Confirmed: US Planned To Nuke The Moon.

*Source: RT

A B53 bomb is seen in this handout taken October 19, 2011 and released October 20, 2011.(Reuters / Handout)

In a secret project recently discovered, the United States planned to blow up the moon with a nuclear bomb in the 1950s as a display of the country’s strength during the Cold War space race.

The secret project, called “A Study of Lunar Research Flights”, as well as “Project A119” was never carried out but initially intended to intimidate the Soviet Union after their launch of the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, which demonstrated their technological power, the Daily Mail reports.

The sight of a magnificent nuclear flash from Earth was meant to terrify the Soviet Union and boost US confidence, physicist Leonard Reiffel, 85, told the Associated Press. The nuclear device would have been launched from a missile from an unknown location. It would have ignited upon impact with the moon, causing a massive explosion that was visible from Earth.

The detonation would have been the result of an atom bomb, since a hydrogen bomb was too heavy for a missile to carry the 238,000 miles to the moon.

Astronomer Carl Sagan was responsible for some of the calculations that could cause the nuclear detonation. Sagan, who later became a famous author of popular science, was a young graduate student at the time. He worked as a NASA advisor from the 1950s onward and died in 1996.

One of Sagan’s biographers claims he may have committed a security breach by revealing the classified project in 1959 in his application for an academic fellowship. Reiffel, who once served as deputy director at NASA and was responsible for the nuclear research at the Armour Research Foundation in 1958, confirmed this claim.

In his interview with AP, which took place in the year 2000, Reiffel said the nuclear detonation could have occurred by 1959, which is when the US Air Force deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles. The project documents were kept secret for nearly 45 years and the US government has never formally confirmed its involvement in the study.

But in the end, the mission was abandoned due to safety concerns about the radioactive material that would contaminate space. The scientists were also worried about the bomb detonating prematurely, thereby endangering the people on Earth.

Rather than blow up the moon, the US continued the space race, sending its first satellite, Explorer 1, into orbit on Jan. 31, 1958. The project was officially canceled by the Air Force in Jan. 1959, and the US instead focused on sending a man to the moon.

Supersonic Flying Wing Nabs $100,000 from NASA.

*Source: Yahoo News

An aircraft that resembles a four-point ninja star could go into supersonic mode by simply turning 90 degrees in midair. The unusual "flying wing" concept has won $100,000 in NASA funding to trying becoming a reality for future passenger jet travel.

The supersonic, bidirectional flying wing idea comes from a team headed by Ge-Cheng Zha, an aerospace engineer at the University of Miami. He said the fuel-efficient aircraft could reach supersonic speeds without the thunderclap sound produced by a sonic boom — a major factor that previously limited where the supersonic Concorde passenger jet could fly over populated land masses.

"I am hoping to develop an environmentally friendly and economically viable airplane for supersonic civil transport in the next 20 to 30 years," Zha said. "Imagine flying from New York to Tokyo in four hours instead of 15 hours."

The U.S. military's B-2 Spirit stealth bomber that debuted in 1989 represents the only previously successful flying wing aircraft, even though experimental flying wings flew before then. Zha's bidirectional flying wing kicks the general concept up a notch by essentially laying two flying wings on top of one another at a 90 degree angle, so that the aircraft faces one way for subsonic flight and rotates another way for supersonic flight. [Supersonic Biplane Design Stops Sonic Booms]

The midair transformation allows the aircraft to fly in its most fuel-efficient modes at both subsonic and supersonic speeds, Zha explained. Jet engines located on top of the aircraft in concept illustrations appear to rotate independently of the aircraft so that they can always point forward in flight.

Such midair spinning might sound unpleasant for people riding the aircraft. But a five-second rotation would only cause pilots and passengers to experience a "g-force" just one-tenth the force of gravity — less than what airline passengers experience during takeoff.

[Slideshow: First flying car completes test flight]

NASA liked the idea enough to give Zha and his colleagues a $100,000 grant from the Innovative Advanced Concepts program. But the U.S. space agency does not expect such funded concepts to fly for at least another 20 years or so.

"We are inventing the ways in which next-generation aircraft and spacecraft will change the world and inspiring Americans to take bold steps," said Michael Gazarik, director of NASA's Space Technology Program.

The bidirectional flying wing aircraft could also lead to the first supersonic drones soaring over the U.S. homeland or distant battlefields. Zha previously pitched the robotic military version to the U.S. Air Force at an unmanned aerial systems conference in 2009.

Both the U.S. government and aircraft manufacturers also have begun pushing for hypersonic aircraft capable of flying more than five times the speed of sound (Mach 5). Aerospace giant EADS displayed one passenger jet concept at the Paris Air Show in 2011, but aviation experts suggested a ticket to board the flight would cost at least $10,000.

The U.S. has already begun carrying out tests of unmanned hypersonic aircraft, but with mixed results. A U.S. Air Force test of the unmanned X-51A WaveRider ended prematurely when the aircraft plunged into the Pacific Ocean on Aug. 14.

US Drone Industry: Open For Business At Home And Abroad.

*Source: RT

US Air Force Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle hanger during a preview day of the Seoul International Aerospace and Defense Exhibition at a military air base in Seongnam, south of Seoul (AFP Photo / Jung Yeon-Je)

The Obama administration has continued in its enduring drive to sell drones to eager allies like Turkey. But if US clients are careless or misuse the weapons, Washington will share the blame, says Tim Brown, a senior fellow at Globalsecurity.org.

After speaking with President Obama on the sidelines of the NATO Summit in Chicago this past Monday, Turkish President Abdullah Gul mentioned the White House’s “positive stance” over the sale of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the state-run Anadolu Agency quotes him as saying.

