Quoted: For all the tinfoil powered flying saucer types. What possible reason would the military have for devloping such super technology (mach 9 aircraft, UFOs etc) and keep it so secret that they can't use it?  All the while pouring money into more mundane experiments and aircraft. Next week when I'm going to get my lunch I think I'll stop by the quantum communications lab and see if they've got that teleporter finished yet...

1) Absolute air superiority.

2) The ability to bomb anyone anywhere in the world with only a few hours notice from bases in the US. It eliminates the need to put expensive facilities on the ground in other countries, while retaining the ability to bomb people like OBL.

3) Guys run the military and guys like toys. It would be really, really cool.

4) If they don't investigate it then they might just get caught surprised when someone else makes a breakthrough.

Quoted: They have a pulse detonation powered plane that flies faster than Mach 6, probably even goes as fast a Mach 9.  It is approximately 100 feet long and looks like a flattened football.  They only fly it at night because of its distinctive contrail pattern. While we're at it, we have another plane that makes no sound, has a set of advanced LCD panels on the bottom that display what is above the plane, making it virtually invisible at night or during the day, the only thing that is visible is a slight distortion in the sky, and it also uses a means of propulsion that no other plane in existence uses to date, enabling it to do some rather unique manuevers, not capable of being performed by conventional jet aircraft using convention flight control surfaces.

I can believe that.

You guys, I swear...  

EVERYONE KNOWS that everything can be explained by either the mach 7 battleships or else the mach 10 Superhornets the Navy built.

Quoted: I'd also suggest you run the numbers on potential energy from Methane vs Jet Fuel (and some of the more exotic blends) and see which one will propel a vehicle faster...

what's the answer for us math challenged folks?

Quoted: Quoted: .  Boeing's recent announcement of their very small stealth aircraft - what is its purpose?  Its too small to carry bombs or any weapons. Says who? It would also make a heck of a survailence platform. As for Mach 9 getting spec ops to places in a hurry - duh then people would have to see it and we'd know about it....  And considering you'd have to base the aircraft near the spec ops units..  Sorry it don't fly (pun intended).

The fact that you didn't know about Boeing's Bird of Prey stealth plane makes me wonder what else you may not be aware of.





http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/q4/nr_021018m.html

ST. LOUIS, Oct. 18, 2002 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] today unveiled the "Bird of Prey," a technology demonstrator that pioneered breakthrough low-observable technologies and revolutionized aircraft design, development and production. The once highly classified project ran from 1992 through 1999, and was revealed because the technologies and capabilities developed have become industry standards, and it is no longer necessary to conceal the aircraft's existence.

In addition to proving many new stealth concepts, the Bird of Prey program demonstrated innovative rapid prototyping techniques. Developed by the Boeing Phantom Works advanced research-and-development organization, the Bird of Prey was among the first to initiate the use of large, single-piece composite structures; low-cost, disposable tooling; and 3-D virtual reality design and assembly processes to ensure the aircraft was affordable to build as well as high-performing.

Fully funded by Boeing, the Bird of Prey project costs $67 million. A subsonic, single-seat technology demonstrator, the aircraft completed 38 test flights as part of its flight-demonstration program. Its first flight took place in fall 1996. Bird of Prey has a wingspan of approximately 23 feet and a length of 47 feet, and weighs nearly 7,400 pounds. Powered by a Pratt & Whitney JT15D-5C turbofan engine, the Bird of Prey has an operational speed of 260 knots and a maximum operating altitude of 20,000 feet.

"Early investments in technology demonstration projects such as Bird of Prey have positioned Boeing to help shape our industry's transformation," said Jim Albaugh, president and CEO of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. "With this aircraft, we changed the rules on how to design and build an aircraft, and what we've learned is enabling us to provide our customers with affordable, high-performing products. Projects such as Bird of Prey have provided the catalyst for integrating speed, agility and reduced cost into the processes we employ to introduce new commercial and military systems to market."

Boeing's current development of the X-45A Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle, or UCAV, technology demonstrator draws directly on its Bird of Prey experience. Some aspects of the UCAV's innovative radar-evading design, such as its shape and inlet, were developed from this project. Together, Boeing Phantom Works and Boeing Integrated Defense Systems are developing UCAV for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, and the U.S. Air Force.

