PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Does Blackbird successor Lockheed SR-72 Aurora actually exist? (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/614962-does-blackbird-successor-lockheed-sr-72-aurora-actually-exist.html)

TonyGosling 31st Oct 2018 23:25

Does Blackbird successor Lockheed SR-72 Aurora actually exist?
 
Aurora Project Behind UFO Sightings In Scotland?

Source: The Press and Journal, Aberdeen, Sunday April 14 2002, via IndyMedia, UK,

LATEST U.S. STEALTH TECHNOLOGY MOVES TO WESTERN SCOTLAND
by The Press and Journal, Aberdeen 9:45pm Sun Apr 14 '02

Soaring at 5,000 miles per hour through the night sky these unidentified flying objects could be a 21st century addition to NATO's airforce. Radar stations at Prestwick, West Freugh and RAF Buchan may have tracked their movements as they fly between secret airbases and the Norwegian Fjords, but the Ministry of Defence and the US Air Force deny they even exist.

Nic Outterside investigates

ALMOST invisible to radar, the F-117 Stealth fighter is one of the most sophisticated warplanes ever built.

But for seven years the US Government denied that the top- secret aircraft - nicknamed Nighthawk - existed.

Then, in 1991, 40 Stealth fighters were suddenly deployed for action in the Gulf War.

Ranging the night skies over Baghdad on 1,270 missions the Nighthawks struck the most heavily defended Iraqi targets to stunning effect.

Now from the cloak of X-Files denial comes a Stealth successor: more powerful, blacker, faster and even more secret.

Under the codename Project Aurora - which may be a wrap for several secret aircraft - the planes are classified within the US defence department's black programme - one whose existence is not admitted by the authorities.

Experts claim experimental and prototype Aurora aircraft are using Scotland, the skies above the North Sea and the wilderness areas of far-Northern Europe as their testing ground.

Bill Sweetman, former technical editor for Jane's Information Group and an author of three books on Stealth technology claims the areas are ideal proving ranges.

"It certainly keeps them out of the eyes and ears of the US observers," he said.

He claims that after 17 years the US defence department is reaching the latter stages of trialing space-age military aircraft capable of astonishing speeds.

"There continues to be a huge black hole in what we know the Pentagon has spent money on," he told the Press and Journal.

"In 1999 black projects accounted for =A312.1billion of USAF research expenditure - that is almost 40% of the =A332billion research and development budget."...................

Jackonicko 31st Oct 2018 23:45

While there may be manned 'black' aircraft flying from Groom Lake and such places, and while there have been a succession of prototypes and technology demonstrators that we've learned about only after they were grounded, I remain unconvinced that any of the recent black aircraft programmes have actually entered full service.

For a while, it seemed most likely that there could have been a tactical reconnaissance/targeting platform (perhaps along the lines of the supposed TR-3A) whose existence might have explained some of the inconsistencies in F-117A operations, but as time has passed, and as we learned more about the -117A I personally started to think that this was probably fanciful.

I'm even less convinced by Aurora reports and rumours. None of the countries that might have been its targets have reported or complained about overflights, and there doesn't seem to have been any replacement for the int gathered by the Blackbird, that hasn't come from known sources (space-based, U-2, Global Hawk, etc.).

Every other secret programme has been spotted before it came out of the Black World - people had fleeting glimpses of the F-117A even before its existence was revealed, and there were plenty of compelling rumours that something was flying night sorties from Tonopah. The same happened with the MiGs and Sukhois flown by the USAF and indeed the F-117As that were kept active after the type was retired.

There's hardly anything with the same degree of 'believability' on the Aurora. There may have been a technology demonstrator or prototype, but reluctantly (because I'd love to believe that there was a secret hypersonic recce aircraft doing its stuff out there), I don't personally believe it.

Haraka 1st Nov 2018 06:30

Then of course there is the "Stealth" Blackhawk.... :)

Ascend Charlie 1st Nov 2018 07:46

They still can't match Blue Thunder for stealth...


