The A-17 Experimental Stealth Attack Plane, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 21-6-2004 @ 12:27 PM by AboveTopSecret.com
A-17 EXPERIMENTAL
STEALTH ATTACK PLANE

A-17 Stealth X-Plane

Generally regarded as a fourth generation low-observable design, the A-17 is believed to have evolved from the YF-23 Advanced Tactical Fighter, and will replace the F-111 Fighter Bomber. The YF-23 lost out to Lockheed's F-22, but it's technology could easily be adapted for use on other projects.

Shaped with complex curves and compound curvature, the A-17 is contoured to minimise radar and aerothermal signatures as it carries out it's mission of electronic warfare and deep reconnaissance. The engine exhaust geometry is reminiscent of the B-2, where the aft section of the engine nacelle slopes down to meet the aft trailing edge of the tail. The engine exhaust is buried deep within the trough, effectively masking the infra-red signature from observation from below. The two large vertical tail surfaces, serve to mask the exhaust from the sides.

No positively-identifiable white world pictures exist of the plane, but sightings have been reported at RAF Boscombe Down in the UK, and Cannon AFB, New Mexico.

Two events help to identify the A-17's existence.

  • In September 1994, an unusual aircraft was seen over Amarillo, Texas meeting the description of the A-17. The plane was dumping fuel, preparing for an emergency landing. On a scanner, the pilot, using the callsign "Omega", was heard reporting a malfunction. At the time, two F-111s were acting as chase planes.
  • A man named Steve Douglass captured two unusual flying triangles on video. He believes they could be A-17s, but admits they could also be F-117s, Tornados, or F-14s.

Two flying triangles

Photo of flying triangles taken by Steve Douglass



reply posted on 27-6-2004 @ 07:35 AM by FredT
Could this be the long rumored TR3-A?



reply posted on 24-10-2004 @ 03:08 PM by Off_The_Street
Some thoughts on the “A-17 Stealth Attack Plane”

I do not understand most of the information on this thread at all.

The first post says: ” Generally regarded as a fourth generation low-observable design, the A-17 is believed to have evolved from the YF-23 Advanced Tactical Fighter, and will replace the F-111 Fighter Bomber. The YF-23 lost out to Lockheed's F-22, but it's technology could easily be adapted for use on other projects.”

Evolved how? |The body shape is completely different, as the apparent size and the role itself. Saying that an”attack plane is evolved from an air superiority fighter and will replace a fighter bomber and then will carry out its mission of EW and deep reconnaissance” is akin to saying that “the new Ferrari sports car is derived form a Peterbuilt 18-wheeler and is designed to replace the Bluebird school bus, which makes it a really great bass boat”.

Some of the rationale for such an aircraft simply don’t make any sense:

Above top secret.com says: “In September 1994, an unusual aircraft was seen over Amarillo, Texas meeting the description of the A-17. The plane was dumping fuel, preparing for an emergency landing. On a scanner, the pilot, using the callsign "Omega", was heard reporting a malfunction….”

Aircraft don’t use scanner frequencies; there are both UHF and VHF frequencies that are military use only. furthermore, if the aircraft or its testing were classified, they'd probably use a KG secure communications device anyway. Saying that the pilot was using scanner frequencies makes about as much sense as the pilot calling in his problems on a cell phone. That’s not the way it works.

” At the time, two F-111s were acting as chase planes.”

F-111’s don’t act as chase planes; they are too big and cumbersome to get in really close to provide in-flight visuals of the test aircraft -- and they cost too much to be used for such a role. If you look at all the test aircraft in flight, you’ll notices that their chase planes are usually either T-38s or F-16s: light, agile aircraft well-suited to such a task.

Here’s another:

” A man named Steve Douglass captured two unusual flying triangles on video. He believes they could be A-17s, but admits they could also be F-117s, Tornados, or F-14s.”

He’s right, it could be a lot of planes; in other words, it’s not positive identification at all.

West Point saus: ” the engines look like the ones on the YF-23.”

How can you tell? First, the F-23’s nacelles were very large, because they were configured to take two different engines, one GE and one P&W (depending on whether there would be thrust reversers involved -- this was later dropped from the requirement list). In any event, you can't see the engines on either of the two pictures, so you have no way of telling what kind of engine there is.

Tim says:

” That is because the A-17 was reportedly design using techonlogy from the YF-23. everything I've ever seen states that the A-17 is Northrop Grumman/USAF program.’

What information is this? Where do you get your information? As someone who has been in the aerospace and defense business for about thirty years, why haven’t I been able to find all this data? Where are your sources?

” The F-16 and F/A-18 are both great planes in their own right, but they still can't match the F-111's preformance.”

What performance are you talking about? The Aardvark is, to be perfectly honest (and no slur against my Australian colleagues) an obsolete aircraft. Its longer range and high sspeed are simply not that big of a deal, as another board member pointed out: one fourth of the bomb load, given gps-guided smart bombs, would do more damage than the Aardvark could do as a bomber, anyway.

sabre says: ” This new plane could be based on the F-117 and YF-23 designs but maybe cheaper and more manoverable.”

Look at it? What possible characteristics of that drawing suggest that it would based on either of those two aircraft (whose respective roles make them about as different from each other as any single-seat jets around)?

Finally, the military never repeats its names or numbers of aircrafts. Northrop, as many of you will recall, did make an A-17 which went into service. Here is a picture of it, around 1936:


Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



In Case Of Videos Of Flying People
  Posted 8 days ago with 9 member flags
Lockheed and Boeing may have seen my design
  Posted 18 days ago with 9 member flags
First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
  Posted 10 days ago with 4 member flags
Boeing X-37 and X-40 - the ultimate history
  Posted 3 days ago with 3 member flags
AWAX type aircraft..fuel waste
  Posted 19 days ago with 0 member flags
Its a bird, its a plane, no its a ....
  Posted 12 days ago with 0 member flags