# Another Black Project?



## Glider (Jun 18, 2006)

I know that this is possibly one of the best kept secrets in that a lot of people believe this is happening but no one has ever had any hard evidence, but this might just be a crack in the secrecy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/5079044.stm


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 18, 2006)

I watched that story on Newsnight a few days ago, very interesting story...


----------



## syscom3 (Jun 18, 2006)

If theres one thing the pentagon (through its DARPA organization) likes to do is to invent all these advanced technology weapons and systems that are on paper only (or at least at sub scale testing) and make the rest of us think they actually do exist.

In the mean time, the real stuff is secretly hidden away.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 18, 2006)

Bingo!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 19, 2006)

Ive heard about this one. There are probably more things than we can think of going on, but as syscom said, most probably never leave the paper or mock up stage.


----------



## evangilder (Jun 20, 2006)

Rumors of the Aurora have been around for years. Is it real? Who knows.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 20, 2006)

I think it's BS - the same way we had the F-19 of the 1980s, it was supposed to be the REAL stealth fighter...




kitparade




LMSW


----------



## evangilder (Jun 20, 2006)

You are probably right, Joe. I remember those models.


----------



## Twitch (Jun 21, 2006)

It's really, really, really obvious that they had "something," call it the Aurora, who cares, because they retired the SR-71s. They never ever retire anything unless they have a replacement.

The Aurora, or whatever, probably took to the air and was ultimately found lacking. Remember the SR- 71s were reactivated for some reason.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 21, 2006)

Twitch said:


> It's really, really, really obvious that they had "something," call it the Aurora, who cares, because they retired the SR-71s. They never ever retire anything unless they have a replacement.


 They did have a replacement, it's called a satellite, so my Lockheed friends have told me...


----------



## Twitch (Jun 22, 2006)

Why were the SRs reactivated? Surley not because the satellite imaging was too poor. If it was they'd never have put the Blackbirds out to pasture before orbiters could do the job in the 1st place.

They had a big official public retirement of a ship that no one ever admitted existing, the Tacit Blue stealth spy plane! It flew from 1982-85 but wasn't publicly acknowledged until 1996. 

I figure the smartest thing is a UAV or UCAV for doing the SR-71's duties but we'll see.....eventually


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 22, 2006)

Twitch said:


> Why were the SRs reactivated? Surley not because the satellite imaging was too poor. If it was they'd never have put the Blackbirds out to pasture before orbiters could do the job in the 1st place.


Because at the time there was a problem positioning satellites within the allotted time requirement. That's still a problem but its not cost effective to continue to operate the SR-71.


Twitch said:


> They had a big official public retirement of a ship that no one ever admitted existing, the Tacit Blue stealth spy plane! It flew from 1982-85 but wasn't publicly acknowledged until 1996.
> 
> I figure the smartest thing is a UAV or UCAV for doing the SR-71's duties but we'll see.....eventually


Tacit Blue was a proof of concept aircraft similar to have blue, it was used in the RCS development of the B-2. 




Northrop

You're correct about the UAVs. That's all I could say right now.


----------



## davparlr (Jun 22, 2006)

Twitch said:


> Why were the SRs reactivated? Surley not because the satellite imaging was too poor. If it was they'd never have put the Blackbirds out to pasture before orbiters could do the job in the 1st place.
> 
> They had a big official public retirement of a ship that no one ever admitted existing, the Tacit Blue stealth spy plane! It flew from 1982-85 but wasn't publicly acknowledged until 1996.
> 
> I figure the smartest thing is a UAV or UCAV for doing the SR-71's duties but we'll see.....eventually



They didn't acknowledge Tacit Blue until 1995 because it was so ugly (see my pictures in the "most beautiful plane" thread)!! Actually, I would not be surprised about a replacement for the SR-71. Satellites are just not as flexible. However, a UAV would make a lot of sense.


----------



## syscom3 (Jun 22, 2006)

A small UAV with stealth charachteristics, flying very high well above any conceivable missle threat, that could loiter for hours on end and has a modular payload for flexability. Maybe even cheap enough to make it a throw away if needed.

Thats what the follow on to the SR71 would be like (in my judgement).


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 23, 2006)

I think a replacement for the SR-71 would be a UAV as well.


----------



## johnbr (Jun 24, 2006)

Remember Lockheed has said most of the aircraft it has made are still top secret.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 24, 2006)

johnbr said:


> Remember Lockheed has said most of the aircraft it has made are still top secret.


Very few...


