Aviation Week Unveils Secret Space Plane

[Fox-Tree]

……I have been out of the military loop for over 10 years now, but speeds were always a big thing. F-15 mach 2.5, F-14 mach 2.34....was always a big deal and nobody would ever give a hard figure on that. The down low speed would be to help anti-aircraft defenses.

“Nobody would give a hard figure?” Who were you asking? I’ve been in the Eagle since 1989 and the max speed hasn’t been “guarded” at least that long. When we go to air shows, we put a big placard next to the jet with max speed, altitude, and weapons load info on it. It clearly states “Max speed M2.5”. Sounds like you were talking to a self-important idiot who wanted to make something seem more important that it was.

I’ve been in the CIC of a ship underway. Most classified areas can be “sanitized” for tours and non-cleared visitors. Your presence there in itself was probably not a big deal. If they did a poor job concealing classified, maybe there was an issue there. Maybe a Navy person can chime in on what problems/issues might arise with a civilian in the CIC. My impression of it was there was a lot of “real time” information available. Most of what you could see would change days or even hours later and not be relevant or a big deal even if you were to release it.

……….You know, thinking about it, I am surprised about one thing they have mentioned about the SR-71. Perhaps you know and can explain it to me. But I am surprised they talked about the fuel that the SR-71 used. JP8 I think it was. I remember it was a lot thicker than other fuels, had a much higher flash point, and there were only a couple KC-135s that could refuel the SR-71. Not only did they talk about it, but the AF bragged about that fuel. I remember seeing them drop matches in a bucket of fuel and saying, look it put the match out (not all that uncommon). Now I have no idea what made the SR-71 such an awesome airplane. But certainly one of the things was the engines and then the fuel they used to run those engines within the parameters that they did. Only thing I know is the fuel did not leak out of the plane like other fuels would have. This they needed since the plane expanded so much when flying their missions. So, it really surprises me that they talked about it when just about everything else about that 1950s bird is still secret.

Since the early the early 1990s, everyone in the USAF (and maybe the military) uses JP-8 for conventional jet fuel. Prior to that, the stateside USAF used JP-4. Nato and US forces in NATO had converted to JP-8 already. I think the big thing was JP-8 had a lower flash point. I think you can drop a match in a bucket of that too.

The SR-71 used JP-5 and yes, there were special KC-135Q aircraft to carry it. I think you’re right about the fuel thickness. It had a higher viscosity to reduce leaking until the aircraft was at speed and began to expand. Apparently it still leaked like a sieve prior to takeoff.

Actually there are several books out that detail specifics of previously classified SR-71 missions. There are also cutaway pictures showing the engines and one book (Maybe called “Sled Driver”??) went into pretty good detail of the hybrid ramjet type engine operations. Very good book with plenty of former "secrets" for inquiring minds like yours.

 

[JimNtexas]

I don't think the basic flight manuals ('dash one' in the USAF) which contain the operating envolopes of our non-stealth fighters have ever been classified. The fact that an F-15 has the same top speed as the F-111 isn't really that helpful to the bad guys. It's not like straight line speed is the Eagles real claim to fame.

On the other hand I know the SR-71 dash one was classified, but its not any more:

SR-71 Online Flight Manual

One interesting thing about this manual is that it revels the SR-71 program's basic code name.

 

[AIR2MUD]

The key is how fast they can go while hugging the ground.

Wow. Spoken like a true, self-proclaimed expert.

He knows all - just ask him, he'll tell you.

 

[Russ]

http://media.fastclick.net/w/pc.cgi?mid=91072&sid=8866

They seem to pooh pooh the idea. People far smarter than me, but I dunno.

 

[FastCargo]

The SR-71 used JP-5 and yes, there were special KC-135Q aircraft to carry it. I think you’re right about the fuel thickness. It had a higher viscosity to reduce leaking until the aircraft was at speed and began to expand. Apparently it still leaked like a sieve prior to takeoff.

Actually, the fuel is JP-7. JP-5 is (was?) used by the USN for their aircraft.

FastCargo

 

[Fox-Tree]

Actually, the fuel is JP-7. JP-5 is (was?) used by the USN for their aircraft.

FastCargo

Thanks for the correction. Sorry, I guess I killed that braincell sometime last weekend at drill.
:beer:

 

[PAA744]

Do YOU have a NEED to know

Fox-3 (Guns)

Thanks for your "awareness" concerning this issue.

Me thinks we are pi$$ing in the wind - trying to explain these issues to anyone that has NOT had some dealings with "the things at hand."

