F-51, Mach 6, 3600 MPH

Geico266

Geico266

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
19,136
Location
Husker Nation, NE
Display Name
Display name:
Geico
Boeing / USAF announced a launch last year of the F-51 that can reach speed of Mach 6 delivering military strikes much faster than ever before. Dropped from a B-52 much like the old X-15 series of experimental aircraft, a booster rocket ignites and launches the "plane" to 3600 MPH. :eek:

That, my friends, is fast.
 
Geico266 said:
Boeing / USAF announced a launch last year of the F-51 that can reach speed of Mach 6 delivering military strikes much faster than ever before. Dropped from a B-52 much like the old X-15 series of experimental aircraft, a booster rocket ignites and launches the "plane" to 3600 MPH. :eek:

That, my friends, is fast.
Click to expand...

There were test flights of an undisclosed aircraft off San Nicholaus island back 20 years ago when they retired the Blackbird first time around that had 'donut on a rope' contrails and cracked 6-7 sonic booms heard by everyone on Catalina. I got a glimpse of it passing beneath me on the way from Avalon to Santa Barbara. I always wondered what happened to that program. It was obviously a Lockheed program since they had a plane full of engineers and such they flew from LGB out there on a daily basis.
 
Henning said:
There were test flights of an undisclosed aircraft off San Nicholaus island back 20 years ago when they retired the Blackbird first time around that had 'donut on a rope' contrails and cracked 6-7 sonic booms heard by everyone on Catalina. I got a glimpse of it passing beneath me on the way from Avalon to Santa Barbara. I always wondered what happened to that program. It was obviously a Lockheed program since they had a plane full of engineers and such they flew from LGB out there on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Aurora with the pulse detonation wave engine.

I'm willing to be that the technology hasn't been shelved...
 
I have always assumed the military has found a better way when current technology is retired, even if the agencies are less than forthcoming regarding the new stuff.

Jack Spectre said:
Yes, the Aurora with the pulse detonation wave engine.

I'm willing to be that the technology hasn't been shelved...
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
I have always assumed the military has found a better way when current technology is retired, even if the agencies are less than forthcoming regarding the new stuff.
Click to expand...

I got a chance to talk to a Blackbird pilot about it once, his option was that the Aurora died a budgetary death with the replacement technology being satellite based. That didn't turn out too hot which is why they pulled the SR-71 out of retirement for GW I. Then the Aerospike engine was developed which I'm assuming is why the Aurora didn't come back into play.
 
Henning said:
I got a chance to talk to a Blackbird pilot about it once, his option was that the Aurora died a budgetary death with the replacement technology being satellite based. That didn't turn out too hot which is why they pulled the SR-71 out of retirement for GW I. Then the Aerospike engine was developed which I'm assuming is why the Aurora didn't come back into play.
Click to expand...

Bill Fox, the guy who donated everything in our Blackbird Room (Bill worked at Lockheed for 32 years, from the F-80 through the F-117; ran Area 51) confirms that there was an Aurora program.

He then changes the subject. Even in his 80s, all these years later, he can't talk about it.
 
In the early 80's, I visited the office of "a company" that rented a single-story building in a new office complex in which my firm rented a branch office. The lease was very unconventional, with no lessor access or maintenance provided or allowed. The furniture in the "president's" office was strangely governmental in appearance, with only one ~4' X 6' picture on the wall behind his desk. All of the picture appeared to be dark blue with some parallel stripes except for the lower right corner that was a flesh tone and what appeared to be the head of an animal and some gold letters including an A, M and a portion of an E or F, all in sharp focus.

When he saw me looking at the picture, he asked if I could identify anything. I responded that it looked like a pack of Camel cigarettes. He acknowledged by saying that Nixon was a closet smoker and the picture was made as he boarded AF 1 in China in 1975 and reached for his smokes. The picture was taken by a camera in a satellite orbiting over China.
 
Yep satellite technology is awesome, the problem is it needs to be in position at the time it's needed to manage to make that awesomeness useful. That's whey the had to pull the Blackbird out of retirement.
 
Actually its the X-51 and is a Scramjet (Supersonic Combustion Ramjet) engine which was the next big thing back in the 60's. I read some reports about it and even was part of some studies. Biggest problem back than was Inlet Start and Combustion Stability. They may have solved it but there are more than a few more hurdles before it becomes practical.

And BTW, the WWII V-1 Buzz Bomb was a Pulse Jet. I know nothing about Aurora and thus feel free to speculate but a Buzz Bomb ain't really new, even if it is supersonic.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
The real question is ............will it hurt the engine if you run lean of peak?:wink2:
 
Henning said:
Yep satellite technology is awesome, the problem is it needs to be in position at the time it's needed to manage to make that awesomeness useful. That's whey the had to pull the Blackbird out of retirement.
Click to expand...

And why the U-2 continues in service along with Global Hawk and other air surveillance vehicles.

