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.

 

Welcome to the jungle - US super/hypersonic programs

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2019 @ 04:12 AM
link   
Mightmight, you've done some good due diligence relative to any/all information available. But what do you think is out there right now that doesn't have a valid path of development or relative location to place inside your timeline?




posted on Aug, 18 2019 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Masisoar

Not much really in the realm of conventional high mach vehicles. I already included some (say speculative) programs in the ISR branch i wont go into further detail on.

Generally speaking, it's very likley that some programs led to some sort of unacknowledged operational capability.
Programs sometimes get cancelled just to be resurrected in the classified realm.
I don't know but i like to think that RATTLRS - Sea Dragon is such a case.
It's also entirely possible, even probable that there are remnants of abandoned, seemingly dead programs that are just sitting on shelves and could be used operationally if neccessary.
Then there may very well be known programs that just mask as development efforts, but are basically already operational. The Navys Coventional Prompt Strike Weapon System is a candidate for that.

And we just don't know about truely classified programs. It would be incredible easy to hide the development and limited production of an advanced air to air or air to ground missile for example. It's a save bet that there were many totally unknown classified efforts over the years. Just last month we had those two Darpa programs, HCCW and HACM that we don't know anything about.
If i had to guess i'd even say the chart shows less than fifty percent of everyhting that has been done since the 80s.

As for other vehicles using more exotic means of propulsion - your guess is as good as mine. This chart focues on ramjets and associated technologies. No pure rockets or speculative electromagnetic or antigravity drives.


edit on 18-8-2019 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Admittedly this has gotten a bit out of hand

10th iteration, new category has been added, Space Access.
Miscalculous programs have been reworked and multiple TSTO and SSTO programs have been added. I'm still thinking about inlcuding rocket powered space planes and crew return vehicles, definitely no conventional rockets or missiles though.



files.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 22 2019 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

i gave you your 1000th star, you should put a watermark on this so no one can 'borrow' it without a little credit given



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 04:16 AM
link   
Pentagon just killed off Boeings RKV...

au.yahoo.com...



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

RKV to me mean relativistic kill vehicle


i wonder what their new plan is and it's crazy they can scrap billions upon billions and than be like were having issues so thanks for the test data and cash

granted GBI's have a very very limited number of intercepts when compaired to a large attack but the few missiles we can take out can save millions of lives.

i hope there is something out there meant for ABM service, most of us know the black triangles exist so maybe they are just relying on them?



posted on Aug, 26 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

Took long enough. It was way over budget, and behind schedule.



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 09:14 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 30 2019 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha



files.abovetopsecret.com...

Now with watermarks and RLVs!

NASA programs are just painful, hope their early 2000s stuff is accurate



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 06:14 PM
link   
minor adjustments for the most part

Just to be clear, blank color bars are not about me trying to 'reveal' secret fastmoving isr platforms.
Everything i put in there is based on information you can find on the web, no *other* sources have been used.
Just on this board alone we talk about at least a dozen different aircraft that could fit the bill.
But i dont want to go into a discussion here, so it leave my opinion on the matter vague on purpose, even so i could put in more speculative details based on public sources.
So no Auroras, Ladys or whatever.



files.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 7 2019 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

did you add the navys new sub launched (maybe) hypersonic missile on there?



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 12:30 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 02:32 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Did i miss anything new?

The new Tridents are just regular SLBMs with nuclear warheads. Conventional payloads for Trident are either very dead or very black. Congress was a hard no on this the last time the Navy tried.
They do have do have the Intermediate Range Conventional Prompt Strike Weapon System which uses the Armys Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (now morphed into the Common Hypersonic Glide Body) as a warhead.
And Sea Dragon according to the Washington Post of course, whatever that is.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight


i heard about a new gen hypersonic missile being tube launchable but didn't get the name, or not one i've heard or seen outside my conversation.

hypersonic missiles and subs, a potent mix forsure.

with the way things are going normal detection methods for nuclear launches are going to be hard to detect unless its a massive launch.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Conventional Prompt Strike.



new topics




 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join