Lockheed Pushes for Hypersonic Aircraft

a reply to: anzha

Even the x-37 gets tracked, sure you can change it but once it's picked its next orbit then you can see where it's been.

The soviets used to pick up the shapes of test aircraft on rcs poles due to the temperature change on the ground from the shadow.

I think keyhole is the term used over the radios when a satellite is above places like Area 51.

However, one of the key observations NRO folks have made is that its not the snapshot intel that works best but the repeated observations over time of changes to sites. Given multi spectral sensors, that gets really, really hard to hide.

Long Loiter time especially near ground unit ops or surveillance on targets of interest.Hypersonics has been around since the 50,s and 60,s.If you go back over the decades every major aircraft manufacturer has delved into design feasibility of atmosphere skippers,true hypersonics,scramjet boosted platforms.Thing is why hasn,t there been any progress from the Concord and Sr-71?Materials?Engine design?

originally posted by: Blackfinger

However, one of the key observations NRO folks have made is that its not the snapshot intel that works best but the repeated observations over time of changes to sites. Given multi spectral sensors, that gets really, really hard to hide.

Long Loiter time especially near ground unit ops or surveillance on targets of interest.Hypersonics has been around since the 50,s and 60,s.If you go back over the decades every major aircraft manufacturer has delved into design feasibility of atmosphere skippers,true hypersonics,scramjet boosted platforms.Thing is why hasn,t there been any progress from the Concord and Sr-71?Materials?Engine design?

Some progress in research has been done, in relation with my post on the page 2 of this thread here are some links.

By the way, i¨m still waiting for someone who knows if these companies are the real deal or are hype (pun intended)

patents.justia.com...
www.hyperpropulsion.us...
www.hyperpropulsion.com...
www.sonicblue.us...
hypermach.com...

a reply to: anzha

Also, remember that the boosting/maneuvering module that was built for the ISS as a back-up in case the Zvezda module couldn't be launched on-schedule was more or less openly acknowledged to be a repurposed NRO bus.

If it had the delta-V to keep something the size of the ISS in orbit, then just imagine what it could do for a Hubble-sized payload.

My hunch was that FIA was an attempt to keep a multi-spectral NRO constellation with the capabilities that we had in 1990 or so in terms of numbers of assets, or effective coverage and response times, but on a post-USSR NRO budget.

FIA clearly failed, and it kind of feels like what was decided in 2004-2005 or so was to keep a reduced constellation of existing KH-11 and LACROSSE descendants, while filling the coverage gaps with an advanced fastmover.

Which would explain the subsequent appearance of our green-spewing lady friend.

a reply to: anzha

It doesn't take long to find a satellite even if you change orbit. And you can only change orbit so much and so often before you run out of fuel.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thats why the idea of a sr-72 type aircraft is so vital in m opinion. You need a platform that is more dynamic and flexible that a satellite.

I would go with two platforms. One that flies relatively low for a hypersonic platform. say at 100ish+ K. Use it for areas of immediate interest where its crucial that data is supplied immediately. Or a strike. I would picture her more as a sr-71 type of mission.

Then, if I were in charge, I would want a hypersonic high flyer to fly routine monitoring missions over contested airspace. Like deep over the chinese or russian homeland. You know just to keep tabs on everything a hostile or potentially hostile nation is doing. But, have that aircraft fly high above the Karmen line. That way even if the enemy knows were overflying their country snooping using a dynamic, unpredictable vehicle there nothing they can do about it. It's not illegal.

a reply to: intelgurl

Welcome back IG You've been missed.

This would be a logical progression from the pair that followed the Blackbird retirement in the 90's I assume?

a reply to: anzha

It seems to me that that article is a bit of sour grapes. Just the tone of it.

But this tech has so many other applications, not just military, that that article didn't even brush against, much less mention.

This sort of tech would seem to be the gateway to suborbital/orbital/perhaps beyond works. Take off, do your thing, go home for dinner...or close to it, anyway.

Obviously, I'm nothing like an expert in these matters...it is obvious, isn't it? But if I can see what look like endless possibilities...why can't these author(s)?

a reply to: seagull

Until they figure out the 8 minute barrier sustained hypersonic flight is going to be impossible for any aircraft.

a reply to: Zaphod58

at relatively low altitudes for hypersonic vehicles?

YOu know what I like. Lockheed's new 'Scramjet" has a component that addresses just that while simultaineously doing something else useful at the same time..

a reply to: Zaphod58

It seems to me, with my admittedly limited understanding, that that is only a matter of time, probably our lifetimes, given the advances we've seen in our lifetimes in materials, designs, and computer abilities.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Do you know if all the hypersonic tests used the same material for the skin? Would point to a possible reason as to why all three failed at 8 minutes.