...catch you later!

Pontius Navigator 1st Nov 2018 08:28


"In 1999 black projects accounted for =A312.1billion of USAF research expenditure - that is almost 40% of the =A332billion research and development budget."...................
Bit thick this morning. Can someone take me through the math (sic) on this?

Sky Sports 1st Nov 2018 09:11


Does Blackbird successor Lockheed SR-72 Aurora actually exist?
..........No

Davef68 1st Nov 2018 09:21

I could tell you but then I'd need to wipe your memory with my pen/light.

Although if you want a new recce asset look at X-37

dead_pan 1st Nov 2018 09:29

Back in the day it was inadvertently referred to in the Pentagon's annual publication "Soviet Military Power" - according to Flight International the document was hastily gathered back in at a press event when one of the journos noticed it...

So in answer to your question, it definitely did exist on paper.

Edited to add: I'm sure some people hereabouts will be familiar with the story about some unknown & allegedly secret US mil aircraft having a mishap at Boscombe in the nineties or early noughties, resulting in much activity on the site with screens erected etc etc.

Stuff 1st Nov 2018 09:41


Originally Posted by dead_pan (Post 10298650)
Edited to add: I'm sure some people hereabouts will be familiar with the story about some unknown & allegedly secret US mil aircraft having a mishap at Boscombe in the nineties or early noughties, resulting in much activity on the site with screens erected etc etc.

Which was subsequently explained as someone seeing TIARA in a hangar and adding 2 and 2 to get a lot more than 4. There was a thread about it that I cannot now find...

treadigraph 1st Nov 2018 10:04

According to Ben Rich "Aurora" was a Pentagon name allocated for funding the B-2 programme... Or something like that.

hoodie 1st Nov 2018 10:40

Stuff, here's one thread and a relevant post: https://www.pprune.org/military-avia...l#post10017348

chopper2004 1st Nov 2018 10:42

SR-71 successor thread
 

Originally Posted by TonyGosling (Post 10298356)
Aurora Project Behind UFO Sightings In Scotland?

Source: The Press and Journal, Aberdeen, Sunday April 14 2002, via IndyMedia, UK,

LATEST U.S. STEALTH TECHNOLOGY MOVES TO WESTERN SCOTLAND
by The Press and Journal, Aberdeen 9:45pm Sun Apr 14 '02

Soaring at 5,000 miles per hour through the night sky these unidentified flying objects could be a 21st century addition to NATO's airforce. Radar stations at Prestwick, West Freugh and RAF Buchan may have tracked their movements as they fly between secret airbases and the Norwegian Fjords, but the Ministry of Defence and the US Air Force deny they even exist.

Nic Outterside investigates

ALMOST invisible to radar, the F-117 Stealth fighter is one of the most sophisticated warplanes ever built.

But for seven years the US Government denied that the top- secret aircraft - nicknamed Nighthawk - existed.

Then, in 1991, 40 Stealth fighters were suddenly deployed for action in the Gulf War.

Ranging the night skies over Baghdad on 1,270 missions the Nighthawks struck the most heavily defended Iraqi targets to stunning effect.

Now from the cloak of X-Files denial comes a Stealth successor: more powerful, blacker, faster and even more secret.

Under the codename Project Aurora - which may be a wrap for several secret aircraft - the planes are classified within the US defence department's black programme - one whose existence is not admitted by the authorities.

Experts claim experimental and prototype Aurora aircraft are using Scotland, the skies above the North Sea and the wilderness areas of far-Northern Europe as their testing ground.

Bill Sweetman, former technical editor for Jane's Information Group and an author of three books on Stealth technology claims the areas are ideal proving ranges.

"It certainly keeps them out of the eyes and ears of the US observers," he said.

He claims that after 17 years the US defence department is reaching the latter stages of trialing space-age military aircraft capable of astonishing speeds.

"There continues to be a huge black hole in what we know the Pentagon has spent money on," he told the Press and Journal.

