SR-72 Confirmed: Mach 6 Project Blackswift

Blackswift was a white/grey project that only recently went black. It was supposedly canceled recently, but has all the hallmarks of going underground.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


There's no such thing as the "Aurora" bomber. The name Aurora was the name given to the funds for the B-2 bomber project, back when Lockheed and Northrop were competing for the contract.

Rolls Royce have progress on Histed with the mach 4 turbine, may be it can be for Blackswist propulsion ?

I came acrossed this topic do to running a search on "Blackswift". Because I found a News Report on it by Fox News of all places.

NASA Blackswift hypersonic scramjet or HTV-3XUploaded by ufoblogger

www.dailymotion.com...

I'm sure many of you well find it as interesting as I did. I to thought it could be Aurora as well. But now I see that it isn't.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by Coops1323]

We know this video, its interesting, this kind of plane, can open the door to routine access of space, I m very impatient to see hypersonic in the white world, now its time to go in 21st century. X-51a is another interestin demonstrator, may be it will be a reusable X-51a demonstrator.

When you talk about the hallmarks of going black, what exactly are the signs?

This is of great interest, and I will definitely be following all future news of this remarkable aircraft!

Originally posted by Coops1323
I'm sure many of you well find it as interesting as I did. I to thought it could be Aurora as well. But now I see that it isn't.[edit on 29-1-2009 by Coops1323]

The Aurora is decades-old technology and a term applied to any streak left behind by an alleged "black" hypersonic spy plane. The reality could be a number of things - technology demonstrators, a specially designed series of craft for special operations (there are people in the military and civilian world who have the job of taking your off-the-shelf military hardware and making it do all sorts of things it was not originally designed to do) - aircraft too expensive to be cost-effective in mainstream service - but a necessary expense for the support they can provide as a small, specialized force.

That said - there's some pretty serious talk about trans-atmospheric strike aircraft (deployed from orbit). They don't run out and tell you "we're planning to militarize space" - but they are certainly working in that general direction. It honestly wouldn't surprise me to see the first stellar military vessels announced and funded within the next twenty years.

If I were an enterprising man - I'd seriously see that "killer asteroid" that's going to cross our path in 2012 as a golden opportunity. Had we the propulsion technology (I make the assertion that, somewhere, we do) - it would be possible to intercept and capture that asteroid, placing it in a distant orbit around the planet.

The use? Why haul materials up from a strong gravitational field when you can park a giant hunk of metal (granted, it needs to be purified - and certain materials would need to be transported for the creation of alloys - but the vacuum of space would allow for a number of methods we cannot utilize in our corrosive atmosphere) out there in space, where it's much easier to move and assemble the materials?

If we miss it this time - we will certainly not miss it the next time around. Though, by then, it would likely be a commercial endeavor as opposed to a military one. Probably would be better that way.

From the threat of impending doom, humanity uses the opportunity to take its first serious steps into space. Quite romantic. Almost as if it could have been planned...... couldn't have happened at a better time, to be honest..... We've got plenty of warning (just within the past decade really got the technology to warn us in time), are on the fringes of viable space flight technology, and threatened with our demise.

Given the track record of our species - we'll come out of this one ahead of the game. Be it of our design, a foreign design, or simply us perceiving order out of chaos...... we're one hell of a lucky species. Attribute that to what forces you want to.

Though I've strayed somewhat off topic.

The point is - there are a lot of projects out there that we don't know about and likely never will. Levels of compartmentalization and the way a lot of that stuff plays out means that few people actually have the whole (or even a complete fragment) story. All kinds of things are developed and tested that never appear on an appropriations bill - they're just part of a pet-project under a general funding bill (handled by local accounting authorities). Some of it is classified - some of it is not classified, but you just never hear about it (and some of it is classified, and no one ever hears of it, so it never gets declassified, even if it's 50 years old).

reply to post by ADVISOR

i think the Aurora project has had many names maybe a name as old as the 1959 Convair King fish got some info off the FOIA files from a proposed design from Convair C.O. when there design was dropped for the A-12(SR-71 Black Bird) by Lockheed they joined Lockheed in development and some years later the F-117 comes out from Lockheed and now the Arora if you notice the pic i have resembles both plains but this design was put to the government in 1959 i don't know how to put the pic on here so if you want to see what im talking about feel free to send request at [email protected] or look for your self in the FOIA files provided here at (www.foia.cia.gov...) tell me what you think thks

As part of current thesis I have actually used a quote from Peter Singers latest Book "Wired For War" which discusses this VERY CRAFT the Blackswift - it is known as the "Common Aero Vehicle" --

cheers.