"The success of the Bird of Prey is a testament to the shared commitment of Boeing and the Air Force to pioneering innovative methods to drive down costs and improve performance," said George Muellner, senior vice president of Air Force Systems for Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. "This project stressed affordability as much as performance and quality, and is one of many that we are using to define the future of aerospace."

Quoted: Ok, it is time for me to pony up. I had a UFOs sighting in southwest Virginia in November 1991 during fall rifle season. I was cooking lunch and lying on my back waiting.  I was watching a single flattened contrail running north/south drift slowly to the east.  I noticed what appeared to be three blue spheres next to each other in a triangle pattern in front of the contrail(between my eye and the contrail). I watched them amazed wondering if it were a freak natural pattern but they maintained their form and symmetry over time so I was sure it was an artifact of design. It was the same shade of blue as the empty sky on either side of the contrail.  If it were not just in front of the contrail, it would have blended in wiht the blue sky perfectly. It was drifting on the wind at the same rate as the contrail.  I suspect that it was some military experiment in optical stealth back in 91.  I suspect it was a ballon of some sort.

A number of people report seeing a contrail, but no visible plane creating it, but a "shimmering" in the air, hence my contention that optical stealth is being deployed on experimental planes.  

Quoted: At least the Bigfoot people have grainy photographs and 'casts' of imprints. You guys don't even have a bad photo, you have to rely on a anonymouse internet story? Thanks for you confidence in our ability to produce Star Wars technology in complete secrecy, you give us way too much credit (or you've been watching too much Stargate SG-1).

If you have not been read onto top secret Phantom Works aircraft projects by the project security officer, then you do not know what they are working on.  Phantom Works, Boeing's equivalent of Skunkworks, is extremely good at keeping technology secret, as attested to the fact that Skunkworks kept the stealth program secret until it was intentionally revealed.  Phantom Works is believed to be working on the second plane I mentioned.

Quoted: At least the Bigfoot people have grainy photographs and 'casts' of imprints. You guys don't even have a bad photo, you have to rely on a anonymouse internet story? Thanks for you confidence in our ability to produce Star Wars technology in complete secrecy, you give us way too much credit (or you've been watching too much Stargate SG-1).

Actually, photos DO exist of this plane.  The Belgian Airforce took a picture of it flying over their airspace.  The incident is very well documented, including a transcript of their radio conversation about how it looked and its unusual flight capabilities.

I have no doubt that we have some crazy projects in the works.

When the big, bad B2 project ws first started in the late 70's/early 80s, one of the main problems the systems engineers had was that of portable information storage. I forget the exact number, but they were damn proud of themselves for producing a system capable of storing and downloading under 100mb of info.

Skip ahead 25 years in computing power......

Quoted: They have a pulse detonation powered plane that flies faster than Mach 6, probably even goes as fast a Mach 9.  It is approximately 100 feet long and looks like a flattened football.  They only fly it at night because of its distinctive contrail pattern. While we're at it, we have another plane that makes no sound, has a set of advanced LCD panels on the bottom that display what is above the plane, making it virtually invisible at night or during the day, the only thing that is visible is a slight distortion in the sky, and it also uses a means of propulsion that no other plane in existence uses to date, enabling it to do some rather unique manuevers, not capable of being performed by conventional jet aircraft using convention flight control surfaces.

And the people who have all this technology (which they got from aliens) seem incapable to put it to use.  They spend billions of your tax $ taking joy rides around the Nevada skies at night.

Quoted: I have been doing extensive research using open sources.   The second plane, which is invisible from the ground, can stop on a dime, change flight direction at right angles  yet fly as fast as a conventional jet, without making sound.  Imagine an invisible, silent  aircraft coming to stop over a combat zone, and Delta operators repelling out of it onto a rooftop.  I firmly believe this plane exists.  It is also rather large, larger than a fighter jet.

A friend and I witnessed something like this at Valley of Fire, NV one night.

We both were watching what appeared to be a satellite, it looked like a slow moving star. Suddenly the object shot off at a right angle across the sky.

It moved VERY fast..like a shooting star.

This was almost 20 years ago.