"In 1999 black projects accounted for =A312.1billion of USAF research expenditure - that is almost 40% of the =A332billion research and development budget."...................

Think up to a point when L-M said 72 not in development lest exist, everyone thought it did exist via press releases plus reported sightings of scaled unmanned demonstrator landing at Plant 42 in the dark with a pair of T-38 Talons.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...t-skunk-works/

cheers

chopper2004 1st Nov 2018 12:32

Whats this at TTR recently?
 

Originally Posted by Jackonicko (Post 10298368)
While there may be manned 'black' aircraft flying from Groom Lake and such places, and while there have been a succession of prototypes and technology demonstrators that we've learned about only after they were grounded, I remain unconvinced that any of the recent black aircraft programmes have actually entered full service.

For a while, it seemed most likely that there could have been a tactical reconnaissance/targeting platform (perhaps along the lines of the supposed TR-3A) whose existence might have explained some of the inconsistencies in F-117A operations, but as time has passed, and as we learned more about the -117A I personally started to think that this was probably fanciful.

I'm even less convinced by Aurora reports and rumours. None of the countries that might have been its targets have reported or complained about overflights, and there doesn't seem to have been any replacement for the int gathered by the Blackbird, that hasn't come from known sources (space-based, U-2, Global Hawk, etc.).

Every other secret programme has been spotted before it came out of the Black World - people had fleeting glimpses of the F-117A even before its existence was revealed, and there were plenty of compelling rumours that something was flying night sorties from Tonopah. The same happened with the MiGs and Sukhois flown by the USAF and indeed the F-117As that were kept active after the type was retired.

There's hardly anything with the same degree of 'believability' on the Aurora. There may have been a technology demonstrator or prototype, but reluctantly (because I'd love to believe that there was a secret hypersonic recce aircraft doing its stuff out there), I don't personally believe it.

Censored Craft Near Hangar Appears In Satellite Image Of Secretive Tonopah Test Range Airport - The Drive


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....8c0f64df7b.jpg

Lonewolf_50 1st Nov 2018 13:10


Originally Posted by chopper2004 (Post 10298709)
Think up to a point when L-M said 72 not in development lest exist, everyone thought it did exist via press releases plus reported sightings of scaled unmanned demonstrator landing at Plant 42 in the dark with a pair of T-38 Talons.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...t-skunk-works/

cheers

Chopper, if you do a little thinking, you might revise some of your assumptions.

A proposed hypersonic reconnaissance and strike aircraft, the SR-72 would serve as a replacement for the famed SR-71 Blackbird, which was retired by the Air Force back in 1998
Tell me, chopper, what has the USAF been doing for the past 20 years without the SR-71 in order to meet their mission requirements that the SR-71 met?
Nothing?
Perhaps they replaced that capability with something else already, and Popular Mechanics might not be as credible a source (in terms of conclusions) as some think.
What is very true, however, is that USAF (and IIRC DARPA) have been spending money over the years on figuring out hypersonic flight. The presumption that this is to build a replacement for SR-71, whose mission area has been fulfilled by something else for about 20 years, strikes me as an unfounded assumption. What mission and role a hypersonic aircraft, manned or unmanned, would fulfill would seem at this time to be something less than 'written in stone' for the simple reason that you have to get it to work as something larger than a scale model.
Given the advances in a variety of tech, I am not convinced that this hoped for hypersonic aircraft would be a manned air vehicle. Think of the weight you can save by not having to account for all of that stuff needed to keep the human up and running for the length of a mission.

LowObservable 1st Nov 2018 17:46

I could tell you the full story, but then I'd have to repeat a horrible cliche from a bad movie with gratuitous male beach volleyball scenes.

ORAC 1st Nov 2018 19:07

I have no idea what it was, but I did watch something accidentally clip the edge of Polestar radar cover back in the 90s, entering to the north and heading south-west. Only for about 8-10 radar sweeps before it left cover again. (Running the gap between Rockville and Polestar coverage). M4 slowing and a 3D height coming down through about 150K.