Originally posted by DeltaNine
When you talk about the hallmarks of going black, what exactly are the signs?

"Canceled due to budget cuts"

VS

TRILLIONS of unaccounted for Pentagon money annually

Just google "Mission Trillions"

So the money vanishes into a black hole along with the projects that they have no money for

That would be hallmark one.

Building a huge new hanger at Area 51 visible on Google Earth...

That would be hallmark two

Hope that helps. I see someone beat me to posting the link to the Fox video at Daily Motion since Youtube deleted it but in case you all missed it a few posts back...

www.dailymotion.com...

Also here is the transcript that Beth Vegh of Pegasus (Undo at ATS) did for us...

One day Air Force pilots will blast off from US bases and reach their targets, flying six times the speed of sound. The Air Force just completing a successful test flight that can make this simulation a reality. It's an experimental plane using a new engine that not only burns its fuel but it blows itself up for greater propulsion.

NASA analyst, aviation consultant, Ken Christiansen my guest now.

Reporter (Bill): Ken, good morning.
Ken: Mornin' Bill
Bill: In english now, not in science talk,
Ken: (chuckles)
Bill: How does it work?
Ken: Very, very complicated. Ah, basically ah, as we transcended from one area to another, from jets to uh, scramjets and rockets, this is more of an explosion within the combustion chamber. A series of very small explosions or large explosions but pulse up to maybe a thousand a second and that will, just like the jetson cars that accelerated you would hear the pulsing umm..much like that.
Bill: Check that out. You see that go off the runway?
Lady in background: hmph
Bill: It was gone. What would this do for aviation, Ken? If we can do it succesfully?
Ken: I think as you go through the uh different technologies, what what really, this is gonna be an enabler to go in the Mach V to Mach X regime
Bill: Which is how fast?
Ken: Ah, very fast.
Bill: That three thousand miles an hour, what is that?
Ken: About three thousand um, you're talking about 2300 miles at Mach 3, so, just under, just under 10,000, within that range.
Bill: So you can take off, you can take off from a runway -- let me be sure I get this right -- fly it at six times the speed of sound and then come back home again?
Ken: Yes, much like the shuttle. The shuttle goes up and comes back as an orbiter. This vehicle would actually be able to take off from a runway or maybe uh a modified launch pad and then return like an aircraft.
Bill: How, how does a human being stand that ...at six times the speed of sound? What, what, what would that feel like?
Ken: It's, it'll be gradual. A human can't that immediate uh, acceleration, so much like the space shuttle, the existing space shuttle, the accelerate from, or they leave the pad at zero and then go up to 17,500 miles an hour to reach orbital velocity. To go into uh, into space, but that's a gradual. In the shuttle's situation it takes about 9, 9 and a half minutes to uh to accelerate to that speed.
Bill: You need the, the equipment to be able to stand it too. How, if if it could be done, what would it cost?
Ken: Uh, that's TBD at this point. The monies that I uh read about on the, when I researched this item, um, it's it's in the millions but this will clearly go into the billions as this, as this is developed. Air Force has been doing it. Darpa's been doing it. Um NASA, uh Dryden Flight Research Center in the uh, does it.
Bill: Yeah uh everyone does it yeah. Wonder what Wilbur and Orville are thinking about this right now. (laughs) uh huh, cool.
Lady in background: (laughs)
Bill: Thank you, Ken. Ken Christiansen. The future, someday.
Ken: You're welcome, Bill
Lady in background: 10,000 miles an hour
Bill: (whistles)
Lady: That's NY to LA in 20 minutes (snaps her fingers). How'd you like that? I'm in.
Bill: I like it!
Lady: Even me. Even I'd get on that flight.

