SR-72 Confirmed: Mach 6 Project Blackswift , page 14
Pages: <<  11    12    13    14    15    16    17  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 87 times


reply posted on 6-10-2008 @ 07:16 AM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by intelgurl



Do you think the blackswift can leave the atmospher during this futur missions. It may be like Hypersoar studies?


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 12:05 PM by Badge01
reply to post by intelgurl



The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


I did a quick search on this thread for the term aileron roll and didn't see it. So forgive if this is a duplication.
From 3/11/08
www.theregister.co.uk...
Wired magazine reported last year that DARPA would also require that Blackswift do a barrel roll, in order to demonstrate that it is a "real airplane", and this has been confirmed. In the new document, DARPA says that Blackswift "shall demonstrate testbed maneuverability at Mach 6+ including execution of an aileron [barrel*] roll".


My thought was 'gee those are some pretty tall tail fins for a plane going Mach 6', but now I'm even more impressed. A porkbarrel roll?
There seems to be a simulation/vid. From this summer:




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 12:23 PM by Badge01
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Here the Falcon simulation. If there is a Blackswift this looks like a pretty good model

This is from last September so I hope this isn't a duplicate.

If it is U2U me and I'll edit it and put something better.

When the video plays be sure and scope out the row of other vids at the bottom. There are a couple good ones.



And here's that something 'better':

Again, a simulation, folks...
Part 1:



Part 2:





As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




[edit on 12/10/2008 by Badge01]


reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 08:10 AM by stratsys-sws
reply to post by Jezza



Hi Jezza,

I think that's exactly what Intelgurl is saying. The real project has gone black, therefore the white world project has been cancelled.

This ties in well with the new, visually obscured hangar at Groom!

Cheers

Robbie


reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 11:00 AM by Badge01
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


reply to
post by Zenagain



The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Can you post your chops/background or other areas where you have the expertise to make your claims, if you don't mind my asking.

Are you in law enforcement or the military - looking at your avatar?

Don't take this as a Mod asking you for information. I'm a Member first. And, don't take this comment as antagonistic. I think it's important that people challenge claims and ask for authority and sources.

If you read through IG's posts she's very nice about it and will gladly give reasons and discussions and citations. All you have to do is ask.

I take it you've read through a number of her posts?

Thanks for the relatively kind reply. It's a better way to do things.

I understand if you don't want to reply - just trying to keep the inquiry on point.

As to the topic, it's been reported on the DARPA site, it's been in Wired Magazine and it's all over youtube. IG was the first to post the information which as an easily available but somewhat obsure industry report or magazine.

I do find the whole concept of a stealthy, small and fast flyer which is Unmanned completely in line with the development cycle. It's gone from the Predators and long lingering types to a fast acting vehicle. The Predator can look down and shoot down. Here we have a version of the F-117a type or a B-2 type attack craft.

Have you worked in the industry? If so I'd consider your input important and valuable.

Have a great day!



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



reply posted on 13-10-2008 @ 08:26 PM by intelgurl
Yes, the Blackswift is now cancelled, if you know anything about the pattern of events that take place when a project goes from public to "black" then you can see that the Blackswift project followed the very same template.



The Path to "Black"

1. White world origins:
Gathering known technologies together, developing a platform design, applying those known technologies to the developed platform

2. Ridiculously difficult goals set:
* Goal A -
Take off under it's own power, attain a speed of Mach 6, do a barrel roll at speed.
Comment: Puleeeze! A barrel roll at Mach 6?!? Have they lost their mind? No, it is an intentionally ridiculous and unattainable goal.

* Goal B -
Develop a hybrid ramjet/scramjet.
Comment: The technology for this is no where close to being at a viable Technical Readiness Level, however - the turbo-ramjet is a 40+ year old design that with current technology can attain the speeds required for this project.

3. Surreptitious split:
Sometime between March and May 2008 I believe there was a split in the Blackswift program.
Comment: It was at that time that the requirements for the Blackswift were intentionally changed from a doable system (a turbojet/ramjet hybrid with a Mach 6 goal) to a ridiculously difficult system (a ramjet/scramjet hybrid). It was also at that time that bidding was opened adding confusion to an industry that knew Blackswift was a Lockheed project through and through. Boeing pretended to jump in but no bidding actually took place.

4. Money/Funding Troubles:
Then came the funding troubles. Congress and DARPA basically lost interest in Blackswift because what? The technology goal of a ramjet/scramjet hybrid was unattainable by today's technology AND the stated goal of doing a barrel roll at Mach 6 was finally seen as being just plain stupid.


4. Cancellation:
In not so quite as blunt of terms, the total stupidity of the Blackswift's goals was the reason for it's final demise. However, one only has to go back to the time between March and May 2008 to see the smoke and mirrors switcheroo.



Is Blackswift Really Dead?

I am here to stake my reputation on the very real possibility that Blackswift is alive and well and being developed in a new oversized hangar sitting on DOE & USAF property about 30 miles north-northwest of Indian Springs/Creech AFB.

Prediction:
By autumn 2009 to winter 2010 you can expect another round of bizarre "skyquakes" tearing through the skies between Nevada and the California coast. You can expect that flight line to cross Vandenberg airspace, this way the sonic boom can be blamed on various rocket projects.

