Pictures Of Mystery Plane Over Wichita

a reply to: Sammamishman

That's the big one. A couple smaller projects went official. The RQ-180 kind of kicked things off for some interesting times.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Manned or unmanned?

a reply to: matafuchs

Manned.

Well, that's a rare catch of black tech. Cool looking.

They can't always hide them ... and the UFO craze certainly helps them hide new tech from potential enemies... but as Zaphod stated, they have to fly over populated areas in daylight sometimes.

I've seen 2 odd airplanes over Tucson, landing at Davis- Monthan ... one totally silent black triangular craft that was on the landing approach at 3 a.m. ... and I mean completely silent... just heard air moving and felt the breeze on my face from displaced air a few seconds after it passed over, blocking out stars. This was in the 90's and I still wonder about how silent it was... but I'm 99% positive it was a military airplane and am fairly sure it was the "stealth" fighter... I just didn't know they were so quiet.

The other was a fighter in daylight, but it had a squared rear with a notch in it and I couldn't recognize the type... but it was a conventional plane.

And then there's the stuff that was so weird I'm 99% sure it was otherworldly... certainly "unconventional."

a reply to: Baddogma

When did you see the fighter?

a reply to: Baddogma

Thats the boneyard right, for all old aircraft and have heard that it is a resting place or holding place for secret projects. Keep it in the open to keep it out of site, right?

a reply to: matafuchs

They don't keep secret projects there, just retired aircraft.

Threads like these being silly are a lot too much like the MH370 thread where too many are making claims and not only as suggestions or IMO offerings, as ''it is this'' ''it is from xyz'' etc when there is too little information to go on.

A few people arguing their own OPINION on threads turning them into ego fests is surely anathema to DENYING IGNORANCE.

It doesn't matter how much a person has been a plane tech or thinks they know, the information is too minimal for any real assessment, especially when there is little or no confirmed information of any sort, not even the validity of the photo.

No one on this thread knows for sure, a guess is a guess and people should stop stating their guesses as ''matter of fact'' and dismissing all others as ''non fact''. Such blatant uninformed opinionated stances is detrimental to ATS.

Makes sense to test a possible "black project" that resembles a B2 where B2s typically fly. Maybe they thought people would think their eyes were playing tricks. Just a guess.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Yeah, you're absolutely right. There's no way that anyone can possibly know what this is, or have friends willing to tell them what it is. I mean, that's so far out of the realm of possibility that it's not even funny. I mean, that's never happened in the history of the military.

Get over yourself. Sometimes people really do know what they're talking about, even if they don't have links on a website to prove it.

hey guys, this is my first post here, Great thread, I work as a graphic designer so am used to doing this kind of thing with images to try and see missing details from clients that send over bad photos, low res logos etc,
If you desaturate the image and then boost the levels you can often see missing details from the color image,
I just did this with the picture,
I can make out some shapes that would lead me to believe this is a B2 bomber, just that on the blue Hazy sky it is hard to see the distinctive rear portion of the plane,,,
On this enhanced version you can see the sloped back arrow style wings and start to make put the pointy shapes in the center where the jet engines are.

a reply to: coldcrush1984

Which image did you use? The one over Texas, or the one over Kansas? Because if it's the one over Kansas, then your enhancement has been rotated 90 degrees.

a reply to: coldcrush1984

First of all, welcome to the party.

Second, that photo is not the one taken at either KS or TX. Try your technique with these photos here:

deepbluehorizon.blogspot.com...

deepbluehorizon.blogspot.com...

a reply to: Sammamishman

Thanks for the reply guys, This is the raw image I used for the post above..... I will have a go with the blog images you linked in a minute.
Cheers

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: gippers

Because my "opinion" comes from people that know exactly what this is. You can try however hard you want, but it's not a B-2.

Oh, so you got an uncle or an inside guy. How could I have expected anything different.

a reply to: coldcrush1984

It'll be interesting to see what happens when you do. That one that you used, has less of a leading edge angle than the one seen over KS.

a reply to: gippers

*shrug* You can believe me or not, I really don't give a damn. My reputation on here speaks for itself.

I don't know if is the same thing, but I saw something like this airplane at morning (6:30-7:00 am)

a reply to: Zaphod58

You should get over yourself.

A few pages back I said it looked like the B2 Stealth.

You said:

And if we know what it is? It's not a B-2, no matter how hard you try to fit it into the mold.

and has clearly just been proven by coldcrush 1984, it does in fact look just like the B2 Stealth. I know planes, very well, including stealth, new tech etc and I know when people are stating their OPINION as fact and ignoring the real facts, such as you just did, then being rude to others for calling them out.

Deny ignorance.

just flicking through the daily mails page and thought i would drop it here:

www.dailymail.co.uk...