Aurora Hypersonic Spyplane

[cichlidfan]

So... yeah.....

 

any word on "DCS Aurora" yet?

 

:D

 

As soon as the DTS: Aurora contract comes through! ;)

[RIPTIDE]

The only problem with that is a country that doesn't want you spying on them.

-They know your satellites orbits,therefore know when to hide

-Drones are easily shot down

 

**Aurora would be Ultimate Surprise Recon Aircraft**:thumbup:

I read enough of the thread though to see that Satellites are more manoeuvrable now. So they can be shifted out of orbit. Add in Stealthy design and it might become an issue.

 

Stealth Drones though.... not always easy to detect.

[Phantom88]

I read enough of the thread though to see that Satellites are more manoeuvrable now. So they can be shifted out of orbit. Add in Stealthy design and it might become an issue.

 

Stealth Drones though.... not always easy to detect.

Really??? I didn't know that,Thank You:thumbup:

 

###...and my Wife says I waste my time on this forum###:D

[RIPTIDE]

###...and my Wife says I waste my time on this forum###:D

You should close the door to the kitchen and she won't see you on the forum.

 

:D

[Phantom88]

:D***Won't work...........I swear this woman can read my mind!!!*** ESP:D

[GC1993]

Thought I'd revisit this guys after just reading this on the BBC site, think it's related?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24803511

[Aginor]

To me that's ridiculous. Because of the following reasons:

 

- If you want to observe some third-world areas like western Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, most of the African continent and basically every part of the world where you would send a spy plane to, you already have at least two technologies providing the same info. Satellites and existing drones.

- If you want to observe a country with an actual air defense that does mind you being there this thing would be shot down, like the existing drones. Its speed won't save it this time. Even the SR-71 was careful where it flew to, because of that. So you use a satellite. The pictures are just as good.

- 2030? Really? Until then satellites will be even better than they are now, and the image quality of civil satellites (I just don't now about newer military ones since they are secret, I assume they may be better or at least equal) exceed the quality of shots taken by equipment available in the 80s (SR-71 and satellites of that era) by far.

 

So I guess if that thing is really built it is a pet project from someone who liked the SR-71 when he was a kid or something. I don't see any strategical value. That sort of plane couldn't gather any information you can't get more easily and more safely using existing technology, such as drones, satellites, reading media, observing the Internet and of course a few agents walking around in the area.

Satellites gather more data in a shorter time, they are really hard to shoot down (even though they are not stealthy) and they provide the same quality of information.

 

Don't get me wrong, I am thrilled about the technology (scramjets and camera pods and stuff), I just can't imagine it would be that useful.

[Buzpilot]

To me that's ridiculous. Because of the following reasons:

 

- If you want to observe some third-world areas like western Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, most of the African continent and basically every part of the world where you would send a spy plane to, you already have at least two technologies providing the same info. Satellites and existing drones.

- If you want to observe a country with an actual air defense that does mind you being there this thing would be shot down, like the existing drones. Its speed won't save it this time.

 

Hotspots are covered with satelites yes, but if a rouge country manage to move a launcher to a different spot, satelites and drones will probably not be available in time.

And in case allies fail to shoot down missiles, mach 6 tecnology can be used to shoot down missiles before they reach USA.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Buzpilot

[Aginor]

Hotspots are covered with satelites yes, but if a rouge country manage to move a launcher to a different spot, satelites and drones will probably not be available in time.

And in case allies fail to shoot down missiles, mach 6 tecnology can be used to shoot down missiles before they reach USA. To prevent fallout.

 

You should really look up how satellite orbits work, because what you just wrote is wrong.

If you have just a few satellites with polar orbits you can have one of them over any part of the world within half an hour or so. Much faster than a plane.

 

You're right about missile defense though, that might be an application.

[Rangi]

Maybe the Americans are just 'putting it out there' in the hope that China will waste even more money trying to copy it.

[Aginor]

Maybe! :D

[Aginor]

A modern satellite uses no fuel at all for changing its orbit.

EDIT: just to clarify. It doesn't need to.

 

But doesn't matter since you got multiple satellites. ONE of them is on the right track.