Could have been a comet, but they don’t usually slow down. Who knows?

And what were all those “soap-on-a-rope” contrails way high and fast off the Californian coast?

LowObservable 1st Nov 2018 19:15

ORAC - It was a streetlight. Attached to a weather balloon.

Ewan Whosearmy 1st Nov 2018 20:09

Two things stick in my mind on this topic:

1. When the MoD declassified its 'UFO Guide' some years ago, it included a number of aircraft types that might explain the actual identity of a reported UFO. In the US section, it included obvious candidates such as the F-117 and B-2. But one aircraft type had been redacted in its entirety.
2. I'll need to dig out his name, but I read the autobiography of an RAF fast jet pilot a few years back, in which he stated he had seen something flying into RAF Mildenhall very late one Sunday night. It was triangular in shape (but not the B-2). I don't recall the details, but I think he was at that time on a ground tour, and had some kind of liaison responsibility between the RAF and USAF. He phoned Mildenhall the next day to enquire what the aircraft type was. They responded that there had been no aircraft movements that Sunday. He fairly rapidly then gets a call from someone in MoD telling him that he didn't see anything and to stop asking questions.

wiggy 1st Nov 2018 20:36

I’ve never early understood this fascination with the Aurora or similar blasting around at hypersonic velocities.....with the advent of stealth, the F-117 and the B2 surely ( :E) any SR-71 replacement is going to be one of the aforementioned, suitably equipped, rather than something trucking along “boomy” as hell and with an IR signature that’s up at 11....

TonyGosling 1st Nov 2018 21:23

Just because there's
So-called SR-72 Aurora
Photoshop fake images
Doesn't mean the plane doesn't exist
In my mind this next gen step being kept from public domain would make a lot of sense
And no, I don't believe in crop circles or chemtrails folks ;-)


Originally Posted by Davef68 (Post 10298641)
I could tell you but then I'd need to wipe your memory with my pen/light.
Although if you want a new recce asset look at X-37


tartare 1st Nov 2018 22:41

It's callsign is Gaspipe :E
Seriously though - I would have thought that the simple laws of physics would suggest that if there is or has been a USAF hypersonic vehicle operating, it would probably have been revealed by now.
Think of the plasma surrounding even a medium sized UAV (or the manned version - which would necessarily be bigger) travelling at Mach 5+.
That's a mile a second at least.
In the infra-red - surely the thing would glow like the rising sun, and there's nothing I can think of that would hide that.
And come to think of it - the same plasma would not only preclude microwave or radio coms and telemetry inks to and from the aircraft would it not - and how would the aircraft's onboard sensors see through the plasma?
Am not a hypersonics, radar or sensor expert - so happy to hear the counterfactual from someone who is.
Did the space shuttle maintain coms all the way through re-entry?
Wouldn't an Aurora be very easy to detect by those it is reconnoitering purely because of its heat - even if it would be very hard to shoot down?
Lockmart are certainly now claiming that they've perfected an operationally feasible scramjet - and there have been credible suggestions that small scale protoypes of an SR-72 have been flying.
Did Aurora ever exist though?
Much as I'd like to think so (how fantastic) I doubt it.

Kerosene Kraut 2nd Nov 2018 08:55

Some theory: They would not have retired the SR-71 without something better and something non-satellite, so something non-predictable.
For stealth reasons some smaller drone might be better. Not sure if speed is the advantage it once was especially with all those tankers and inflight refueling involved back then. The question is why would anyone today still want it to be manned? Signal delay? Why not a smaller drone? Like folded up in a box dropped from some innocent C-17 inflight or something you can launch from a submarine?

dead_pan 2nd Nov 2018 09:32


It's callsign is Gaspipe
Surely you mean Gaslight?

TelsBoy 2nd Nov 2018 10:12

Is the Aurora not flown out of Area 51 by the augmented super-human half-alien mutants to keep a track of the chemtrail spreading programme?