Infact, this is one of those "I told you so" moments.

I told you after the assumed split of programs in spring of 2008 that the above-board, white world version of Blackswift was doomed.

As stated in this link to a previous post a couple of pages back I told you guys how this works and when it happened.
the decoy gets cancelled, the real one goes deep black...

Let's review the differences stated for the original Blackswift that went black and the secondary version with unattainable goals which was cancelled:

"White" or Official version
Powerplant: pulse/scramjet hybrid (unproven, intentionally a ridiculous endeavor)
Airframe: HTV-3 research platform
Development location: Skunkworks, Langley & WPAFB
1st flight: 2012 or maybe never...
Speed: M8 +

"Black" version, now an SAP
Power plant: turbo/ramjet hybrid (a la - the SR-71's P&W J-58, been there, done that)
Airframe: HTV-3X Reconnaissance & Strike platform
Development location: Groom Lake, WPAFB
1st flight 2009-10
Speed: M6



What's Attainable and What's Not?

The original concept for the HTV-3 Blackswift was a turbojet/ramjet combined cycle engine along the lines of the SR-71's now famous J-58's. It was hypothesized, proposed and then accepted that with today’s technology such an engine could indeed power a fighter-sized vehicle to Mach 6.

It is in fact considered across the globe in countries having advanced aerospace projects, that combined cycle turbo/Ramjets (as in the SR-71's J-58 turbine/ramjet combined cycle engines) are the key to hypersonic, air breathing flight in the near term.

Scramjet technology is still not ready to play ball with the big boys, however turbo ramjet hybrid technology as seen in the 40+-year-old design of the SR-71 is quite viable and in it's modern iteration is able to push upwards in excess of Mach 5.

Who is pursuing hypersonic aircraft using turbo-ramjet hybrid technology?
Try Russia, France, Germany, Australia and the UK for starters.

Source: Rejigged Ramjet Program Envisions Start of Test Flights in 2012: Aviation Week & Space Technology, 10/13/2008 , page 40

So where is the US where hypersonics is concerned? It depends on who you're listening to. If you listen to the government mouthpieces then hypersonics is some dreamy goal that requires technologies we are just discovering or just not yet mature enough for such a vehicle.

We all know that's a load of crap though, we here at ATS keep up with this stuff and as a full bird colonel told me one time, "don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining..." In other words, we will not be deluded.



Let's review:
* Hybrid turbojet/ramjet technology is available today to power a vehicle from zero to Mach 6.

* There is a need, a requirement if you will from the last Quadrennial USAF Review that stated a hypersonic reconnaissance / strike vehicle was needed in order to meet the US's security goals for the 21st century.

* Blackswift catered to those requirements until it's goals were changed to a more ridiculous power plant and doing a barrel roll at Mach 6...



Conclusion:

Absolutely transparent to those who have seen this before -

Blackswift has gone black.

RIP Blackswift, we won't hear from you again unless a major conflict with Russia or China takes place. National assets like this just aren't paraded around for the whole world to gawk at and study, no - this bird has disappeared until such time as it is needed.






[edit on 10-14-2008 by intelgurl]


reply posted on 14-10-2008 @ 01:21 AM by intelgurl
Originally posted by Zenagain
Is there a new spy plane to usher in the new era? Doubtful.

Blackswift will not be a reconnaissance platform primarily, but rather part of the multi-tiered LRS (Long Range Strike) program. Make no mistake, Blackswift is a bomber, a "we can be there in 2 hours" strike vehicle, the secondary function of the Blackswift is to do post strike battle damage assessment, provided a distant second pass is feasible.

This ability adheres to the current tightening of the kill-chain philosophy, (aka the F2T2EA cycle) which mandates the ability to find, strike, assess and strike again if necessary. A more robust recon package would be available by plugging in different modules and replacing the bomb carriage and doors with a custom abbreviated system from the Global Hawk (not as good as the U-2's package).


Satellites now do that work infinitely better than any jet could. What use the new jet? In this time when our economy is collapsing around our necks, do YOU feel the need? Nuh uh. Anyway. Carry on...... Aurora and all that......

Sats Alone are not a Silver Bullet:
Satellites arguably provide better imagery than a global Hawk's sensor package, but the problem is timing.

Most spy sat orbit times are well known to the major global players. A spy sat pass does little good if the party of interest knows when that pass happens. Sure, with the variety of bandwidths available certain things can be discerned, but if they are moving or covering or otherwise obscuring the sat's view then that billion + dollar bird is doing you no good. An aircraft suddenly showing up at 100k ft traveling at Mach 6 on the other hand could provide accurate data as well as surprise the bejesus out of people on the ground.

As an addendum to this last paragraph it is important to state that there will soon be a 24/7 geostationary presense over the Middle East, but there are not such capabilities all over the globe.

I hope this helps...
Pages: <<  11    12    13    14    15    16    17  >>    ^^TOP^^



In Case Of Videos Of Flying People
  Posted 11 days ago with 9 member flags
First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags
F22 mishap or more that meeets the eye?
  Posted 2 days ago with 4 member flags
Boeing X-37 and X-40 - the ultimate history
  Posted 7 days ago with 3 member flags
Its a bird, its a plane, no its a ....
  Posted 15 days ago with 0 member flags