Quoted: Quoted: They have a pulse detonation powered plane that flies faster than Mach 6, probably even goes as fast a Mach 9.  It is approximately 100 feet long and looks like a flattened football.  They only fly it at night because of its distinctive contrail pattern. While we're at it, we have another plane that makes no sound, has a set of advanced LCD panels on the bottom that display what is above the plane, making it virtually invisible at night or during the day, the only thing that is visible is a slight distortion in the sky, and it also uses a means of propulsion that no other plane in existence uses to date, enabling it to do some rather unique manuevers, not capable of being performed by conventional jet aircraft using convention flight control surfaces. And the people who have all this technology (which they got from aliens) seem incapable to put it to use.  They spend billions of your tax $ taking joy rides around the Nevada skies at night.

No one said, nor have I implied, anything was obtained from aliens.  How do you know that they are not putting it to use?  During the battle of Fallujah, the military asked the imbedded reporters not to mention a plane that was circling above the city.  Since UAV's (Predator, Globalstar) are public knowledge, WHAT plane were they told not to write about?  Note the portion in red below.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6462834/

NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq - The skies over Fallujah are so crowded with U.S. military aircraft that they are layered in stacks above the city, from low-flying helicopters and swooping attack jets to a jet-powered unmanned spy drone that flies above 60,000 feet.

Much of the focus has been on the massive U.S. ground assault to reclaim the insurgent stronghold, but the complex air war is an indication of the effort and equipment the United States has invested in winning the battle for Fallujah.

No fewer than 20 types of aircraft have been thrown into the fight, including 10 fixed-wing planes, three types of helicopters and seven kinds of unmanned drones.


‘Wedding cake’ air cover

“We call it the wedding cake. It’s layered all the way up,” said Air Force Lt. Col. David Staven, who leads the ground targeting effort on a U.S. base outside Fallujah.

Much of the air war is being directed by 10 teams of ground controllers, who moved into the city with Army and Marine fighters. The controllers call down bombing raids or rocket attacks on insurgent positions in the city, said Staven, who leads the 9th Expeditionary Air Support Operations Squadron.

“You take out the threat from the air so you don’t have to get soldiers into the building to clear it on foot,” said Staven. “It’s better to take the enemy out from a distance than to go face to face with him.”

American warplanes relentlessly pounded Fallujah over the past three days, pouring cannon fire, rockets and bombs onto the city, sometimes just blocks ahead of advancing U.S. troops.

A pair of AC-130 gunships fired their entire arsenal of ammunition on Fallujah during Monday night’s assault — launching dozens of 105mm shells, hundreds of 25mm rounds and more than a hundred 40mm rounds.

“They’d just walk rounds down the street in front of the Bradley teams,” said Staven, 43, of Great Falls, Mont. “They sent two gunships home with no rounds left.”

On Wednesday, an Apache gunship sank five boats in the Euphrates River that the military said were used to resupply guerrillas with rocket-propelled grenades and mortar shells.


Computer driven targeting

The front line strikes are directed by Air Force or Marine tactical air control teams, who carry computers and laser target designator gear in backpacks, climbing to rooftops of Fallujah and pointing out targets for Air Force, Marine and Navy attack jets.

The teams’ laptop computers allow them to glean targeting coordinates from live video transmissions from unmanned spy planes droning above Fallujah.

Some teams are paired with Army or Navy special forces teams or snipers, working on the front lines and calling airstrikes within two blocks of their own positions.

The crowded airspace meant that attack jets bombarding the city Wednesday had a three-minute window to scream down and demolish targets — and then clear out — before another followed on its tail.

Strike jets fly in high-altitude “holding areas” until they are given bombing coordinates, Staven said. U.S. warplanes bombing the city include Marine F-18s and AV-8 Harriers.

The city is also being pummeled by Army Apache and Kiowa helicopters and Marine Super Cobra gunships, as well as the unmanned Predator spy plane, armed with Hellfire missiles.

There are also a slew of unmanned spy planes — including the Hunters and Pioneers — that relay targeting imagery to controllers, as well as a manned Air Force Joint STARS craft monitoring ground traffic and an observation plane that the military requested be unidentified.

‘Electronic warfare’

At least two aircraft outfitted with “electronic warfare” equipment have flown in the battle of Fallujah, jamming cellular telephones and other communications signals, some of which can be used to remotely detonate insurgents’ bombs.

On this Army base outside Fallujah, Staven leads a four-man team watching spy plane video to find mortar teams or rocket launchers and then feeding their positions to pilots flying over the city, or via chat rooms to the nearby Marine air operations center.

