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.

 

'Fastmover' seen by Swiss guys from Tikaboo in 1999: discussion

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:00 AM
link   
a reply to: MAVERICKANDGOOSE

With the timing, some of it probably went to the hypersonic programs that were running around 2010 and 2011.




posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaph, do you think that "Fastmover" seen by Swiss guys from Tikaboo in 1999 smells more like Kingfish or more like something related to those hypersonic programs of time around 2010 or 2011?

...or maybe mixture of both?

edit on 24-4-2017 by SpeedFanatic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:05 AM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer


Gotta ask..

Why did you choose that tag 1947Boomer??

ETA: Groan @ BP.


edit on 24-4-2017 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:11 AM
link   
The JP7 probably went into the X-51 program. It was flown out of Edwards.
If you think about it, 680.000 pounds is not enough to sustain a fastmover program, even if there is only one airframe.
The SR-71 consumed up to 40.000 pounds per hour, on average about half if I’m not mistaken.
That’s less than 30 hours of flight time.
In any case, purchases for a classified program would be, well, classified.

Kingfish died long ago, let it rest. If someone wanted to build a new fastmover based on an older design, the Blackbird itself would be the logical choice. Or something newer, like the XB-70 (3rd prototype…) or the YF-23. Definitely not the program which died on the drawing board half a century ago.




edit on 24-4-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:13 AM
link   
X43 flew in 2001 so......



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

X-51 essentially replaced the X-43. Both programs had issues, the technology is nowhere mature enough for a manned application. Sad and surprising considering what they aimed for with Isinglass/Rheinberry back in the day. Also, the X-43 used hydrogen.
Any operational fastmover program today would still use airbreathing aircraft - nothing significantly faster than the SR-71.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: SpeedFanatic


That drawing looks a tat like this thing.




posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Although i agree that a modern era fastmover would be air breathing i disagree with it being sr71 speeds. Surely with todays modern era we can design engines that can push an aircraft significantly faster than mach 3.2. I mean we just gotta be able to.

I have a question. Could it be possible that they could invent a new fuel with new off the records procurement thats newer and better than jp7.

Also scramjets i say are the way of the dodo bird. Id abandon them too for better ideas and designs. Leave scramjets to expendable stuff like missiles.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

You can push a ramjet design up to Mach 6 or something. The problem is fuel efficiency/consumption. The tanker cant keep up. Sweetspot is around Mach 3, cruising speed of both the SR-71 and the XB-70.To go further you need a scramjet engine.
But scramjets dont work 'well' at low speed (below Mach 3), you need another engine accelerate before the scramjet can kick in. You call this a turbine based combined cycle propultion system, essentially a scramjet ontop of a ramjet engine.

As far as we know this as never been done before. There were some rumors (there always are) but just look at the sorry state of the white world scramjet programs.
Both the X-43 and the X-51 used rockets to start the scramjet engines and had several failures at high speeds. The technology is not mature yet. A black manned program doesnt make sense if they cant get their oversized darts to work properly.

I'm sure there were multiple efforts to replace the SR-71, one or two might have gone operational. But i really, really dont think they got a workable scramjet design in the Eighties or Nineties when they cant get it working properly today. IF they did go significantly faster at some point, a boost-glide program is somewhat more realistic. There were rumors about that too, during Reagan/Bush era. Was even discussed on this forum at some point. But just as with the X-51, if you look at what they tried to do with the HTV-2. i just dont think they had it all figured out in the black decades ago.




edit on 24-4-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

I agree with you on the scramjet. Just not very great an idea in the end.

Tell me more about this combined cycle engine. Ive never heard about it before. So is it like a jet engine with a scramjet too? Seems like a lot of weight for a aircraft to hoist aloft. Could they come up with something better.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

What about all the sonic booms during the 90s over los angeles. Wasnt that the aroura? I heard it went mach 4 or 5 according to experts like joe rogaway or was it the sweetman guy. I read all their stuff.

Hey you know a lot. what do you think that mysterious bird flying over wichita was they took pictures of a few years ago. I think its the a12 avenger fighter. Or maybe the aurora. It looks fast..

Also the f35. Whats your opinion. I think it sux. Its too slow and under armed. The newer soviet fighters are better cause they are faster and more manueverable in a dogfight.
edit on 24-4-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

For the combined cycle engine (TBCC) you can check out Lockheeds SR-72 proposal. Its their latest attempt to make it work, surprisingly its a white world sells pitch. Tells you all about its chances.
www.globalsecurity.org...

This is a Nasa slideshow on the TBCC:
ntrs.nasa.gov...
If you can make sense of it, i'm no that interested in technical details...


This CalTech study argues against the previous (?) 'aircraft at Mach 5' thesis:
authors.library.caltech.edu...
I havent found much beyond that on sonic booms (other than pulse detonating donuts confirmed !!11!!) but as said, i'm sure they tried to build an SR-71 successor. Maybe they even pushed the envelop beyond Mach 4 with some Kind of demonstrator, but fuel consumption and efficiency issues remain.
Also from a tactical viewpoint, i dont believe you do much better against modern russian SAM systems at Mach 4 instead of Mach 3. They are designed to engage hypersonic cruise missiles and ballistic at terminal velocity. So why bother.
Mach 6 to 10 or even faster might result in a significantly reduced engagement zone but such a craft is way off IMO.

