UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 24

Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 14:06:14 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 10:30:57 -0400
Subject: Re:  U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs - Ledger

>From: Gildas Bourdais <bourdais.gildas.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 12:02:31 +0200
>Subject: Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 01:46:32 -0300
>>Subject: Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs

>>>From: Michael Christol <spachopr.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 09:00:43 -0600
>>>Subject: Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs


>>If you can't prove the viability of 1947 to 2007 technology as
>>the culprit for the UFO then you don't have that to support your
>>argument. But you and others can't claim year in and year out
>>that we have the capability or had it then when there's
>>absolutely no aero-space science to support it and no aircraft
>>to support it-anywhere.

>>I could really get into this but it would likely bore the hell
>>out of everybody. It has in the past.

>>The little piece I wrote was meant to be cheeky while not
>>getting off on a rant.


>This is not boring at all to me. On the contrary, it is the kind
>of sensible technical data that we badly need in ufology. We are
>plagued, in France too, with a lot o fancy speculation about the
>nazi saucers, etc.

>Recently, Jean-Pierre Petit claimed that there is a secret,
>hypersonic version (mach 10) of the B-2 propelled by MHD! I was
>invited, next to him, when he explained that, with a model in
>hands, on the first French TV network, TF1, a couple of years
>ago. I was petrified.

>It's in his best selling book entitled "UFOs and secret American
>Weapons" (OVNIS et armes secretes americaines), published in
>2003 and still on the tables of book stores. There seems to be
>no end to that sort on nonsense.

Hi Gildas,

Thanks. I don't doubt there is a replacement for the SR-71
possibly a Mach 5 or 6 vehicle of terrific 'dash' capability
most probably utilizing scram-jet [supersonic ram-jet]
technology at altitudes above 60,000 feet.

A French aerodynamicist first began working on ram-jet
technology back in the late 1930s so it's not new. This type of
aircraft is exotic in relation to it's speed and heat resistant
construction but none of it is new technology which is - in fact
- quite old. But there's apparently a need to have this aircraft
as a one off or two off production that will of course cost
hundreds of millions of dollars to research then produce.

Stan Friedman mentioned, in another post, the cost associated
problem with serial production of aircraft. It's time consumming
and expensive.

For example the new Boeing 787 design is an aircraft built from
scratch and this first aircraft will be sold once tested rather
than just being a prototype to help keep down cost.

The F-117As are all hand built and no two are identical. The B-
2s are handbuilt but are uniformly jigged up and cost nearly a
billion a copy.

This cost problem would have been the same for the Hortons that
some claim flew near Mt. Rainer not even a full two years after
the end of the war.

It's fiction anyway.

The Hortons were in preliminary stages, one was a one third
scale model which was to be tested and the full scale version
wasn't ever flown.

Take one look at the intakes on the Hortons and that pretty much
trashes any supersonic theories. The intakes stalled the airflow
at faster speeds stalling the compressors a probelm that went on
for years until AVRO solved it with variable geometry inlets on
the Arrow's intakes.


Don Ledger

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com