B-27 Switchblade

Actually that wasnt my comment! I was quoting the other guy I just didnt put the comment in quotations.

Comp,

ok

thanks for that

Cheers

BHR

Folks, You are not even talking about a real aircraft! The B-27 Switchblade swing-wing stealth bomber was aMOVIE PROP!!!! It was design and created for Hollywood's film industry.

Remember, the link to Northrop? It was a patent on an idea, but it is NOT classified. Do you really think they would publish the patent for something that is classified? the idea is real, but the plane is not! they don't publish patents for operational military aircraft for security reasons. That's why you've never seen the patent for the F-14, F-22, YF-23, F-35, B-52, B-1, or B-2! On a patent, you have to explain in detail how something works! For the benefit of everyone, please think though ALL of the facts about something before you go chasing a red harring! Now that everyone has had a chance to beat the dead horse with a stick, let's bury the old myth and MOVE ON! It's time to Close the thread!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance

Ghost,

Take a chill pill man.

LOL

Cheers

BHR

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
Ghost,

Take a chill pill man.

LOL

Cheers

BHR

Sorry! I meant to come across lighter then I did. Thanks for the message!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance

Originally posted by ghost
That's why you've never seen the patent for the F-14, F-22, YF-23, F-35, B-52, B-1, or B-2!

Check out Patent #s 314366, 6138957

Ghost, wrong aircraft, that's the F/A-37 Talon used in the film, not the AX-17 Switchblade.

Foward swept wings are highly plausible, as the X-29 and the Su-47a Bekrut has shown us.

Now for the Sr-71 to reach speeds of Mach 9 under the atmosphere, god would need to be on top of the aircraft powering it using fairies. Now, I don't know where any of you got the idea, but despite popular belief, those rockets on the sides, yea they can only push so much in the atmosphere, it isn't a scramjet folks, only about 72,000lbs of thrust each, the SR-71 turns out to be pretty heavy, we always have that weight to thrust ratio to account for right?

Anyways, yea operations speeds for the SR-71 are probably Mach 3.17 as has been stated before, but the airframe would never sustain Mach 6 or higher in the Atmosphere, perhaps above 150,000 FT, but I'm not a genius on the matter at hand.

What I know of the AX-17 Switchblade is that it was a design to be a fighter attack bomber, stealth, and foward swept. It would reach high speeds, but it isn't an intercepter, so probably like speeds of Mach 2.6 or Mach 2.2.

Keep in mind, that depending on the job of the aircraft, is where the speed will come into play, the F-14 is an Air Fleet Defense Fighter, commonly mistaken for an intercepter, but formally known by the pilots as an Air Fleet Defense fighter. It could probably reach speeds of mach 3, but what would the conditons have to be?

Did I hit everything? Is there anything else needing clearing up?

Don't mean to be offensive, but seriously folks, lets try using some logic, not what websites post, but what you all believe, if anyone has the slightest idea of physics, just sit down, and think for a minute, for an aircraft to go very fast, what would the conditions have to be? What would the factors include? Building an aircraft is nothing close to easy, it is very difficult and getting it to work properly and fly high and fast, is possibly one of the most difficult engineering jobs around, right up there with space shuttle design and structure design. It is hard folks, so it's not suprisingy that people may not completely understand the concepts, it is a hard topic, and to fully comprehend what's going on, you would need to be very smart, I'm not saying I comprehend it, because I know very little about physics, but I'm just trying to do some logical thinking here. Well sometimes it's better to sit and think, than to go on the internet, find potential sources, and just post like crazy, no?

Shattered OUT...

Actually there are all sorts of conceptual patents out there that are vague in the extreme that cover known mil spec devices of all types and known black projects.

Shattered,

Despite our disagreements on other issues I must agree with you on the SR-71.

It does what it says on the tin (for those not in the UK that is from an advert for varnish) which basically is Mach 3.2 or thereabouts.

It is not capable of double that never mind triple.

Cheers

BHR

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Ghost, wrong aircraft, that's the F/A-37 Talon used in the film, not the AX-17 Switchblade.

Anyways, yea operations speeds for the SR-71 are probably Mach 3.17 as has been stated before, but the airframe would never sustain Mach 6 or higher in the Atmosphere, perhaps above 150,000 FT, but I'm not a genius on the matter at hand.

What I know of the AX-17 Switchblade is that it was a design to be a fighter attack bomber, stealth, and foward swept. It would reach high speeds, but it isn't an intercepter, so probably like speeds of Mach 2.6 or Mach 2.2.

Shattered OUT...

Intresting! I have never heard that before. Thank you for teaching me something new! I've never heard of an F/A-37 before. Base on the pictures I've seen the similarity is truely striking.

One more thing I Just caught! Some sourses list the Swithblade as the AX-17, others list it as the AX-29. The main ATS lists the A-17/AX-17 as having conventionally swept wing:
A-17 on ATS

The AX-29 is supposed to have Forward sweeping wings:
AX-29

So, befors we get too wrapped up in this topic, Can you claraify which of these aircraft are we talking about? Right now I'm a bit confused.

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance

Mods,

How does one get a thread closed off?

Cheers

BHR

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
Mods,

How does one get a thread closed off?

Cheers

BHR

Alot of hate and stupidity.(Proven to be easily accomplished here on ATS).

Anyways, yea Ghost, we are talking about the AX-29, although I have never seen it referred to as the AX-29, I've seen it more commonly refered to the AX-17. I guess the AX-17 design must have been improved upon and redesignated as the AX-29.

O and yea that first aircraft is in my avatar, uhh, I think it's the F-119 Sentinel.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 8-4-2005 by ShatteredSkies]

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
Mods,

How does one get a thread closed off?

Cheers

BHR

Well, if it's your own thread all you have to do is ask, if it's someone elses it's probably not polite to ask.

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies

O and yea that first aircraft is in my avatar, uhh, I think it's the F-119 Sentinel.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 8-4-2005 by ShatteredSkies]

Could of sworn it was the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter....

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies

O and yea that first aircraft is in my avatar, uhh, I think it's the F-119 Sentinel.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 8-4-2005 by ShatteredSkies]

Could of sworn it was the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter....

No, the one that Ghost posted, not that was on my Avatar.

The second aircraft on my avatar is the Sentinel.

Shattered OUT...

Interesting posts!

I think more research needed.

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies

No, the one that Ghost posted, not that was on my Avatar.

The second aircraft on my avatar is the Sentinel.

Shattered OUT...

Ahh sorry, misread

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies

No, the one that Ghost posted, not that was on my Avatar.

The second aircraft on my avatar is the Sentinel.

Shattered OUT...

Ahh sorry, misread

I can't seem to find the Sentinel online, there was a website that had it, but I can't find it...

Shattered OUT...

Shattered,

What are the rest of the planes on your avatar?

I think I see an F-35 at the top and a B2 at the bottom.

Cheers

BHR

It converted 99.9% of heat to light.

Aww c'mon go for the gusto of 100%, it's just as rediculous.
Now consider the following, whenever you change energy from one type to another you produce heat, everything. Despite long exposure to energy as heat we're still bad at dealing with it in an efficient manner, while this materal would pretty much solve all that it's also a contradiction of how things tend to work. All energy conversions out of heat tend to be very inefficient, otherwise countless things would have been worked out by now, a working fusion reactor would be one of them. Now as great as super-high speed is a working fusion reactor is at least 10x more useful. If such a material were to be made this is where it would be found first.