The SR-71 was a magnificent Weapon System but a maintenance nightmare. Watching the shutdown was a good example, Chocks in and Drip Pans everywhere.

Cheers
 
AdamZ said:
The real question is ............will it hurt the engine if you run lean of peak?:wink2:
Click to expand...

One of two things will happen if you mess up the Fuel Air Ratio 1) it will just stop and auger in or 2) blow up and many pieces will auger in . Seen both happen but not the auger in part since it was in a test cell.:yikes:

Cheers
 
Last edited:
uuuuh, we could tell you what the FA ratio is, but then we'd have to . . .:hairraise:
 
X3 Skier said:
The SR-71 was a magnificent Weapon System but a maintenance nightmare. Watching the shutdown was a good example, Chocks in and Drip Pans everywhere.

Cheers
Click to expand...

It changed shape as it flew due to the heat generated by the high speeds. Once it hit Mach speeds all those dribs and drabs sealed up tight as you please. Of course, new parts had to be designed ad hoc, because the airplane changed shape every outing.

I recall a Russian jet pilot tell his superiors after chasing one that not only could he not believe we had such technology, he was aghast that such technology could even exist. An amazing aircraft, designed in a year and quite the legacy for the amazing Kelley Johnson.
 
steingar said:
It changed shape as it flew due to the heat generated by the high speeds. Once it hit Mach speeds all those dribs and drabs sealed up tight as you please. Of course, new parts had to be designed ad hoc, because the airplane changed shape every outing.
Click to expand...

Correct, not to mention the first extensive use of titanium in an airplane and hence the maintenance nightmares. It was the price to pay to get the intel.

A friend of mine was forming up for tanking his RF-4 at night when an SR-71 plugged in the J58's afterburners and vanished with the Speed of Heat. This was before it was publicly announced. He reported it since all he saw was the AB Flames and was told, "You didn't see anything and don't forget that you didn't see anything.":D

Cheers
 
X3 Skier said:
And why the U-2 continues in service along with Global Hawk and other air surveillance vehicles.

The SR-71 was a magnificent Weapon System but a maintenance nightmare. Watching the shutdown was a good example, Chocks in and Drip Pans everywhere.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Yep, that plane leaked like a sieve until it got heated up at speed. The guy told me that the 'preflight' for a mission took 24 hours and if they had to sit on runway alert they had a fuel truck hooked to it to keep it topped off. He said the worst part was not being able to scratch an itch on your face in the helmet. He told me about losing pressure once and having to fly with the suit inflated, said that was a stone cold *****.
 
Range safety detonated it at 16 seconds after rocket separation, couldn't control it due to a guide fin problem. The engine was never fired.
 
airguy said:
Range safety detonated it at 16 seconds after rocket separation, couldn't control it due to a guide fin problem. The engine was never fired.
Click to expand...

frown.jpg


Oh well, dealing with sophisticated and highly experimental technology there will be bumps in the road.
 
Jack Spectre said:
Yes, the Aurora with the pulse detonation wave engine.

I'm willing to be that the technology hasn't been shelved...
Click to expand...

And it is actually pretty old technology in some ways. V-1 stuff.

My bet is the Aurora is still flying, or actually operational.
 
Anthony said:
And it is actually pretty old technology in some ways. V-1 stuff.

My bet is the Aurora is still flying, or actually operational.
Click to expand...

My bet is not.:( No program remains this 'black' for over 20 years. If it was operational the SR71 wouldn't have been hauled out of retirement when those type of needs were required to be filled since it was twice as fast.
 
Henning said:
My bet is not.:( No program remains this 'black' for over 20 years.
Click to expand...

Not quite entirely true (reference the 4477th TES/Reg Eagles), but I tend to agree. SR-71, F-117, and various other lesser programs have all been revealed historically within 5-10 yrs. I think the MIGs were able to stay black due to the remote nature of their operating area, but when you throw in worldwide deployments or at least flying to the far reaches of the globe, it would be hard to keep it in the box for this long.
 
> I think the MIGs were able to stay black due to the remote nature of
> their operating area

"Red Eagles" was one hell of a story/read. Highly recommended.

The F117's @ Tonopah were the cover story for the MiG ops. A few of the
MU-2 shuttle aircraft are still on the civil registry. I wonder if the owners
know their history?

When the USA and Soviets began hosting exchange meetings, a Soviet AF
General asked his USAF host at Nellis how many MiGs we had a Tonopah.
Just for grins, he answered/exaggerated, "over 300," which was an an
answer and qty the Soviet AF General was not expecting. <g>

A few months ago, I bumped into three 4477th pilots. We were waiting
for our respective hosts/minders to fetch us. Only one had read the book.
He said the story & ops were square with Squadron lore.
 
