Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Holy Moly! sr-71 top speed is Mach 14 (leaked document)

page: 6
1
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Electro and Magnetic hydrodynamics are only used within boundary layers.

It has often been speculated that this system is on the B-2 (many confuse it with anti-gravity).

It will reduce boundary layer drag, improving range.


It is not a distinct propulsion technique, not yet anyway, and it certainly is not capable of getting the Blackbird up to Mach 0.14 never mind Mach 14.




posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Localjoe3
Richard-

Please refrain from calling me a crank or nutcase.. im a 24 year old network engineer that dabbles in motors and em technology for fun..

*snip rest of post*



I didnt call you a crank or a nutcase, I said 'same old rubbish - cranks and nutcases' and thats my opinion of the technologies and the people publishing reports on the 'internet' as discussed here on ATS.

Theres a world of difference between building a desktop demo of a few bits of wire and foil, weighing no more than a few ounces, connected to the mains supply (I did all that 18 years ago in high school), and building a working aircraft weighing several tonnes and carrying its own power source.

Look, we can all build paper airplanes, but to go from a paper airplane to Concorde is an entirely different matter - and thats what you are suggesting by saying 'look, Ive done it on my desk!'. Moller can't even get his 'sky car' off the deck in a safe and reasonable manner using decades old fan technologies - and hes been working at the same problem for 30 years now!

No doubt someone is working on it, but its nowhere near ready for the prime time. Its like fusion - always 20 years away. I don't forsee anything wierd and wonderful under the US governments hat, and I havent for a while - you can quote me on this, because I can tell you now that for the next 50 years you won't see anything other than evolutionary coming out of the black projects shadow. No new power sources, no magical levitation devices, nothing of that ilk. More exotic fuels, sure, better engines, certainly, better heat resistent materials, definitely. Antigravity? Nope. Invisibility? Highly doubtful. Aliens? Not a chance.

*sigh* perhaps its just me, perhaps Ive outgrown this website - I disagree more and more with the 'out there' technologies being passed off as viable fact. More and more I come here, wanting serious discussion, and more and more I just find myself reading posts and laughing. Mach 14 SR-71? Hah! 747 to orbit? That was a good one. Mach 6 F-22? Its good, but its not that good. There was someone here the other day insisting that a technology was viable because the US Patent Office had issued someone a patent on it - the technology was essentially a perpetual motion machine. I had a good laugh on that.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   
I wish it had that top speed because it never would have had to retire.

In my opinion the SR-71 is the most beautiful airplane ever built in human history.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Localjoe3
 


I have worked on any number of B-1s with the maintenance crews. There are no odd pads or any kind of exotic propulsion systems on them anywhere. They use the same old afterburning engines that every other high speed aircraft uses.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Your right i mis spoke but i was right about the b2 . This tech is not so far out of reach to be a primary propulsion system for these delta wing planes. I found an old thread here from 2003 discussing this stuff and it got ruined buy wakco's talking about element 115 . The Ehd/Mhd propulsion systems are still viable and have been around since the the sixties.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by RichardPrice
 


I understand what u mean richard and it maybe worth a couple of core people with a topic in mind creating a research group to provide that out let. I came close to getting one created during the whole tracking down the F-23 thread. I still would enjoy the aviation section on here its just getting watered down with anon posts and off track tech talk at times. All threads have there issues ie the 911 forums which our issue is tame compared to but I just wanted to say I feel your pain. Send me a U2U if your interested



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   
This is a good thread to earn points

Holy Moly! sr-71 top speed is Mach forty not fourteen.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I know we've been using ferro fluids in MHD drives for submarines for a while now. So ferro fluids are probably farther along in applications technology wise than we are aware of.

The SR-71 I think according to Ben Riches book had a top speed around Mach 3.7. I wouldn't be surprised though if one reached mach 4.2 once. Although I'm not holding my breath on it.

THe book is very interesting. It talks about how the nose cone of the aircraft was once seen melting and running up the windscreen by pilots once while at high speed around mach 3.2, and that they had to use these special irons to smooth out the wrinkles to the skin of the plane after it landed because it ran so hot due to friction.

I've also heard that the plane got so hot that they used a sorta crane like thing to get the pilots out once the plane landed so that they wouldn't have to touch the hull.

I also, think that EHD's is used on aircraft like the B-2 but that it's mainly a way to reduce drag giving the aircraft a great loiter or range. Might slightly effect gravity's effect on the craft (ionized exhaust TT Brown's theorys etc...) and give it a slight push so that they can throttle down once the effect gets going and save fuel.

believe we can visually cloak aircraft. and maybe with plasma fields cloak other electronic signals too. radar etc...



