Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 160 posts

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#91

Post by dkersten »

austinheap wrote: post #69
derefr wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've completely missed the boat (heh); what is "Navy-UFO conspiracy"? Because at least one interpretation of that combination of words is entirely level-headed (UFOs as Naval materiel, e.g. penaids and their friends, electro-optical EW missile-countermeasure systems), while the other, not so much.

NY Times: ‘Wow, What Is That?’ Navy Pilots Report Unexplained Flying Objects https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/26/us/politics/ufo-sightings...

As Neil Degrasse Tyson once said, even pilots aren't astronomers or astrophysicists and often don't know what they're seeing when they look at the sky.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#92

Post by dkersten »

close04 wrote: post #75
mgarfias wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, the way i remember it happening: both YF-22s were lost do to mishaps, the YF-23 was faster, stealthier, and just as maneuverable without the vectored thrust. The AF wanted the -23, but the chairman of the senate armed services committee was from Georgia, where Lockheed promised to build the -22. and the history got rewritten. Source: Dad was part of the YF-23 program at northrop and lost his gog when the proje…

> the way i remember it happening: both YF-22s were lost do to mishaps Seems they're museums pieces now and look relatively unscathed. [0][1] > The two YF-23 prototypes were museum exhibits as of 2010 [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-23#/media/File:YF-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-23#/media/File:YF-...

> both YF-22s were lost

> The two YF-23 prototypes were museum exhibits

The 22's were lost, the 23's were museum exhibits, not the same planes.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#93

Post by close04 »

dkersten wrote: post #92
close04 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the way i remember it happening: both YF-22s were lost do to mishaps Seems they're museums pieces now and look relatively unscathed. [0][1] > The two YF-23 prototypes were museum exhibits as of 2010 [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-23#/media/File:YF-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YF-23#/media/File:YF-...

> both YF-22s were lost > The two YF-23 prototypes were museum exhibits The 22's were lost, the 23's were museum exhibits, not the same planes.

My bad, my brain read it as “the 23s were lost”. Sleep deprivation at its best.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#94

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

dkersten wrote: post #91
austinheap wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NY Times: ‘Wow, What Is That?’ Navy Pilots Report Unexplained Flying Objects https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/26/us/politics/ufo-sightings...

As Neil Degrasse Tyson once said, even pilots aren't astronomers or astrophysicists and often don't know what they're seeing when they look at the sky.

I don't follow this line of reasoning.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't astronomy the scientific study of celestial objects; and astrophysics is the branch of astronomy concerned with the physical nature of those celestial objects.

Why would either of those be the right consultants for UFOs, which are decidedly not celestial objects.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#95

Post by wbl »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #94
dkersten wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Neil Degrasse Tyson once said, even pilots aren't astronomers or astrophysicists and often don't know what they're seeing when they look at the sky.

I don't follow this line of reasoning. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't astronomy the scientific study of celestial objects; and astrophysics is the branch of astronomy concerned with the physical nature of those celestial objects. Why would either of those be the right consultants for UFOs, which are decidedly not celestial objects.

Astronomy includes knowing when you aren't doing it and instead seeing an artifact of your instruments or weather.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#96

Post by acqq »

manigandham wrote: post #89
acqq wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The capabilities actually used were and are a real overkill, for many orders of magnitude. The whole think tanks and whole branches of military from the start worked on many order of magnitudes multiplied assumptions of the military capability of the opponents. Only now you can read their acknowledgment that the estimates were hugely overblown (1). So they did produce overkill from the start as they produced "enough"…

Yes, it's rather cynical. And yet it's this very tension that keeps the peace. The world is now in the longest stretch of world-wide peacetime ever in history.

> The world is now in the longest stretch of world-wide peacetime ever in history.

Peacetime where? There was constant war since WW II mostly directly or indirectly waged by the US.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#97

Post by emiliobumachar »

ddalex wrote: post #84
austinheap wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Said critter thinks the 'A' in 'UFO' means aliens from outer space.

But there is no A in UFO...

That's the point. Conventional wisdom is that Unidentified Flying Objects do exist as per their literal definition, but they're not alien spaceships.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#98

Post by Spooky23 »

nabla9 wrote: post #39
mNovak wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realize this is a joke, but just wanted to add that Rogoway is a consistently great and thorough writer on defense subjects. I've been reading his stuff since the Foxtrot Alpha days.

I completely different view. Rogoway's is not into critical thinking or good analysis. He is also deeply into monetizing Navy-UFO conspiracy.

UFO talk is PR distraction correlated with military product development. A major component of it is to discredit conversation about observations.

In the 90s it was stealth aircraft, in the 80s it was Tomahawk missiles, 50s any of a dozen airborne platforms.

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#99

Post by cafebabbe »

syntaxing wrote: post #5

I know it's toxic but from a technical aspect, that is really cool. I remember reading that the Apache Helicopter (I think?) can redirect it's exhaust internally temporarily to become invisible to heat seekers. Some of these technologies are super fun to read about.

"I know it's toxic but from a technical aspect, that is really cool"

is a great alternative HN tagline

Re: The SR-71's predecessor used cesium-laced fuel to create radar-absorbing exhaust

#100

Post by sokoloff »

jabl wrote: post #77
tjohns wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're working on a replacement for 100LL avgas, thankfully. There's some flight safety concerns that have delayed it, but it's still a work in progress.

Last I heard the project has stalled. And with the current administration there's unlikely to be political pressure to get it rolling.

The concerns I have around the project are more in the FAA certification process than in the EPA. I don’t believe this is a partisan issue; it’s stalled under both Democrat and Republican administrations.

I think that the 737-Max issue will put so much more spotlight and brakes on anything that seems remotely risky, that the alternative fuels program (which was already struggling as you note) is unlikely to make serious near-term progress.

Almost tangentially, I believe that we have a viable fuel technically (G100UL) that is likely to be (or be the template for) the fuel ultimately selected, albeit possibly a decade or more in the future.

Post reply on HN