Last edited:
Some of the older retired contract guys I met in flight school had been "exposed" at one point or another during their careers. I found an old "events" logbook that past members of my squadron had kept updated (from the mid 1970's through mid 1990's), and one of the coolest entries was something along the lines of "Squadron departs for Constant Peg det". I guess only now does that have meaning. There were also a couple interesting entries about jets not returning after strikes in Lebanon and Iraq ('91). Cool bit of history.
 
X3 Skier said:
A friend of mine was forming up for tanking his RF-4 at night when an SR-71 plugged in the J58's afterburners and vanished with the Speed of Heat. This was before it was publicly announced. He reported it since all he saw was the AB Flames and was told, "You didn't see anything and don't forget that you didn't see anything.":D
Click to expand...

Unless your friend flew an RF-4 magically modified to burn JP-7, you can probably give him a ring and call BS on his story.
 
denverpilot said:
Unless your friend flew an RF-4 magically modified to burn JP-7, you can probably give him a ring and call BS on his story.
Click to expand...

Didn't say they used the same tanker. Just that he was forming up for tanking (with JP-4) when the SR flashed by. No idea why the SR was out of AB prior.

I didn't ask if there was another tanker in the area with a similar track with JP-7 which is possible, I suppose.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
One of the editors at AWST's opinion is that Aurora was a Lockheed product which made it into the air, but was cancelled for whatever reason. His thoughts on the matter are online somewhere...

Sooner or later the story will come out.
 
X3 Skier said:
Didn't say they used the same tanker. Just that he was forming up for tanking (with JP-4) when the SR flashed by. No idea why the SR was out of AB prior.

I didn't ask if there was another tanker in the area with a similar track with JP-7 which is possible, I suppose.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
We could start a thread about building a supersonic wind tunnel and test different geometries and fuel ratios for converging diverging nozzles...

If we could just move enough air through a chamber to "start" the nozzle it should keep itself going...
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
We could start a thread about building a supersonic wind tunnel and test different geometries and fuel ratios for converging diverging nozzles...

If we could just move enough air through a chamber to "start" the nozzle it should keep itself going...
Click to expand...

Interesting thing is there's a couple people registered on this board with the knowledge required...
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
We could start a thread about building a supersonic wind tunnel and test different geometries and fuel ratios for converging diverging nozzles...

If we could just move enough air through a chamber to "start" the nozzle it should keep itself going...
Click to expand...

Been there, done that. I was part of the project that was doing it back in the late 60's. The flight testing now happening some 40+ years later was to verify the "real world" effect in an actual vehicle.

IIRC, the reason no flight test back then was there was no mission requiring the technology. Now the USAF is interested in long range fast strike and the Scramjet is one answer beyond ICBM's with non nuke warheads which would be sort of like using a 20 ton press to drive a nail. Strike from Orbit is tied up in the politics of Military in Space. They are running these tests to establish technical feasibility of a Scramjet powered vehicle. So far, not so good but it is a relatively low budget exercise.

Cheers
 
X3 Skier said:
Been there, done that. I was part of the project that was doing it back in the late 60's. The flight testing now happening some 40+ years later was to verify the "real world" effect in an actual vehicle.

IIRC, the reason no flight test back then was there was no mission requiring the technology. Now the USAF is interested in long range fast strike and the Scramjet is one answer beyond ICBM's with non nuke warheads which would be sort of like using a 20 ton press to drive a nail. Strike from Orbit is tied up in the politics of Military in Space. They are running these tests to establish technical feasibility of a Scramjet powered vehicle. So far, not so good but it is a relatively low budget exercise.

Cheers
Click to expand...

I just don't see that much inherent increase in value, for scramjet-delivered conventional weapons as versus standard cruise missiles - unless there is a looming possibility of something that could take out the slower cruise missiles and it's not public knowledge yet? It's going to be basically impossible to take out a Mach-6 delivery vehicle with anything less than directed-energy weapons, and the technology for that device is not easy to develop so it will be limited to the advanced nations.
 
Henning said:
Interesting thing is there's a couple people registered on this board with the knowledge required...
Click to expand...

I know people with the knowledge required...the company I work for builds wind tunnels!
 
airguy said:
I just don't see that much inherent increase in value, for scramjet-delivered conventional weapons as versus standard cruise missiles - unless there is a looming possibility of something that could take out the slower cruise missiles and it's not public knowledge yet? It's going to be basically impossible to take out a Mach-6 delivery vehicle with anything less than directed-energy weapons, and the technology for that device is not easy to develop so it will be limited to the advanced nations.
Click to expand...

Look up the Prompt Global Strike program. Essentially retrofitting ICBMs that are accurate enough to deliver conventional munitions.

And they have stuff that will hit them that are not directed energy weapons too...and an ICBM goes a helluva lot faster than Mach 6
 
There's a lot of Analysis of Alternatives (fancy word for paper studies until somebody decides what they really want) going on now for the Global Fast Strike Mission.

The X-51 program is intended to provide part of the tech base to support those studies. I could on and on about the viability of various options but nothing is going to happen until after the election then it may or may not proceed no matter who is elected.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top