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: 17
134
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Nah

Not buying the B2

It has a definitive strait line at the back which is fairly lite on the edge,

interesting pic




posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: stopbeingnaive

And for people to come in and say that it definitely IS a B-2 is comical as well. So is claiming this was at 50,000 feet with no way of telling.

The U-2 uses the rearview mirror for a lot of things, including aircraft checks, and while taxiing on the ground, because they have extremely limited visibility in the suits they wear.

Above 40,000 feet contrail formation is reduced because there is less humidity at that altitude. While you COULD see contrails at 50,000 feet, it would take extreme conditions to do it.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
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.


Yeah, I know that's a CGI image. Here are some more Google images for the B-3:

B -3

There is even one called "Broken Arrow". What the.... I thought that was the code for a lost nuke.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: ionwind

That's the "B-3" from the movie.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ionwind

That's the "B-3" from the movie.


LOL, yeah I liked that movie.

But:


Broken Arrow refers to an accidental event that involves nuclear weapons, warheads or components, but which does not create the risk of nuclear war.


en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 19-4-2014 by ionwind because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Wolfenz

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


Well this did tho wasn't actually in space for a reentry just dropped from a B-52 Stratofortress

not sure if it was actuality space worthy

Martin Marietta X-24B
en.wikipedia.org...-24C



X-24B pilots
John A. Manke - 16 flights
Michael V. Love - 12 flights
William H. Dana - 2 flights
Einar K. Enevoldson - 2 flights
Thomas C. McMurtry - 2 flights
Francis Scobee - 2 flights



Hmm According to LOL

Blackstar (spacecraft)
en.wikipedia.org...

Encyclopedia Astronautica
Blackstar
www.astronautix.com...

and the Skeptics

Blackstar: the US space conspiracy that never was?
Two-stage ultrasecret vehicle wows the crowds
By Lester Haines, 24 Apr 2006
www.theregister.co.uk...


Six blind men in a zoo: Aviation Week’s mythical Blackstar
by Dwayne A. Day
Monday, March 13, 2006
thespacereview.com...

Blackstar A False Messiah From Groom Lake

As late as 1966, their publicity department released artist's concepts showing B-70 air launches of X-15, Minuteman, Gemini-Titan, and what seems to be a cluster of three Agena upper stages. (file photo of an X-15 test plane and pilot John B McKay).
by Jeffrey F. Bell
www.spacedaily.com...


Either it was Made or on the Drawing Board.

Need More Info


thespacereview.com...
www.theregister.co.uk...


Hmm interesting

ALA - 60 Theromplane Russia
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk...://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6A30B96E-35AD-4F73-93B1-863F59A3A0E4/0/uap_vol2_pgs76to90.pdf< br />
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk...://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/EDAB29D1-BBE2-4811-A62B-45D6C9608BCE/0/uap_vol2_pgs91to105.pdf

Meanwhile in my Searches I come Across this from ATS

Triangle UFO or the Secret XOV-BlackStar Spaceplane ?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Yup Pretty Much Looks like the Pic the Op Posted just a Side Angled View of it
files.abovetopsecret.com...







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

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

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



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Wolfenz

Didn't fly into space, but it existed, and was tested.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well, that's different from "Contrails don't form above 50,000 ft." Yes. But no one is in here like you saying, as if they were the one flying the plane, that it is for sure a B-2. It's more logical to believe it is a B-2. I have a hard time believing the military is out flying their top-secret plane in the middle of the day so Joe blow can snap pictures of it and post it all over the internet.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: stopbeingnaive

And how do you think that those pre-reveal pictures get taken? They don't send official photographers out with cameras to take bad, grainy pictures. There are also very good reasons for a black project to be seen flying during the day.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Definitely a strait line at he back which is unlike anything know or know projects in development except maybe the A-12 avenger II ?

Some minor enhancements

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



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: gippers

originally posted by: canucks555
Could be the main topic on almost every forum on ATS. Why fly it over a city?

ufo indeed..

