USAF SAUCER PROGRAM DECLASSIFIED not the Avro

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Which brings me to a question. If flying saucers don't exist, why did we try to make them?

If we were trying to mirror technology we gained from Roswell, we should have a bad ass fleet of weather balloons right now.

The main reason for the disc aircraft was that at that time airfields would be redundant and unusable in a very short time for conventional jets with long take-offs. The US air force were into VTOL and underground bunker concealment against anything Atomic, whatever. Probably a good idea at the time, probably a good idea today should the need be there. I'm sure there is stuff like that nobody is going to hear about any day soon.
But even back then some of the periodicals did some good guessing games like here,


Even the Royal Air Force Review had very accurate pictures printed with theirs showing a full disc image. This is from 1955, you might just be able to make out the disc, and it's not the Avrocar.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
I'm not a big fan of saucers though.

They do have that nasty tendency to flip over during forward flight.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Which brings me to a question. If flying saucers don't exist, why did we try to make them?

If we were trying to mirror technology we gained from Roswell, we should have a bad ass fleet of weather balloons right now.

Excellent question!
Well said!

originally posted by: StratosFear
a reply to: network dude

I`ve been told more than once that the model kit Testors did for the Roswell crash was an accurate depiction of the craft. The term flying saucers was never about their appearance but how they flew. Throughout the years that has been distorted to literally mean a flying saucer reinforced by the countless times the Avrocar has been brought up by whatever TV show repeating the same thing they've been saying for years like its something new.

This one?

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Zaphod58

hey I like triangular airframes too!

That's like a flying wing in delta configuration. I wonder who is responsible for the design and construction, and hope we don't have to wait 20 more years to find out.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: parad0x122

The rumor is there will be a declassification soon. That one is a pretty aircraft too.

Would that be the one being built or planning to be built in at the expanding site in Florida?

a reply to: Violater1

Affirmative.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: parad0x122

The rumor is there will be a declassification soon. That one is a pretty aircraft too.

You just never know. It's about right.

a reply to: Bedlam

Hoping it's the Sneaky Weasel F-111 replacement that's getting declassified soon.

a reply to: StratosFear

No, that one is on schedule, but won't be soon. This is another one.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Is it to enter operational service or is it one that has been used for awhile and no good reason to keep classified? Or is that pushing it?

a reply to: StratosFear

Starting to push it into uncomfortable territory.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaph,

possibly Kansas photo or the texas photo? If Kansas I think I know what that one is. Sweet. More interested in the Texas one though.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Neither of those. One will be released on its own schedule.

You guys will find out when it happens.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Companion of yesteryear finally released to the public?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: StratosFear

Starting to push it into uncomfortable territory.

Understood, I will be patient(try to). If its cooler than the F-117 was back in 1991 and the B-2 in 1994 then it will be worth the wait.

20 years from now there had better be a book of all these secret aircraft with actual images so we know what all those scientist and engineers had kept secret for so long. Perhaps a Groom Lake or Skunk/Phantom Works museum so the people behind the projects can get some recognition for their years of kick ass work. What sort of aviation pioneers exist out there that rival Chuck Yeager, Bernard Lynch or Robin Olds that we don't know about yet?

a reply to: StratosFear

I know what you mean. I'd love to see another Johnson working and what they could do with new technology. Especially some of the stuff I've heard about that's hidden.

a reply to: network dude

That`s an excellent observation, why would they even think that a saucer could fly and be controlled unless.... they had already seen one in controlled flight.along those same lines why would they even think that a flying saucer shape would be more advanced than their current aircraft unless....
surely they wouldn`t have tried to copy something that was less advanced than what they already had.

In theory a saucer is more aerodynamic and efficient

actually in theory a raindrop shape is the most aerodynamic shape so if they were going for aerodynamics then why didn`t they experiment with a raindrop shaped craft?

a reply to: Tardacus

The technology of the time would barely let a large flying wing shape be controllable. There's no way they could have done it. They barely kept a saucer shape under control five feet off the ground.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: network dude

That`s an excellent observation, why would they even think that a saucer could fly and be controlled unless.... they had already seen one in controlled flight.along those same lines why would they even think that a flying saucer shape would be more advanced than their current aircraft unless....
surely they wouldn`t have tried to copy something that was less advanced than what they already had.

In theory a saucer is more aerodynamic and efficient

actually in theory a raindrop shape is the most aerodynamic shape so if they were going for aerodynamics then why didn`t they experiment with a raindrop shaped craft?

A raindrop falls it does not fly. Lift is required for flight hence why (most) aircraft have wings.

a reply to: StratosFear

And look at all the trouble they had just designing Pumpkinseed.