Sorry, it's Friday, I get let out once a week. Where's the tin hat...

Davef68 2nd Nov 2018 10:38

I think it's fair to say that the US must have had some prototypes and assets that are not in public view - the RQ-170 was in service for a while before being spotted in Afghanistan (and test and trials versions I suspect accounts for some of the 'triangle' sightings from the late 90s and early 2000s)

The sighting that always intruiges me was Chris Gibson's 'triangle' over the North Sea in the late 80s - Gibson was an oil worker, but also an ROC member and aviation enthusiast (later to make a name for himself with books about post-war British aircraft projects)

In August 1989, Chris Gibson, a Scottish oil-exploration engineer and, at the time, a member of the British Royal Observer Corps (ROC), was working on the oil rig Galveston Key in the North Sea when he noticed an aircraft in the shape of a pure isoceles triangle refuelling from a KC-135 Stratotanker alongside two F-111s. The unknown aircraft, cruising in a formation northward through Air-to-Air Refuelling Area (AARA) 6A, is what people have come to believe, is the mysterious Aurora hypersonic spyplane. Another possible aircraft, which could have been seen over the North Sea however, is Northrop's A-17 stealth attack plane. Chris Gibson's observation of the mysterious flying triangle is often cited by UFO researchers when the subject of Aurora rises. Below, Chris Gibson explains precisely what happened, as well as giving an insight into himself.

I welcome any questions on my North Sea sighting, as I am of the opinion that too much is taken at face value in the black aircraft snark hunt. I think that the snark hunt has degenerated into an exercise in regurgitating the same old stories with little or no new research being done. A bit about me. I work as a drilling technologist for a major oil field service company. I hold an Honours degree in geology, with some engineering, geophysics and chemistry thrown in. I also did a post graduate course in systems analysis, I was a member of the Royal Observers Corps for 13 years and was a member of the ROC's aicraft recognition team for 12 of those years. In this field I was considered to be an expert and produced an aircraft recognition manual for the ROC. Some will obviously know the sighting story, but I'll fill you in on what happened from my point of view.

I was working in the indefatigable field on the jack-up rig 'Galvestion Key' in August 1989. My colleague, Graeme Winton, went out on deck but returned immediately. He told me to "have a look at this." We went outside and Graeme pointed skywards. I had been at university with Graeme and he knew of my interest in aircraft. As far as Graeme was concerned it was a formation of aircraft and he reckoned I'd be interested. I looked up, saw the tanker and the F-111s, but was amazed to see the triangle. I am trained in instant recognition, but this triangle had me stopped dead. My first thought was that it was another F-111, but there was no 'gaps', it was too long and it didn't look like one. [bannerad] My next thought was that it was an F-117, as the highly swept planform of the F-117 had just been made public. Again the triangle was too long and had no gaps. After considering and rejecting a Mirage IV, I was totally out of ideas. Here was an aircraft, flying over head, not too high and not particularly fast. A recognition gift and I was clueless. This was a new experience. Graeme asked me what was going on. I watched as the formation flew overhead and told him that the big one was a KC-135 Stratotanker, the two on the left were F-111s and that I didn't know what the fourth aircraft was. Graeme said "I though you were an expert?" I said "I am." To which Graeme replied "Some expert."

It was obvious to me that this aircraft was something 'dodgy'. I watched the formation for a minute or two and went back inside with Graeme. At the time I was writing the aircraft recognition manual and had a Danish Luftmelderkorpset Flykendingsbog in my briefcase. This is probably the best aircraft recognition book ever produced. I looked through it, but nothing matched. I then sketched what I had seen and sent this to Peter Edwards, who was a Group Officer in the ROC and was also on the recognition team.

