Pictures Of Mystery Plane Over Wichita

a reply to: Zaphod58

Wouldnt a c32 be an improvement though? Isnt the 135 like a 707 or something.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Speckled Trout belongs to the 412th Flight Test Squadron. Buy having a KC they can use it with aircraft out if Edwards when they're not flying a Trout mission. A C-32 couldn't do that.

Going on the record to say the kansas sighting wasn't a B2.

Took me awhile to get thru everything so THANKS for the plane porn on pg 49 and explaining the problems with plasma propulsion. It was much appreciated.


Given recent events with NK I'm gathering we "may" be treated to accidentally viewing something interesting in the skies besides the Perseid meteor showers? Can honestly say I never contemplated us needing a Stealth Tanker, but it seems obvious. Still not exactly grasping why we're having problems making the boom invisible?

Has anything since 2014 gone public?
The hints were awesome, but yeah, I didn't get it.

a reply to: Caver78

It's fine when it's retracted because it's shielded by the aircraft fuselage. But with stealth aircraft, the idea is to be as smooth as possible. Things sticking out tend to become radar reflectors. That's why all the stealth aircraft have retractable lights and antenna.

In addition, the part of the boom that you see on the back of the tankers now, is just the outer shell. The portion that plugs into the receiver retracts completely inside the part that you see. That's basically an aluminum tube that extends out. And it's about as stealthy as a B-52. It can't be made out of most composites because fuel is corrosive as hell to composite materials, or it was until recently.

There are several platforms that would be extremely useful if they could be turned into a stealth platform. Being able to go even somewhat into hostile territory with a support platform would radically reduce turn around time for aircraft. Right now, CAP aircraft have to fly to their patrol area, after refueling well outside hostile territory, then limit their time on station because they have to go all the way back to the tanker. And they're usually outside AWACS and other ISR capability.

So As I have said before and will say again.

Its NOT a B-2
Also we always assume the USAF and government is stupid. It these suckers were seen in public AND in day time, they wanted to be spotted and were in 2014 clearly intended to send a message to the Soviets and the ChiComs, they "Hey you may be prepared for what we have now, but we have other stuff.... "

a reply to: FredT

Exactly. If you followed what was going on at the time, almost immediately after these two aircraft were seen, things quieted down quickly. The Crimea almost immediately went quiet for awhile, and posturing in the Pacific died down. It was actually kind of funny to watch.

For what the Kansas and Amarillo plane are , sending a message with them work well May be its time to do the same for North Korea

a reply to: Blackfinger

This makes a lot of sense, I think you're on the money.

Just piggy backing on the topic, but when do you think we'll see the stealth hawks unveiled? 5 maybe 10 years?

a reply to: E92M3
I prefer the Kansas unveiled

a reply to: E92M3

Considering we have projects that are approaching their third decade with the only information about them being debates on whether they actually exist or not, I'd say, the second of never.

a reply to: Zaphod58

lol second after never,
[


Sighting again:

Med to small V shaped craft with 5 FAINT(if it weren't so dark i'd have missed it) red balls, flying what seemed med to med-low alt. and SILENT maybe 20-30 seconds 2 very quite shoppers following it at a quick pase

a reply to: penroc3

Can you go more into detail about the craft. V shaped like a chevron. Or v shaped as in the lights only. Were you able to see the crafts shape and the lights. If so any details. How was it travelling in a slow speed at low alt or was it up in the sky doing a good clip.

Does it matter if they're declassified if we're seeing them?

It's not like you guys are Turnips raised up under a cabbage leaf. Seeing them gives you plenty of information to start with even tho granted it's not as cool as them popping into air shows.

Something is better than nothing?

a reply to: Caver78

I learn a lot via observation.

Thinking outside the box here do banks of computers and monitors like on say an AWAC have to be boxy and modular these days?
Curved screens,laid back seating and having the hardware wired into the composite structure you could fit a lot inside something B2 sized and shaped.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

uhh it was night time so its hard to give a really firm estimate of alt. but no more then 100' and going at a very reasonable clip 40-60mph. the red lights were so dim i almost didnt notice it, they were round evenly spaced and the dimmest red you could imagine being able to see as far as illumination.

the craft from the very tim lights looked to be a V with no center just a V. and as i was watching it it almost like they noticed they were noticed and did as close to a 90 degree straight up turn and was gone...fast and silent


its hard to tell the width of the craft but it could snugly fit one one in to it.

a reply to: Blackfinger

Thats an interesting question can one make an entire fuselage a sensor/antenna

a reply to: Caver78

That falls into the "we all know they're there, but what do they do" category. Just about everyone knows there are black projects, but seeing something overhead, is not the same as knowing what it is. We don't need to know every single gory detail, and don't expect to. But we like to speculate, and better know what we're looking at.

You can figure out some things by looking at pictures, but when they deliberately fly so that you can't get a clear shot of it, it gets a lot fuzzier. This thread is a great example. It went pages of people arguing that it was nothing more than a B-2 at a weird angle.

Thats an interesting question can one make an entire fuselage a sensor/antenna

Old school skins or composites?
Wing skin sensors
Composites