If someone does not have a need to know, Then they do NOT have a need to know.

It really is that simply - sorry, but you (& me) are not that important...

 

[Fox-Tree]

Fox-3 (Guns)

Thanks for your "awareness" concerning this issue.

Me thinks we are pi$$ing in the wind - trying to explain these issues to anyone that has NOT had some dealings with "the things at hand."

If someone does not have a need to know, Then they do NOT have a need to know.

It really is that simply - sorry, but you (& me) are not that important...

Okay, maybe I killed more that just that one braincell.

Why are you thanking me for my "awareness" (in quotes). I don't really get that.

Have I given the impression that I AM important? WTF? Most of your post went over my head. I did fly all night so maybe I'm just a little slow.

BTW, Fox-3 ain't for Guns anymo' - Years and years ago it was listed in brevity code as a call for a gun shot but no one ever used it. Other NATO guys clung to it for a while. It's been brevity for an Amraam shot since about 1992 - welcome to the 21st century!!

 

[Lear Wanna Be]

Was it also what the Navy guys flying F-14s called when shooting an AIM-54? Not that the Tomcats ever shot any AIM-54s, at least at the bad guys.

 

[SIG600]

Was it also what the Navy guys flying F-14s called when shooting an AIM-54? Not that the Tomcats ever shot any AIM-54s, at least at the bad guys.

Not that you know about....

 

[Fox-Tree]

Was it also what the Navy guys flying F-14s called when shooting an AIM-54? Not that the Tomcats ever shot any AIM-54s, at least at the bad guys.

Yes, they called it for -54s - basically it's a call for any active radar missile and the -54 was the first. It didn't become more mainstream until both services started using AIM-120s.

I think you would find more than a couple of F-14 pilots who might take exception to your last statement. However, shooting at bad guys is quite a bit different than killing them. Shooting but not killing ain't going to make it into Aviation Week for public consumption.

Even though you've had few tours of the CIC, ships and "accidentally" saw something classified, there are a few things the Navy probably chose not to let you in on.

 

[Lear Wanna Be]

Just to be clear, it was a little more than a tour.

Now tell me about Spy planes, Spaceships, and Aliens....come on Foxy, spill it!

 

[Fox-Tree]

What makes you think I know? Just an Eagle driver - they don't tell us much about those things.

 

[Rogue5]

SpaceDaily article refutes many points in the AvWeek article:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Blackstar_A_False_Messiah_From_Groom_Lake.html

Some of the points made in the above are in dispute as well..

 

[Lear Wanna Be]

BUMP

If someone does not have a need to know, Then they do NOT have a need to know.

Those in the know, sometimes don't know. Others that do know are suppose to know. Some do know that should not know. Then others claim to know, that may or may not know. No, I don't know, but it would be interesting to hear from someone that might know.

 

[414Flyer]

There is all kinds of interesting stuff out there on the ranges and other locations. There is even a really interesting modified 737 out there flying, but good luck finding out much about it or where it is based at.

 

[Lear Wanna Be]

Saw some photos of a modified Gulfstream 2 with a special nose and pylons under the wings. The aircraft was flying out of both Groom Lake and Pt. Mugu Naval Air Station. It is registered to the Air Force Material Command and Operated in cooperation with MIT. It is blocked for tracking purposes. Hmmmm

I have also seen photos of F-16s, SU-27s, and MIG-23s flying out of Groom Lake.

If you believe the rumors, Groom Lake (Area 51) and Tonopah are not where the really secret stuff goes on anymore. The rumor mill says that there is another secret base on the Nevada/Utah border. Who knows. There are more military installations out there than you can count. It is just fun to speculate and our government certainly does not do anything to play down all the mystery that goes on out there.

 

[Weasel Keeper]

There is all kinds of interesting stuff out there on the ranges and other locations. There is even a really interesting modified 737 out there flying, but good luck finding out much about it or where it is based at.

http://www.evergreenaviation.com/supertanker/index.html Tucson, AZ!

Oh, thought you said modified 747.

 

[414Flyer]

This "single stage to orbit "plane was sitting on the ramp at Groom, you can go to google earth and find it.

http://img430.imageshack.us/img430/1544/area512fm.png

 

[Lilah]

There is all kinds of interesting stuff out there on the ranges and other locations. There is even a really interesting modified 737 out there flying, but good luck finding out much about it or where it is based at.

Everybody knows about this plane....it's old news....

http://www.air-and-space.com/Death%20Valley%20sighting.htm

Lilah