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Although if the engiens/ramjets on the sr-71 are hooked up to generators and are used like one of tt browns flame get electrical generators one could ionize the exhaust of the plane while at the same time sending a massive electrical charge to a leading electrode or diode on the front of the aircraft creating a plasma sheath that will reflect or divert much of the airflow and the supersonic shock front of the craft. reducing friction from air and reducing the work the engines would need to do to make the craft accelerate allowing the plane to go much much faster than they claim, while avoiding much (not all) but much of the problems with heat. the long length of the fuselage could be to increase the distance between the exchaust charge and the charged leading edge or nose of the plane making the circuit have a much higher voltage potential differential.

I still doubt mach 14 but maybe much faster than mach 3.2.

THe engines could have been spaced so far out to allow some air to enter them instead of keeping them totally shrouded in the plasma sheaths weakened air flow.

I don't know this stuff would border on electrogravetics so it's still something people should be skeptical about but maybe a possibility. If electrogravetic is real and if it really works like they say it does.



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I wanna reply to OP, cause I didn't read all posts.

Only thing I can say is BULL#


M3.2 is really fast especially if you consider SR-71 (A-12 actually) first flew less than 15 years after first supersonic flight. Anyway blueprints of DR-71 engines are available for public use now (you can see them here ). You can clearly see that those are turbo-ramjet engines, which work as ramjets at high speeds. NO ramjet is able to accelerate airplane to M 14. The highest ramjet speed is M 5-6, eventually 7.

Greets



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
anyone who has an interest in the blackbird since the 1980s like i have knows that the official cruising speed is mach 3.2...however since the blackbird
has cruised in and out of russian airspace for some thirty years without ever being caught by a missile i think 3.2 is a pretty modest number......the air speed gauge in the instrument cluster reads well past mach 5......might be a clue



posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 08:46 PM
link   
that is an interesting point. the speed gauge goes to mach 5. The speed gauge was probably made for the plane. dont think they made too many other speedometers back then that went up to mach 5.

most likely the plane can go low mach 4



posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
.however since the blackbird
has cruised in and out of russian airspace for some thirty years without ever being caught by a missile


The SR-71 never overflew the USSR.


.....the air speed gauge in the instrument cluster reads well past mach 5......might be a clue


Most large civil aircraft have air speed indicators that go above Mach 1. Guess what.....



posted on Nov, 14 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GrndLkNatv
 

Just wondering if the SR-71 could achieve Mach. 14 in a Power Slam into the ground. How high would it have to fly to do that?



posted on Nov, 14 2008 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by benevolent tyrant
I know that fighter pilots, wearing g-suits, train extensively to handle the g forces. The pull of 4 or 5 g's can present a "very difficult environment' in which to function. What sort of training could possibly be offered to pilots to learn to cope with 14 g's? Do we really train our pilots to fly while unconscious?


I doubt the 14 speed. However I don't think Mach #'s translate into G's; that is, a craft going Mach 2 doesn't necessarily pull 2 G's. Not my area of expertise though.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 09:19 PM
link   
The aircraft most certainly did overfly the USSR on many occations. You can see a little about this aircraft here, although not technical in nature, it is still an awesome show.

www.greatdanepromilitary.com:80...

As far as the arguments go on this site, I won't even answer this stupid stuff. Go see Star Trek the answer is in there somewhere.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 09:19 PM
link   
The aircraft most certainly did overfly the USSR on many occations. You can see a little about this aircraft here, although not technical in nature, it is still an awesome show.

www.greatdanepromilitary.com:80...

As far as the arguments go on this site, I won't even answer this stupid stuff. Go see Star Trek the answer is in there somewhere.



posted on Dec, 12 2008 @ 09:45 PM
link   
The SR-71A max is about 2400mph, but its too hot at that point.


Mach 14 ?? Not a chance,

Heck the SR-91A cant go that fast...yet.



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 01:43 AM
link   
No one inside of a gravity field could survive moving at 14 Mach. Getting shot out of a plane with the emergency seat already causes a pressure of up to 70g which is enough to break most pilot's bones who do that. So aslong as a plane has no antigravitation field or something like that. Already while accelerating the pilots and the entire plane would be crushed to the size of a pizza ( and i know this is an unrealistic example but it shows what i mean). They would have to get the crew out of the plane looking like mud (litteraly)



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SwordDancer
No one inside of a gravity field could survive moving at 14 Mach. Getting shot out of a plane with the emergency seat already causes a pressure of up to 70g which is enough to break most pilot's bones who do that. So aslong as a plane has no antigravitation field or something like that. Already while accelerating the pilots and the entire plane would be crushed to the size of a pizza ( and i know this is an unrealistic example but it shows what i mean). They would have to get the crew out of the plane looking like mud (litteraly)


How about you take some basic physics lessons sometime? You can be at 1G while moving at Mach 14 - g-force and speed do not go hand in hand, g-force is a component of acceleration and not speed.

If you accelerated from standing still to Mach 14 in a short period of time, *then* the crew would be exposed to high g's, but not from simply travelling at Mach 14.

Basic physics guys, basic physics.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join