Aurora - a Famous Speculative Project

[CJGibson]

If I may ask - all these years later, do you feel you have come across any credible theories/info about what you saw from the oil rig in 1989? Or is the whole thing still just as much of a mystery now as it was back then?

Very much so. Never had a credible (to me) explanation
A) UK MoD - Vulcan - laughable. They should know better.
B) US DoD - F-117 - plausible but goes counter to the USAF's dates for F-117s in Europe, plus it didn't look like one
C) Curtis Peebles - swept F-111 - plausible, but according to F-111 pilots I contacted, AAR-type manoeuvers in fully swept configuration are not recommended and in fact unsafe. I have yet to see a photo of a fully swept in-service F-111 on the boom, but happy to be corrected. Your mission, should you chose to accept it...
D) Belgian triangles (first I heard of this was in the post above) - cobblers.

Chris

 

[southwestforests]

D) Belgian triangles

Although I am aware of the 1980s UFO situation, my brain's first understanding of those words was to imagine some kind of dessert pastry.
Look, it is 04:19 in my time zone, cut my brain some slack.

 

[Stargazer]

The F-117 was revealed in November of 1988, a whole year before the invasion of Panama. I think you may be correct about the Libya statement though.

You're right of course, I got my dates mixed up here.

 

[Artie Bob]

I go back to the story in the local newspaper, when I worked as an engineer in Pasadena during the early 90s. In response to reports of repetitious earthquakes in the inland empire, Cal-Tech responded that theses were not earthquakes, but the sonic boom of air vehicles headed in the general direction of Nevada. Cal-Tech also said they could identify specific vehicle types by their seismic signature, make a estimate of their size and track them with their multiple sensing sites in the region. The signature did not match any type previously identified. The story never had a follow-up and my gut level evaluation was the story was true and accurate. I also believe that whatever agency operating the vehicle was totally blindsided by seismic tracking capabilities and moved quickly to silence that story's source. Not a nut case, that incident was rational, and had a real feel of truth. I made a post in this thread some time ago, can't remember how it was taken. Just saying, whatever was involved may not have been Aurora, but I cannot remember any program that would fit the parameters of the vehicle reported.

ArtieBob (PEME, Pilot 50 years, MA History)

 

[Archibald]

AARS / QUARTZ was the "official" SR-71 successor. Imagine a B-2 like big stealth drone, equally eye watering expensive except worse, because drone with 1980's guidance systems.
That thing was to fly ahead of the B-2s and loiter subsonically inside USSR airspace to pin down all the mobile ICBMs - SS-16, SS-20, SS-24. Then it would beam the coordinates to B-2s coming for the kills, via Milstar (military comsats).

The Soviets had learned how to move the mobile missiles using gaps in KH-11 coverage, driving the NRO and spysats crazy. So back to aerodynamic vehicles which can loiter subsonically like a plain old U-2R / TR-1 - except inside USSR airspace.

Now the annoying rub with AARS QUARTZ was where to base it, since it was super dupper secret. Put that in Mildenhall, the home nest of SR-71s, and spotters but also Air Traffic (it's a stealth drone, but airliners are still there too) would aks "hey, what's that ?" So base it in the USAs like the B-2s, except it would take a lot of time and fuel (or tankers) to ferry it to Europe if WWIII blew up.

So my understanding ( well I red that on this very forum) was there was an ultrafast platform to complement AARS / QUARTZ, flying to Europe and the WarPac airspace much more quickly.

I don't think Aurora ever flew but if it ever had a mission to drive it, seems to be that one.

Back in the 1960's the NRO, CIA and USAF already had big battles between post- SR-71 (ISINGLASS / RHEINBERRY) spysats, and early drones (147 lightning bugs vs COMPASS ARROW vs TAGBOARD) The CIA and NRO archives are crammed with memos exploring manned spyplanes vs drones vs spysats vs "wild alternatives".

 

[Stargazer]

So my understanding ( well I red that on this very forum) was there was an ultrafast platform to complement AARS / QUARTZ, flying to Europe and the WarPac airspace much more quickly.

But if it could do the same job faster, wouldn't that kill the need for AARS/QUARTZ, then?!

 

[Archibald]

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/aars-lockheed-quartz-tier-iii-frontier-systems-w570-arrow-shadow.511/

 

[quellish]

AARS / QUARTZ was the "official" SR-71 successor. Imagine a B-2 like big stealth drone, equally eye watering expensive except worse, because drone with 1980's guidance systems.

Actually it's a bit more nuanced than that.

What an "SR-71 successor" is depends on who is talking and when. Does it mean a high-speed or "crisis" capability? Does it mean the ability to penetrate defended airspace? Both?

During the 1980s there were many mentions of a "TR-1 replacement" that was unmanned and able to penetrate. This was QUARTZ (and in some cases other UAVs). There was also mention of an "SR-71 replacement". In some cases these were clearly separate things, in others they may have been referring to the same thing.

Around 1990-1992 the language around this changed, and the unmanned aircraft was now also the "SR-71 replacement". This could have been based solely on its ability to penetrate. Or not, who knows! But the "TR-1/U-2 replacement" language mostly disappeared around this time. Notably, in 1989 a classified reconnaissance program was cancelled alongside the SR-71, while QUARTZ continued for several more years.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Very much so. Never had a credible (to me) explanation
A) UK MoD - Vulcan - laughable. They should know better.
B) US DoD - F-117 - plausible but goes counter to the USAF's dates for F-117s in Europe, plus it didn't look like one
C) Curtis Peebles - swept F-111 - plausible, but according to F-111 pilots I contacted, AAR-type manoeuvers in fully swept configuration are not recommended and in fact unsafe. I have yet to see a photo of a fully swept in-service F-111 on the boom, but happy to be corrected. Your mission, should you chose to accept it...
D) Belgian triangles (first I heard of this was in the post above) - cobblers.

Chris

I think I've seen some pics/videos of F-111s sweeping their wings fore and aft while on the boom, but that's about it. Definitely not lingering fully swept.