Lockheed Pushes for Hypersonic Aircraft

a reply to: BASSPLYR

That is a surprisingly interesting idea.

a reply to: Zaphod58

No. It's a great idea👍
The last time you and Samm got together. Some great photos got posted.

And it's good to see you again Intelgurl.




Did I read the posts right? An SR-71 was reinstated? Is it the only thing that can be used as a chase craft?

Great Idea

a reply to: Bigburgh

No. They were talking about when they were brought back in the 90s.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thank you for the clarification.

Another idea I think should be considered is that we as Aviation Forum members should set up and contribute to some sort of Aviation Forum Research Library.

Make a Sticky thread where members can post links to online PDFs or articles that are pertinent to Aviation and/or Aerospace Sciences.

That way the members can use it like a resource to learn up on a subject or research and refer members with similar interests or research topics to.


Links only, no actual downloads to prevent legal, T&C or Copyright issues. I dunno I've set a IM to a Mod and to Springer asking about the viability of such an idea in regards to the above concerns. Waiting to hear back and get some input from the staffs/Site Owners perspective of such an idea.

I really think it would be a awesome Idea.

Great !!

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Sammamishman
A hypersonic strike bomber would make that much worse. Though, hypersonic missiles would probably be a better bet due to costs.

Those may violate the IRBM treaty. There's a reason why those were feared.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Once again, you west-coasters will get all the fun!

Though I guess that around here, you could make a killer "former aircraft or systems manufacturer site that's now getting razed to build more condos tour"

Or an "I got detained by security at Raytheon/Sikorsky/P&W/Draper/Lincoln labs tour and I promise I won't try to take a picture of that EAKV/Stealthhawk/ADVENT core/Laser Ring Gyroscope Assembly/low-POI conformal AESA prototype again, I swear..." tour, if you were feeling particularly "adventurous"

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Well, scratch the idea of a research library. Just found out it's too complicated from a legal standpoint. Which I fully understand.

a reply to: Barnalby

I'm a 48 stater. I go where I want when I want for hunting. The joys of being a driver.

Although the top of my head blew off when my wife told me when she was driving a few years ago she went to Sikorsky for a load, and got to go inside to use the bathroom and didn't even look.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Womens...

a reply to: drwire

She walked right past the assembly line and never looked up.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You're preaching to the choir on the open road bit, I put about 30k/year on my personal car alone...

Too bad it takes forever to get out of the Northeast though, the country really opens up once you get to the south or to the west of the DC/Baltimore area.

Oh well, if you like helicopters, between Sikorsky, Kaman, and Agustawestland, the Northeast is the place to be!

Did Sikorsky have anything especially cool on the line at the time? I was under the impression that all of the "cool" stuff was assembled off-site in the 90s.

originally posted by: intelgurl



Considering that it has been decades to get to this point technologically speaking; it seems within reason to assume that if they can produce a demonstrator within 2 years then there is tech already working that they can glean from.

If I were asked to read between the lines I would take it as a confirmation that SR-72/hypersonic/skyquake producing aircrafts are indeed flying. Obviously in one-off or limited production runs, but flying just the same.
But that is only my opinion. What's yours?

Well I am pretty sure we had at least one active fast mover a few years back I don't know if its still operational. Rumors from the tanker pilots I worked around in late 2007 to early 2008 said more or less "something was/is using JP-7" and during my time in Manas (more rumors) I gleaned that some JP-7 refueling happened in the early part of the afgan war. Which would be before 2007 when I first deployed as we never used JP-7 during my time deployed. I know 6 years (2001 to 2007) is a pretty big gap but that's the way rumors work.

Sadly being a lowly crew chief I didn't learn much more.

a reply to: Barnalby

That many? That's like two and a half months of below average weeks.

I don't know if they did. She didn't look! As far as I know they didn't.

a reply to: Pyle

There are at least three platforms I know of off the top of my head that require a T model to refuel.

a reply to: mbkennel


1. The Russians have pretty much withdrawn from the INF.

2. Air launched hypersonic missiles are not banned so long as they are not ground launched cruise missiles or ballistic missiles.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Either they can use both jp-8 (slow) and jp-7 (fast) or Edwards is doing a lot more "special" fueling then it seems.

a reply to: Pyle

They're not flying out of Edwards. The tankers are coming out of Beale, the others are coming out of other locations. The Air Force bought a fair amount of JP-7 in 2010, and still show current prices for it in various locations.