Yay, I'm 13, I...don't know. Mature for my age.

@ Spelling: My eyes, they hurt!

Back on topic...

Do I think Aurora exists? Possibly, but then again, the years in which "Aurora" was spotted, were the years during which the B-2 was being developed. Codename, possibly? Triangular shape, elongated, possibly a prototype for the B-2? And at any rate, it would take YEARS worth of technology to design an engine that could propel a conventional aeroplane to speeds of Mach 6/20+, unless it was supposed to propel itself to an altitude beyond the atmosphere, take photos, and re-enter, reaching speeds of Mach 20 on descent, in order to make a high speed get away. No one knows its been there, if they do know, they cannot identify which faction it belongs to.

Boy, I hope I'm wrong with this theory...do I now know too much? 

Quote:


Many such aircraft exist, and are in fact in the public domain, such as "Have Blue" (a proof of concept aircraft for the F-117a) and "Tacit Blue", a technology demonstrator for the B2, which flew from 1982 to 85, but was not revealed publically until 1996 (it's now on public display!).

My own personal view is that Aurora is a name that has been continually over used over the years, genarally by UFO enthusiasts and "plane spotters". I expect several projects that have been "called" Aurora over the past 30 years have appeared under "real" code names, such as those above.

http://www.fas.org/irp/mystery/index.html

Boy oh boy, there is a lot of information / disinformation in this thread. As far as question of if a still classified super/hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft has been or is still being used, I cannot say one way or the other. I can say that the days of manned aerial reconnaissance are fast drawing to a close. Modern UAVs have several advantages that make them more appealing for these types of operations. I won't get into too many details on that end because it would get too long and boring.

Now something I can talk is the specifications listed in the original post (I do have a degree in this sort of thing):

Mach 20? I don't think I've seen the (unclassified) speed of a SAM above Mach 10. The extra weight from airframe, engines, and fuel requirements to run at that speed would really not buy you anything extra as opposed to running at lower speed. Mach 6-8 would really make the most sense for this type of aircraft.

LH2/LOX is rocket fuel. It's what the Space Shuttle engines use. That fuel is totally incompatible with any air breathing engine design (hence the requirement for liquid oxygen). In addition rocket engines are good for making things go fast for a shot period of time. They are not really a good choice for cruising an aircraft for an extended period of time.

Engines:
Lots of choices out there, a lot of them have some significant problems with practical implementation in an operational aircraft. The hybrid turbo/ramjet would probably be my choice because of previous experience with the technology on the SR-71.

I seriously doubt the government would be this inept at keeping something secret....

Felix/FFDS wrote on Sep 17^th, 2007 at 8:02am:



If you can remember the "Not The Nine O'clock News" version, then yes you are 

Matt

Ashar wrote on Sep 19^th, 2007 at 11:28pm:


It must be real, Hollywood has made a movie about it 

Matt

No, not a bomber, it is supposedly a spy plane.
Another reason why I don't think it exists is that its capabilities are no longer what is required of a reconnaissance aircraft. Due to the nature of current conflicts, a plane that that watch an area of a long period of time is much more valuable to us than a plane that can take a few photos and leave (possible one reason that the -71 was retired). Because of this, UAVs like the Predator and Global Hawk were developed because they can sit over a target for 12-24 hours continuously taking and transmitting real-time video... and they don't get tired.

Also, I find it highly unlikey that any manned aircraft could hit Mach 6, or anything even remotely close. The X-43 hit approximately Mach 10, but that was basically an engine with wings. I think it is impossible with current technology to achieve Mach 10 with an aircraft of significant size.