S@F


I hope you're not suggesting it is an alien UFO. It is from this planet hence the con trails.


I don't think that the supposition that this is an exo-atmospheric craft is beyond reason. After all, thanks to the information age, we have a much better grasp of what the government is capable of, and how non-transparent they really are. And if it were a true "alien" craft, it makes sense that they might want to "mimic" a terrestrial aircraft. Just for fun!
I'm pretty sure "advanced" civilizations that are challenged with entering/leaving/flying in the Earth's atmosphere might adopt the local customs. The contrails are what they are, what you get when you introduce a hot surface into an extremely cold, damp environment. Pretty sure an alien craft might generate some heat at that altitude. Physics is physics right? at least that's what all the science guys keep telling us. And if you were going to build a true exo-atmospheric craft for operating in LEO, you'd use a delta wing. Just like the space shuttle. After all, maybe the "visitors" we attribute to UFO activity aren't a whole lot more advanced than we are, but maybe just enough to fool the angry monkeys! Also, a few more point s to consider, Is it a US manufactured air frame ? Is it a hoax? Is there a reason I should care? Just checking. wanted to see if you read to the end of the post


edit on 4192014 by tencap77 because: spelling / content

edit on 4192014 by tencap77 because: spelling / content



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Wolfenz

Didn't fly into space, but it existed, and was tested.


Right thats why i said about the X 24

not sure if it was actuality space worthy



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



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Wolfenz

But that's why it was on the list, and others aren't. There is no real evidence that some others actually existed or flew in any form.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Just wanted to say thanks to everyone that contributed especially Zaphod, I learned a lot about air craft in this thread and I had no idea what so ever that you were so "in the know" Zaphod. Keep it up guys this has been a fascinating thread regardless of most of it being conjecture and unprovable.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

They expanded the "envelope"....why go over land and not the Ocean? My line of reasoning is Air Traffic and to test certain systems, along with any possible mission deployment.

When you say heightened security can you be more elaborating? Isn't south ramp already high secured? I would think so...!?

You also said some to this technology has been declassified...can you point to links or articles talking about the technology, even if its vague? I do remember reading a declassified article on the B-2 and right there in the article was a detailed description with picture of the USAF wanting a subsonic B-2 with a different air frame configuration. This was built and tested, just not published about. Sometime you have to read in-between the line. Got the link of secretproject.uk forum.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: themadgenius

Flying to different areas, long term missions, with a little exposure thrown in before it goes Grey.

South Ramp has a lot of passive security on it, but they've gone more active with their security in the last few months. More visible patrols, guards at checkpoints, etc. Stuff they haven't really done since the B-2 was there.

Someone started a thread on here that has some very interesting white papers in it. Every one of them has since been purged from the net (and by purged, I mean with a thermonuclear device). There are several other threads of technology that while still classified has been hinted at. All in the Aviation forum.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Well, there's another thing about this sighting that makes sense. Seems like the air space in the SW U.S. has a "history" of unusual aircraft sightings, and that cannot be debated. The fact it was sighted over Wichita? No surprise there. But the resemblance to so many previous delta's that either got built or cancelled is pretty impressive. After all, why go through the hassle of creating a new air foil shape, when you've already spent so much money on the engineering and testing on "perfect shapes"? But the fact it was spotted in the U.S. Southwest? I say they did build something using the A12/Avenger data, and it is probably exo-atmosphric. Probably headed for Vandeberg!



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: tencap77

The triangle isn't the best shape for exo-atmospheric though. A shuttle/X-37 design with a larger upper fuselage is better, as it can carry more payload, as well as having a better shape for slowing on the way down.
edit on 4/19/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Two different aircraft, two different mfg teams...

Bag on Zaph all you want, but he's pretty accurate on what he's been sharing...

As for the A-12 connection theory, remember there was a competing team for that contract

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



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Riffrafter
a reply to: Domo1




Why would they be flying it around in the daytime like that if it's a black project?


They have to train in daylight too.


Exactly, the pilot perspective does change with daylight.



new topics

top topics



 
134
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join