Aircraft Developments at Detachment 3

So maybe Gariac can answer this, or other aviation gurus...If the future of aviation technology is unmanned drones & aircraft, why have we witnessed satellite imagery of expanding runways at 'Area 51' over the past several years. Obviously, drone technology is nothing new. Heck, even Lockheed played around with drone technology launching from the SR-71 platform. We have the F-22, and obviously the F-35, which literary requires no runway, and we currently have no NASA Orbital program at the moment, that we know of, so what have they been building that requires that much runway?

I would think the only answer is an extremely fast mover... or something coming back unpowered needing a bit of extra in case their glide slope isn't perfect...

I would bet something fairly large coming back from orbit... but we'll most likely never know.

~winter

a reply to: Cosmic911

Because extremely long runways are Good Things in test programs. There were two B-1 emergency landings at the Edwards Dry Lakebed that took advantage of the super long runway. One with no nose gear, one that couldn't swing the wings forward to slow to landing speed.

What if its not a runway, and instead, the foundation for a giant high powered railgun that can launch craft almost all the way into orbit

Isnt it a backup runway for the Shuttle program as well when they were flying?

Footage of B-1 emergency landing:

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
What if its not a runway, and instead, the foundation for a giant high powered railgun that can launch craft almost all the way into orbit

If it was it would have to split open to reveal a rail system. lol. imagine that. flying over and ya see the runway open up and a rail cannon pops up to launch a aircraft.

a reply to: SpeedFanatic

I'm amazed they could get the plane off the ground due to the size of the balls required having to do such things if things went wrong.

I do know theres a lot of backup and support but having to land something with that price tag and have to cause who knows how much damage to fix it up as it will not be some private with a hammer to sort out the dents.

But the team that last maintained the front wheels will shall we say get some trouble.

originally posted by: Maxatoria
a reply to: SpeedFanatic

I'm amazed they could get the plane off the ground due to the size of the balls required having to do such things if things went wrong.

I do know theres a lot of backup and support but having to land something with that price tag and have to cause who knows how much damage to fix it up as it will not be some private with a hammer to sort out the dents.

But the team that last maintained the front wheels will shall we say get some trouble.

I imagine that repair team is prolly in Alaska now a days.

a reply to: yuppa

a reply to: Maxatoria

At the time of that accident, the B-1 was, to put it mildly, an unmitigated disaster. They had significant problems with everything from defensive systems, to hydraulics, and everything in between. It culminated in them missing Desert Storm, because they were sitting in the US grounded. There wasn't anything anyone did to cause that, or could have done to prevent it.

Interesting side note, the day that happened, a KC-135 over the Maine border exploded in flight.

a reply to: Cosmic911

The runways at Area 51 are entirely ordinary. They are not even the longest examples in the world. Also, it doesn't matter if you are testing aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing capability. The test base still needs to accommodate all kinds of conventional support aircraft (passenger and cargo transports, chase planes, etc.).

Not to mention that the "longest" runway at Groom Lake is no longer used and most of the extra length was only for use in case of emergency.