It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A hypersonic puzzle.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:24 AM
The first time I saw a white F-117A was in April 2000 while driving from Edwards AFB to Palmdale in the late afternoon. Silhouetted against the sky it looked black but as it turned and caught the sun's rays, it gleamed. At first I thought it might have been something like the SENIOR SPUD anti-IR coating project.

I followed the airplane to AF Plant 42 and arrived near the approach end of the runway in time to watch it land. As I recall, it was overall gloss white. I didn't notice any markings but I'm sure the tail number was there at the very least.

More white F-117As started showing up at Palmdale and a local photographer got some great pictures. The airplanes usually had some black parts (canopies, edges, etc. - no two exactly alike). I got some information about the coating refurbishment operations from some of my Skunk Works contacts. Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine published an article about it. There is some information here:

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:31 AM
Thanks for that Shadowhawk.

I got emailed the same thing but from another angle. Interesting that they were working on applications to make painting on the stealth coating easier - I couldn't believe it that they used to hand apply it!

Amazing aircraft it really is - shame its retired.

Wonder if theres a replacement ?

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:48 AM
reply to post by Dan Tanna

Many would argue the F-35 and F-22 are more than capable of filling the role of the F-117. Both are far more stealthy than it.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:53 AM
I agree CObzz to a point, but just why now when neither are in servcie nor will they be for a while yet ?

I guess theres little need for a stealthy 'go down town on day 1' craft at the minute bar the B-2 and a few drones they have.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:00 AM

Originally posted by Dan Tanna
Wonder if theres a replacement ?

Cobbs is quite right. The F-22 is stealthier, faster and far superior in sensory abilities and weapons delivery than the now retired F-117 Nighthawk.
The F-117 served well but it's old school now.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by intelgurl]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:02 AM

Originally posted by Dan Tanna
I agree CObzz to a point, but just why now when neither are in servcie nor will they be for a while yet ?

F-22 IS in service.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:36 AM

Originally posted by firepilot
Shadowhawk is THE expert on black projects on here. He knows more than anyone else, knows a lot of people, and I think he probably actually knows more than he can divulge sometimes, since doing so could violate someones trust or get someone in trouble.

I thought Intelgurl was knowledgeable about black projects too. She been working at Creech and Tonopah since spring 2005. One would thnk she have a good understanding of things like that.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:38 AM
8th of August 2007....

Well i'll be a monkies uncle !

F-22 in servcie in the far east. Nice !

oh man, I want to be young again so i can dream of being a F-22 pilot.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 06:43 AM

Originally posted by nanobyte
I thought Intelgurl was knowledgeable about ...

Don't even go there Nanobyte,
Shadowhawk offers up reliable, well sourced information, and is an asset to the ATS community as a whole.


posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 07:04 AM
I appreciate all and every input even if i don't agree with it - ill still; bear it in mind.

[Unless of course its invisible reptilian aliens only visible in highly photoshopped images!]

I thank Shadowhawk for his contributions - even though i truely do believe in an operational hypersonic platform - against good solid reliable advice i must say. But thats my want - however wrong I may be (guess its wishful thinking!)

However, as said before, all and every contribution is welcomed and especially from those who have great in depth knowledge that i do not posses.

I publicly thank ALL and EVERY poster here for their time and efforts to educate me and point me in directions that may be of assistance.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 07:52 PM
Of course Intelgurl knows a lot, she even works in the industry. However, at the same time because of that, she has to also be rather careful about discussing anything that could even have any kind of relationship to programs she is involved in, even if it was something tangentially related and she was just speculating.

Shadowhawk has been personally researching black projects and our favorite base for a long time, and knows lots of people who have actually been there, and I have never seen any errors in his information.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 09:38 PM
reply to post by Shadowhawk

Reply also to 'Firepilot'......

Can you confirm any of his information with documents or personal interviews?I thought not,I don't care if he was on CNN,guess what so was Bush,and he is a liar!

Back to topic:I'm sure that is the information you got Shadow,but all I am telling you is your source is lying to you,or is being lied to himself!

I don't really care what you all think,I am just trying to help you all out by telling you the real facts.I have seen these craft that Shadows source says doesn't exist.I have talked with a person who had the highest clearance available(something Shadows source probably doesn't even know exists!)If you think that what Shadow tells you is the absolute truth than I truly feel sorry for you cause you are IGNORANT.I mean that in no derogatory way either!

Stop and think for a minute..........all Shadow has told you is what you already know and can find on the net!Do you really think that that is as deep as it goes??Do you really think if what he said was true and the US's deepest secret he would be alive to tell you? Or wouldn't at least some other person collaborate his story(as there is always more than one person who knows that isn't supposed to!)Do you really think that after nearly fifty(50) years of jet flight that we STILL CANT GET PAST HYPERSONIC,BUT YET GO INTO SPACE????

Just think for a minute........someone is not telling the truth here and it is not me!

[edit on 6/9/2008 by jkrog08]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 09:54 PM
Also I want to point out since I have seen that apparently some members on here work for the DoD,or have sources(supposedly)within Area 51 that you might be telling the information you know,but if you are really with the Dod or know about black projects than you know about 'compartmentalization'(sp?).What I'm saying is even you must admit it is possible that you are not being told the truth(since obviously you are not 'high up' and elite within the field)or all of the truth.If you really think you are being told everything then once again YOU ARE IGNORANTAs I stated before and in my thread you can see in my signature(take a guess which one,)I have seen these craft your sources or employers say don't exist!

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 11:50 PM
Shadowhawk has a proven track record of aviation knowledge, especially in regards to our favorite base and black programs. Yes, that is documented.

For you to come on here, as some newcomer and impugn the accuracy and integrity of him and his postings, imply he is a liar, and act like you know more than he does, thats just ridiculous.

Sorry you do not, and you would be well advised to actually learn about things, rather than mouth off like you know it all and and how everyone else that disagrees does not.

And I would say with the patience he shows others, and his willingness to research and share so much information, he is probably a lot better person too.

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 12:26 AM
Stop, please.

If we just leave me to my ramblings and mumblings and just leave off my thread. Please.

I am trying to get my head around some thing thats interesting to me and all this is not helping me at all.

Please, just let me be and i'll make mistakes and messes under my own steam ok ?

People, please, just let me be ok ? i'd really appreciate that.

Oh and I think I have an area that i totally over looked, and couldn't see through the woods from the trees because of a lack of focus.

#Am writing a next post, BRB.#

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 12:39 AM

On the coffee table in his cavernous office in the Pentagon's E Ring, Air Force chief scientist Mark J. Lewis has a model of such a machine, a 14-ft.-long missile called the X-51 WaveRider. With an angled nose, flaps in the middle and an inlet on the underbelly, the device looks like a cross between a spaceship and a futuristic cruise missile. It's designed to go nearly seven times faster than a Tomahawk — a flight from the Arabian Sea to eastern Afghanistan would take 20 minutes — and destroy targets with its own kinetic energy. Test flights are scheduled for 2008.
On the coffee table in his cavernous office in the Pentagon's E Ring, Air Force chief scientist Mark J. Lewis has a model of such a machine, a 14-ft.-long missile called the X-51 WaveRider. With an angled nose, flaps in the middle and an inlet on the underbelly, the device looks like a cross between a spaceship and a futuristic cruise missile. It's designed to go nearly seven times faster than a Tomahawk — a flight from the Arabian Sea to eastern Afghanistan would take 20 minutes — and destroy targets with its own kinetic energy. Test flights are scheduled for 2008.

The pressure, drag and high temperatures associated with hypersonic speeds (typically, greater than Mach 5, or 3600 mph) used to be considered too extreme for an aircraft to handle in a controlled way. Only ballistic missiles and spacecraft burning rocket fuel, shooting into space and roaring back to Earth, could go that fast.

What the X-51 does is to turn some of the most brutal effects of hypersonic flight to its advantage. Take shock waves, for example. Bursting through the air at a hypersonic rate produces a train of waves, one after the other, which can drag down an aircraft. But the X-51 is a "wave rider," with a sharp nose shaped to make the waves break at precisely the right angle. All of the pressure is directed beneath the missile, lifting it up. The shock waves also compress the air to help fuel the X-51's combustion process.

The craft is the same size and shape as a Joint Air-to- Surface Standoff Missile, so it can be attached to a B-52 or fighter jet. It runs on standard JP-7 jet fuel, not on rocket fuel, so it fits in neatly with the military's existing logistical chain. The X-51 is made from a fairly standard nickel alloy, not from exotic materials. And the advanced engine technology is very real. In 2004, NASA broke speed records while testing its X-43A, a precursor to the X-51 (see "Breakthrough Awards 2005," Nov. 2005). In a final test flight, the 12-ft.-long aircraft hit 7000 mph — nearly Mach 10. In other words, the X-51 is not just some lab experiment; it's being designed from the start to deploy. "I've got tremendous confidence in it working," the Air Force's Mark J. Lewis says.

That doesn't mean the X-51 will be in competition with a conventional Trident. It will have a range of only 600 nautical miles. And it first needs to be lifted into the air by a plane, then accelerated by a rocket-fueled booster before its hypersonic engine kicks in. But if the 2008 test flight is a success, the X-51 will be the first weapon other than a ballistic missile to fly at hypersonic speeds.

It all makes sense now. This isn't dead, not even close. This is a highly specialised weapons research area.

X-51 global strike

QinetiQ, Boeing phantom Works, DARPA, University of Queensland Austrailia..

HyShot I was launched on 30 October 2001
HyShot II was launched on 30 July 2002
HyShot III was launched on 25 March 2006
HyShot IV was launched on 30 March 2006
HyCAUSE was launched on 15 June 2007

University of Queensland

Look at who was pumping in the money and who got involved in HyCAUSE..

