183 lines
9.4 KiB
Plaintext
183 lines
9.4 KiB
Plaintext
SUBJECT: AIR FORCE ABONDONED SR-71 FILE: UFO3104
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From Aerospace Daily, Wednesday January 13, 1993
|
|
Aviation Week Group, McGraw-Hill Inc.
|
|
|
|
Aerospace Daily Special report
|
|
|
|
Air Force abondoned SR-71 follow-on in mid-1980s
|
|
|
|
The Air Force gave up on a 1980s attempt to develop a follow-on to the SR-71
|
|
Mach 3-plus reconnaissance aircraft because the technology was out of reach and
|
|
unaffordable, according to active and retired service, Pentagon and industry
|
|
sources familiar with the program.
|
|
|
|
The aircraft, originally envisioned as succeeding the SR-71 in the 1990
|
|
timeframe, was being developed at least in part by Lockheed's Advanced
|
|
Development Co. or "Skunk Works" unit in Burbank, Calif., but was
|
|
canceled about 1986, sources said.
|
|
|
|
"There was a program, but we couldn't make it work," an industry source
|
|
reported. An Air Force official added that "we would have been remiss in
|
|
our responsibilities if we didn't try."
|
|
|
|
Sources said they were willing to discuss the top-secret, special-access-
|
|
required program in a limited fashion because of an increasing number of media
|
|
reports that the AF is operating a hypersonic SR-71 follow-on. They believe,
|
|
as one source said, that the stories should be "debunked".
|
|
|
|
The aircraft, of which only drawings and small models were made, was to have
|
|
been capable of sustained speeds of about Mach 4-5 with an intercontinental
|
|
range. It would have been a large aircraft, about the size of the B-1B bomber,
|
|
with a long, tapered fuselage.
|
|
|
|
Sources said the AF and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency were
|
|
pursuing the technology against the wishes of the Central Intelligence Agency,
|
|
which wanted the funding diverted to develop and procure more sophisticated
|
|
spy satellites using technologies such as imaging radar.
|
|
|
|
But the AF countered that an aircraft could be more responsive than a
|
|
satellite if imagery was needed of a location faster than a satellite could
|
|
be positioned over it. This argument "still holds", a Pentagon source said.
|
|
|
|
Sources were reluctant to discuss the specific technologies that would have
|
|
been applied to the aircraft, except to say that they were similar to those
|
|
now being wrestled with on the National Aerospace Plane.
|
|
|
|
"Let me put it this way," an ex-Pentagon official said. "Many of the same
|
|
people working on NASP (also) tried to make this thing work. If they had
|
|
succeeded years ago, why would they be having so much trouble now?
|
|
|
|
A senior AF official ridiculed the suggestion - made in some press reports -
|
|
that NASP is a huge cover for the hypersonic plane.
|
|
|
|
Though unwilling to discuss technical details, sources did say that slush
|
|
hydrogen or methane was the intended fuel for the aircraft, but that the
|
|
materials technology didn't exist to keep slush supercooled for the length
|
|
of a mission in fuel tanks only a few inches from skin temperatures of
|
|
thousands of degrees.
|
|
|
|
Propulsion technology also had not advanced far enough tp provide the
|
|
desired increase in capability over the SR-71, sources said.
|
|
|
|
"The analogy of lighting a match in a wind tunnel is valid," observed one
|
|
source. "It's not an easy thing to do, and it hasn't been done yet."
|
|
|
|
The project "did not, in the final analysis, cost all that much money," an
|
|
industry source once connected with the program said. "But there was no way
|
|
to cost it out and see where we would end up. We did not have a blank check,
|
|
and there were competing programs deemed by the most senior Air Force
|
|
leadership to have (higher) priority.
|
|
|
|
One of these higher priorities was the B-2 bomber. Ironically, one of the
|
|
"hiding places" for funding for the then-secret B-2 was "Aurora," a program
|
|
name which accidently made its way into a 1985 Pentagon budget document.
|
|
The "Aurora" line item in the P-1, or procurement, budget book was slated to
|
|
increase to $2.7 billion in 1986 and was listed as an aircraft. This accidental
|
|
reference is what spawned a near-cottage industry in speculation about a secret
|
|
hypersonic plane.
|
|
|
|
The speculation increased when the Air Force decided to retire the SR-71
|
|
without an obvious successor in public view. Coupled with the AF's
|
|
clandestine development, production and operation of the F-117 stealth
|
|
attack plane, many industry observers refused to believe the service's
|
|
denial that it had an "Aurora" or other top-secret reconnaissance aircraft.
|
|
|
|
Air Force Secretary Donald B. Rice has of late aggressively denied persistent
|
|
reports of an "Aurora." Sources said Rice has been challenged by members of
|
|
Congress who also refuse to believe his denial of the program's existence,
|
|
insisting that they are being kept in the dark about a program for which they
|
|
are supplying funds.
