Mysterious unidentified flying object photographed over Texas

page: 2
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 01:22 PM
link   

wmd_2008


Underlined above,that's a FAR better image than ufo pictures shown on here and guess what the exif data is still there unlike 99.9999% of the ufo BS posted on here!!!

Nikon D70 1/1500th of a second f5.6 300mm telephoto lens.


And Gizmodo is a decent source.


You can make out a lot from the photos.




posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Aliensun
All of this excitement over a grainy picture when the image is far less distinct than many images of UFOs that come to ATS.


Often the case when comparing a real image with a CGI hoax.



So I'm guessing from your tone that you are only interested in Unidentified Flying Objects if they are piloted by Aliens, yes?



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Nice to see that, for all those billions of dollars, they've managed to reinvent a 60 year old design, the Avro Vulcan.



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   

FireMoon
Nice to see that, for all those billions of dollars, they've managed to reinvent a 60 year old design, the Avro Vulcan.


I see your point. It's engines are probably placed like the Vulcan, but the wing shape is different.



Avro Vulcan
edit on 28-3-2014 by pianopraze because: forgot link



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Looks to me like a childs drone toy, you can buy such things from any local hobbyist store.



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Well there's only so many shapes which seem to work aerodynamically. You want an octagon?!?


FireMoon
Nice to see that, for all those billions of dollars, they've managed to reinvent a 60 year old design, the Avro Vulcan.



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   

wmd_2008

Nikon D70 1/1500th of a second f5.6 300mm telephoto lens.


Which is a far superior camera and lens to any cell phone camera out there, and look at the terrible results. And then people wonder why that, with billions of cell phone cameras out there, there is a dearth of good UFO pictures.



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Pretty cool lookin... whatever it is.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Looking at the blow up, I can see the small triangle at the exhaust, like the Phantom Ray. Also, allowing for the angle at which it is being viewed I see no reason to think the wing shape is different from the a phantom Ray.

Wonders: has the US built a scaled up, twin engined, manned attack aircraft based on the Phantom Ray demonstrator?



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 02:49 AM
link   
While my post most likely wont be the right answer, I will throw this out there as it is.

Could it be a drone conducting functions under the Treaty on Open Skies?


The Treaty on Open Skies entered into force on January 1, 2002, and currently has 34 States Parties. It establishes a program of unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of its participants. The treaty is designed to enhance mutual understanding and confidence by giving all participants, regardless of size, a direct role in gathering information about military forces and activities of concern to them.

Open Skies is one of the most wide-ranging international efforts to date promoting openness and transparency of military forces and activities. The concept of "mutual aerial observation" was initially proposed to Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin at the Geneva Conference of 1955 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower; however, the Soviets promptly rejected the concept and it lay dormant for several years. The treaty was eventually signed as an initiative of US president (and former Director of Central Intelligence) George H. W. Bush in 1989. Negotiated by the then-members of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, the agreement was signed in Helsinki, Finland, on March 24, 1992.

This treaty is not related to civil-aviation open skies agreements.


It allows nations who sign the treaty the ability to perform over flights of any installation they want in the US. Those flights cannot be restricted with the sole exception of flight safety. The use of "National Security" to restrict flights is not permissible.

Anyways, thought I would throw that out there.
The requirement is the images taken must be released to all members of the treaty.



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



They can't fly any aircraft they want over, there's only certain aircraft they are allowed to use.

Usually the country overflying uses the host countries aircraft.



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Stealthbomber
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



They can't fly any aircraft they want over, there's only certain aircraft they are allowed to use.

Usually the country overflying uses the host countries aircraft.



Observation aircraft may be provided by either the observing Party or (the "taxi option") by the observed Party, at the latter's choice. All Open Skies aircraft and sensors must pass specific certification and pre-flight inspection procedures to ensure that they are compliant with treaty standards. The official certified U.S. Open Skies aircraft is the OC-135B Open Skies.


Granted wikipedia could be wrong and I have not served in the military so im not sure which info, yours or the articles, is correct. If you know for sure good deal and I will take your word over the article.
edit on 30-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: changed wikileaks to wikipedia... long day



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


The article pretty much says the same thing I was trying to, that they can't just fly over any aircraft they want to it's gotta be certified. Usually they use the other countries aircraft, because even if they don't I'm pretty sure there is observers from the host country in the aircraft at the time.

Open skies is really pretty useless for catching anything secret. They have to give prior notice before a flyover so anything they don't want to be seen will be put away.

You also couldn't really use a black aircraft for it either and since the aircraft in the picture hasn't come into the white world yet there would be zero chance of using for open skies, perhaps if it was a recon jet it might be doing some flyovers of other countries although not officially.



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 04:25 AM
link   
Contrails and jet propulsion.......I would believe alien aircrafts would be more advanced.



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Agartha
 


No one said it was aliens.

In the literal sense of the word this is a UFO (for some
)



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Stealthbomber
 


Yeah, silly me..........UFO doesn't necessarily mean alien.......and most UFOs are probably military planes.



posted on Mar, 30 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Agartha
 


Try actually reading a thread before commenting. Your sarcasm was poor btw.



posted on Mar, 31 2014 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


This must be global, testing of a new craft cause I seen air tracks as well at random times of the day with no planes in site in Australia.



posted on Mar, 31 2014 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Abavs
 


Next time pm me when and where this tracks are and I'll tell you exactly what the plane is mate.



posted on Mar, 31 2014 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Stealthbomber
 


Fair enough and some good points I had not considered..

thanks for the education.





top topics
 
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join