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: 58
130
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2017 @ 05:09 AM
link   


Any chance you could expound on this just a hair?

Whats higher up the food chain than a B2?
And not a demonstrator.




posted on Aug, 10 2017 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger
Mmmm, B-21?
I dont know



posted on Aug, 10 2017 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian
B21 is same hierarchic as B2..Need look higher up the food chain.



posted on Aug, 10 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   

edit on 10-8-2017 by Rider because: deleted



posted on Aug, 10 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   
large area for internal wing storage, at the very least 2 to 4 engines, high speed S turns of a populated city....

my guess would be a stealthey troop transport or a gas truck



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 03:16 AM
link   
There is no way we will go from SR-71 to SR-72 in the white world, what about the green lady is SR-84 (in service date).
edit on 11 8 2017 by Forensick because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Triangle?



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Something Zaph picked up on earlier in the thread.A platform that no one would think of.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger
Yes we still don't find the mission for that




posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

I think he alluded to some folks getting it right but then quickly talking themselves out of it. I too think i saw a few get it right only to talk themselves out of it.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: myss427

“They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. He has been very threatening beyond a normal state and as I said they will be met with fire and fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before.”-Trump

Made me think triangles. The media immediately jumps to nuclear but we've all seen a nuclear attack before.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

Hes referring to something else. Fire wouldnt be the correct word but showing north Korea the light would be a better description



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Anti-Matter powered Direct Energy Weapons for the win.

Something happened at Dugway... that Directed Energy Beam Test was real. I don't know if Anti-Matter was the power source, but something was putting out a ton of energy.

My guess is a beam from the sky...



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Winterpain
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Anti-Matter powered Direct Energy Weapons for the win.

Something happened at Dugway... that Directed Energy Beam Test was real. I don't know if Anti-Matter was the power source, but something was putting out a ton of energy.

My guess is a beam from the sky...


No, dugway was from the ground up.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

Well to be fair comes from both directions.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The mission for this platform has been mentioned several times, in several places. But, like so many others, it's not sexy and exciting so when it gets mentioned, it gets ignored or discarded.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

Stealthy platform with massive laser to shoot down in-bound ballistic missiles in the boost phase. Wasn't the entire issue with Boeing YAL-1 Airborne Laser Testbed, was that it couldn't get close enough and remain survivable?

Of course it's secret, that would be incredibly disruptive.

From Wikipedia:


As of 2013, studies were underway to apply the lessons of the YAL-1 by mounting laser anti-missile defenses on unmanned combat aerial vehicles that could fly above the altitude limits of the converted jetliner.[25]

By 2015, the Missile Defense Agency had started efforts to deploy a laser on a high-altitude UAV. Rather than a manned jetliner containing chemical fuels flying at 40,000 feet (12 km), firing a megawatt laser from a range of "tens of kilometers" at a boost-phase missile, the new concept envisioned an unmanned aircraft carrying an electric laser flying at 65,000 feet (20 km), firing the same power level at targets potentially up to "hundreds of kilometers" away for survivability against air defenses. While the ABL's laser required 55 kg (121 lb) to generate one kW, the MDA wanted to reduce that to 2–5 kg (4.4–11.0 lb) per kW, totaling 5,000 lb (2,300 kg) for a megawatt. Unlike the ABL, which required its crew to rest and chemical fuel to be reloaded, an electric laser would need only power generating from fuel to fire, so a UAV with in-flight refueling could have near-inexhaustible endurance and armament. A "low-power demonstrator" has been planned to fly sometime in or around 2021.[26]

en.wikipedia.org...


Come to think of it, why do you need a laser to do this? A missile would also work well - like an air launched SM-3, but the beauty of a laser is it's harder to detect and NK is less likely to interpret a shoot-down as an act-of-war if it doesn't know why the missile failed.

Perhaps, since such a craft would need a wide array of extremely powerful sensors - it carries no weapons and instead is integrated into AEGIS via NIFC-CA or Missile Defense Agency's Ballistic Missile Defense System. And is complementary to sensors such as Sea-based X-band Radar and space-based sensors.

I think if it's manned, it's probably armed. Otherwise why not use RQ-180? Unless the platform was rushed into service and/or the agency is not USAF, instead Missile Defense Agency. Perhaps it could also be designed to look like and operate like a B-2 to keep it under wraps, especially since it will be operating near China.

So I'm guessing it's something to do with missile defense, penetrating electronic warfare, or penetrating ISR.

Or maybe those who are leaving clues (or give clues to those giving clues here) are really disinformation agents or have false intelligence, aimed at scaring potential adversaries in the name of the United States Government. I mean, the US has not had a serious war in a long time now, the threat of some "secret-weapon" would surely serve the interests of the United States Government, even if it does not reveal what it is and even if it does or does not exist. It would actually not surprise me if there's some USG office aimed at creating discussions like this. Then again, not like I care, I hate North Korea too!

Or maybe we're all useful idiots.
edit on 11/8/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Since the sighting was in the eastern US with the aircraft based in the west, if the sighting was deliberate on behalf of the US then it was almost certainly aimed at Russia. Around this time was during the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Not long after was the supposed USS Donald Cook incident.

I feel like we haven't discussed potential uses for lasers enough. They were discussed earlier, but then discussion stopped.
edit on 11/8/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 11:48 PM
link   
What can lasers be used for?

Lidar (like radar, but using a laser source). What can radar be used for? datalinks, detecting air targets, detecting ground targets, imaging. However, the laser advantage seems to be that the radiation is more collimated (narrow), thereby making datalinks harder to detect. Or allowing a large power to be focused on an enemy missile. Frequency is higher, therefore more data can be sent over the same link. It also operates in a spectrum that's far different, allowing different kinds of objects to be imaged and detected. Earlier in this thread someone mentioned that the B-2 uses a laser to detect contrails.

