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.

 

New Pictures Of Previously Black "Senior Prom" Stealth Cruise Missile

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2005 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
People that stake out Area 51 have reported something they call ''The Baby B-2'' I have also heard people at Northrop make mention of this years ago.

Im not sure if people were just reporting a X-45 prototype before it became public or if their was infact a UCAV that was a mini version of the B-2


I have another possability for this. In a book I have called:The $5 Billion Misunderstanding: The Colapse of the Navy's A-12 Stealth Bomber, they mention Northorp's unsucessful design as "A scaled down B-2". This does leave the possability that this aircraft may be a Black Project for a manned aircraft based on Northrop's failed A-12 design!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance




posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I've heard the Tomahawk cruise missile has a much longer range, but that the Brits and the Italians wanted Storm Shadow, because of the "double key" policy annoyance , you need digital authorisation from the american government to fire Tomahawks from your frigates....

Storm shadow does own the traditional Tomahawk in the stealth department, but the americans wil come with the stealth hypersonic Reusable Launch Vehicle drone, that goes into the theater with mach 3.5 and overthere releases unpowered cruise gliderbody missiles, lowering dastically the detection time/range as opposed to subsonic missiles, also gpropulsion less (or minimal propulsion) gliderbodies have smaller radar cross-section. Also released from high altitude, more room to switch targets on the flye. Definately an improvement

The trend is clear: nations no longer want to make dirty hands in a war and preferrably use long stand-off distance and unmanned drones.



[edit on 22-2-2005 by Countermeasures]



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

I figure if a cruise missile can make use of the same level of stealth as a B-2 it would be near invisible to radar. Since the B-2 with a wingspan of over half a football field can appear about the size of a bee on radar. Think how small a 15ft missile would be on radar if it had stealth of the same performance.


A cruise missile has to maximize internal space better than a full scale airplane, so stealth has to be sacrificed a little.

Also, here are some pics of the Advanced Cruise Missile - which is the USAF's stealth, long range, cruise missile. It is nuclear only, and it's capabilities are still closely guarded








- That's 3 of them over George H. W. Bush

It's estimated that the ACM has a RCS of around .001 m^2 - comparable to speculation on the B-2. Flying at, lets say, 100 ft AGL and 500+MPH that would be a hard target to hit.

Edit- Used big ACM picture by mistake

[edit on 22-2-2005 by Starwars51]

[edit on 22-2-2005 by Starwars51]



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Very interesting, I see they have overcome the wobble tendency of stealth shapes with forward wings.

What's the deal with having the tail pointed downward, better stealth, more lift or better aerodynamics ????


[edit on 22-2-2005 by Countermeasures]



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Countermeasures
Very interesting, I see they have overcome the wobble tendency of stealth shapes with forward wings.

What's the deal with having the tail pointed downward, better stealth, more lift or better aerodynamics ????


I think the forward wings are still pretty unstable. Propably fixed with lots of computer work and inertial guidance/stabilization.

My guess as far as the tail is to reduce IR signature. Since the tail folds in, if it were on top the engine/exhaust would be on the very bottom of the missile - making a big IR signature.

Of course that is wild speculation on my part ....



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   
How long has this stealthy nuclear cruise missile being operational?

Who produces the missiles? How many does the USAF have? Any test Vids?

It looks a lot like JASSM, which is a stealth cruise missile, and it to is a air to ground munition, but the JASSM is conventional and not nuclear.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:54 PM
link   
ok...I've done some looking and thats one impressive weapon.

Although I didn't have much luck finding a test video of it, I found some other info on it.



Primary function: Air-to-surface advanced cruise missile. Speed: 334-601 mph. Dimensions: Wingspan 10 ft., length 20 ft. 8 in., body diameter 2 ft. 4 in. Range: More than 2,000 miles. Payload: Nuclear warhead.

The thing that is impressive is its 2,000+ mile range.

It was nuclear only and the size of the nuke could vary from a 5 kiloton all the way up to a 150 kt! For some comparison the one dropped on Hiroshima was a 15 kt. The USAF originaly planned for 2,500 but the cold war coming to a close those numbers fell a lot...they finally ended up with 460 of them, they recieved the last one from Raytheon in 1993. There accuracy back then were around 100 - 300 feet acurate, but have since all been upgraded with GPS.


This missile looks a lot like the Lockheed JASSM, oficially called AGM-158A, which has a range of 230 miles and carries a conventional 2,000 lb bomb. The USAF wants 4,900 of them. The Navy wants 450. Lockheed also have started on development & demonstration of the JASSM-ER, officially called AGM-158B, which will have a range of 600 miles. They will cost $400,000 bucks a pop, which is a lot...But hey, having the worlds most accurate cruise missile doesn't come cheap.


Using GPS and a gyroscope-based inertial system guide Lockheed Martin’s jet-powered cruise missile toward its target. Just before impact, an infrared camera images the target. An onboard computer compares the video with a template based on reconnaissance photos, and the missile fine-tunes its final dive.

heres a pic of the JASSM



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 11:55 PM
link   
Actually $400K is pretty cheap, the Tomahawk is what 1-2 million a shot if I recall right



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 12:17 AM
link   
I just hope that the engineers have solved the F 117's flaw of not being able to fly when its raining. Here in the Pacific Northwest it rains a lot, so I don't mind that particular limitation to its usage.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Actually $400K is pretty cheap, the Tomahawk is what 1-2 million a shot if I recall right

Yeah...Sites say 1.4 mill, but considering that they dont need any support to get airborn I would say there price is pretty reasonable. and they have a good track record, after all...they have being in use for decades.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join