----------



## HealzDevo (Jun 25, 2006)

What do you mean very few? If as someone said they are that skilled at keeping black projects, the Lockheed comment does make sense. In producing aircraft to new designs for a different type of warfare there has to be a lot of prototype concept aircraft along the way and there just don't seem to really be that many in the case of some of the modern Stealth Aircraft so could these be kept secret at the Area 51 Airbase? We are talking in reality a massive leap in design and yet there don't seem to be that many failed designs. I know there are computer simulations etc, but still there has to be data gained from actual models, etc. to fuel that computer simulation properly.


----------



## syscom3 (Jun 25, 2006)

I bet many of those designs were paper studies or deliberate misinformation to fool the ruskies, or smoke out a traitor or two.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 25, 2006)

HealzDevo said:


> What do you mean very few? If as someone said they are that skilled at keeping black projects, the Lockheed comment does make sense. In producing aircraft to new designs for a different type of warfare there has to be a lot of prototype concept aircraft along the way and there just don't seem to really be that many in the case of some of the modern Stealth Aircraft so could these be kept secret at the Area 51 Airbase? We are talking in reality a massive leap in design and yet there don't seem to be that many failed designs. I know there are computer simulations etc, but still there has to be data gained from actual models, etc. to fuel that computer simulation properly.


I worked there for over 10 years and I was in the Skunk Works - there aren't a lot of proof of concept aircraft built because many times its done at company expense. Someday you may see a "few" items pop up that were kept secret for many years (the Have Blue prototype and the D-21 drone) but don't hold you're breath, I doubt you'll see much more than that...


----------



## HealzDevo (Jun 25, 2006)

Of course, I was talking about the small remote controlled drones that can be used even in the small RC kit form to prove a plane before they progress to larger scale models. I am assuming that somewhere there are hundreds of small RC planes built at Skunk Works to see whether it was worth building a proof of concept aircraft. I thought the whole idea of a big proof of concept aircraft was that the design had been proven on a smaller scale and then they were scaling it up.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 25, 2006)

There are people right now working with tiny UAVs at LMSW in Palmdale California. It's anyone's guess how many of these are "classified" but my feeling is LMSW is going after Predator size UAVs that are a lot more capable..


----------



## Twitch (Jun 26, 2006)

I researched an article back in 2002 so I know this is further advanced now-

"Today most of the major and even not so major, aerospace companies are in development of UAVs with many contracts up for grabs. There exist today tiny insect-sized recon devices that can fly into a building via silent, sub-miniature electric motors and gather images with TV cameras the size of a fly’s eye. One is even powered by a “device that converts chemical energy into reciprocating motion through a direct non-combustion chemical reaction." It uses one propellant, has no flame or visible exhaust and can operate without oxygen. This is not sci-fi, it’s happening now. MAVs (Micro Aerial Vehicles) of larger size abound in number with weight measured in grams and size in the less than 6-inch range."

As for sinister big spy planes I found this theory presented a few years ago too-

"It’s been pieced together that the Aurora is carried aloft by a C-5 (good idea- less visual exposure) to 35,000 feet where its huge clam-shell doors open and the ship is extended via a hoist arm as it powers up. Wing tips unfold and lock as the plane is dropped to then fly under its own power. It climbs to well over 100,000 feet by using a turbo-ramjet engine ingesting exotic methane or hydrogen fuel as it travels at 3,800 MPH to survey its designated target. Once the mission is complete the Son of Blackbird would meet up with another or the same C-5 where the boom would extend, capture would occur, the wing tips folded, and it would be swallowed up inside the massive mother ship."


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 26, 2006)

Sounds pretty wild....


----------



## Gnomey (Jun 26, 2006)

Yep, almost a bit too wild...


----------



## johnbr (Jun 30, 2006)

Lockheed has said that 6 of the last 7 planes that there test pilot tested are steal topsecret.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 30, 2006)

johnbr said:


> Lockheed has said that 6 of the last 7 planes that there test pilot tested are steal topsecret.


Show me where you read that!!!!!


----------



## MichaelHenley (Jul 4, 2006)

Twitch said:


> . It climbs to well over 100,000 feet by using a turbo-ramjet engine ingesting exotic methane or hydrogen fuel as it travels at 3,800 MPH to survey its designated target.


Sounds kind of like the scramjet, but not...
i bet that when the scramjet gets to a more refined stage, someone will seize it for the rest of the deep black projects...


----------



## johnbr (Jul 4, 2006)

It was on a doc for the new F-35 Fighter.When the locheed testpilot was geting in the plane.The was on Disc channel.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 4, 2006)

johnbr said:


> It was on a doc for the new F-35 Fighter.When the locheed testpilot was geting in the plane.The was on Disc channel.


I know the lockheed test pilot and could tell you that statement is BS....


----------

