Blackstar discussion...

Despite the many details provided by AvWeek about the purported Blackstar program, the existence of an "operational" TSTO reusable system seems wildly inconsistent with what has been happening with all the rest of the government space programs since the early 1990s and with what they have planned for the next couple of decades.

- As a reader already commented, NASA's whole approach to space transport is based on the claim that fully reusable space vehicles are not feasible with current technologies.
- DARPA has had programs like Falcon and RASCAL (canceled due to cost overruns) that are intended to provide "responsive space" capability. For the next 5-10 years, this simply means launching microsats on short notice. Why not just use Blackstar or build on its capabilities?
- Why would a system like the Blackstar be "shelved" when it is so far beyond what anyone else is flying and beyond what the rest of the government claims is even feasible?
- The magazine article speculates that the program was run directly or indirectly by an intelligence agency and they managed to kept it secret from even "top military space commanders". So how did they manage to fly this thing to orbit and not have it show up on the military's space tracking system?
- In a government where secrets seem to stay secret only until more than one person knows about them, I find it extremely hard to believe a huge program like this could be kept under wraps for over 10 years. And not just from the public but from most of the military and NASA.

If it was the beginning of April, I would take this whole thing to be a big leg-puller.

If we were still in the 1980s, I would assume AvWeek had been led astray by a disinformation campaign aimed at the Soviets. But the Soviets are gone so I'm not sure why anyone in the Pentagon or the Intelligence agencies would bother to run an elaborate spaceplane ruse other than perhaps to get back at AvWeek for breaking so many stories about secret programs over the past several decades...

A design study program and some prototype tests, maybe, but a secret operational orbital system borders on sci-fi. I like sci-fi and I hope this story is true but I'll wait for independent confirmation before I'll buy it.

Posted 03/05/06 | 18:31:22 by TopSpacer | Filed under: Military Space

Comments

So let me get this straight. Not only did they drain the lifeblood from the A-12 and NASP (quite probably significantly contributing to their demise, and the consequences thereof), but they are now canceling it! I sure hope they have an anti-grav system already in production to replace it :-)

Posted by Ben Reytblat at 03/05/06 21:07:43

Unsubstantiated rumours of a top-secret XB-70 lookalike have been around for years - just google "Brilliant Buzzard" for examples - and this story looks like more of the same. TopSpacer is right to be sceptical.

Posted by Andrew Zalotocky at 03/06/06 07:10:57

Most likely the DOD intelligence is fueling misinformation stories to cover up some other classified activity, probably not nearly as sexy as the space Alt. waverider RBCC propulsion Blackstar and Aurora concepts. However I wouldn’t be all that surprised if a black world TSTO system based on 1960’s spare hardware (SR-71, B-70 Valkyrie turbine technology) and FDL X-24C studies existed. Frankly I’m surprised that NASA, and DOD has allowed the dust to collect on these past technologies for so many years.

Posted by Doug Gard at 03/06/06 07:21:13

I also am suspecting that Blackstar, if
operational was cobbled together from
existing hardware but modified for our
purposes. It makes sense budget-wise.

There had been numerous sightings of this aircraft - most of it documented here at Dan Zinngrabe's old and un-updated but still interesting Black Dawn site at:

http://members.macconnect.c...

If you're interested, click on the
"Brilliant Buzzard" report for info.

There was also a home video of an
large aircraft with a very long
burning contrail and a seperate
very fast craft with a white
contrail (but very poorly filmed)
that made me raise my eyebrows.

Some of the other hearsay reports
indicating someone looking at sat
photos of Groom Lake and seeing
three large white triangles on the
ground near the runway, others
indicating targets above Mach 3
running up and down the east coast
(see the Black Dawn report on the
latter).

My feeling is that if such a thing exists it is only used when required.

There may be design shortcomings or
it may not be completely operational
or it may be very expensive to
operate. Or dangerous. Or all of
the above.

It's very interesting but the truth
promises to be a lot less interesting.

Posted by Todd Madson at 03/06/06 11:00:14

"Two people can keep a secret, but only if one of them is dead."

