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: 61
134
<< 58  59  60    62  63 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2017 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
Im thinking something B2 sized or a bit smaller but not B2 shaped.Blended wing yes.




posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 04:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Naturally getting details of a new aircraft is like tossing a steak to a lion, but really, part of the fun from what I've seen is this back and forth of accidental visuals outside of hangers, pouring over google earth photo's, waiting patiently near airfields for that one incredible moment.

If we were just spoon fed a press packet of yearly new models like car companies do, I think it would take 3/4 of the fun out of all this. No adrenaline rush, no thrill, you have to admit the cat and mouse aspect of all this really is part of the total package.




posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Caver78

With google maps it more telling at what youre not seeing that you normally should.

Like for a while at this one air base, one of the larger hangers had its door open. The open side of the hanger was in shadow but upon closer examination you could see that the shadow was partly fake. The image got partially whatever it was that was in that open hanger door but when they realized it they airbrushed it out. but, the airbrushibg shadow was too dark and you could still see the rough shape of whatever aircraft that was in the door.

Another fun one is when you see dirt roads suddenly stop only to pick up again a quarter mile further on. When you zoom in you realize that something has been airbrushed out and replaced with a pretty good facsimile of foliage and natural surroundings. But then you realize cause you know a lot about plants that they put chaparele on the wrong sides of the hills (like lichen being on the wrong side of a tree) and that the foliage is a type not even found there. Ooops.

Sometimes you can get clues as to whats inside a hanger by examination of the air venting system on the roof or the fuel lines going into it or even the suspicious building right next to it. Like whatever is in that hangers got a lot of support facilities on hand.
edit on 14-8-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Security would have to be paramount in regard to Black Projects in all areas.Manipulation and censorship of images has been going on since WW1.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

See?
Puzzling it out is half the fun. I've been reading here awhile and the bike trips to the airfield, Zaphods photos, skywatching in "likely" air corridors is all part of the mystery and fun.

If info was handed to us it wouldn't be near the fun of having earned those bits and bobs. It fires up our brain cells to contemplate what new innovations are in the pipeline and riddle out the "How" of the few sightings we do get.
It's one thing to skywatch hoping you'll see a "possible UFO" but infinitely more satisfying to actually see one of ours and stand there dwarfed by the awesomeness of our own machines.

Millions of man hours went into development, years of schooling, people much smarter than me plus test pilots JUST so I could stand there bug-eyed and scratch my head. While I'd give my left nut to see the Green Lady I'm nowhere near her flight corridors. But scraps are fine... Not complaining!

The Google photoshops indeed are "telling" and part of "the chase", the fun, the puzzle.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Caver78

I have a few more to put up in the next few days. Got an F-22, F-35, and C-12 by Edwards yesterday.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

Hey I went to RIT, interesting to see this here



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

I'll just leave this here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Question is whats going to command and control or even communicate with these AI f22s and f35s? Surely youd need something equally as stealthy flying to facilitate that. Should the usa be looking at C5ISR solutions for the ever evolving and complex battlefield? I mean sooner or later these AI controlled fighters are going to need a quarterback to coordinate all of these developments. I mean AI fighters are cool but youll need something to intergrate them into the complex battlefield theres a lot of of data fusion that needs to be performed before these AI can reach their full potential.

It would be wise of the usa to persue that endeavor. I fear with out a development like this the sea of data troops on the ground to airforce and marine assets are providing will cause a fog of war that could be avoided and tamed by something that can coordinate all that info and feed it back in a coherent picture to anybody involved.
edit on 15-8-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

The fighters aren't AI,they'll have AI assistance. It will command Loyal Wingman, including deciding who attacks with what weapons.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I get that but the evolution of this will be AI run fighters and drones galore. Those aircraft will have to communicate and help give assustance to a lot of other assets. It would be good to have a mobile asset that could help coordinate or even command these AI. Im just saying that the military should look into finding a solution to this ever looming and eventual tsunami of sensor and data these aircraft and ground assets will be providing and needing in return.



posted on Sep, 13 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I did some searching and apparently a straight trailing edge, as displayed in this aircraft, is actually not an ideal shape at all for a stealthy aircraft. Which is why pretty much all modern stealth concepts have a planform aligned trailing edge - such as the B-2, F-22, F-35, and PCA concepts. From looking at the Northrop - Grumman (heh, before they were Northrop Grumman) ATA concept which looked like the original high altitude B-2 concept, they clearly understood this. Lockheed probably understood this - see F-117.

Does anyone else think that, therefore, this aircraft is most likely made by Boeing (or one of its predecessors) and is a couple of decades old at this point?

EDIT: Actually it might just be poor picture quality. I know this thread keeps going around in circles, forgive me.

edit on 13/9/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2017 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

CObzz do you get AWST? They are doing an multi issue series on stealth and go into a fair amount of detail on design etc.



posted on Sep, 13 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Nope. I'll check it out. Thanks.
edit on 13/9/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

If you play with the Wichita image in Photoshop, it will leave you with significant doubts as to whether ACTUALLY has a straight A-12 style trailing edge...



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

The trailing edge is nice n all but its the leading edge in that photo that brings me the most pondering. Its interesting to say the least and could indicate a few things.

Anybody wanna speculate why the Wichita bird has a interesting color to the leading edge?



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Sometimes I feel like a rube because exotic ionization boundary layer management systems do nothing for me, yet seeing a classic planform possibly in the flesh brings out my inner child like nothing else...



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

I wonder if you could derive the size of the planes, Amarillo or Wichita, based on the expansion of the contrails?

You'd have a range of sizes based on the presumed altitude, but...



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 07:10 PM
link   
A touch smaller than the B2 is my thoughts on both platforms..Leading edge is plasma manipulation I think...When they start doing it on complete airframes Ill have a WOOOOOOO moment.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

I'm 75% sure that Wichita actually resembles the Lockheed NGB "totally not QUARTZ with a window painted on it" model, which would make it a wing with narrow-set twin engines in a diamond-shaped main fuselage and a span of about 170'.

I think Amarillo was probably a fair bit smaller, and I'd guess her to be roughly B-58 or Mirage IV sized.



new topics

top topics



 
134
<< 58  59  60    62  63 >>

log in

join