Top Secret Aircraft

[vanir]

Please continue discussion about Aircraft here - thanks -- j7

 

Just so you know the top speed of the SR-71 is still classified(most likely TS SCI). Her top cruising altitude is also classified(also likely SCI). Any numbers you get are officially accepted numbers, but so far the maximum capabilities will be classified probably until I'm dead. A couple of very important things to note: It takes time to declassify the speed of an aircraft... Especially a high speed reconnaisance plane. Note that the speed record was beaten by just enough to hold the record.

I've read at least two books written by ex SR-71 pilots. True enough the listed maximum dash speed and altitude capabilities of the SR-71 remains classified (until something like 2021 iirc), however pilots were able to allude to approximations without being charged. Both said, "More than 3.3 Mach and higher than 100,000 feet had been achieved during missions." Also the world absolute speed record is averaged over 1000km as measured by ground stations, so the actual dash speed of an aircraft is always higher than this figure. It is ~likely~ the YF-12A (all prototypes fitted with 3x AIM-47 LRAAM internally and the AN/AWG-9 later inherited by the Tomcat to recover project costs...it was initially going to be inherited by the F-111 until Grumman won the Navy contract), had a dash capability of around 3.25 Mach and the SR-71 around 3.35 Mach. The A-12 was probably the fastest of the bunch with a dash capability (again purely speculation) of 3.4 Mach. I must point out, at these kind of speeds the slightest Mach increase led to tremendous increases in drag and airframe heating.

 

To make you feel better I should mention the MiG-25 had an airframe limit of 2.83 Mach and the P variant a top dash speed of 2.8 Mach, with an operational maximum speed of 2.35 Mach (in an almost vertical climb however). Pilots were speed limited to 2.5 Mach under normal conditions. When pressed to the airframe limits the very basic, if gigantic non-bypass engines had a habit of overspeeding.

The RB variant and later PB and PBS variants (1980's update), had uprated engines with vastly improved service life (about ten times), and a rated maximum dash speed of 2.83 Mach (ie. the airframe limit) with external ordinance up to and including a four ton bomb load for the RB precision bomber. Maximum cruise speed was 2.35 Mach with good economical figures (circa. 700km armed combat radius). Note that all Soviet performance figures are typically with either a full or half weapons load in contrast to US performance figures (the 2.5+ Mach F-15 for example, is actually more like the 1.8 Mach F-15 if you want to carry a full load of MRAAM and SRAAM missiles).

 

The Egyptian MiG-25R which was clocked at 3.2 Mach had actually burned out its engines and achieved this speed accidentally, due to a phenomenon especially common among "turbojet engines" known as "runaway rpm." The engines were completely destroyed upon landing and it never flew again.

 

In service, in the nuclear strike and strategic defence scenario, the MiG-25 fleet of interceptors would climb at 2.35 Mach. If need be any MiG-25 could arguably achieve speeds of up to 3 Mach, but it was reasonably likely the pilot and aircraft would not survive. That was the intention of this kind of defence strategy. But it would have been effective, this there is no denying. Through the 70's and 80's they could catch and down any nuclear capable cruise missile in service, which was part of their design specification. As mentioned the rest of the time they were officially speed limited to 2.5 Mach.

 

Not saying she was a perfect aircraft. Heck it took a buick engine just to get the thing started. She'd drip fuel on the tarmac and had no ability to have guns(it was tried and the thing shot herself down) or external armaments(again tried, but made her too unstable). She had a turn radius larger than the Sea of Japan at cruising speed. But she wasn't designed as a fighter. She was designed as a high altitude recon plane. Which sadly(or maybe not so sadly) that job has been taken over by UAV's and Satelites.

The SR-71 which desintegrated mid-flight did not shoot itself down, it was trying to launch a remote piloted Mach 4+ reconnaissance drone, an experimental idea for the Blackbird to carry one of these "piggy-backed." It was a failure, obviously and the idea was withdrawn.

