X-65 Aurora: The experimental stealth aircraft that could change jet design forever

The development of military aircraft technology will soon advance to include a flying machine without any moving control surfaces.

The new X-65 Aurora will not fly with the standard active flow control (AFC) system but instead use jets of air from a pressurised source to shape the flow of air over the aircraft's surface, with AFC effectors.

By removing external moving parts from the design, an aircraft's weight and complexity can be reduced, while most importantly making it easier to hide in the air – perfect for military stealth jets which can't be spotted by radar.

#bfbsforcesnews #forcesnews #aircraft #technology #stealth #military

[paulwood]

The intake needs a red light bouncing back & forth.

[madsteve]

The design reminds me of the "White Star" class of spaceships from "Babylon 5".

[timmurphy]

Pity that the UK version of this: Magma just disappeared "off the radar".

[ronaldmarcks]

I realize I'm just a civilian and have no way of guaging what can safely be disclosed, but even the mention of this technology seems like something I'd want to keep close to my vest.

[stevenandrews]

This system will also reduce drag! Awsome!

[Phil_AKA_ThundyUK]

This is one step closer to having a workable combat plane that works IN SPACE!!!!

[GenuineUFOs]

They have stranger looking craft than that out there. I took a two photos of a futuristic looking round black craft with angled wings over Hartlepool UK on 10.04.2021 at 11.21am.

[Pesmog]

A few experimental aircraft and drones have tried to produce defuse thrust over the years. I may be wrong but I don't think any could be described as successful as they were considered complex. Its probably one of those technologies where computers will help it fly better. One design that springs to mind is the Hunting 126 from the 1960's which although not quite the same, used similar ideas. It could take off at really low speeds.

[jameshewitt]

You can see elements of the USAFs Tacit Blue in these designs, makes sense as that was a 80s program investigating low probability of radar detection ie low RCS

[adamcrookedsmile]

Probably a gain in stealth, but propulsion efficiency would drop as the engine thrust is diverted to doing control.

[kenw]

What the. Is this even real? How can it be?

[cujimmy]

Our stealth jet is so good even the pilots can't find it.

[buzzlite]

A 'plane' is a carpenters tool for flattening wood.

[rokuth]

So... A New Generation Blackburn Buccaneer? It looks more like trading one set of complex controls for another set. I can see the benefits for military aircraft, but for commercial, and private/personal aircraft? It will take some time until something like this becomes the norm not the exotic. Then there is the option of using flexible surfaces instead bleed air. Maybe a combination of both would be the ultimate best solution.

[trsu]

I keep wishing we had something like Dawn Aerospace's Aurora flying out of Spaceport Cornwall. Is there crossover value in this technique for suborbital flight - I mean, could there be sufficient flow to control vehicle orientation while out of the atmosphere? I'm guessing the jets would most likely be compressed air from the engine, rather than from a pressure vessel, though I suppose some control while taking off and landing must be desirable.
Did the Wright Flyer have movable control surfaces? Didn't they deform it? Deformable fluid-borne vehicles are long overdue another shot.

[jabsdrahm.]

why not use the tech for the Tempest/global combat fighter?

[Nihtglom]

Is nobody going to mention BAE's Demon which flew quite some time ago, back in 2010?

[motionsic]

Loss of engine bleed air = loss of control. Sounds ok for expandable UCAV’s.

[camdenmcandrews]

Use compressed air from the engine's compressor stages. Eliminate hydraulics. Huge reduction of weight, wear, radar signature, and cost. The risk that I see, especially with the single-engine design shown, is that if you lose your engine, you lost all control. For a military fighter or a long-range cruise missile*, it might be worth that risk; but I'd be shy about considering this technology for commercial or general aviation applications. (Yes, I am a retired aerospace engineer, and a pilot. I did, however, spend most of my career working for NASA, not DARPA.)

*MEMO TO UKRAINIAN ENGINEERS: We might be on to something here, guys.

[TheHookahSmokingCaterpillar]

Some designer watched too many episodes of Thunderbirds!