You don't refuel it.

 

As for the military: Military burns money like nothing else. If a few millions are gone for a useless project nobody cares. Don't assume that they spend their money logically.

 

EDIT: And yes, of course the SR-71 was not only retired but replaced. By satellites. :)

Edited November 12, 2013 by Aginor

[Kaktus29]

the recent news about incoming development of SR-72 the REPLACEMENT of old SR-71 with this new DRONE btw is proof that Aurora WAS REAL.. they developed it and tested the plane to the max and after all this time now doing the drone version of it..

 

and all this talk about satelite versus spy plane.. US air force is not doing this for recon purposes but for Offensive capabilities.. to have the option to bombard without fear of retaliation upon the aircraft.. they call it "the new stealth" ..

 

this thing will fly mach 6 in upper limits of our atmosphere dropping bombs around the globe.. and being practically unreachable by all known defenses we have now.. since it is designed to be of stealthy nature plus high altitude plus high speed makes it pretty much invulnerable to make all kind of bombing missions around the planet..

 

Aurora was integral part that culminated in this new drone being developed..

[Aginor]

Ok, look. You don't need to change your orbit. Those satellites have pretty low orbits so they are quite fast. All you have to do is to change the direction the sat is looking, and you can do that without using any fuel.

Your orbit as seen from earth is different every time because you use a polar orbit and the Earth rotates under you.

 

So it is true that a single satellite may not be available over a certain point of earth in, say, 6 hours. But for that purpose you have more than one satellite. You have lots of them, so you can ensure that there is one near any position that is interesting at least every half an hour or so.

Geostationary orbits are bad for spy satellites because they are too damn far away. You can see nothing from there.

And of course you can hide stuff from satellites. But then you can also hide them from spy planes. Also a spy satellite doesn't magically see everything, you have to know where to look at. Scanning big regions might be easier than by using spy planes but it is still hard.

The knowledge where the satellites are doesn't help the enemy much, because most things that are interesting to do without letting anyone know (such as making ICBMs ready) can't be done in half an hour. That's one reason why both the USA and Russia use silos for their ICBMs. Even a satellite can't tell whether they are ready or not. Nor can a spy plane.

 

Also even a spy plane needs hours to fly somewhere, take a look at a very small area and then get the hell out. So you get even worse shots because you cannot monitor anything for a longer time. A satellite can fly over there every half an hour and get a look, a spy plane can't.

You need to take off somewhere so even if nobody knows where you are flying they know you got a spy plane up. A satellite is always there, you have to guess whether it is looking at you or not (it may be visible from your location but maybe it is looking somewhere else, you just don't know).

Also spy planes can't be used in daylight, since you can see contrails and stuff. A satellite can look at you all day.

 

Actually shooting down a satellite is pretty hard. Especially a spy satellite since it is very fast. You could shoot down a geostationary satellite. But those are just for TV and not spy satellites.

The US failed numerous times trying to shoot down fast objects, and the one spy satellite they shot down (in 2008!) was their own (so they knew its orbit very exactly). And the one that was shot down by the Chinese was a weather satellite which is much more easy to hit.

Also how many spy satellites do you want to shoot down before the one who owns it bombs your facilities that do it?

 

EDIT: Kaktus29 has a point actually. Bombing with a hypersonic drone is much more interesting as an application of such things, because you can't bomb with satellites all that well.

I just don't agree that just because there is a "replacement" 30 years later the Aurora has to be a real thing.

 

EDIT: I forgot one thing: Flying high and mach 6 won't save it once it is detected. At least not if it is near a country with modern weapons. Those who can shoot at satellites can shoot down that one as well. And then there is the question whether you can really make something that fast really stealthy.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Aginor

[Aginor]

Yep, that's the point. Both is possible. We just don't know it. we only know what we see. And that's why the Aurora is so unlikely, it's just not that useful.

[SkateZilla]

Can I just throw in that we have a Stargate in Cheyenne Mountain?

[Aginor]

Hey! That's supposed to be secret! :-D

[joey45]

Can I just throw in that we have a Stargate in Cheyenne Mountain?

 

Way to go :thumbup: