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.

 

Blackswift Budget Cut by 40%

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Interesting article i thought id share w/ the community..Enjoy!!!
blog.wired.com...

Good Day
Skept!cal




posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 03:38 PM
link   
I'm tellin' ya...
You are watching a project go black, that's all I have to say about it.



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Hello, Intelgurl
You think Blackswift is going to black? This is a new design on the picture.
Do you think they can cancel the program?



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
i think the man reason for this budget cut from my understanding is the fact that the Air Force is coming up w/ a new plane that flys hypersonic w/ the use of rockets and i think its much less expensive than the Blackswift...But to just cut off a project such as Blackswift would be absolutely crazy from the standpoint of the technology its using...Scramjet technology is exciting stuff that needs to be looked at more and not cutting the budgets for it...But for all we know they have Aurora and they dont care about this project too much..who knows


Good Day
Skept!cal



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I think its a terrible mistake to cut the Blackswift program, hypersonic is the futur of the aeronautic. Subsonic bomber, is not the futur.



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by skept!cal
i think the man reason for this budget cut from my understanding is the fact that the Air Force is coming up w/ a new plane that flys hypersonic w/ the use of rockets and i think its much less expensive than the Blackswift...But to just cut off a project such as Blackswift would be absolutely crazy from the standpoint of the technology its using...


The project you are referring to is the X-51, it is a rocket assisted aircraft. Not as viable as or as quickly reuseable as a turbine/ramjet hybrid.
Initially the Blackswift HTV-3 spun off from the hypersonic FALCON project with the idea of marrying the propulsion system of the RATTLRS project with the airframe of the of the FALCON HTV-3.

The RATTLRS propulsion method is a hybrid or combined cycle turbo/ramjet. What other superfast aircraft do we know of that utilizes this type of engine?
The SR-71.


The SR-71's J-58 engines are early 1960's technology, there are now modern techniques to get far more speed out of a simple and comparatively inexpensive turbo/ramjet system. Estimates in excess of Mach 5.
To say that it is too expensive to build the Blackswift compared to the X-51 is a crock of crap.

Furthermore, this was Lockheed's project from the start, it was their concept, their airframe and their historic ability to build such an aircraft, so when the USAF announced that they were going to accept bidding from Lockheed, Boeing and Northrop to build the Blackswift, the handwriting was on the wall that this bird was going black.

Now funding is being cut, which is what generally happens when a project goes into an SAP (special access project aka "black").
Groom Lake where the SR-71 flew from initially now has a new large hangar with a large earth berm between it and the mountain where enthusiast like to peer down from. There is a new extended runway at Groom as well.

There are rumblings within the industry of a hypersonic aircraft being developed, prefunded and in the black.
Why prefunding? The present administration wants this aircraft developed even if the next administration and congress cut back on advanced developments - which they almost certainly will.

The Blackswift is real, it's going black and it will fly. We're probably looking at 3 -5 tech demos in secret operation by 2012.






[edit on 6-13-2008 by intelgurl]



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 08:56 PM
link   
i'm with intelgurl it wouldn't surprise me if it was going black and in a few years they say "o we finished it..." and it looks like the ever mysterious aurora



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by intelgurl
I'm tellin' ya...
You are watching a project go black, that's all I have to say about it.


After my hpersonic thread this is all I have to say....


DEEP DARK BLACK.



Note: As for the picture being different, do not be suprised if this thing is rolled out and is tailess.

Not two tails, not one like the new pic, but zero, nada, nothing.

[edit on 13-6-2008 by Dan Tanna]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:02 AM
link   


Wired magazine noted last night that the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee has recommended that almost half the first chunk of Blackswift's proposed $800m budget be cut, falling into agreement with like-minded sceptics in Congress. Building the Blackswift may be impossible anyway (at least, impossible in a near-future timeframe) and it would be doubly so on a shoestring budget. As one might expect, the plan is being promoted by DARPA, the Pentagon boffination bureau which doesn't even get out of bed until all the other mad scientists have got .aches and gone for a bit of a lie down. Reportedly it is Tony Tether - chief wingnut-prof at DARPA - who insists that Blackswift be able not only to fly at Mach 6, but perform a barrel roll while doing so.




I love the description of DARPA.

But really, I still say and agree with people that this is a project that will vanish from view and appear a few years down the line - 'taa daa ! look what we made...' type of moment.

The Register

Read it all and see the ignorance surrounding the project and the fact its being compared to the 'leaky SR-71'.

We should collectively kick his arse for such ignorance.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:37 AM
link   
On the new picture we can see HTV-3X but there is no name of Blackswift,
and next year HTV-2 must do a fly demo it is the same plane?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:24 AM
link   
DARPA Pdf

No there are second and third gen as far as i understand it. The darpa doc. has it all in.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by intelgurl
Now funding is being cut, which is what generally happens when a project goes into an SAP (special access project aka "black").


I think this programme is going back to black

Its my opinion that the interim programme between the SR-71 and this suffered major setbacks, and that one never came out of the black, and nor is it likely to.

I think the attempt to bring this one out into the white world has failed to garner the support it needed from the politicians, so now they're "dipping" it, slowly.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
I hope than Lockhed can develop this beautiful plane with black budget.
But why Blackswift come in withe world and after return in Black. This plane have a great interest, why politicians don't support it a lot? may be hypersonic plane can evolve in a space launcher it would be important with the end of the Shuttle.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:20 AM
link   
probably quicker and easier to do it in the black.
less interference.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:41 AM
link   
There is a big evolution of the HTV3-X in this new picture. It can be a new concept for Blackswift.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Blackswift going black?

Does that make it Blackerswift?


Going black probably does make a lot more sense, especially if they're getting into a critical phase of development.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:00 PM
link   
As a correction to my previous post, I'd like to say that the SR-71's were tested/flown out of Edwards.
It was the SR-71's predecessor the A-12 "Oxcart" program that flew out of Groom Lake.

I have ATSer AJSR71 to thank for pointing that out to me.
Thanks!


Natalie~



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Hello Dan Tanna,
You make a very good job on your Hypersonic thread, why do you say the new Blackswift is tailess?



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by intelgurl
 


Amazing insight Intergurl...sorry its been so long to post..dont have internet at home and only can post mon-fri at the job..shhhhhhh
...thanks again for the info very insightful stuff


Good Day
Skept!cal



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Dan Tanna
 


what makes you come to this conclusion? Just interested



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join