Triangular Aircraft

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

My neighbor talking to his wife a block away was a deafening explosion of noise compared to that 'plane' which couldn't have been more than 1000 feet from my ears. That's quite some tech.

That would also seem to be outside our technological ability to suppress sonic boom formation - because the engine noise should still be present. Active noise cancellation might be able to pull that off - but then again - this might not have been one of ours.

reply to post by 1ofthe9


You can quiet engine noise down a lot. The B-2 is the size of a B-52, but can't be heard more than 7-800 feet away with anything approaching reliability when it's cruising. I've had them go over, and didn't hear a thing, with them probably at around 2,000 feet or so.

reply to post by 1ofthe9


I have a few theories about what it was. But none of them include a craft with a jet engine in it.

No amount of noise cancellation in the universe can remove the noise generated by a hypersonic jet aircraft at functionally point blank range.

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


It wasn't hypersonic, it was at best supersonic. And you don't have to have a screaming jet engine to push you to supersonic speeds. The F-22 proves that.

reply to post by Zaphod58


So aiecraft like this have no jet exhaust; no aerodynamic surfaces; make no noise and buzz trac homes in densely populated usa cities going back ti 1930?

Zaphod58
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear

 

It wasn't hypersonic, it was at best supersonic. And you don't have to have a screaming jet engine to push you to supersonic speeds. The F-22 proves that.

Yeah, but even supercruise is noisy. Maybe they've decided to roll out a MHD engine?

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


Exhaust on top of the fuselage you'll never see it on the ground except certain angles. Aerodynamic surfaces blend with the aircraft until they're used.

As for why it was there, any number of reasons.

reply to post by 1ofthe9


No way. If they do go with an MHD it'll be many years before it's even hinted at being in use.

reply to post by 1ofthe9


I wish I had been an aerospace engineer instead of a nuclear engineer. But this whole train of thought seems more ludicrous than unicorns (to me).

reply to post by Zaphod58


You are telling me that lift can be generated by expelling jet engine exhaust (that makes zero sound)
Out the top of an un Aero dynamic slab of metal and this not only provides enormous lift but also supersonic forward motion? This is your assertion?
Also inaudible supersonic exhaust besides making no noise produces no visible jet exhaust of any kind? Zero lumens of light?

In the military we had a phrase for this - pfm.

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by Zcustosmorum

 

What I saw could easily have some sort of
cloaking or multiple projection of images
type of thing in effect; given my sight of
a 'cube' that both was and was not
there. But I only saw that cube for
about 10% of the total incident viewing
period; so maybe that weird cube
"shrodinger's cat thing was just my
imagination'.

KPB

Sounds very much like an advanced optical stealth system---phase conjugation etc....

reply to post by mbkennel


The stealth explanation might obey the laws of physics..and it was flying unstealthed anyway.
Its the 100% silent propulsion with no visible jet exhaust that gets me.

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


Maybe you can show pictures of what visible jet exhaust is, because I've never seen jet exhaust be visible.

If your talking about the exhaust area of the engine, there are many ways to hide it.

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


The B-2 exhaust is on top of the fuselage and it flies just fine. The F-117 exhaust vented up from the back of the wings, and it flew just fine.

So now the engine produces the lift? When did that start happening?

There are ways to deaden the noise from the engine, including placing the exhaust on top of the fuselage. There are also some VERY interesting engine advances I can't talk about.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Yah just like the nonexistent aerodynamic surfaces.
My shoes are more aerodynamic than that thing was. I told you I wasn't an aircraft designer. But there is still this thing called stall speed. Without forward motion (with a plane) you get no lift.

reply to post by KellyPrettyBear


There are these things called "flying wings" that don't require conventional surfaces. The other surfaces are blended with the wing to reduce this thing called "drag". They only move when needed.

There are also ways to make aircraft do this thing called "hover".

I'm well aware of stall speed, and a lot of other things like interesting propulsion systems most people would never dream of.

I thought this was going supersonic, so what does stall speed have to do with anything?

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

Yah just like the nonexistent aerodynamic surfaces.
My shoes are more aerodynamic than that thing was. I told you I wasn't an aircraft designer. But there is still this thing called stall speed. Without forward motion (with a plane) you get no lift.

Check out the work being done with the X-56. There's all kinds of potential for the use of elastic control systems and thrust vectoring.

Zaphod - I know MHD is a major stretch - but the lack of engine noise in this case is bugging me. :s

reply to post by 1ofthe9


Let me look into a couple things. Give me a few days, and if I can say anything about what I can find out I will.

Zaphod58
reply to post by 1ofthe9

 

Let me look into a couple things. Give me a few days, and if I can say anything about what I can find out I will.

I'm real keen on whatever you can dig up.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Was thinking outloud. This lady was telling me that she saw the exact same craft hovering for a long period of time with no sound whatsoever and no exhaust.