Lockheed Pushes for Hypersonic Aircraft

a reply to: Zaphod58

I didn't even know we had tankers in Beale again. I would have had it on my dream sheet if they had not moved them all to Seymour Johnson.

a reply to: Pyle

They might have moved them out by now, but they were at Beale for awhile. I haven't kept up with all the bases and their types.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I know they moved them out when Seymour Johnson was being built up with Grand Forks' tankers. USAF was closing merging lots of tanker guard/reserve units around that time.

My basic google foo/google maps shows that they still have no tankers but in 2014 some talk of having a unit again in fiscal 2015.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You said "load" and "bathroom"!
😂

Secret helo stuff would've been cool! Sorry bout your mind ☺

a reply to: Zaphod58

I remember following the fuel back when we were researching it, it's great what you can find out from old pdf's👌

That is an excellent idea

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
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.

a reply to: nelloh62

as much as it is. it can't be done. too risky with the legal side of things if one of the authors doesn't like it.

but I do like the Aviation Field Researchers Club idea. maybe make regional chapters even.

a reply to: B2StealthBomber

Amen, any particular ones for looking over? Aalways in the neighborhood for a good rabbit hole to jump down...

It seems not everyone is thrilled with Lockheed's hypersonic aircraft:

foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com...

a reply to: anzha

No comment.

Another hypersonic hater, sure we don't need new technology , better let them to the Chinese and Russian for the futur. Im a LOCKHEED HTV-3X , SR-72 supporter give money to Skunk and let them change the world

a reply to: darksidius

There's a difference between hypersonic hater and realist. The Chinese and Russians have to overcome the same problems that we do. The same laws of physics and materials science apply to them that apply to everyone else. They're no closer to solving long term hypersonic flight than we are.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I found that article to be shallowly researched, seemingly willfully ignorant and leading to a rather unimaginative and inprovident conclusion.

actually, it reads like a paid hit piece. wouldn't be surprised if it were.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'd say the usa is several billion dollars closer. and several decades.





what? I rout for the home team.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Gawker media needs all the cash they can get now that hulkamania hit them so hard. So yeah, it wouldn't surprise me either, and I wouldn't be surprised if Tyler isn't looking to pull a Sweetman and get himself a job at Boeing or Northrop.

That might also explain why someone who used to pride himself so much on speculative journalism about possible classified platforms would so willingly ignore all the circumstantial evidence that Lockheed already HAS at least one post-SR-71 bird in operation.

a reply to: BASSPLYR
I hope so, I prefer to see USA solving the hypersonic flight than China or Russia. I m Confident that Skunk have something new in his hand, since decade they have

a reply to: darksidius

Ten years doesn't mean much if there's no money.

Just to give you a sense of what Lockheed may be up to, I'd suggest looking no further than:

Boom Technology, Incorporated

If you poke around on the website, you'll see Mr. Cappuccio and Mr. Hartmann are both involved in the effort.

M = 2.2

a reply to: anzha

I can't believe he dropped that sats can be used instead, and he calls himself a journalist..

When any decent researcher knows sats are predictable.

a reply to: B2StealthBomber

Sats orbits can be changed.

And the X-37 is the ultimate version of that.

However, one of the key observations NRO folks have made is that its not the snapshot intel that works best but the repeated observations over time of changes to sites. Given multi spectral sensors, that gets really, really hard to hide.