Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
2
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

Oakey

Original Poster:

16,489 posts

101 months

[news] 
Monday 8th October 2012 quote quote all
Extremetech said:
Tighten the strap on your tinfoil hat: Recently declassified documents show that the US Air Force was working on, and perhaps had already built, a supersonic flying saucer in 1956.

The aircraft, which had the code name Project 1794, was developed by the USAF and Avro Canada in the 1950s. One declassified memo, which seems to be the conclusion of initial research and prototyping, says that Project 1794 is a flying saucer capable of “between Mach 3 and Mach 4,” (2,300-3,000 mph) a service ceiling of over 100,000 feet (30,500m), and a range of around 1,000 nautical miles (1,150mi, 1850km).


http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/137505-us-air-f...

TheEnd

14,246 posts

73 months

[news] 
Monday 8th October 2012 quote quote all
seems legit.

FunkyNige

5,438 posts

160 months

[news] 
Monday 8th October 2012 quote quote all
Cool, I love the little snippets of information we get about the top secret designs.

trickywoo

4,125 posts

115 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all

Eric Mc

76,655 posts

150 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Wasn't all that top secret really -


Advertisement

Eric Mc

76,655 posts

150 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Needless to say, the Brits got there first -


dr_gn

8,722 posts

69 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Eric Mc said:
Wasn't all that top secret really -

That picture is included in the linked story - the article isn't about that aircraft.

Eric Mc

76,655 posts

150 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Didn't have time to read the story to be honest.

TheEnd

14,246 posts

73 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
dr_gn said:
Eric Mc said:
Wasn't all that top secret really -

That picture is included in the linked story - the article isn't about that aircraft.
Through the history of the program, the project was referred to by a number of different names. Avro referred to the efforts as Project Y, with individual vehicles known as Spade and Omega. Project Y-2 was later funded by the US Air Force, who referred to it as WS-606A, Project 1794 and Project Silver Bug. When the Army joined the efforts it took on its final name "Avrocar", and the designation "VZ-9", part of the US Army's VTOL projects in the VZ series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_VZ-9_Avro...

jmorgan

20,440 posts

169 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Nothing saying it got off the ground? Says "capable", wonder who tagged that on.

I thought a big chunk of Avro engineers went on to NASA and eventually Apollo when it was canned.

Max_Torque

7,994 posts

102 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Oakey said:
Extremetech said:
Tighten the strap on your tinfoil hat: Recently declassified documents show that the US Air Force was working on, and perhaps had already built, a supersonic flying saucer in 1956.

The aircraft, which had the code name Project 1794, was developed by the USAF and Avro Canada in the 1950s. One declassified memo, which seems to be the conclusion of initial research and prototyping, says that Project 1794 is a flying saucer capable of “between Mach 3 and Mach 4,” (2,300-3,000 mph) a service ceiling of over 100,000 feet (30,500m), and a range of around 1,000 nautical miles (1,150mi, 1850km).


http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/137505-us-air-f...
Bit tricky to actually go into the low hypersonic region without re-configerable "mach shock trapping" inlets for the engines unfortunately..............
Also, when you read about the control issues Lockheed had with the A-12/SR-71 at only "mach 3 plus in the mid 1960's (airframe cleared to M3.3 in extremis during operational entry into denied areas), and that was a fairly conventional aerodynamic/aerothermal package, which broadly speaking had passive stability in all threes axis (ok, it was marginal in Pitch, but i digress) i can't see how you could have ever got a high mach saucer to ever fly in the mid 1950's??

coanda

1,873 posts

75 months

[news] 
Tuesday 9th October 2012 quote quote all
Hmm, I initially thought (through reading) that the Avrocar was a cover story for Silver Bug, but I can see it's useful as a research tool on coanda effect craft. I've never had the time to go looking for in-depth info on the silverbug but, the coanda effect is something of a research interest for me - hence the name - so I'll need to go looking at some point. Not sure if there'll be detailed enough info out there yet to be of use.

Some points though.....

  • A non-spinning disc is unstable in forward flight at any angle of attack other than 0.
  • They planned to use a lot of engines to do this - not really that efficient considering the amount of fuel required to power five or six engines (the high speed proposal). Some of the fuel burn is offset by the lower drag in forward flight, but not enough to cancel it all out. These are fairly crappy (in terms of fuel burn) 60s era engines after all.
  • Linked to the above will be the large friction losses experienced by the ducting required to get thrust from the engines to the vents - again, for the high speed proposal, but it also applies to the Avrocar.
  • Good solution on the Avrocar - tip driven fan removes the need to deal with torque effects. On the down side, it's harder to control the speed of the fan, and thus the lift generating capacity of the machine. There's a lag between the crew changing the throttle setting on the engines and the speed of the fan adjusting to the new jet efflux speed. It could be quite a bit actually, considering the high inertia of the fan rotating at speed. You couldn't use a rotor brake because you'd have to deal with the torque effects on the rest of the vehicle, and it would wear out pretty fast!





AndyNetwork

1,562 posts

79 months

[news] 
Tuesday 16th October 2012 quote quote all
Eric Mc said:
Needless to say, the Brits got there first -

Any idea where this photo was taken - looks like a Camo painted victor in the background.

LotusOmega375D

2,509 posts

38 months

[news] 
Tuesday 16th October 2012 quote quote all
AndyNetwork said:
Any idea where this photo was taken - looks like a Camo painted victor in the background.
SAAB Draken?

dr_gn

8,722 posts

69 months

[news] 
Tuesday 16th October 2012 quote quote all
AndyNetwork said:
Eric Mc said:
Needless to say, the Brits got there first -

Any idea where this photo was taken - looks like a Camo painted victor in the background.
Newark Air Museum.

Zad

9,657 posts

121 months

[news] 
Tuesday 16th October 2012 quote quote all
scratchchin

Reminds me of some of my favourite bits of fakery:




Lots more what-if renderings f the K-7 here:

http://englishrussia.com/2009/01/25/russian-flying...


Rum Runner

2,146 posts

102 months

mrloudly

2,503 posts

120 months

[news] 
Wednesday 17th October 2012 quote quote all
dr_gn said:
AndyNetwork said:
Eric Mc said:
Needless to say, the Brits got there first -

Any idea where this photo was taken - looks like a Camo painted victor in the background.
Newark Air Museum.
Baby Victor wink Anyone know what it is?

Simpo Two

59,646 posts

150 months

[news] 
Wednesday 17th October 2012 quote quote all
mrloudly said:
Baby Victor wink Anyone know what it is?
Saab Draken I'd say.

The angle makes it look remarkably like a small Victor:



dr_gn

8,722 posts

69 months

[news] 
Wednesday 17th October 2012 quote quote all
mrloudly said:
dr_gn said:
AndyNetwork said:
Eric Mc said:
Needless to say, the Brits got there first -

Any idea where this photo was taken - looks like a Camo painted victor in the background.
Newark Air Museum.
Baby Victor wink Anyone know what it is?
Just type in "Newark Air Museum Saab Draken" into Google or Google Images, and the answer will magically appear before you.

2
Reply to Topic