“This is how we’re controlling the air war,” Staven said, pointing to a bank of five computer screens in the dusty, crowded nerve center of the 1st Cavalry Division’s base.

The constant air and artillery bombardment has to be demoralizing for Fallujah’s guerrilla defenders, Staven said.

“Suddenly you see that mortar team disappear. You never heard it coming. That’s got to weigh heavily on their minds,” he said.

Quoted: The fact that you didn't know about Boeing's Bird of Prey stealth plane makes me wonder what else you may not be aware of.

Again your ASSuming the wrong thing....

1) Absolute air superiority.

F22 already gives us that

The ability to bomb anyone anywhere in the world with only a few hours notice from bases in the US.

We got that too, they are called ICBMs and SLMBs.  And before people start screaming 'no nukes' there are programs to use the missles to deliver conventional weapons.

Guys run the military and guys like toys. It would be really, really cool

Yeah but Congress doesn't give out $$ so men can play with toys.

If they don't investigate it then they might just get caught surprised when someone else makes a breakthrough.

Ok, since you're not getting the point.  NOBODY is saying there isn't research into various unusual propulsion fields.  What I am saying is we don't have UFO aircraft flying around spooking hunters and such.  AGAIN WHY KEEP IT A BIG SECRET??  Super weapons that can bomb you in 2 seconds work FAR better when the enemy knows about it - it scares them shitless and they think twice about attackings.

Another point.  Comercial launch is big business.  If you could build a Mach 9 aircraft odds are you could build a nice inexpensive launch vehicle.  Yet I still see the same old throw away commercial rockets.  Why is that?  Boeing would OWN the commercial launch buisiness with a cheap launch system.

Methane has a higher ISP than RP-1 which is Rocket Grade Kerosene and similar to jet fuel.

I was under the impression Methane only had 30-40 MJ/kg compared to Kerosene/JP4s 43-48MJ/kg.  Do you have different numbers?

as attested to the fact that Skunkworks kept the stealth program secret until it was intentionally revealed.

You're kidding right?  There were toy models of 'stealth' aircraft out, Tom Clancy wrote about them in 'Red Storm Rising' back in 1986.  Heck anyone remember the Congressional hearings on the subject when the AF General got up with the AMT 'Stealth' model and proclaimed "We don't have a Stealth Airplane; AND IT DOESNT LOOK LIKE THAT ANYWAY!".  Yeah NOBODY knew about stealth aircraft.

Quoted: Quoted: The fact that you didn't know about Boeing's Bird of Prey stealth plane makes me wonder what else you may not be aware of. Again your ASSuming the wrong thing.... 1) Absolute air superiority. F22 already gives us that The ability to bomb anyone anywhere in the world with only a few hours notice from bases in the US. We got that too, they are called ICBMs and SLMBs.  And before people start screaming 'no nukes' there are programs to use the missles to deliver conventional weapons. Guys run the military and guys like toys. It would be really, really cool Yeah but Congress doesn't give out $$ so men can play with toys. If they don't investigate it then they might just get caught surprised when someone else makes a breakthrough. Ok, since you're not getting the point.  NOBODY is saying there isn't research into various unusual propulsion fields.  What I am saying is we don't have UFO aircraft flying around spooking hunters and such.  AGAIN WHY KEEP IT A BIG SECRET??  Super weapons that can bomb you in 2 seconds work FAR better when the enemy knows about it - it scares them shitless and they think twice about attackings. Another point.  Comercial launch is big business.  If you could build a Mach 9 aircraft odds are you could build a nice inexpensive launch vehicle.  Yet I still see the same old throw away commercial rockets.  Why is that?  Boeing would OWN the commercial launch buisiness with a cheap launch system. Methane has a higher ISP than RP-1 which is Rocket Grade Kerosene and similar to jet fuel. I was under the impression Methane only had 30-40 MJ/kg compared to Kerosene/JP4s 43-48MJ/kg.  Do you have different numbers? as attested to the fact that Skunkworks kept the stealth program secret until it was intentionally revealed. You're kidding right?  There were toy models of 'stealth' aircraft out, Tom Clancy wrote about them in 'Red Storm Rising' back in 1986.  Heck anyone remember the Congressional hearings on the subject when the AF General got up with the AMT 'Stealth' model and proclaimed "We don't have a Stealth Airplane; AND IT DOESNT LOOK LIKE THAT ANYWAY!".  Yeah NOBODY knew about stealth aircraft.

The F-117 was made public in 1983, IIRC.  There are also toy models of Aurora, the former name for the first plane I mentioned.

Quoted: During the battle of Fallujah, the military asked the imbedded reporters not to mention a plane that was circling above the city.  Since UAV's (Predator, Globalstar) are public knowledge, WHAT plane were they told not to write about?

Off the top of my head I can think of two, but neither move at Mach 9 nor have adaptive camoflauge, nor do they make funny contrails.

Quoted: Quoted: During the battle of Fallujah, the military asked the imbedded reporters not to mention a plane that was circling above the city.  Since UAV's (Predator, Globalstar) are public knowledge, WHAT plane were they told not to write about? Off the top of my head I can think of two, but neither move at Mach 9 nor have adaptive camoflauge, nor do they make funny contrails.

The second plane I mentioned is an observation plane.  Originally, it did not have the adaptive camoflage, but still had silent flight.  The first plane I mentioned was not the one I was referring to here.  It has a completely different type of application.  One plane is an ultrafast transport platform and the second plane is an observation platform.

Quoted: The F-117 was made public in 1983, IIRC.  There are also toy models of Aurora, the former name for the first plane I mentioned.

The F-117 was revealed in November, 1988. It's tinfoil-brigade predecessor, the YF-19, looked nothing like it.

Quoted: The F-117 was made public in 1983, IIRC.  There are also toy models of Aurora, the former name for the first plane I mentioned.

Incorrect.  The Air Force didn't publicly aknowledge the aircraft until 1988 (Source: The US Air Force www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f117/).  A full 2 years after Clancy's book.  Clancy even got one of it's nicknames right (Frisbee).

The Aurora's been talked about since the late 80's.  Should such a plain exist,  I'd put money on it's no Mach 6-9 super plane, faster than SR-71 for sure but not as fast as you want to believe.

Hey I thought this was going to be a discussion about hypersonic aircraft, which are interesting.

What do you think is the expected outcome of these tests?

Military platforms only? That would be a shame.

They seem to toss off "satellite launcher" as an afterthought...

Too bad, since a reusable air vehicle that could get us into orbit at a reasonable cost would open up Space for practical human exploitation and colonization. We have everything we need now, except for that reliable and non-explosive ability to get to orbit...I mean, NASA is going back to CAPSULES for chrissakes!

Quoted: Hey I thought this was going to be a discussion about hypersonic aircraft, which are interesting. What do you think is the expected outcome of these tests? Military platforms only? That would be a shame. They seem to toss of "sattelite launcher" as an afterthought... Too bad, since a reusable air vehicle that could get us into orbit at a reasonable cost would open up Space for practical human exploitation and colonization. We have everything we need now, except for that reliable and non-explosive ability to get to orbit...I mean, NASA is going back to CAPSULES for chrissakes!

www.bbc.co.uk/southerncounties/community/strange_south/spy_plane/story.shtml

Quoted: Quoted: Hey I thought this was going to be a discussion about hypersonic aircraft, which are interesting. What do you think is the expected outcome of these tests? Military platforms only? That would be a shame. They seem to toss of "sattelite launcher" as an afterthought... Too bad, since a reusable air vehicle that could get us into orbit at a reasonable cost would open up Space for practical human exploitation and colonization. We have everything we need now, except for that reliable and non-explosive ability to get to orbit...I mean, NASA is going back to CAPSULES for chrissakes! www.bbc.co.uk/southerncounties/community/strange_south/spy_plane/story.shtml

Yes the spooky stuff is interesting too, but the thread starter was about these new hypersonic engine tests. I was hoping some of our aero guys would expond on that, not debunk UFOs.

What I don't understand is why they insist a petroleum based fuel is what will take us into the hypersonic realm.  I do not think that they are being entirely honest.   Because various sections of the craft will reach cruising-speed temperatures ranging from 1,000 degrees fahrenheit to more than 1,400 degrees fahrenheit, its fuel must both provide energy for the engines and act as a structural coolant extracting destructive heat from the plane's surface.

At hypersonic speeds, even exotic kerosene such as the special high-flashpoint JP-7 fuel used by the SR-71 Blackbird can't absorb enough heat. The plausible solution is cryogenic fuel.

The best possibilities are methane and hydrogen. Liquid hydrogen provides more than three times as much energy and absorbs six times more heat per pound than any other fuel. The downfall is its low density, which means larger fuel tanks, a larger airframe and more drag. While liquid hydrogen is the fuel of choice for spacelaunch vehicles that accelerate quickly out of the atmosphere, studies have shown that liquid methane is better for an aircraft cruising at Mach 5 to Mach 7. Methane is widely available, provides more energy than jet fuels, and can absorb five times as much heat as kerosene. Compared with liquid hydrogen, it is three times denser and easier to handle.

This is why I think our ultrafast planes, which already exist, use Methane as fuel.  I don't understand why NASA is touting the petroleum based fuel scramjet.  They are most likely out of the loop.

Do 'donut contrails' exist? Sure. Do we know what causes them? Nope.

I saw one of these contrails just a couple of weeks ago, but didn't see the plane that made it.

One night, looking up into the AZ desert sky, I followed an airplane across the sky.  It seemed to stop in mid-air and then go to warp speed like something out of Star Trek.  

Returning to the subject of scramjets, back in the late 50's/early 60's there was Project Suntan, a precursor to the SR-71. The idea was to use liquid hydrogen and a complex but conventional engine to get very high speeds. Apparently they were going to use the liquid hydrogen to bleed off part of the aerodynamic friction heat as well. They (meaning P&W, who I notice are working on this project as well) got an engine working on a test stand. Hydrogen had some good properties for scramjets.

The energy density of hydrogen wasn't so hot, though, so the design would have led to a short-ranged aircraft, which ultimately killed the project.

It is a common misconception that PWDE (Pulse Wave Detonation Engines) do not produce donut trail contrails.  If they are operating outside their normal specified parameters, they DO produce that type of contrail, and I believe the sound generated is between 100 and 200 Hertz.  A plane on a test flight with that type of engine may very well generate that type of contrail.

Quoted: Returning to the subject of scramjets, back in the late 50's/early 60's there was Project Suntan, a precursor to the SR-71. The idea was to use liquid hydrogen and a complex but conventional engine to get very high speeds. Apparently they were going to use the liquid hydrogen to bleed off part of the aerodynamic friction heat as well. They (meaning P&W, who I notice are working on this project as well) got an engine working on a test stand. Hydrogen had some good properties for scramjets. The energy density of hydrogen wasn't so hot, though, so the design would have led to a short-ranged aircraft, which ultimately killed the project.

That is correct.  Methane would be a better fuel, from what I've read.

(sigh) more UFO stuff

Back to the Hypersonic thread stuff:

What about "slush hydrogen"? Wouldn't that reduce the volume of the fuel jkstexas2001 brings up?

Quoted: (sigh) more UFO stuff Back to the Hypersonic thread stuff: What about "slush hydrogen"? Wouldn't that reduce the volume of the fuel jkstexas2001 brings up?

I believe they have and are experimenting with slush hydrogen, slush hydrogen/methane mixes, and slush methane.  While the volume is indeed reduced, there are other factors to consider in a hypersonic craft, as the fuel must not only propel the craft, but also help cool the craft.  Methane can absorb more heat than hydrogen without igniting.  I do not understand why a JP family fuel is even being mentioned.  The definition of hypersonic is when there becomes a layer of "stagnant" air in front of the plane, a wall of high pressure and high temperature, I think it occurs around Mach 5.1 or so.  Whatever fuel they decide to use must be able to absorb heat as well as propel the plane to hypersonic speeds.  

As for cooling the airframe, wouldn't it be better, both for NASA-type missions as well as military operations, to accelerate as quicly out of the atmosphere as possible, rather than stay in it and suffer the thermal load?

Tag, 'cause this is hella interesting.

Quoted: As for cooling the airframe, wouldn't it be better, both for NASA-type missions as well as military operations, to accelerate as quicly out of the atmosphere as possible, rather than stay in it and suffer the thermal load?

