Slashdot Mirror


US Air Force's 1950s Supersonic Flying Saucer Declassified

MrSeb writes "Tighten the strap on your tinfoil hat: Recently declassified documents show that the US Air Force was working on, and perhaps had already built, a supersonic flying saucer in 1956. The aircraft, which had the code name Project 1794, was developed by the USAF and Avro Canada in the 1950s. One declassified memo, which seems to be the conclusion of initial research and prototyping, says that Project 1794 is a flying saucer capable of 'between Mach 3 and Mach 4,' (2,300-3,000 mph) a service ceiling of over 100,000 feet (30,500m), and a range of around 1,000 nautical miles (1,150mi, 1850km). According to declassified cutaway diagrams, the supersonic flying saucer would propel itself by rotating an outer disk at very high speed, taking advantage of the Coand effect. Maneuvering would be accomplished by using small shutters on the edge of the disc (similar to ailerons on a winged aircraft). Power would be provided by jet turbines. According to the cutaway diagrams, the entire thing would even be capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL). The fact that there are no disc-shaped aircraft in the skies today, though, suggests that the USAF's flying saucer efforts probably never got past the prototype stage."

9 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. or ... by brenddie · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The fact that there are no disc-shaped aircraft in the skies today, though, suggests that the USAF's flying saucer efforts probably never got past the prototype stage."

    or they work so good that only blurry and shaky videos exist of them flying around and terrorizing cows

    --
    The best test environment is production. - Me
    chrome://browser/content/browser.xul
    1. Re:or ... by ByOhTek · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, the cow thing was me. Sorry, my bad.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  2. Note to self: by slazzy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Invest in buying more shares in tin foil companies.

    --
    Website Just Down For Me? Find out
  3. Re:Didn't Get past prototype by DeTech · · Score: 5, Funny

    Excuse me sir you seemed to be confused on what the words prove, fact, no, and/or sky means.

  4. Project "1794" sounds awfully damned familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...as in re-arrange those digits and you get 1947, the year of the famous Roswell New Mexico UFO crash.

    Coincidence?

  5. Re:It all sounds vaguely familar... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Funny

    " what is the advantage of a flying saucer compared to wing based aircraft? at least on earth"

    To completely screw with the enemy.

    Broadcast loudly "ACK! ACKACK!" from loudspeakers while you only use lime green lighting.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  6. Re:so all those people weren't crazy by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

    I understand some things are questionable, when all you see is a bright light moving in the sky, but detail accounts cant all be spoofs.

    Before the Lindisfarne monastery was attacked by Vikings in 793, the monks reported having seen a multitude of omens, among others, swarms of fiery dragons were seen in the sky. I sincerely hope these weren't real, since my country not only has no anti-UFO missiles, but no anti-dragon missiles as well.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  7. Re:so all those people weren't crazy by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hi, I'm an alien (many of us are reading /. and even posting

    On the "B" Ark, I presume.

  8. Re:so all those people weren't crazy by ari_j · · Score: 4, Funny

    There are a few people claiming "you assume this" or "you assume that." You're all wrong. I, a conspiracy nutter, assume that the aliens are law-abiding and did not want to violate FAA regulations.