Weird California sighting

a reply to: StargateSG7

Some of the buildings were constructed using a method of adding a plasticising agent and then a hardener to the local sand in molds to form blocks and in some cases whole walls, they nicknamed it sandcastling, stuff cures into workable material in less than 6 hours

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: nelloh62

But the Bulgarian air fields are next to fairly well populated areas with people who probably have internet & phone cams. Not the best place for deep black craft.

The UK is also heavily populated around the airfields, and no-one has taken a photo of the Green Lady that they can admit to.
Many a black aircraft has supposedly visited this country, and with all the internet and phone camera's that we have, still no photo.

a reply to: nelloh62
I have realy a doubt that a highly classified Platform willl be based in any of the site you speak about . In my opinion something like the green lady can't be in a near public view.

a reply to: TheBogmonster

You wrote:

"....some of the potential base locations were ID'd by a method called "drop-bolting" to verify bedrock density by vertically dropping what looked like mutant Aim 9's in small groups out the back of an old C130 at 5k."

I think "drop-bolt" is UK slang for "cone penetrometer". (see Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...).

Penetrometers are one of the most common methods in civil engineering for determining the load bearing strength of the surface. The lower the strength, the deeper the penetrometer or bolt will bury itself when dropped from a known height. You could kick these out the back of a C-130, circle back and observe (through binoculars) how deeply they were buried and tell whether it was safe to land and takeoff at that particular spot. You can't tell just by looking whether a particular salt pan out in the desert between the dunes is hard packed or soft.

a reply to: darksidius

Why not shes been based before near some of the largest metropolises in the world and over flew them often enough.

I witnessed the green lady outbound at 8:45 pm. Standing on my sidewalk walking to the corner store. Anybody, ANYBODY, walking along the Venice boardwalk could have easily seen her if they had taken the time to simply look up. Or if they were like me and just standing on a sidewalk in west los angeles. Any kid at UCLA could have seen her. Just about any resident in the city of santa Monica. Anybody looking out a west facing window at los angeles international airport could have seen her.

The thing is most people would not recognize that they are looking at an aircraft and will write it off for just about any other phenonena to meteors to flares or even i could imagine a odd looking roman candle

originally posted by: darksidius
a reply to: nelloh62
I have realy a doubt that a highly classified Platform willl be based in any of the site you speak about . In my opinion something like the green lady can't be in a near public view.

Are you on about Bulgaria or UK ? The likes of Graf Ignatievo had apparent sightings of strange shaped aircraft landing at night. And as for the UK, they were testing secret platforms not long ago in Scotland. I got informed after the event or I would have gone up. So to be honest, anyones guess is as good as another because they could use most bases at 4 am , and no-one is there at the right time with the correct equipment.
If it was that easy, why has the latest tech not been snapped at Area 51. That place has always got someone snooping, even at a distance and nothing worthwhile has been photographed clearly.

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: TheBogmonster

You wrote:

"....some of the potential base locations were ID'd by a method called "drop-bolting" to verify bedrock density by vertically dropping what looked like mutant Aim 9's in small groups out the back of an old C130 at 5k."

I think "drop-bolt" is UK slang for "cone penetrometer". (see Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...).

Penetrometers are one of the most common methods in civil engineering for determining the load bearing strength of the surface. The lower the strength, the deeper the penetrometer or bolt will bury itself when dropped from a known height. You could kick these out the back of a C-130, circle back and observe (through binoculars) how deeply they were buried and tell whether it was safe to land and takeoff at that particular spot. You can't tell just by looking whether a particular salt pan out in the desert between the dunes is hard packed or soft.

....


AND....if you have a large enough tube, you can add a passive concussive
device (i.e. a sliding heavy weight that crashes into another fixed slab
upon impact creating a very small but still good enough acoustic signal
source for newer very sensitive sesimic survey instruments) ...OR...
you add a fully active explosive concussive device for aerial-originated
seismic surveys that use old less sensitive instrumentation or for those
really deep surveys.

----

If it's just a cone-based surface impact device then it's just
probably for surveying a wide area for the ability to support
a large flat runway surface. If they're doing that then it
means the runway must be REALLY BIG ... I would say
MORE THAN 10,000 feet which means a really fast flyer
that needs to come in fast or has a LOW lift ratio...
(i.e. long and pointy with barely any wing surface)
and it's MAYBE EVEN SPACE-CAPABLE !!!!!!!!!!

WHOOOOAAAA !!!!!!

Yes I agree both of you, Bassplyr where you are right, its the way that few people in fact look the sky . I know Venice boardwalk LA is my favorite city with Vegas If it fly over LA why you can't take a picture of it if it's at the same time ?

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: TheBogmonster

You wrote:

"....some of the potential base locations were ID'd by a method called "drop-bolting" to verify bedrock density by vertically dropping what looked like mutant Aim 9's in small groups out the back of an old C130 at 5k."

I think "drop-bolt" is UK slang for "cone penetrometer". (see Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...).