Blackbirds had no problem with weapons systems. The YF-12A successfully fired the AIM-47 (an earlier version of the AIM-54 Pheonix) several times. I have a photograph of one being fired. By this stage however, program complexity and costs had already cancelled the proposal, along with the bombing facility that was to be given the SR-71 and NASA stepped in to continue aerospace testing and help recover the tremendous funding spent so far. The same thing which happened to the Valkyrie project essentially befell the Blackbird, except that the SR-71 continued into limited production for joint USAF/CIA intelligence gathering (since their A-12 fleet had already been handed over to the various Blackbird projects for the Air Force). This move also dealt with a serious concern about the development of the CIA as a politically independent powerbase (ie. a not necessarily democratic powerbase, not necessarily subject to the US administration of the day, scary scary).

It was program and mission costs which killed the Blackbird as a military warplane, not its capabilities as a genuine (extreme performance) warplane. Clarence "Kelly" Johnson said in an interview I watched, it was the biggest mistake ever made by the USAF. He thinks a dramatic advantage was handed to Russian airframe engineers by deciding upon the (still current) USAF doctrine of extreme transonic performance over and above supersonic capabilities.

He was also the man who developed the Stealth fighter technology which has since been translated onto both the F-35 and F-22. He says it was a mistake, but was happy to be paid even so.

 

Keep in mind the failings of the MiG-25 were largely rectified in the MiG-31, by the same token a 1990 derivative of a Blackbird which had entered production instead of the F-15 back in 1973, might've similarly solved some of its manoeuvrability and other technical issues (notably engine design, whilst exceptional and unmatched was prone to flameouts during turns, on top of that aircraft-carrier nimbleness in turning circle you described). But it is as equally possible to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the entire US economy would've collapsed with this addition to all the other defence and technology development funding (like the manned space program). I mean when I say expensive, I'm talking thousands of billions of dollars for this one project, plus unit cost (all titanium...), plus mission costs (NASA ground stations requisitioned...).

 

 

 

Hmm, let me say this. For some years now an open challenge by the Russian defence administration has been tendered for any US warplane to front at any international airshow in view of the public and match Flanker performance. And I'm not talking about the 1990 Cobra manoeuvre, that's old hat (and has only just been matched by the F-22), but I mean taking four tons of external ordinance from a cold runway start to 40,000 feet in 1 min 55 seconds and flipping over yourself to fire missiles backwards.

The challenge has thus far gone unanswered...though admitedly the export models of the Flanker aren't the vectoring thrust units with the upgraded Soyuz (Mach 3 rated) engines.

 

But as has always been the case, US planes going up against export Russian warbirds is one hell of a totally different thing to going up against Russia. And these days they will now sell the best...if you've got the ready cash.

[Tommycat]

My bad, I'm still going with the limited data I had access to. I could have sworn though that at one was shot down by it's own guns. Though your drone explanation makes more sense as the airflow over the drone and the Blackbird being disrupted in such a manner would equal two very unstable aircraft.

 

I thought I remembered something about the internal missiles, however I wasn't sure it was the Blackbird.

 

I do wish they had continued the supersonic research, but at the same time I'm glad the blackbirds were grounded.

 

I will say that I'm pretty sure they have a faster plane. I heard rumors about one that was significantly faster back in the day(this was better than 15 years ago). One that made the blackbird look like it was standing still. Though I will admit that it could be of course just rumors... or that it was scrapped because of our squishy pilots.

[vanir]

I'm not sure but just guessing I'd say you mean the X-15 rocket plane. That was the one NASA used to prepare USAF pilots for the astronaut program, and it was still up in the air at that time whether and what might wind up in service production as warplanes.

 

Like I've spent a bit of effort trying to outline, it was a pretty hairy time back then. Nobody really knew within a shadow of a doubt what the other side was truly capable of, where the advances in aerospace technologies might lead and who'd get them first. As it was real life was fast becoming everything you'd read about in science fiction and nobody could say just where or when that would end. Conspiracy theorists were even suggesting the Russians were involved with extra-terrestrial intelligence.

