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.

 

This is the amazing Lockheed Martin SR-72—the space Blackbird

page: 25
38
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
In my opinion too, this large hangar start building in 2006 ( wee see it on Goggle earth) , and Lockheed say they work on the engine with Aerojet/Rocketdine since 7 years, its the same timing. This hangar is in the extrem south surely for something highly classified. The rumor of the SR-72 is on the web since 2007, and the rumor of the huge hangar too it can't be a coincidence. I m impatient to see the first real pictures of this beauty, surely Aviation Week will be the first on it




posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Many thanks to the OP ,

and a big thanks to all the usual suspects


this is what ATS is good at . (reminds me of the old days )
and Zaphod . I am really looking forward to your new upcoming thread.

OT - has anyone heard from Intelgirl ?? i hope she is doing OK, nice to see she has been proved correct on this one.

thanks

Snoopyuk



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopyuk
 


Its up, so enjoy. Is not done yet but I need to get caught up on other things too.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 11:02 PM
link   
this could be another attempt at another successful space re-entry vehicle. as it being powerful streamlined could have a internal cargo bay for such projects.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


It doesn't carry enough fuel for orbit. It would need a booster system to get it up there, including external fuel tanks.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Bomber-dropped from altitude???



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyingFox
 


It wouldn't be bomber dropped either.

There were rumors of a SSTO platform a few years ago but I don't know how correct/incorrect they were.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


yes it could use the improved nasa solid rocket boosters to enter prespace orbit.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


Except there doesn't appear to be anywhere to attach them. And out wouldn't need hybrid engines, it would need launch facilities and would be kind of hard to hide.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


it could be housed at the old shuttle building or at edwards afb and attach to pylons or attachments that remove and have a cover like the landing gear cover. maybe?



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


But the point of this is to have an ISR platform that you can launch from anywhere, and no one knows you launched.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   
i heard of some kind of missile launch facility somewhere in the gulf of mexico on an old update oil platform. or instead of using the solid rocket boosters they could use and updated enlarged version of the x-51 scramjet



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


Same problem. No matter where you place it, you aren't hiding a rocket launch. There are dedicated satellites sitting in Geosynchronous orbit monitoring the entire US looking for missile launches. They'd pick this up in a second, as soon as the boosters lit up.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


ok so what do you think its for another high altitude reconnaissance aircraft like in the u-2?



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by chrismg
 


It doesn't carry enough fuel for orbit. It would need a booster system to get it up there, including external fuel tanks.


Indeed the leap from "high altitude multi-mach" to "orbital" is not a trivial one - you can't just "strap on" something to make it happen, nor are the designs you would use for the 2 functions the same in the first place.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


It will perform the same mission as the SR-71, faster, stealthier, and with a strike capability. So yes, it will be similar to the U-2.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:30 PM
link   
and not be shot down by any countries surface -to-air weaponry. so is it manned or unmanned?



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


Everything is pointing to unmanned.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:37 PM
link   
understandable as the us air force and navy train more unmanned uav operators than fighter and bomber pilots.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismg
 


Actually they're facing a problem of not having enough pilots for UAV's.




top topics



 
38
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join