|
|
|
|
An exasperated Rice told reporters last fall that the persistent rumors are
|
|
creating "certain beliefs and expectations in some quarters that are just
|
|
unfounded" (DAILY, Nov. 2). Rice said the reports have "gotten way out of
|
|
hand," and he added "categorically" that "the system described in those
|
|
articles does not exist. We have no aircraft that flies at six times the
|
|
speed of sound or anything up close to that." He said such a program would
|
|
be impossible to conceal because it would involve too many people and cost
|
|
too much money.
|
|
|
|
During the years of speculation about the then-secret F-117, Air Force
|
|
officials and spokesmen never categorically denied the program's existence,
|
|
but instead chose the ambiguous, "I have nothing for you on that," or a
|
|
flat "no comment."
|
|
|
|
Rice fired off a terse letter to The Washington Post in December complaining
|
|
about two "Aurora" stories that accused the AF of spreading "disinformation".
|
|
|
|
He insisted that the service has no such program "either known as 'Aurora'
|
|
or by any other name. And if such a program existed elsewhere, I'd know
|
|
about it - and I don't." He added that he has "never hedged a denial" about
|
|
it, and the AF "has never created ... cover stories to protect any program or
|
|
vehicle like 'Aurora.' I can't be more unambiguous than that." Rice echoed
|
|
the remarks in a rare interview with CNN the next day.
|
|
|
|
The AF has investigated various reports of phenomenon that suggested an
|
|
"Aurora"-type aircraft, because, as one service official said, "it wasn't
|
|
one of ours and we wanted to know if it was someone else's."
|
|
|
|
The service had MIT's Lincoln Laboratories do an independent analysis of data
|
|
recorded in Southern California by a U.S. Geological Survey seismologist. The
|
|
data allegedly showed that some aircraft was routinely causing triple-sonic
|
|
booms. But Lincoln Labs found that "the data matched documented flight tests
|
|
of Navy aircraft along the California coast," according to an AF document.
|
|
|
|
"Aurora" was reported to have made a covert night landing at Lockheed's
|
|
Helendale, Calif., facility on July 12, 1992, but the AF said this would be as
|
|
"amazing" feat, since the field is "short, narrow ... only 4,000 feet long and
|
|
400 feet wide ... and could not possibly accomodate a billion dollar, one-of-
|
|
a-kind hypersonic aircraft nearly the length of a Boeing 747."
|
|
|
|
A "long, slender, aerodynamic shape with rounded chines" seen being loaded
|
|
into a C-5 at the Skunk Works - and reported as "Aurora" - was actually an
|
|
F-117 radar cross section pole model, the AF asserted.
|
|
|
|
After checking out a reported near-miss between a commercial airliner and an
|
|
unusual supersonic aircraft last year, the AF couldn't find a military plane
|
|
that would have been in the area, and "based on our investigation, we can
|
|
unequivocally state that no military aircraft was involved in this incident."
|
|
|
|
The AF also said that some "sightings" of the mystery plane "will probably
|
|
remain unchallenged simply because there is not enough information available
|
|
to even hazard a guess." In this category the service places reports of a
|
|
wedge-shaped plane over the North Sea in October 1989 and "puffs" of smoke
|
|
resembling "doughnuts on a rope.""
|
|
|
|
While the hypersonic "Aurora" is not a reality, sources and independent
|
|
evidence suggest that the AF may indeed operate secret aircraft unfamiliar
|
|
to the general public. The Skunk Works, for example, routinely accounts for
|
|
more work in Lockheed's annual report than can be accounted for by overt,
|
|
or "white" programs. But these would not, as Rice said, "come close to"
|
|
the performance attributed to "Aurora".
|
|
|
|
The Pentagon revealed the existence of one of these aircraft in a synopsis
|
|
of a classified Inspector General audit released last year. The IG is
|
|
required to summarize audits that it isn't permitted to publish.
|
|
|
|
The audit, labeled simply "Report No. 92-110 - Top Secret," was ordered "to
|
|
determine if the Program was responsive to contingency requirements and to
|
|
evaluate the overall management of the peacetime program."
|
|
|
|
The synopsis described "the Program" as needing "improvements ... in
|
|
procedures for transitioning from peacetime (to wartime) operations and for
|
|
approving peacetime reconnaissance flights." In addition, it said that
|
|
"the Air Force budget for one aircraft type was overstated by $14.4
|
|
million for the six-year period ending in FY 1997."
|
|
|
|
Pressed repeatedly to explain this secret aircraft, since it would, at
|
|
first glance, suggest an "Aurora," a Pentagon official would only advise
|
|
the questioner to "think lower-tech."
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*********************************************************************
|
|
* -------->>> THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo <<<------- *
|
|
********************************************************************* |