 

 

Mate, I'm not a feller who likes to go around starting arguments. Hate 'em myself, just gives all sorts of silly stress for nothing. But I can't help thinking all these modern impressions of US military superiority is more than half a case of kids not listening properly to their parents, and failing to bother researching primary sources of the last hundred years world history.

You know song lyrics like, "don't believe the hype," yeah they're streetwise dudes talking about what I'm trying to say and not the television

[Q]

I think that Tommycat is talking about Aurora, the existence of which has never been confirmed.

[vanir]

Oh I've seen that before...iirc it was also the name given to a hypersonic suborbital passenger scramjet proposal that was tossed around NASA once or twice, but never seriously considered. The main theme centred around a lift body powered by a set of take off engines (low-bypass turbofans), plus a set of high speed engines (basic scramjets). The same design again was a proposal for a Space Shuttle replacement (X-30) which was cancelled in 1993 despite US$2.7b/93 being spent on development so far.

 

Part of the reasoning of conspiracy theorists is probably that money spent (believing it must have gone somewhere other than lining pockets, obviously they don't know the system very well), and all the testing done. The hydrogen cooled structure was wind tunnel tested to 16 Mach, scale models flown to 4 Mach and 8 Mach and engine components tested under conditions simulating 18 Mach.

 

One of the prohibitive problems discovered as the scale models increased in size was the sheer amount on ascent heating: which was more than the Space Shuttle on descent!

The entire program apparently became an interesting side project in engine development and research, but no genuine aerospace proposal. One of the reasons cited was the sheer cost and complexity to develop a single demonstrator (ie. inventing new materials to construct it with).

 

Officially speaking the three SR-71 Blackbirds that were bought from the Air Force by NASA (1991) were for the purposes of component research in the X-30 project. This would also fund conspiracy theorists as to what was being developed (a spyplane instead of a shuttle replacement).

 

Final point would be of course, even the F-117 and B-2 were never any kind of secret. You just weren't to go near them and there weren't any pictures floating about, but it was department heads, project members and industry and military personnel who were speaking about them openly from pretty much day one. I mean it's a little hard to hide Project Blue when it's being handed out to every civilian contractor out there (Lockheed, Mc Donnel Douglas, etc.). I've got structure and avionics details in my '94 Janes.

[Yar-El]

I think that Tommycat is talking about Aurora, the existence of which has never been confirmed.

I have seen only one actual photo of the Aurora, and Wiki's version is in no way acurate. It looks similar to the B-2 Spirit: Stealth Bomber; however, the wings are thicker and more end rounded. It's legnth is also the same as the B-2. X-33 and Venture Star's engine design was inspired by Aurora's; thus, Lockheed Martin was ordered by the military to stop the X-33's development. Its was a Lockheed slip up.

[CommanderQ]

You know, it's kind've interesting, but we know the Aurora exists, but yet it denies existence. It's like how we know there is a NSA, a National Security Agency, but if you look it up, it'll come up with "No Such Agency." So, in this case, the Aurora, we don't have much confirmation on its existence, but we're very sure it does. We best be careful what we say....

[Yar-El]

You know, it's kind've interesting, but we know the Aurora exists, but yet it denies existence. It's like how we know there is a NSA, a National Security Agency, but if you look it up, it'll come up with "No Such Agency." So, in this case, the Aurora, we don't have much confirmation on its existence, but we're very sure it does. We best be careful what we say....

You can find information on the actual Aurora in your library. You need to search aviation articles that date back to the 1980s. Microphish articles to be exact. On the tv-show sightings in the 1990s, there was a ten second glimps of the craft. It's engine design and alloy is black ops secret.

 

Edit - Sorry J7 I didn't see your post.

