Replies

Thought you might like this

The Wing

At first, I had no intention of saying anything about our government's latest secret deadly weapon. However, a friend sent me an article from a Russian newspaper (see below)...and I can no longer delay release of this information.

The "WING" makes the Aurora look like it's in reverse when flying. The "WING" out-flies the Aurora by five (5) times the speed.

Somehow we're still working on finding out how government scientists managed to figure out how to cancel the sound of the plane using its speed.
br> This "WING" is able to leave the atmosphere, but not by much, and still take crystal clear pictures of its targets.

The engine is a "pulse" very similar to Aurora's, however, the fuel consumption is much better. I've had it explained to me in terms of an automobile: Imagine getting 1500 miles to 1/2 (HALF) a gallon of gas!

This "WING" has the ability to stay aloft for weeks on end. If it needs refueling, it reenters the atmosphere and is refueled as any other airplane.

Now, THE KICKER...its fuel is oxygen and hydrogen. The government, as we speak, has teams of scientists working on a conversion kit so the "WING" can "suck-in-and-convert" its own fuel from the atmosphere.

The scary part...the "WING" is also designed to deliver nuclear weapons as well as conventional weapons.

Its exact speed is actually unknown at this time. Its silence makes this plane an extremely deadly weapon in the hands of a warmongering president such as ours. Currently, there are four (4) working prototypes; they are based at the 'new Area 51' in the state of Oklahoma.

"Now, THE KICKER...its fuel is oxygen and hydrogen. The government, as we speak, has teams of scientists working on a conversion kit so the "WING" can "suck-in-and-convert" its own fuel from the atmosphere."

Ooooh. Oxygen and hydrogen. Just like the 1960-70's Saturn rocket upper stages, and the Centaur upper stage. And the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME). That's cutting-edge, fer sure.

People who are ignorant of propulsion often confuse "fuel" with "propellant". Propellants are oxidizer and fuel. You cannot "suck fuel from the atmosphere"; you can suck oxidizer. Air is 22% oxygen and therefore a pretty rotten oxidizer compared to liquid oxygen. And studies--repeatedly run since the 1960s--on sucking air and separating out the oxygen have shown that: (1) The equipment for doing so is incredibly heavy and (2) Any moisture in the air plays havoc with the heat-exchangers needed to liquify the oxygen. Oh, and (3) the energy required is considerable, which reduces the overall efficiency of the powerplant.

As for nuclear engines, they tend to have thrust-to-weight ratios in the "absurd" category. Whereas the SSME has a thrust-to-weight of about 70, nuclear rocket engines are in the range of 8-20. They would be suitable for an upper stage, but not for a booster. And an atomic air-breather was exhaustively studied in the 60's and 70's and it is simply a non starter. If you want, I'll provide gruesome detail.

--Boris