We discussed what to do about it but decided that if it was reported through official channels, it would be at best rubbished, at worst lead to trouble. Having signed the Official Secrets Act I didn't want to jeopardise my position in the recognition team, so I kept my mouth shut. I told other members of the recognition team in the hope that they could shed some light on the subject. On returning home I had a look through my book collection. The only aircraft which came close to matching what I had seen was a Handley Page HP115. It was not one of them. Whether this aircraft was a Aurora is debatable - my background precludes jumping to conclusions based on a single piece of evidence. I wrote to Bill Sweetman (Stealth expert) after being sent an illustration from Janes Defense Weekly which matched what I had seen. As an aside, I wrote to two other writers who did not reply. Bill reckons it was Aurora; Agenct 'X' reckons it was the FB-119. I don't know what it was. It is the only aircraft I have ever seen that I could not identify. Pete Edwards told Bill Sweetman that if I didn't know what this aircraft was, it isn't in any book. I've been hunting this 'snark' for almost 9 years now and have turned up some interesting stuff, mainly through my own efforts, but also by having looked in the most unusual places. Talking to the people involved is a necessity.


Kerosene Kraut 2nd Nov 2018 11:04

The SR-71's core mission is said to have been post-SIOP reconnaissance. This need should persist today. It might support the point of keeping it manned at least optionally.

Blacksheep 2nd Nov 2018 13:31

Come, now. The fact that the Nighthawk has been retired shows plainly that there must be a successor in service.

Prangster 2nd Nov 2018 14:02

Obviously missing something?
 
Mach lightspeed eh? At that velocity I'm not too surprised no ones seen it. Let me let you into a secret. It's supposed to be secret. Maybe for once they managed not to leak like aunt Mildreds collander. Or more likely, like David Blane, they employ slight of hand to misdirect your gaze....the truth is out there somewhere, Just not Machrihanish.Oops I shouldn't have said that.

bobward 2nd Nov 2018 15:50

A little bit of (probably useless) information to add to Chris Gibson's comments.
The Indefatigable gas field is about fifty miles north east of Cromer in Norfolk, ie the southern North Sea.
Although it's relatively close to RAF Mildenhall etc, surely any super-secret machine would not operate so close to the major air routes across southern England?

I'll get my coat and hat and leave now....
...and stop calling you Shirley.

Misformonkey 2nd Nov 2018 19:32


Originally Posted by Blacksheep (Post 10299733)
Come, now. The fact that the Nighthawk has been retired shows plainly that there must be a successor in service.

Mind the gap......

Onceapilot 2nd Nov 2018 19:45

Although I do not totally discount the possibility of some Very Low Observable (VLO) platform(s) for seriously rare use, I strongly suspect that the funding has been spent in Space, AI and Internet Warfare. ;)

OAP

Stuff 2nd Nov 2018 20:23


Originally Posted by Misformonkey (Post 10299964)
Mind the gap......

It's not a gap. It's a "capability holiday."

TEEEJ 2nd Nov 2018 20:36


Originally Posted by Ewan Whosearmy (Post 10299184)
Two things stick in my mind on this topic:

1. When the MoD declassified its 'UFO Guide' some years ago, it included a number of aircraft types that might explain the actual identity of a reported UFO. In the US section, it included obvious candidates such as the F-117 and B-2. But one aircraft type had been redacted in its entirety.

Link to the declassified document with one aircraft under Western Programmes edited out in both text and image.

Working Paper No.9 'Black' and Other Aircraft as UAP Events.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g..._pgs76to90.pdf

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...pgs91to105.pdf

From

Ministry of Defence | Freedom of Information | Publication Scheme | Search Publication Scheme | Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) in the UK Air Defence Region

Stuff 2nd Nov 2018 21:27

That's a fascinating document.

The original copy was marked variously UK/NATO RESTRICTED but was presumably overstamped SECRET at some later date before finally being redacted and declassified. Clearly the original author didn't think that the paragraphs and photos that were subsequently removed warranted a higher protective marking than RESTRICTED when it was written. Did the significance of what was in those deleted paragraphs not become clear until after it was initially written?

Davef68 2nd Nov 2018 22:19

When was that dated? the 'F-22B' was cancelled in 1996, so it must pre-date that.