Penetrometers are one of the most common methods in civil engineering for determining the load bearing strength of the surface. The lower the strength, the deeper the penetrometer or bolt will bury itself when dropped from a known height. You could kick these out the back of a C-130, circle back and observe (through binoculars) how deeply they were buried and tell whether it was safe to land and takeoff at that particular spot. You can't tell just by looking whether a particular salt pan out in the desert between the dunes is hard packed or soft.

I know the technology is similar Boomer but these bolts have live telemetry and have some flight control it seemed, no need to observe anything, they were packed tightly in blocks of 12 - 4 x 3 a rolling rack allowed the loadies to push them to the tail gate and extend and the geeks would then initiate a drop sequence with about 1 sec hap between each bolt and the tail fins (like I said, Aim 9's with cut off fins) allowed them to adjust for a grid pattern spread , when they l'd finished the drop pattern, an elongated thin circuit from what I could observe they went up to 10k for our dive exit, the drop baskets (their words) were hand made, not great welding either and hand soldered but they worked flawlessly. I'm guessing live uplink to a g-sensor which would give them very accurate impact data I would have thought.

So those bolts seemed to be a lot smarter than the penetratometers you mentioned.

a reply to: TheBogmonster

You wrote: "....So those bolts seemed to be a lot smarter than the penetratometers you mentioned. "

So it would seem. The measurement principle is the same; the depth of penetration is inversely proportional to the load bearing strength of the surface material. But you're right--with a G sensor on board, the penetrometer itself could measure how how far it went in to the soil, virtually instantaneously, and telemeter it back up to the aircraft. No eyeball measurements needed. About 15 years ago I worked at NASA on technology like this for application on Mars. As I said, this is a very common and very trusted measurement technique.

If you don't mind saying, what makes you say this area was subject to active map editing? I had come to my own suspicions about this based on some informal comments from an acquaintance within the IC, but nothing I could prove one way or another.

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: TheBogmonster


If you don't mind saying, what makes you say this area was subject to active map editing? I had come to my own suspicions about this based on some informal comments from an acquaintance within the IC, but nothing I could prove one way or another.

As I said, the UK operated from that area in the Rub' a few times, some of the smaller bases that are well hidden (fuel dumps, weapons caches) belong to the UK, I know the Empty Quarter very well, operated in and out of there on many many occasions and it was common knowledge that any aerial photography (sat or aircraft) was being edited before being made publicly available

Speaking of crazy stuff around los angeles. Went fishing again last night at quail lake.

Whats in this video is alive and well.


m.youtube.com...

Saw two of them for an hour a few weeks ago.

Last night my buddy and i watched 5 at once doing the same stuff for nearly an hour.

Edwards is a happening place.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Speaking of crazy stuff around los angeles. Went fishing again last night at quail lake.

Whats in this video is alive and well.


m.youtube.com...

Saw two of them for an hour a few weeks ago.

Last night my buddy and i watched 5 at once doing the same stuff for nearly an hour.

Edwards is a happening place.

Stop teasing, would love to know what they are.
Sent you a PM sir

a reply to: nelloh62

Hmmmm. I dont have any PMs from you. How long ago you send it?

a reply to: nelloh62

Well if you did send and i didnt recieve than thats weird. And suspect.


Also i have no idea what they are

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: nelloh62

Well if you did send and i didnt recieve than thats weird. And suspect.


Also i have no idea what they are

Suspect indeed ! Well this a conspiracy forum eh .
One had some juicy info in, and damn, I didnt' save it.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Excuse me sir, i don´t know if you have watched this; maybe is something like your sighting.
Forget the audio.
Location Malibu.
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Fastmover

Sadly thats thirdphaseofmoon who are usually hoax cgi videos.

Whats in the video looks very little to what ive seen. That being ssud malibu and adjacent topanga canyon are ufo hotspots and there is some interesting videos floating around on youtube of ufo out over the channel islands along the same coast.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Speaking of crazy stuff around los angeles. Went fishing again last night at quail lake.

Whats in this video is alive and well.


m.youtube.com...

Saw two of them for an hour a few weeks ago.

Last night my buddy and i watched 5 at once doing the same stuff for nearly an hour.

Edwards is a happening place.

====

I must be spoiled...Since the video is from the early 1990's
I was impressed....but then I compared it to even my cheaper
camera drones and I thought....that video was kinda rinky
compared to what we have now!

Since the video is 29.97 fps originally around 720 by 486 pixels,
the math says velocity is likely less than 100 mph for the objects
since the camera was pretty close, so I'm not all that
impressed anymore by those maneuvers even IF the
object was around 25 to 40 feet in diameter based upon
some initial angle-of-view and pixels-to-feet calculations!

Yaaah! I'm spoiled nowadays....I got better gear than that!

a reply to: StargateSG7

.....ok. I doubt your estimate on distance. Ive watched the exact same thing plus and they were a good distance away playing peak a boo behind a mountain range. The objects in that video are also likeky at least a mile or much more away.

The only thing thats spoiled is your sense of distance. I dont care what wackadoodle frames per second mumbo jumbo youre babbling about.