 

No worries, I can see who's typing posts as I am Let me know if you guys want a separate topic in Kavars main about this. -- j7

[CommanderQ]

* I think if we're going to continue the top-secret airplane conversation, perhaps we should speak to J7, what do you think we should do?*

 

True, there have been sightings of such an aircraft, probably an accident on Black Ops' part, but if they were seriously trying to keep it secret, there would've been alot of arrests taking place. So, it's Black Ops, but not well...super-black ops:D

 

So, does this contribute to how insular we are about security?

[Yar-El]

* I think if we're going to continue the top-secret airplane conversation, perhaps we should speak to J7, what do you think we should do?*

 

True, there have been sightings of such an aircraft, probably an accident on Black Ops' part, but if they were seriously trying to keep it secret, there would've been alot of arrests taking place. So, it's Black Ops, but not well...super-black ops:D

 

So, does this contribute to how insular we are about security?

DARPA and Lockheed are very closed mouthed about this project. Stealth Bombers were recently revealed in the 1990s. I wanted to be a Samantha Carter.

 

I don't know how someone found it, but here is a very close design -

 

Here is the B-2 Spirit top. You can see the similarities.

[CommanderQ]

Wow. That's an amazing picture, haven't seen that one before. It'd be one scary moment to see that flying near you, I wouldn't want to be the enemy. I think the Government should probably begin designs for something newer, though, you know, alot of these things are probably a bit older, probably built before the 90's I'd think. But that design is just so aggresive in its attack style, you could say. Definately amazing, I wonder how Black Ops likes this handiwork?

[Yar-El]

Here is their sister the Hopeless Diamond -

[True_Avery]

You know, it's kind've interesting, but we know the Aurora exists, but yet it denies existence. It's like how we know there is a NSA, a National Security Agency, but if you look it up, it'll come up with "No Such Agency." So, in this case, the Aurora, we don't have much confirmation on its existence, but we're very sure it does. We best be careful what we say....

Umm, sorry?

 

No, the Aurora does not exist. Or, rather, it was a concept that was never built.

 

Why? Because we don't need spy planes anymore. The reason the Blackbird was retired was because we have satellites that can zoom down to look at your ****ing face.

 

We didn't need the Blackbird to spy anymore, so we put it down and placed money into projects like the F-22 Raptor.

 

You can find information on the actual Aurora in your library. You need to search aviation articles that date back to the 1980s. Microphish articles to be exact. On the tv-show sightings in the 1990s, there was a ten second glimps of the craft. It's engine design and alloy is black ops secret.

There are no such pictures.

 

There is a concept art picture that was created, but all the pictures you see are photoshopped or from airplane simulators.

 

It is too risky to fly these expensive craft into enemy airspace to spy. This is why we have both satilites and un-manned craft.

 

The money is in remote piloting. If the Aurora did exist, then it has been retired as well in favor of things like the Predator.

 

I don't know how someone found it, but here is the actual design -

Nice Try.

 

That is a photo from a simulator, as are all the other photos.

 

We don't need the plane, and haven't for nearly 20 years.

 

DARPA and Lockheed are very closed mouthed about this project. Stealth Bombers were recently revealed in the 1990s. I wanted to be a Samantha Carter.

No, they aren't because it either doesn't exist or was a failed prototype.

 

And, again, stealth bombers were no secret for all of the Cold War. We needed bombers then, and we were in an arms race with Russia.

 

We do not, however, need manned stealth reconnaissance planes anymore.

 

Here is the B-2 Spirit top. You can see the similarities.

Ok, before you talk anymore you need to realize this:

 

A stealth reconnaissance plane is NOT A BOMBER.

 

Why do they look similar? Because people assume thats what its supposed to look like. But the truth is, our bombers are stealth, fine, and still in use and can actually still be used to spy.

 

In fact, our best stealth plane currently isn't even a bomber. Its a Jet. The F-22 Raptor. That thing could easily look over an area, or take out a target over the circumference of the globe without ever being spotted.

 

This thread is sooo tin hat. Aurora nowadays is just a word for "secret plane", which there are dozens if being made at a time. The majority of them are failures, so it is very, very possible that your supposed Aurora doesn't exist, or just simply never saw much use.

 

And, again..

 

We have satellites and the Predator. We don't need them anymore.

[Yar-El]

<snipped>

 

SR-71 stopped receiving funding due to the plane's costs. Aurora is still being funded today. Our military X-planes are being heavily tested and developed, and we are in full mode for the development of some stuff you wouldn't believe. The Predator is a baby.

 

Some old stuff -

 

X-45A - http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/X45A/index.html

[CommanderQ]

So what if we don't need spy planes, True Avery?!

 

That thing could be super-effective in bombing runs, deep into enemy territory. Of course, the bomb aiming system would have to be modified greatly, and the pilots put through the hardest of training, but it'd be worth it. An aircraft like the Aurora would have the ability to drop a nuke, and nobody would ever, ever, know. If it moves as fast asthey want it, too, sending in a strike force to handle big problems would be a thing of the past {armies will still be needed, no matter what, soldiers too. Just really big problems that contain only the enemy and are very big, could be handled easily} This could be an excellent counter-strike weapon, if it is ever finished. We won't need bomber aircraft period if we finish the global artillery satellite {not actually the name, but this satellite will have the ability to nuke or attack any point on the planet from its space position} Of course, before our country uses such weapons, we should probably get out of debt:D

[jrrtoken]

SR-71 stopped receiving funding due to the plane's costs.

That was partially the cause, but there's no doubt that the main reason why it was discontinued was due to the fact that satellites systems and whatnot made it obsolete.

Aurora is still being funded today.

Unless if there's proof to back this up, the Aurora is simply a myth. Now, there might be some "secret" projects that we don't about, but there's no way to even know that Aurora is is even in development.

 

I should also mention that the U.S. military spending is so high now that we don't even need to spend any money in R&D, since they already have more than enough technology to obliterate a small country in thirty minutes.

[Yar-El]

That was partially the cause, but there's no doubt that the main reason why it was discontinued was due to the fact that satellites systems and whatnot made it obsolete.

It was also obsolete due to its maneuvering issues. Other crafts showed more flexability in defensive fighting. Cost was the major issue.

 

Unless if there's proof to back this up, the Aurora is simply a myth. Now, there might be some "secret" projects that we don't about, but there's no way to even know that Aurora is is even in development.

You won't get those details anytime soon.

[jrrtoken]

You won't get those details anytime soon.

That was my original point. There's no way for anyone to inherently proof nor disprove Aurora's existence.

[Jae Onasi]

True, there have been sightings of such an aircraft, probably an accident on Black Ops' part, but if they were seriously trying to keep it secret, there would've been alot of arrests taking place. So, it's Black Ops, but not well...super-black ops:D

Black ops are (almost) never leaked 'on accident'. It's either leaked by the gov't as a strategic move ('Hey, Russia, check out our Boss plane that cen fly over your country without you ever knowing it, so watch out'), or it's leaked by someone who's spying. While no one's perfect, the people who reach black ops security levels know how to keep their mouths shut and -not- have such accidents.

[CommanderQ]

Well, Jae, the Black Ops area of security definately knows how to keep its mouth shut and it would seem that there is no use for a leak of this sort. Though, there is one thing, even Black Ops makes mistakes. I cannot provide information on what mistakes, but they do, as you said, no ones perfect. I notice that our country does have a tendency to flash secret or new weapons about. This is probably irrelevant, but television has started numerous shows on our many different weapons that will totally rule the battlefield. I don't think thats the wisest of decisions, but then again, nobody has really come up with better technology than the U.S. Well, they might've, but not without copying a direct design{Russians did that alot}.

 

But I agree with what you said on the Black Ops for sure, I was probably a bit wrong on what I said concerning "super" black ops {perhaps very wrong}.

