Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 26, 2024, 7:47 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Aurora Sightings?
#1
Aurora Sightings?
Not the northern lights.

The replacement for the SR-71.

Three times in the last few months I have heard an unusual sounding jet engine - what I believe is a pulse jet. 

Last Friday before noon I saw an unusual condensation trail - that had evenly spaced nodes perpendicular from the main trail. It overlaid 4 conventional contrails and appeared above them. The path was from east southeast to west northwest.

Only one aircraft I know of is thought to use a pulsejet engine - the so-called Aurora spy plane.

Now I know that when the SR71 was still classified - it only flew nightime missions. So it is likely the Aurora would do the same.

From the direction I observed the contrail - and assuming they were landing where it was still nighttime - it would put it based either at Elmendorf AFB Alaska (where I firstbsaw a SR71) or Eielson AFB Alaska - which had the second longest runway in the world.

Any thoughts?
Reply
#2
RE: Aurora Sightings?
“Aliens”
Dying to live, living to die.
Reply
#3
RE: Aurora Sightings?
X37-B
Reply
#4
RE: Aurora Sightings?
Uhm... you know how 'Old' the Aurora would be by now, technology wise?

Heck.. considering how far in the past the retirment of the SR-71 was... The Aurora would be similarly as 'Long in the tooth'.

The Yanks couldn't keep the identity of the F-117 and the B-2 a secret for long.

Not to mention the "Dragon Lady's" that are still, possibly, flying around.

I doubt the Aurora is actually a 'Thing'. Heck, probably a screeen, like the F-117 was for the B-2 project and development, for something even more weird and hyper wonderful. Wink

Cheers.

Not at work.
Reply
#5
RE: Aurora Sightings?
(December 30, 2019 at 10:15 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: Uhm... you know how 'Old' the Aurora would be by now, technology wise?

Heck.. considering how far in the past the retirment of the SR-71 was... The Aurora would be similarly as  'Long in the tooth'.

The Yanks couldn't keep the identity of the F-117 and the B-2 a secret for long.

Not to mention the "Dragon Lady's" that are still, possibly, flying around.

I doubt the Aurora is actually a 'Thing'. Heck, probably a screeen, like the F-117 was for the B-2 project and development, for something even more weird and hyper wonderful. Wink

Cheers.

Not at work.

The YB71 - the SR71 prototype went in service in 1958. It was still classified almost 30 years later.

....

It is almost unconcievable to NOT have an in-service spy plane that can do recon in places where satellite recon isn't effective. 

I would bet everything that they did not pull the SR71 from service till they had a replacement.

(December 30, 2019 at 9:31 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: X37-B

Very useful - but not quick deployable and not really all weather capable.
Reply
#6
RE: Aurora Sightings?
(December 30, 2019 at 10:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote:
(December 30, 2019 at 10:15 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: Uhm... you know how 'Old' the Aurora would be by now, technology wise?

Heck.. considering how far in the past the retirment of the SR-71 was... The Aurora would be similarly as  'Long in the tooth'.

The Yanks couldn't keep the identity of the F-117 and the B-2 a secret for long.

Not to mention the "Dragon Lady's" that are still, possibly, flying around.

I doubt the Aurora is actually a 'Thing'. Heck, probably a screeen, like the F-117 was for the B-2 project and development, for something even more weird and hyper wonderful. Wink

Cheers.

Not at work.

The YB71 - the SR71 prototype went in service in 1958. It was still classified almost 30 years later.

....

It is almost unconcievable to NOT have an in-service spy plane that can do recon in places where satellite recon isn't effective. 

I would bet everything that they did not pull the SR71 from service till they had a replacement.

(December 30, 2019 at 9:31 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: X37-B

Very useful - but not quick deployable and not really all weather capable.

It rolled for over 700 days. And it's NO weather capable. Cool
Reply
#7
RE: Aurora Sightings?
(December 30, 2019 at 10:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote: The YB71 - the SR71 prototype went in service in 1958. It was still classified almost 30 years later.

....

It is almost unconcievable to NOT have an in-service spy plane that can do recon in places where satellite recon isn't effective. 

I would bet everything that they did not pull the SR71 from service till they had a replacement.


Meh.  They're getting so that they're launching satelites by the dozens of dozens in even a single launch.

As you've pointed out. The YB71 helped in/gave rise to the development of the SR-71. Which, as I pointed out, the retirement of the SR-71 puts anything like the Aurora at something of 30 years old as we conjecture.

By now something like the Aurora would already be nearing retirment.... Heck ,even just through air frame fatigue, in favour of something using modern materials and CAD assisted airodynamic design.

Still.. we can but dream and speculate, hey? Wink

Not at work.
Reply
#8
RE: Aurora Sightings?
(December 30, 2019 at 10:44 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:
(December 30, 2019 at 10:37 am)onlinebiker Wrote: The YB71 - the SR71 prototype went in service in 1958. It was still classified almost 30 years later.

....

It is almost unconcievable to NOT have an in-service spy plane that can do recon in places where satellite recon isn't effective. 

I would bet everything that they did not pull the SR71 from service till they had a replacement.


Meh.  They're getting so that they're launching satelites by the dozens of dozens in even a single launch.

As you've pointed out. The YB71 helped in/gave rise to the development of the SR-71. Which, as I pointed out, the retirement of the SR-71 puts anything like the Aurora at something of 30 years old as we conjecture.

By now something like the Aurora would already be nearing retirment.... Heck ,even just through air frame fatigue, in favour of something using modern materials and CAD assisted airodynamic design.

Still.. we can but dream and speculate, hey? Wink

Not at work.
Ok..

So what leaves a pulsed contrail?

https://www.flyingmag.com/pilots-places/...ce-aurora/
Reply
#9
RE: Aurora Sightings?
(December 30, 2019 at 11:03 am)onlinebiker Wrote:
(December 30, 2019 at 10:44 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: Meh.  They're getting so that they're launching satelites by the dozens of dozens in even a single launch.

As you've pointed out. The YB71 helped in/gave rise to the development of the SR-71. Which, as I pointed out, the retirement of the SR-71 puts anything like the Aurora at something of 30 years old as we conjecture.

By now something like the Aurora would already be nearing retirment.... Heck ,even just through air frame fatigue, in favour of something using modern materials and CAD assisted airodynamic design.

Still.. we can but dream and speculate, hey? Wink

Not at work.
Ok..

So what leaves a pulsed contrail?

https://www.flyingmag.com/pilots-places/...ce-aurora/

*Shrug* No idea. Pretty sure the Yanks are trying out quite a few new material sciences when it comes to high performance combat air engines.

Remember seeing/reading about a giant '3D printer' in ceramics that was being used to mass produce lighter and more durable turbine parts to increase engine performance while reducing engine weight in things like the F-22 and F-23's.

Plus... given development lead time, companies would even now be trying to think of what's going to replace the F-22 and 23's that are in service.

I'm just saying/pointing that Aurora speculation is... 'Old' quite frankly. Aironauctic technolgoy, like that of Naval designs, is never/not static. They'd have moved on in the 30 odd years since the idea of Aurora surfaced.

Cheers.

Not at work.
Reply
#10
RE: Aurora Sightings?
I have no personal knowledge of the Aurora, but I absolutely loved the SR-71. They used to fly them right over the Soviet Union, and by the time their air defense could respond, it was already gone. The firm top speed has never been declassified, but the Russians showed it as going above Mach 3. On the ground it didn't even look like it could fly, it tended to drip lubricant and the wings sagged a bit, but that was because it was so optimized for flight that that it was a completely different Blackbird in the air.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)