Perhaps a more powerful version of this, that's similar, could be used to detect ICBM missile trails during the boost phase. But I don't see how this is much different than simply using a radar to detect the missile itself, except it's potentially harder to detect. I also don't see how a laser datalink is much more capable than something like the F-35's Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL), except perhaps a higher datarate is possible with lower probability of detection. Anyone know what the datarate and range are of MADL, and if a laser datalink is required for an extremely capable ISR platform?

Maybe the higher bandwidth could be useful, if the aircraft was simply to gather up all electronic signals (i.e. mobile phone calls), then send it for real-time data analysis at a remote point. Data could then be sent back to the aircraft, which then could inject fake RF signals into the enemies communications networks. Or cyber teams on the ground could use the data for cyber through other networks and purposes, or send back data to the aircraft to inject signals (i.e. fake phone calls) into the enemies communication networks. You always hear about how the US wants to fight as a multi-domain force, being able to achieve the desired affects seamlessly across multiple domains, as required. If this is the case, then said aircraft could also be armed to take out targets with extreme accuracy, again, to be able to achieve the desired effect taking advantage of and using multiple domains. Since it's armed, that's why it's manned, as opposed to simply an ISR aircraft. I actually think this is most likely. A laser datalink may not even be required, just a datalink, or even processing could be done on-board. This aircraft would be part of a highly integrated, highly compartmentalized, system-of-systems approach, encompassing the integration of electronic warfare, ISR, cyber, and precision strike.

I've never seen this mentioned before and is highly speculative. But Russia and others tend to use siloed ICBM's simply to soak up the majority of the adversaries missiles in the event of a nuclear war. Mobile ICBM's in submarines or land vehicles are much harder to destroy as they are mobile. But all, and especially mobile systems are often reliant on using celestial navigation for accuracy. So while you may not think accuracy matters when delivering a nuclear bomb, but it certainly does if you are delivering a nuclear bomb against a small hardened targets. Could you use a laser, therefore, as essentially an analogue to a typical conventional electronic warfare aircraft, but using a far different spectrum of light, in order to disrupt ballistic missiles? I think this is unlikely, since it would disrupt the nuclear deterrence of multiple nations.


The astro-inertial guidance is a sensor fusion/information fusion of the inertial guidance and celestial navigation. It is usually employed on submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Unlike silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, whose launch point does not move and thus can serve as a reference, SLBMs are launched from moving submarines, which complicates the necessary navigational calculations and increases Circular error probable. This stellar-inertial guidance is used to correct small position and velocity errors that result from launch condition uncertainties due to errors in the submarine navigation system and errors that may have accumulated in the guidance system during the flight due to imperfect instrument calibration.

en.wikipedia.org...



Laser guide star is an artificial star image created for use in astronomical adaptive optics imaging. Adaptive optics (AO) systems require a wavefront reference source in order to correct atmospheric distortion of light (called astronomical seeing). Sufficiently bright stars are not available in all parts of the sky, which greatly limits the usefulness of natural guide star adaptive optics. Instead, one can create an artificial guide star by shining a laser into the atmosphere. This star can be positioned anywhere the telescope desires to point, opening up much greater amounts of the sky to adaptive optics.

Because the laser beam is deflected by astronomical seeing on the way up, the returning laser light does not move around in the sky as astronomical sources do. In order to keep astronomical images steady, a natural star nearby in the sky must be monitored in order that the motion of the laser guide star can be subtracted using a tip–tilt mirror. However, this star can be much fainter than is required for natural guide star adaptive optics because it is used to measure only tip and tilt, and all higher-order distortions are measured with the laser guide star. This means that many more stars are suitable, and a correspondingly larger fraction of the sky is accessible.

en.wikipedia.org...



The FASOR is used for laser guide star experiments. It is tuned to the D2a hyperfine component of the sodium D line and used to excite sodium atoms in the mesospheric upper atmosphere. The FASOR consists of two single-frequency injection-locked Nd:YAG lasers close to 1064 and 1319 nm that are both resonant in a cavity containing a lithium triborate (LBO) crystal, which sums the frequencies yielding 589.159 nm light.

en.wikipedia.org...


(640 nm is the dominant frequency of light from stars).

Another possible use is to disrupt adversary optical satellites, thus denying the adversary an information advantage, even over areas extremely close to their own territory. This avoids the need to place politically sensitive laser installations in friendly nearby nations (if the beam can even reach) or place them on other mobile platforms such as ships, after all the laser source may be obscured by cloud cover whereas the satellites target may not. This could be very useful, especially against tactics Russia is employing. I think this is moderately likely, but if China and Russia found out, they would likely kick up a huge fuss due to weaponization of space and all.


, research is being conducted at the laboratory into how to use ground-based lasers to disable satellites; that is, as an anti-satellite weapon.[1]

en.wikipedia.org...


- Lastly, perhaps lasers could be used to send information to special forces or spies, at much higher speeds and lower probability of detection compared to traditional methods. Maybe receivers could be better hidden and easier to smuggle, due to the higher frequency of the radiation. I don't think this is likely, the internet is far better suited to this.

Are all my ideas too sexy?
edit on 12/8/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2017 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


Fighter: Done
Strike: Testing
Bomber: In development
Tanker: Wouldn't that be interesting to see.
ISR: Multiple platforms in testing or operational.


(and regarding EW/ECM)


Which can be combined with another aircraft. There's one that can only really combine well with the EW mission.
.

Cyber.



new topics

top topics



 
130
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join