Posted by Mobius at 03/06/06 13:58:34

The only named witness to this vehicle is "James Petty, president of JP Rocket Engine Co" who "spotted [it] flying over Salt Lake City at about 2:35 p.m. local time" on October 4, 1998.

The "JP Rocket Engine Company" is apparently "JP Rocket Engines," an (amateur?) group that appeared in the 3/31/03 issue of AWST. At the time, they had reportedly launched an Aerotech solid rocket with an aerospike nozzle of their own design.

Now, we have a reported TSTO vehicle believed to use aerospike engines, spotted flying a major city in broad daylight, and the only reported witness happens to be president of JP Rocket Engines.

That could be a remarkable coincidence, but it raises a number of red flags. Why would a very large, top-secret aircraft be flying over Salt Lake City? Why would no one else report it? (The Utah UFO Hunters do not list any sightings for that date.)

If the vehicle really was low and "climbing slowly," then it must have taken off from an airport near Salt Lake City. The nearest military field would be Hill AFB, which is a maintenance and supply base -- not the sort of place likely to be testing experimental aircraft.

An existing aircraft carrying an external fuel tank or missile load might be mistaken for a TSTO and is much more likely to be operating in that area. The witness's imagination might then fill in details, like aerospikes, that he is familar with.

Posted by Edward Wright at 03/06/06 16:22:58

The story doesn't add up.

Boron fuels, mach 3 carrier aircraft, etc.

Far too much magic technology the conflation of
various rumours programs and efforts.

I wouldn't doubt the IC and USAF would want this,
but building a Mach 3 bird the size of a B-70 is
big bucks, and it's hard to hide.

Maybe they tried, and discovered the program stank. The mainline USAF is spending far too
much effort on micro-sats and ORS for this
to be real.

Posted by Spartacus at 03/06/06 21:58:54

Popular science had an article on a secret lift body that used ram jet technology. It used Hydrazine as fuel. I've talked with some guys that did maintenance on mid air refueling units that where equipped to deliver hydrazine. Such a body could not have left the ground under it's own power.
Some smoke usaully means there is a fire some where.

Posted by IowaRube at 03/07/06 10:51:40

> Boron fuels

Note: The B-70 program considered the boron "zip fuel" because it promised one advantage -- extra range. That's important in a strategic bomber, but the first stage of a TSTO does not need exceptionally long range. So, boron would provide no particular advantage.

Also, where are the production plants for boron fuel? Hiding those would be a major challenge in itself.

Posted by Edward Wright at 03/07/06 11:37:40

Just google "JP Rocket Engine Co." for example. And wait for their early April issue for a clue! ...But this provides us with a well detailed idea of what America could build.

Posted by Sergey Kozlovskoy at 03/09/06 17:04:59

NASA's HEDM program looked at using boron slurried with gelled hydrogen (cooled by helium) as well as with kerosene. The 'toothpaste' sounds like kerosene slurried with boron. Reported Isp gains are 100-150 sec with hydrogen, 31-100 with kerosene, depending on the study you read.

Proplems with such fuel include pumping it, though HEDM program says the 'toothpaste' consistency only occurs when its still. Once induced to flow the gel turns to a watery state to allow pumping easily. One source I spoke to who build a boron-kerosen ramjet in the late 1980's for rocketdyne said their program was cancelled due to the pumping difficulties.

It sounds like the orbiter, with its vanes in the belly, may have used some sort of air breathing strutjet system. I don't think they were very firm on the propulsion details even though they use a lot of buzzwords in the article.

My own suspicion is that if it existed, and is being mothballed, it is only because they have a more effective 2nd generation system developed, which might be indicated by the fact that every technology development program at NASA necessary for an air breathing 2nd generation SSTO RLV has been scuttled in the last 2-5 years, some of which have publicly resurfaced at DARPA or other military agencies.

Posted by Mike Lorrey at 03/11/06 15:35:29

Add Comment

Note: HTML code will not work except for bare URLs (i.e. http://www...). Also, for postings older than 1 week, comments are filtered manually to prevent spam and so may not appear for a few days.
Note: Trash talking and name calling, especially in anonymous comments, won't be tolerated.