[Yar-El]

Well, Jae, the Black Ops area of security definately knows how to keep its mouth shut and it would seem that there is no use for a leak of this sort. Though, there is one thing, even Black Ops makes mistakes. I cannot provide information on what mistakes, but they do, as you said, no ones perfect. I notice that our country does have a tendency to flash secret or new weapons about. This is probably irrelevant, but television has started numerous shows on our many different weapons that will totally rule the battlefield. I don't think thats the wisest of decisions, but then again, nobody has really come up with better technology than the U.S. Well, they might've, but not without copying a direct design{Russians did that alot}.

 

But I agree with what you said on the Black Ops for sure, I was probably a bit wrong on what I said concerning "super" black ops {perhaps very wrong}.

$10 million for a hammer.

 

That was my original point. There's no way for anyone to inherently proof nor disprove Aurora's existence.

I restated what you said? Sorry Pastrami.

[Tommycat]

Oops haha guess I opened up a whole nuther discussion.

 

I know more, but I am not sure what parts are classified and what parts aren't(nothing I personally worked on, because I was too young haha). I will say that we already know of the new prototype scramjet which NASA tested. It far exceeded the speed of the SR-71's official recorded speed. That was at least ten years later than I had expected to see it.

[Q]

In fact, our best stealth plane currently isn't even a bomber. Its a Jet. The F-22 Raptor.

I'm assuming you meant fighter, right? Either way, you're incorrect. AFAIK the B-2 is currently the most stealthy aircraft in our inventory. The F-22 is designed to be stealthy, yes, but making it as stealthy as the B-2 with the technology that was available at the time (the design is ~20 years old) would have compromised its performance to an unacceptable degree. Its design is therefore a compromise between stealth and performance whereas the B-2's design goes all-out for stealth.

[Rev7]

I'm assuming you meant fighter, right? Either way, you're incorrect. AFAIK the B-2 is currently the most stealthy aircraft in our inventory. The F-22 is designed to be stealthy, yes, but making it as stealthy as the B-2 with the technology that was available at the time (the design is ~20 years old) would have compromised its performance to an unacceptable degree. Its design is therefore a compromise between stealth and performance whereas the B-2's design goes all-out for stealth.

This is true, but I have to tell you that both of these aircraft have extremely low radar signautures and I have read somewhere that it is rumored that the B-2's radar signature is roughly that of an aluminum marble & the F-22's is roughly the same.

 

The most likely reason that this is is because of the tail. It is not currently possible to elimanate the tail on the Raptor completely because of its maneuverability. There are trade-offs that must be made because both of these fine aircraft have different functions. Other stealth parameters such as the buried engine and weapons bay, platform alignment are taken care of in the Raptor. It is all about cross-sections

 

So the F-22 Raptor is the most stealthy fighter in the US inventory, but overall the B-2 takes the cake.

[Darth_Yuthura]

Something that most people don't really consider about aircraft that fly mach 3+ is the extreme friction that comes from such speeds. Surprisingly, the reason why the Mig 25 could reach mach 3 and the F-15 could not was because it sacrificed the fighter-like characteristics to tolerate the extreme speed and heat caused at such velocities.

 

Odds are that the F-22 doesn't top the Mig-25 or even the F-15 in raw speed because the stealth-characteristics would be traded off. One thing about aircraft such as the RS-71 and the B-1b that few emphasize is that they both are not true stealth aircraft, but have an excellent balance between speed and agility with a reduced radar cross-section. I think that the B-1b is a better bomber than the B-2 because it compensates for true stealth with speed and electronic countermeasures. It's cheaper too.

 

The RS-71 was a remarkable aircraft, but it costs roughly $200,000 an hour to operate. It simply isn't practical anymore because of satellite imagery becoming better. Odds are that there would never have been a better replacement for the blackbird because there was no practical use for it in any retrospect.