X-56 and the implications to modern flight

Sam lives!

a reply to: anzha

Haha. Living is the reason I've been scarce for a while.

a reply to: Sammamishman

I bet if one were traveling at really, really high speeds you'd want anti flutter technology in your wings.

but you know bass I'm crazy. I'd want variable geometry on parts of the wing too.

We are using simple lead blocks on RPA's for static ballast, it is only in the fuselage and used for CG...way low tech as you would imagine. On A-10's I think they were DU...

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: Sammamishman

I've read that the X-56 might be a direct, white world response by Lockheed to problems encountered with a decidedly different aircraft they worked on that may or may not have had a similar planform to the X-56. There any truth that?

Yes, that's exactly right. In an interview early in the Lockheed Martin portion of the program a guy from the Skunk Works said the X-56 had been designed, in part, in response to a flutter problem that "really bit us in the ass" on "another project." He wouldn't say what the earlier project was. It was not DarkStar.

a reply to: Shadowhawk
The follow on to DarkStar then?

a reply to: mightmight

More like the predecessor.

a reply to: Barnalby
Just as well but they took their time then... X-56 flew in 2013, the predecessor went away in the early 90s.

a reply to: mightmight

Which is probably an indication that someone high up decided they needed something with the predecessor's capabilities, again.