrogen and Oxygen to produce electricity and water.

    (full stop)

    This part I agree with.

    The "recovering water and turning it back into water" part, not so much.

    Combining a hydrogen fuel cell stack with solar panels to produce more hydrogen is definitely not the "typical" fuel cell I see in buses, forklifts, cars, submarines, stationary engines, aircraft etc etc.

    Would you mind elaborating.



    edit on -06:0056152172015-02-11T14:17:56-06:00 by Psynic because: recovered, not captured.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 02:47 PM
    link   
    a reply to: thebozeian

    I was just quoting the patent. I didn't write it.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 02:50 PM
    link   
    a reply to: gfad

    Sorry for not making myself more clear Psynic. What I meant to say was solar cells and/or fuel cells, not that it could be powered by some kind of hybrid solar/fuel cell. I can see where the confusion came from though. Thats my fault.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 03:05 PM
    link   
    a reply to: Jukiodone

    Your mention of a pivot-able control fan reminds me of another patent I saw that was for a pivot-able control plate of sorts that would act as a sort of thrust vectoring.
    www.google.com...

    Heres a patent for using bursts of air to control direction in flight (from what I can understand of the patent anyways)
    www.strutpatent.com...

    I like this one for a differential thrust control system
    www.google.com...



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 03:12 PM
    link   

    originally posted by: Psynic

    originally posted by: 1947boomer

    originally posted by: Psynic

    originally posted by: thebozeian
    a reply to: JJRichey
    Uhh, I was about to chastise another poster about bringing up nuclear reactors when I noticed you contradicted yourself and therefore left the way open for any speculation.

    JJRichey


    8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle

    Ok no problem so far.. then.


    10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells

    So whch is it? Yo cant say on one point that it doesn't have fuel cells, and then four and a half lines later claim it does

    LEE.



    A "fuel cell" and a "solar cell" are completely different things.

    "Fuel cell" refers to a 'hydrogen fuel cell' which relies on a consumable tank of hydrogen.

    "Solar Cell" is more often referred to as a 'solar panel' and do not require refuelling .


    The typical fuel cell combines Hydrogen and Oxygen to produce electricity and water.

    (full stop)

    This part I agree with.

    The "recovering water and turning it back into water" part, not so much.

    Combining a hydrogen fuel cell stack with solar panels to produce more hydrogen is definitely not the "typical" fuel cell I see in buses, forklifts, cars, submarines, stationary engines, aircraft etc etc.

    Would you mind elaborating.




    I believe what he is trying to say, is that the solar cell could be used to power the pump that would feed the water that is a byproduct of the hydrogen fuel cell, back into the fuel cell, resulting on less water used. Don't know how efficient that'd be or if it'd be worth the extra weight as oppossed to just carrying more fuel(water). At least that was how I read the post.



    posted on Feb, 11 2015 @ 03:28 PM
    link   
    a reply to: JJRichey

    You have an IM sir.



    new topics

    top topics



     
    5
    <<   2 >>

    log in

    join