It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pictures Of Mystery Plane Over Wichita

page: 16
134
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Wolfenz

Because that list is of confirmed X planes. There's no real evidence that Blackstar ever existed.




posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
It's just a drone, get used to it.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   
I do think there is a case for old projects that have still to be declassified. The one that comes to mind immediately is the "mother ship" photographed from Tikaboo in the early nineties. It was really big and really white and has yet to see the light of day. The rumour mill says it lives in a hanger at Edwards still, who knows. There are probably several others that have still not been acknowledged.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Although those news people say it's an X-47B, the thing on the trailer apparently isn't. Side profile is different and has no vertical surfaces. It's yet another "flying dorito" type aircraft, which seems to be the profile for aircraft with both good stealth and efficiency attributes. Shape isn't going to be exact because of the styrofoam they packed it in under the shrink-wrap, but you can still get a fairly good idea.

In that case, why trailer and not fly it to where it's going? I don't think there's any companies down there (further west in St. Louis yes, but not around Champaign) that work on that kind of thing. I wonder what the University of Illinois is doing in regards to stealth research?



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Stealthbomber

While I don't think it shows achieved flybys you can find future flybys of many different sats here:

spaceweather.com...

I haven't used it but this free sat track software looks interesting:

orbitron.software.informer.com...


edit on 19-4-2014 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Not many people know of this aircraft. It's the TR-B3. It has a nuclear reactor in it.


Here is video footage as an example.
www.youtube.com...
edit on 19-4-2014 by Sixpennyrocket because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sixpennyrocket
It's the TR-B3.

Nope



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Hey Zaph. You keep saying that the triangle shape is very stealthy. And all one has to do is change the shape of where the fuselage meets the wings and the aircraft's rolls could change. I noticed the plane over texas looked a little different than the plane over kansas. Maybe its the same model plane but using . . . variable geometry while still being stealthy. Sorta like a B-1 but using the B-2 shape instead. They got all those new materials that can change shape.

This thing could be super stealthy with the addition of newer technologies. It could have the ability to fly both very high and fast then change its leading edge right around the cockpit and the trailing edge (you know where the fuselage and the wings meet) and being nice and maneuverable at low speeds and altitudes. At the same time a majority of the fuselage wouldn't be effected by the variable geometry and could be used modularily (sp) with either weapons or advanced electronics depending on the mission. sell it as a one stop platform for both those needs and eliminate the need for three separate crafts. Saves the govt a lot of money and opens up lots of business opportunities with "sub-models" for whoever built this.

Oh yeah throw in some new add on to the existing engine technology that gives it better fuel usage and range. Maybe even use new skins that can't be used on "older" craft. Maybe these skins do more than "Stealth" maybe the skins react with whatever the propulsion or radar does. Maybe in conjunction. Maybe thats why its rumored to be more of a grey color than a black color. Maybe it can be any color it wants. We have other weapon systems that can be any sound they want. So why not color.
edit on 19-4-2014 by BASSPLYR because: trying to fix grammar



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: ionwind

But if you look at the image, it is not an exact triangle. Instead of a straight line at the base, you can see formations (can't find the proper word for it).



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   
What ever the plane it, it is not an exact triangle shape. The base isn't a straight line.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Regarding the recent heightened security at Edwards, Bing Maps is now not resolving down into greater resolution at Edwards. Whereas, a few weeks ago, it was. Any info on what particular building? Only a few?

Possible flight path in and out of Edwards would be North to Northeast, than East over NTS, south of St. George and Durango, continuing straight across, what I like to call the four corners line, south of Witchia in which it possibly turn Northeast again towards Kansas City and east into Missouri and into Whitman, if it is even flying into Whitman??

The four corners region is a great place to camp and try and photograph this craft it is flying out of California.

Any guess's on what the wingspan is in length? What leads on possible AFB this craft is coming in and out of? Besides Edwards and Groom?



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ezwip

No, it isn't "just a drone".



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: themadgenius

I don't have the exact buildings, but the South Ramp is where the high security projects take place, so it'll be out there.

As for flight paths, it had been flying between a few points and back, but they've recently expanded the "envelope" so to speak.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Stealthbomber

That plane is at least 50,000 feet high, and you don't even know if you're getting a clear view of it.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Kuroodo

Ridged?



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: stopbeingnaive

At 50,000 feet you wouldn't see contrails. Contrails stop forming above a certain altitude, which is well below 50,000 feet.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ionwind
Here's an enhanced image posted on The Aviationist site:

[quote/]

Thanks for posting this pic. I was really jazzed about this program when I was in the NAVY and I couldn't remember that it was supposed to be called avanger/A-12. But when I saw the airfoil on this picture, it was the first thing that popped into my mind. The DoD spent beau-coup bucks on this and cancelled the program. But then again, it's the same DoD that sends our people into combat carrying an AR-15! Maybe they built something "new" using the same airfoil, which I believe was selected for the stealth/range benefits of a flying wing.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: tencap77

Thanks for posting this pic. I was really jazzed about this program when I was in the NAVY and I couldn't remember that it was supposed to be called avanger/A-12. But when I saw the airfoil on this picture, it was the first thing that popped into my mind. The DoD spent beau-coup bucks on this and cancelled the program. But then again, it's the same DoD that sends our people into combat carrying an AR-15! Maybe they built something "new" using the same airfoil, which I believe was selected for the stealth/range benefits of a flying wing.


Yeah the A-12 looked really ahead of it's time. I would love to see one in flight. But there is no reason why they couldn't rework some of the old designs with new materials and avionics.

I think the picture I posted by Dayanx from The Avionist may have been fudged a bit: "Dayanx on Reddit, filtered the image and highlighted the possible shape of the aircraft.

I think the aircraft is banking, and the more I look at it, the more it looks to me like one of these:



Here is an attempt I did at enhancement but there is a lot of noise, but I think you can make out the general outline:




posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I don't know if that is true or not. I couldn't find anything that said planes absolutely do not make contrails above that altitude, but I did see that the U-2 spy plane has a rear-view mirror on it for the sole purpose of detecting contrails, which seems like an odd thing to have for a plane that cruises at well above 50,000 ft where contrails are not made, don't you think? None the less, you still don't know if it's a clear picture. So for you guys to come in here and say that it's unequivocally not a B-2 is comical.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: ionwind

That one hadn't flown at the time of that picture. That was just a photoshopped B-2.

Boeing has a similar design showing as a potential future bomber though.



new topics

top topics



 
134
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join