Could it be BAE's Replica program? IIRC they were flying subscale models from Walney Island

The AvgasDinosaur 3rd Nov 2018 12:22

I think I recall that, it was alleged, that some of the first F-117 crews deployed in GW1 had 'team stealth' patches with two slightly different silouhettes thereon. This were quickly replaced by conventional F-117 patches. Was there a recce stealth aircraft back then ? Possibly in smaller numbers than the F-117.
Your comments and observations appreciated.
Be lucky
david

Ewan Whosearmy 3rd Nov 2018 13:15


Originally Posted by The AvgasDinosaur (Post 10300442)
I think I recall that, it was alleged, that some of the first F-117 crews deployed in GW1 had 'team stealth' patches with two slightly different silouhettes thereon. This were quickly replaced by conventional F-117 patches. Was there a recce stealth aircraft back then ? Possibly in smaller numbers than the F-117.
Your comments and observations appreciated.
Be lucky
david

David

A year or two after the end of Gulf War I, I read in one of the broadsheets that the US Air Force had acknowledged the F-117 had operated in concert with a classified recce platform. Whatever it was has never been declassified.

I don't know much about the Nighthawk, but I don't think it was set up for real-time or dynamic targeting, not least of all because its ingress and egress routes were very carefully planned to minimise its exposure to threat radars that had the power (and other characteristics) to generate a detectable radar return at a reasonable distance. This made me think that, rather than operating as a killer-scout duo, the second platform was actually there to conduct bomb damage assessment.

SATCOS WHIPPING BOY 3rd Nov 2018 16:22


Originally Posted by dead_pan (Post 10298650)
.....

Edited to add: I'm sure some people hereabouts will be familiar with the story about some unknown & allegedly secret US mil aircraft having a mishap at Boscombe in the nineties or early noughties, resulting in much activity on the site with screens erected etc etc.

I was there, it didn't happen.

There was over a period of many months lots of little routine incidents of no concern but add these together and saying they happened all on one day led to quite a story. I personally asked the local police to close the main road from Amesbury to Salisbury so that an aircraft with a snag could make a safe approach without risk to the public. I remember reading the guff in the Telegraph and sticking it into the LH page of the ATC log for posterity. If the log has not been binned it will still be in there.

One minor incident that didn't help matters was where a member of the public crashed his car just off base out of hours and the Fire Section crew went to assist. The vehicle was a a black Opel Manta. The Opel bit was taken out by the conspiracy theorists and lo-and-behold we have a Black Manta crash at Boscombe.

Got to go, a black sedan has just pulled up outside and men in dark suits are coming my way. Cheery-bye.

The AvgasDinosaur 3rd Nov 2018 21:19


Originally Posted by Ewan Whosearmy (Post 10300464)
David

A year or two after the end of Gulf War I, I read in one of the broadsheets that the US Air Force had acknowledged the F-117 had operated in concert with a classified recce platform. Whatever it was has never been declassified.....................

E.W. Thanks for your time and reply,
i further believe, heaving read several reports, that at the end of the F-22/F-23 evaluation competion the F-23 was found to have better performance especially in low observability, but was significantly more expensive to produce. As the F-22 entered production the F-23 design was developed into a reconnaissance platform which has an almost symbiotic relationship with the F-22. The nature of the design of both craft and the sensor fit in the F-23 derivative are the reasons that the F-22 has never been offered for export. This derivative may or may not be the oft rumoured "TR-3", often confused with the tier3 unmanned project.
Thanks again for your time
Be lucky
David
P.S. The F-23/(TR-3) was built in small numbers as a plantinum asset


chopper2004 4th Nov 2018 10:28


Originally Posted by dead_pan (Post 10299560)
Surely you mean Gaslight?

You mean this ? 😆😛 used to see this’s advertised At back of British Airways in flight magazines in the 1980s

Products Archive - Gaslight club

cheers


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:19.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.