posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 08:16 AM
I think it is widely acknowledged that some sort of Aurora-like craft exists, or has existed - and has been tested. The question is whether or not the
technology is ever likely to be used in anger. Most leading defence authorities - including Janes, that you mention - seem to focus more on unmanned,
remote controled aircraft technologies than massive speed vehicles like Aurora.
The real question is, if Aurora doesn't ever come to light as a project of significance for the US air force - who is answerable for the massive
amounts of public money that have surely been thrown into this project only for it not to be used?
There is a vanity to the production of high-speed in aircraft that may not be matched by their potential in a combat situation. There is obviously a
huge advantage to be gained from reaching a target or location 8 times as fast as your opponent - but is it actually necessary to do so at 8000mph
rather than 2500, say, or even slower? What's the real gain?
W