Sponsorship for the HyShot Flight Program has been obtained from, The University of Queensland, Astrotech Space Operations, Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA, UK), National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA, USA), Defence, Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO, Australia), Dept. of Defence (Australia), Dept. of Industry Science and Resources (Australia), The German Aerospace Centre (DLR, Germany), Seoul, National University (Korea), The Australian Research Council, Australian Space Research Institute (ASRI), Alesi Technologies (Australia), National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL, Japan), NQEA (Australia), Australian Research and Development Unit (ARDU, Australia), the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR, USA) and Luxfer, Australia.

And to add this from QinetiQ themselves.

A GBP1m million QinetiQ scramjet experiment was successfully launched on March 25, 2006, at Woomera, 500km north of Adelaide, South Australia at approximately 1.45pm local time (03:15 GMT). A University of Queensland-led project, named HyShot 3, successfully launched QinetiQ's scramjet engine which was attached to a Terrier-Orion rocket.

and this....

The HyShot 3 experiment is designed to determine whether the efficient air inlet will enable the combustion chambers to auto-ignite. Managed under the umbrella of the Hyshot international programme led by the University of Queensland (UQ), the QinetiQ project aims to provide low cost in-flight experiments, enabling the validation of ground test facilities and thus furthering scramjet technology.

The UK MoD funded QinetiQ scramjet engine has been put through an extensive ground test programme in Brisbane at UQ as well as Farnborough, QinetiQ's headquarters.

Space travel

Proof Boeing are involved comes from this article.

Under a recently-signed agreement enabled by a Queensland Government award, Boeing will work with the DSTO and The University of Queensland on three critical flight tests and will contribute to the design of a free-flying WaveRider-type hypersonic vehicle that will be used in two of those flight tests.

Aviation news

Wave Rider shapes.

[edit on 10-6-2008 by Dan Tanna]

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:23 AM
Wave Rider shapes.

Many U.S. and Australian test facilities, contractors and universities will also be involved in preparing and carrying out the flights. They include:

*The USAF Arnold Engineering Development Center wind tunnels and its "Free Jet" test facility" at Tullahoma, Tenn.

*The NASA Langley Research Center high-temperature tunnel at Hampton, Va.

*CUBRC company test facilities in Buffalo, N.Y., including its "LENS" hypersonic test facilities, the world's most advanced tunnels for high-Reynolds-number testing in hypervelocity flows.

*United Technologies Research Center facilities in Hartford, Conn.

*AFRL "Cell 22" scramjet propulsion research facility at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.

*Boeing Phantom Works.

*The universities of Queensland and New South Wales in Australia.

Aviation week

Cell 22 ? that sounds very interesting.

So does this next part.

NASA hypersonics expert Dr Isaiah Blankson believes that MHD energy-conversion in the intakes can take 30-40% of the energy, letting a turbine engine run at up to Mach 7. Past the MHD the air would slow from Mach 7 to Mach 3. This was the speed of the air going into engines of the Blackbird spyplanes. The Blackbird's conventional J-58 turbojets could keep burning up to Mach 3+ because of their special intakes, which slowed the intake air down for them using a retracting central spike. This would permit the reusable first stage of a future NASA two stage to orbit launcher to take off from a runway and get its piggyback orbiter well up into scramjet-type flight regimes, all using just one set of engines.

One set of engines to take it to mach 7.

And this bit really shocks me.

Reportedly, Blankson says extracting 30 to 40 per cent of the inflow energy would cut its speed by 50 to 75 per cent. That sounds counterintuitive, as kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity, but presumably a man with his background knows what he's on about. Potentially, a Mach 7 flow would slow to Mach 3 downstream of the MHD, and then a Blackbird type setup could handle it.

Next Big Future



They are in an official NASA Pdf.

I don't know what to say actually. It goes way past anything I ever had in my imagination / thoughts at the start of this thread. I may of got some stuff wrong, but Wave Riders and hypersonics was the right tree to bark up.

I just have to find out how long this has been going on since.

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:50 AM

As a military aircraft, a HyperSoar bomber the size of an F-22 could take off from the U.S. and deliver its payload from an altitude and at a speed that would defy all current defensive measures. It could then return directly to the continental U.S. without refueling and without the need to land at forward bases on foreign soil.

HyperSoar. I knew I was missing some thing.



Science notes 1999

HyperSoar would not only be the fastest airplane ever, but would also be more efficient than anything flying, Carter claims. “It is truly efficient to go very fast," Carter says, although that may seem counterintuitive. The supersonic Concorde’s fuel use per weight transported is extremely inefficient, because its body consists mostly of wings. Believe it or not, HyperSoar would not have wings, but would instead be shaped like a wing. The spearhead shape, a so-called “waverider” design, is excellent for gliding even at low speeds of 120 mph during landing.

Amazing. At the start of this thread I said that this was a multi company multi angled multi establishment effort.

I may of barked at the wrong branch but I am barking up the right tree.

[edit on 10-6-2008 by Dan Tanna]

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:12 AM
THat's one unstable aircraft!


posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:15 AM
No you see the low speed and high speed aerodynamics may have been done already in the LoFLYTE tech demonstrater and HyTECH was the high speed body...

Stable down to speeds of 120 MPH as it states in one of the articles I have linked.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in