I have no specific inside on Wichita or Amarillo. Your guess is as good as mine. I'm a nobody with no access to anything interesting.
According to Zaphod Wichita is a Grey World aircraft, manned, relativley new, not the A-12, not the RQ-180 and not the NGLRS-D.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Personally i believe at least one bit of Information is (unintentionally) wrong, but who knows. I'd like it to be some sort of LO LPI AEW craft but as said, your guess is as good as mine. Doesnt look 'fast' to me though.

Dont want to derail the thread even more... the F-35 is probably ok for a multirole aircraft. I just think way too many other procurement programs suffered because of JSF and despite that, the US will probably end up with less F-35 than it needs. Classic too big to fail / there is no alternative

edit on 24-4-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Pulse detonation contrails aren't pulse detonation contrails. I have watched just about every type of commercial aircraft leave contrails that turned into donuts on a rope.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Hey thanks for the links im going to read up on this combined cycle jet engine.

Cant they build something hypersonic with good fuel consumption? Like what if they mix zip fuel into the engine like street racers do with Nitrous.

If theres no sucessor to the sr71 than what was the aurora about. It was a giant flying triangle shape. A lot like the Wichita plane.

Hypersonic aircraft are too loud. Everybody can hear where it went with the sonic booms and sonic booms are physics and impossible to make go away. Then you have all the heat issues cant they just track the jet cause its engines are hot.

Spyplanes are useless these days with satellites.

Hey what do you think of the tr3b. Its a flying triangle according to insiders and supposedly used for anti electronics warfare. You think maybe the wichita plane is the tr3b. It would make sense



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
Yes obviously. I tried to be sarcastic


a reply to: BASSPLYR
More likely than not, 'Aurora' was a budget line for infrastructure for the B-2 program, nothing more. I have read other, credible opinions though (quellish on secretprojects.uk for one).
I think Aurora as buzzword does more harm than good. Everybodys 'knows' about it, every bit of information is looked at in the hope that - it might be - finally - at last - the myhtical thing - everybody dreamed of - and just wants to be true.
Too easy.
Unfortunately there being no fastmover program for long periods of time after the SR-71 went away makes sense. Tyler Rogoway had a great interview on this a while back:
aviationintel.com...

TR3B is bs, just like TR3A. Someone didnt know about Tier 3 back in the day, overheard something and thats how the rumor got started.
If you are talking about the black tirangles with three lights underneath /Phoenix Lights /Belgian Ufo wave - i believe they exist. I dont belive the stuff Astr0 wrote about them on this forum.
I personally think they are some sort of airship with a (somewhat) exotic propulsion system. Try thestealthblimp.com or check out JP Aerospace.
edit on 24-4-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Whos JPAerospace. Im going to google them .

Tyler rogaway knows his stuff. I read his things and wish one day i know as much as experts like him.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

I saw this before and I agree it's spot on!

a reply to: mightmight

"I'm sure there were multiple efforts to replace the SR-71, one or two might have gone operational."
Could you broad it a littlebit, do you mean about manned birds or unmanned ones?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

"Skyquakes" were caused by something that is related to the aircraft that guzzling JP-7 that has been flying for 26 years and still flying today. The bird that using JP-7(the one that has been flying for 26 years and still flies to day today) is not directly responsible for "Skyquakes" but is related to it in some way. I wonder if the JP-7 bird(that flies for almost 27 years) is manned or not?

a reply to: mightmight

I always thought that TR-3A is "F-117 Companion" in other words...



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: SpeedFanatic


If there was an unmanned replacement effort it was loitering VLO. The only rumors about fast unmanned recon assets i'm aware of are connected to AARS/Quartz. It's supposed to have had a high speed component at some point. Dont know more than that.
But i thinks it not unlikely, that parts of this program survived in some form. And maybe stuff from the Navys high altitude recon program from back then as well. Just not within the armed services but the NRO. The thing with all the research about what might have happened to witch cryptic budget line when the SR-71 went away (try finding out if Copper Canyon is still active ... ) - maybe ist the wrong part of the DoD entirely. Those NRO guys are sitting on an anual operating budget of 10 to 15 billion at this point. God knows how much money they get from SAPs. They operate a vast array of highly classified satellite surveillance systems, the amount of money the routinley blow on this tech is insane.
I dont believe for a second they never got around to thinking about aircraft as well after the Airforce lost the SR-71 capabilities. And i fully believe that we never hear anything about it. Just think about what we knew about other activities of US Intelligence agencies before Snowden.
I'm willing to bet, the Green Lady Zaphod cant shup up about
was never an Air Force Project. The NRO just took over some defunct program from whenever, threw the odd billion at it and build itself a nice and shiny high speed recon asset. Cause why not. Cheaper than a satellite. Guess the Airforce doesnt even know about it.

As said, TR-3A as a designation is bs. Someone heard about Tier 3 UAVs and it went from there. Of course, some stuff you can find about the TR-3A on the web looks like it might be related to the Companion.
The designation of the companion is probably similiar to the F-117.

edit on 24-4-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

This greenlady. What do you think she is and wheres she most likely based.

I think shes owned by northrup as a demonstrator . Probably flies at mach 3 to 4. Nothing can fly at mach 6+ it will shred apart.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Nm. .
edit on 4/24/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/24/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join