There are different theories / ideas about that.  One thought is to conserve fuel it could skip across the upper atmosphere and reaccelerate periodically, like a stone skipping across a pond.  There are no refuelling tankers at 200,000 feet, so for the plane to be able to make a rapid, non-stop flight halfway around the world, it would have to take measures to conserve fuel that are somewhat unusual. During the phases where it comes back down in contact with the atmosphere temporarily, cooling would be a major concern.  

The miltary wants to get somwhere real quick, right? What could be better than an air-breating (scramjet) trajectory to mach 25, then a rocket kick to orbital flight, like the old National Aerospace Plane profile?

To me its seems more technologically simple than slogging through the atmoshphere for the whole flight...plus it gets us a real space vehicle for civilian uses!

Quoted: The F-117 was made public in 1983, IIRC.  There are also toy models of Aurora, the former name for the first plane I mentioned.

Wrong. The F-117 wasn't made public until the late 80s. Just before the B-2 was introduced. In 1983 the pilots of the F-117 told people they were flying A-7s with special gear.

Quoted: The F-117 was made public in 1983, IIRC.  There are also toy models of Aurora, the former name for the first plane I mentioned.

"toy model"? WTF is that?

I build scale models

Quoted: Quoted: The F-117 was made public in 1983, IIRC.  There are also toy models of Aurora, the former name for the first plane I mentioned. Wrong. The F-117 wasn't made public until the late 80s. Just before the B-2 was introduced. In 1983 the pilots of the F-117 told people they were flying A-7s with special gear.

You are right.  We first used it during the Panama Operation.

Quoted: We would not have discontinued the SR-71 program without having something better.  There are applications where UAV's simply do not fit the bill, and satellites are easy to defeat, because it is known when they are overhead.

There are stealth systems for satellites, too.

Quoted: Quoted: We would not have discontinued the SR-71 program without having something better.  There are applications where UAV's simply do not fit the bill, and satellites are easy to defeat, because it is known when they are overhead. There are stealth systems for satellites, too.

Very true.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I have been doing extensive research using open sources.   The second plane, which is invisible from the ground, can stop on a dime,squishing the flesh bags inside change flight direction at right anglescartoonishly making the fleshbag's seatbelt cut them like Wile E Coyote running through a harpsichord,  yet fly as fast as a conventional jet, without making sound.  Imagine an invisible, silent  aircraft coming to stop over a combat zone, and Delta operator's repelling pureed remains pour out of it onto a rooftop.  I firmly believe this plane exists.  It is also rather large, larger than a fighter jet. Fixed it for ya. ... , my thoughts exactly Newtonian Physics was superceded by Quantum Physics and by The General Theory of Relativity.  Exactly why would a major Defense Contractor invest nearly a billion dollars into research in the field of antigravity, if there were nothing to it.  According to General Relativity, Gravity and Inertia are interconnected.  If the effects of Gravity can be cancelled out, then it follows logically so are the effects of inertia.  I fully understand the BS flags, laughing smily faces, etc.  If this area is BS and this stuff is not possible, why are so much of your tax dollars going into researching this technology?  It is the only explanation I can come up with that ties together evidence from numerous eyewitnesses, and it is a lot more plausible than what the kooks say about UFO's or backward engineered UFO's, etc. The direction of research appears to be that there is a way to cancel out the effects of gravity using some sort of electromagnetic field.  Russian Physicists, the same type of folks who discovered the principles of Stealth Technology, have developed proofs of this possibility - you can read the research papers, unless they have been pulled off of the internet. Regarding the LCD technology, years ago it was tested on the bottom of an F-15 fighter, making it invisible from the Ground.  Boeing recently announced the existence of a prototype stealth plane that is rumored to have LCD technology so that it can fly during the day without being detected.

Its not going to be LCD, more than likely Thinfilm OLED

If we actually had anti-gravity, using it soley for the propulsion of a spy plane would be a criminal act of the highest manitude.

Anti-gravity = Starhip Drive

I have several friends who are Air Force. When asked about some of these topics, the answer always comes back " We have things operational that would make George Lucas green with envy that he didn't think of them first for Star Wars."

Quoted: Do 'donut contrails' exist? Sure. Do we know what causes them? Nope. I saw one of these contrails just a couple of weeks ago, but didn't see the plane that made it. One night, looking up into the AZ desert sky, I followed an airplane across the sky.  It seemed to stop in mid-air and then go to warp speed like something out of Star Trek.

Do not drink the bong water.