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.

 

Lockheed is pushing the SR-72 for the tune of $1 billion

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Oh, Lockheed is on a roll. At least a PR roll.

They brought up the TR-X and how to get an operational set of 30 optionally manned or potentially manned U-2 replacements up and running.

They recently touted their lasers as ready to be placed on ships and aircraft as weapons.

Now, they are talking up (and giving away a bit) their SR-72 concept.

The tech involved was originally developed under Black Swift, the DARPA effort. They claim they made a number of breakthroughs. They are NOW claiming they can build an F-22 sized (!) demonstrator to go from subsonic all the way up to Mach 6 for $1 billion.

The relatively small size makes me curious. It must be just a demonstrator and the range cannot be great. It must be purely a demonstrator rather than something operational. Get up to Mach 6, hold for the 8 minutes and drop back down?

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

At Mach 6 the outer air skin could quite possible glow in the dark given the atmospheric temperatures it will encounter. It will be a brick with wings, all be it a very expensive brick.
edit on 16-3-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake




It will be a brick with wings, all be it a very expensive brick.


You mean "albeit"

sorry I couldnt help myself



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: tinner07


ATS gives a 'mis-spell'-red underline when you spell all be it, albeit.....



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   
At Mach 6 it would go about 614 miles in that 8 minutes.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
it better be made out of pure gold at that price. better have a built in coffee maker too.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

They meant to say, they need $1 billion to minimize what they already have.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

There are many ways for them to bring things out of the Black.

Most involve money.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:56 PM
link   
So, the LM CEO comes out and says, "Blah blah blah, hypersonic. Blah, blah, several breakthroughs. Blah, blah,air breathing, blah, blah, blah." And, we are supposed to believe that a version of this "F-22 sized," aircraft doesn't already exist or has existed? Hmmmmmm. Me thinks I smell a Skunk. ( see what I did there? LOL!!)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: SonofaSkunk

There is no F-22 sized hypersonic platform.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   
THAT'S it ...we NEED Blackswift garage kits in Airforce livery.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   
So, there is NO F-22 sized hypersonic platform, but is there a larger version ? Stands to reason it would be bigger given it would need lots of fuel, no ?


originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: SonofaSkunk

There is no F-22 sized hypersonic platform.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well, maybe not. But, (taking my heritage into account, hence my screen name,) I strongly suspect they no doubt have something along these lines already flying. They kinda have a track record for that sort of thing.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: nelloh62

Depends on the mission, requirements and other factors, such as how close you can get tankers to the target region.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Also how close a very friendly ally is



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: nelloh62

They flew both the SR-71 and U-2 in areas that weren't close to very friendly allies.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
It's possible this proposal is going to make use of a ceramic like skin that's flexible. They were working on this 20 years ago and it suddenly got very quiet with no more publicity. I've wondered all along if they came up with something that while to expensive for commercial aviation would work for military aircraft. It would be a major breakthrough and could give an aircraft both weight advantage and greater conservation of fuel. My best,



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: airforce47

You mean the MAW? That was more like 30 years. NASA has been flying a Gulfstream with flexible control surfaces for a few months now. Pretty impressive results so far.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:23 PM
link   
I'm seeing little tv diddy's about a new commercial airliner that does mach 4.

Should be tested in a couple years and I'm saying to myself, wtf?

I'm not hearing the military having aircraft with that capability.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

There are a lot of capabilities the military has that we know little to nothing about.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join