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.

 

About the Aurora....

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   
I have a few questions about the Aurora:
1)USAF denies it's existence, but what about other organizations, such as NASA?
2)Could the Aurora be the X-33?
3)Or an enlarged verion of the Boing X-43
4)Why reconnaissance? What about an Intercepter?
5)Why an aircraft? What about an space prototype, as mentioned above?



GSA

posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Im new here, but I still know how to use the search function!!

See on the bar at the top of the page? theres a search button, which will lead you to a search enginge for the site. Type in aurora and just see how many threads there are!!

Hundreds!!!



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   
What is your point?
I have seen a lot of Aurora threads.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Firehawk
What is your point?
I have seen a lot of Aurora threads.


His point might be that instead of making people type the responses to your questions all over again, you could use the search function and just read the original ones.


GSA

posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 06:39 PM
link   
sorry that is my point in a very nice way : )

Have a look through alot of threads, see what there is to say about it, and if there is no answers to your questions then make a new thread, but till then have a read and take a few notes. its a big topic which has been around for over a decade now - youll be suprised about what you will find. HOWEVER there still is not a single photo in existence of the aurora / mach 6 - 14 recon bird.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   
First, one design for Aurora is believed to be similar to the X-43. Several books written about it have showed illustrations very similar to the Hyper-X. I believe the the X-43 program is, in fact, directly related to Aurora, or to a larger, manned aircraft that has already been flying for some years now. The Hyper-X may just be for show and the real aircraft would be revealed as being 'developed' from the Hyper-X, instead of the other way around
As for the question about the role, going through aviation history, more effort and secrecy had beeg placed on strike and recon aircraft than interceptors because they offer first-strike capability, each in their own way. In fact, often both of those roles are combined in the same aircraft, like the TSR.2, SR-71 (orginally RS-71, meaning Recon-Strike, and an bomber version was proposed), F-105, and the Buccaneer. All these aircraft had great secrecy place around them because the air forces wanted, more than any other aircraft, the high possible chance of survival, like the F-117, hidden for 8 years, or the F-105, not revealed for 19 months after it first flew. As much as many armed forces like to flaunt their fighters and big bombers, the real threats are the strike and recon aircraft. That's why Aurora is so hidden for it's role.


[edit on 18-7-2006 by TSR2005]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 08:09 AM
link   
1)USAF denies all their black aircraft's existence. NASA could possibly own Auroras, as SR-71s are owned by both.
2)If it were the X-33, AW&ST would have had a hay day about it and we would definately know. But it could possibly be connected. And the X-33 was canceled recently.
3)Probably not. Probably. The Aurora is said to have closer resemblance to a isoscolese (sp?) triangle. That and there's been no link made by any major sources. It could possibly be related to the program, but I'm not sure.
4)'Cause we've always had Recon. and spy aircraft: U-2, I believe the F-117 was sometimes used as a recon., SR-71, then it just stopped because of sattelites. But planes are more efficiant for money and for imaging. It's more than likely they were using that for a cover story.
5)It may be. But at the time of the first Aurora sightings, I'm pretty sure we weren't into the idea of craft like Aurora's supposed look flying into space, but I'm not sure. And it's a good possibility that Aurora may be a TAV, and may be able to operate in both space and air, because it's build is close to what we've tried before, like X-33.

Does that give you some answers?
I'm no expert at space projects, so some of my info may be wrong there, as my stuff usualy comes from smaller sites.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 02:20 PM
link   
SR-71s are owned by NASA but havnt been flown in a long time. I think they were used for researchnot for their original design. Ive also NEVER heard of a bomber version of the A-12 (the predecessor to the SR-71) being developed. The A-12 was recon, which eventually grew into the SR-71 which was also recon only. There was also a flying prototype for a YF-12 which was an interceptor.

I cannot see the Hyper-X (X-43) being developed as a precursor to Aurora just for the sake of a coverup. The USAF has never shown such prudent modesty before, the F-117a and B-2 were completely different to anything ever seen before but they didnt bother making some fake intermediate as a cover-up.

I do agree tho, mods, do we really need another Aurora thread?



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 02:34 PM
link   
***SIGH***

Maybe we need an entry test here...

Must be able to read and know where the buttons are and how to use them before getting posting priviledge



The Bright Star is a private venture of Lockheed Martin Skunk Works. It is a Mach 2+ supersonic cruise/sonic boom research aircraft, which was used by the Skunk Works to raise DARPA's interest in QSP (Quiet Supersonic Platform) research. Although it is not a DOD project, the USAF provides some support (at least by providing a secret flight test location ;-)). The Bright Star has been flying for many years, and was the cause of some of the unexplained sonic booms over the western USA. The Bright Star is the most plausible cause for many so-called "Aurora" sightings.


No you can't have the link... use the search button...



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
SR-71s are owned by NASA but havnt been flown in a long time. I think they were used for researchnot for their original design. Ive also NEVER heard of a bomber version of the A-12 (the predecessor to the SR-71) being developed. The A-12 was recon, which eventually grew into the SR-71 which was also recon only. There was also a flying prototype for a YF-12 which was an interceptor.


There were many B-12/ RB-12 bomber Studies and one reached a Full Forward Fuselage mock up stage. Nothing came of this proposal as it was seen as a threat to the XB-70.

I Do not think there has been an "Aurora" aircraft at the Area. There's little doubt but what there is a secret platform whizzing around that someone stuck with the name of Aurora. During the development of the B-2 bomber, the program ran into severe over costs to the point the military feared Congress would cut funding. To get around this they started a black program called Aurora for which "black" funds were appropriated. The money was spent on the B-2 program.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join