Key points for me...


Bill: You need the, the equipment to be able to stand it too. How, if if it could be done, what would it cost?
Ken: Uh, that's TBD at this point. The monies that I uh read about on the, when I researched this item, um, it's it's in the millions but this will clearly go into the billions as this, as this is developed. Air Force has been doing it. Darpa's been doing it. Um NASA, uh Dryden Flight Research Center in the uh, does it.
Bill: Yeah uh everyone does it yeah.

and this one...


Ken... The shuttle goes up and comes back as an orbiter. This vehicle would actually be able to take off from a runway or maybe uh a modified launch pad and then return like an aircraft.

I still want to kill Bill though Let the NASA guy speak for crying out loud

Those two comments I highlighted, especially this "Air Force has been doing it. Darpa's been doing it. "...

That would be hallmark three

that second picture looks like aurora except white in color. somebody else might have already said this but im lazy right now and didnt read through posts.
dlr.thexhunters.com...

Well, I see a scale model of the cancelled X-33 venture Star . It was one of the offered variations. And not any SR-72. By the way, if they were going to make a new recce aircraft it would not be designated SR_ 72. Better check out next generation attack helicopter for Lockheed Martin at my page- theadvancedboy.blogspot.com ( must copy and paste the link). leave comments.

While everyone's patting the Air Force on the back, I'm thinking of Lockheed.

It's one major advancement after another, after another.

Wouldn't you just LOVE to hang out with those guys at the work stations.

By the way they have been building scale demonstartors for years including ramjet and scramjet concepts usually dropping them from b-52 and then propelling it . Those are nothing more than expensive toys. When on earth will Americans start building real size crafts? otherwise their uberprojects ain`t better than my built models, with a difference that mine cost close to nothing compared to their tax sucking toys costing millions. Do I have to design alone the replacement for Chinooks and Large cargo planes etc? Why don`t you invest in me. at least I build real models not CGIs)))

So amazing that a country in jeopardy with people hurting big time, has the gall to implement these multi-billion dollar black projects. I mean really.. the country can't survive without this 4,000 mph stealth plane? I can't imagine total project cost for something like this not to mention crews and maintenance. Madness..

Originally posted by Darkpr0


Does the USAF intend this to be a UAV/UCAV or will it be manned?

The OP clearly says UCAV.


Fast forward 2 years from the OP ...

Could this be the weapon that takes out buried iranian nuclear sites? Seems like the kinetic energy alone from going mach 6 might be enough to reach the buried targets. Perhaps the MOP is just a smokescreen for this weapon.


[edit on 9/29/2009 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by bdn12
...Not everything that the US builds has to be sold to foreign countries.

Sold, stolen... like there's a difference.

1998

Just what happened in February 1996 when a Chinese rocket exploded when it was about to launch an American sat? And in that aftermath, did Loral Space Systems, the satellite's builder, pass on secrets to the Chinese government? If so, why should we care?

So far, everything the committee has been told has come via classified, secure briefings.

www.accessmylibrary.com...

Now that months have passed since the Blackswift stories graced the pages of aerospace magazines and major news outlets, and everyone presumes the Blackswift is dead and buried comes this small press release from Pratt & Whitney.

Lockheed Martin has awarded Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne a contract design of a turbine-based combined-cycle (TBCC) propulsion system able to propel a hypersonic strike and reconnaissance vehicle to speeds of Mach 6.

"The TBCC propulsion system consists of a turbojet engine, which can operate from take-off to Mach 3, and a ramjet engine, which can operate from Mach 2.5 to Mach 6."

Folks, I am still on my soap box about this. I haven't given up, I am convinced that the Blackswift program is proceeding on schedule in the black world in spite of the cancellation/supposed funding cut.

Source: Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Awarded Contract to Perform Combined-Cycle Engine Risk Reduction: Sept. 28 PRNewswire

reply to post by intelgurl


Kewl Thanks for the update... haven't heard from you for some time

Well all those missing TRILLIONS have to be going somewhere where they don't show up on paper... that is a lot of money... 9 trillion unaccounted for fiscal year 2008 alone

Bet that would buy a prototype or three