“They are trying to convince the Congress,” he added.

Ankara has long been eager to get its hands on armed drones to help squash autonomy-seeking Kurdish rebels in the country’s southeast.

But the influence of pro-Israel lobbyists on the US Congress could scuttle any such deal. Relations between Ankara and Tel Aviv plummeted following a 2010 Israeli commando raid on a Turkish ship carrying civilian activists and aid to Gaza Strip.

A failed Turkish airstrike that killed 34 smugglers misidentified as Kurdish rebels is also likely to stymie the sale for some time.

While Turkey eagerly awaits a decision, drone export advocates say a policy of refusing to sell the unmanned vehicles will only deprive the flagging US economy of sales and jobs. And those pushing for greater leniency in international drone sales have a powerful backer.

Apart from Turkey, President Obama has long been pressuring US lawmakers to authorize the sale of presumably armed drones to NATO allies in order to redistribute the burden of America’s global military operations, both past and present.

Advocates of the president's position claim that by empowering NATO allies with drone technology, alliance members would no longer need to rely on United States drone capabilities in counter-terrorism and reconnaissance operations.

With fears that countries like China and Iran are attempting to get in on the drone market – with Iran managing to reverse-engineer a captured US spy drone last month – pro-export enthusiasts are likely to feel their case has been bolstered.

The economics of unmanned flight

Even if Washington isn’t directly selling drones to foreign governments via Foreign Military Sales, one way or another, drone technology is already being exported.

On Monday, the US embassy-based Office of Security and Cooperation in Iraq (OSCI) announced “Iraq's Navy has purchased U.S. drones to protect the country's oil platforms in the south, from where most of Iraq's oil is shipped."

However, the OSCI was not forthcoming about the number or type of UAVs provided to Baghdad.

Several companies have in fact already been granted the right to sell drone-related equipment by the State Department, including L-3 Communications, Dream Hammer, and Broadcast Microwave systems.

LEPTRON has even been given permission to sell drone helicopters.

But Texas-based defense contractor Vanguard Defense Industries is paving the way for future trends, as it has been granted the right to sell drones to foreign governments for narco-trafficking and counter-terrorism operations, the American Independent reported earlier this month.

Despite an expected 25 per cent bump in domestic sales from $35 to $40 million for next year, Vanguard’s CEO Michael Buscher says the future is abroad.

“I don’t see the domestic market as being such a boom,” said Buscher. “Our bread and butter is still going to be overseas foreign military sales,” the daily quotes him as saying.

Buscher’s optimism is not surprising.

Last month, the US-based marketing firm Teal Group estimated that “UAV spending will almost double over the next decade from current worldwide UAV expenditures of $6.6 billion annually to $11.4 billion, totaling just over $89 billion in the next ten years.”

The Teal Group study further predicted the US will account for 62 per cent of the worldwide RDT&E (Research, Development, Test & Evaluation) and 55 per cent of procurements over the next decade.

Domestically, a congressional budget office study published last June showed a planned Pentagon outlay of $40 billion to purchase more than 700 large and medium-sized drones in the coming decade.

It should come as no surprise, then, that the United States Air Force trained more drone pilots than fighter and bomber pilots combined in 2011, NPR reported last November.

Congress remains unsure

Despite the purported economic benefits, Senate Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein expressed her reservations about disseminating drone technology to foreign states last December.

"There are some military technologies that I believe should not be shared with other countries, regardless of how close our partnership," the Wall Street Journal cites her as saying.

"The United States should be trying to control the proliferation of certain weapons, and I would put armed UAVs in that category."

At the time, a proposal to equip six unarmed Italian-owned Reaper drones with $393 million in weapons systems was log-jammed after being informally presented to US legislators.

But with the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International spending some $280,000 lobbying Congress in 2011, lawmakers might become amenable to helping out the one US industry that appears to be crisis-proof:arms.

­

‘US bipolar on selling Terminator-type technologies’

Tim Brown, a senior fellow at Globalsecurity.org, believes America’s position on exporting drone technology is somewhat ambivalent.

“The US government has a bipolar attitude toward exporting UAV technology,” he told RT. “On the one hand there is a concern with how a weapon system is used once it is exported. The more sensitive the technology, the fewer countries the US will share it with.”

Brown says that while drone technology can be very effective in preventing the loss of soldiers’ lives and targeting terrorists, the US still has reservations about exporting the technology even to traditional allies, such as Turkey, which may use it to target Kurdish rebels.

“The concern is that Turkey will use US-built UCAVs to go after the PKK [the Kurdish Workers’ Party], and might not place a high enough priority on quality control in their targeting process,” he noted. “The number of innocent civilians killed might increase.”

Brown also stressed that the US Congress, the Department of Defense and the State Department will have to weigh the pros and cons of approving the export of the technologies to countries like Turkey.

“On the one hand the US would like to export UAV technology to support the US economy, sustain and create US jobs,” he said. “But if allies are careless or misuse these weapons, the US will share in the blame.”

Brown also took note of the fact that the US was able to successfully test a fully autonomous drone, without a pilot behind a computer controlling it with a joystick. He believes this may be the future of military technologies, the development of which is increasingly weeding out the human element.

“We are not quite there yet, but the era of 'Terminator' type UCAVs flying around autonomously, using programming and fuzzy logic to target enemies on the battlefield is probably not far off,” he noted. “The F-22 and the F-35, if built, will probably be the last manned fighter to go into production in the United States. The proliferation of this new weapon system may or may not have a positive effect overall.”