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.

 

Weird California sighting

page: 59
134
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Won't be able to get it from Detroit until at least Monday. Won't be back up here until Wednesday, at the earliest. But I'll keep my eyes open and note anything I see.




posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: cmdrkeenkid

We might get lucky. They've been testing several platforms overseas lately, so she might be there. If she's there we're probably looking at three to four days minimum, so she might not be back until after you get it.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Good catch on the light post, you're absolutely right. You don't think the thing flying around in the video looks almost identical though? It has the same shape and light arrangement, and I think even the colors are the same.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Looked up the historical flight data on Flightradar24. Nothing was shown going over. Closest thing was an A340 around 930pm and an A380 around 10pm. From 830pm until the A340, not much was flying above and shown on that website.

Just had to look something up to alleviate my concerns of misidentifying what I saw. Still not fully bought into everything, but I was late to the party.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: cmdrkeenkid

I've personally seen this particular aircraft flying over Wyoming at least three times. It's a purely conventional aircraft, testing some new technology that will come in handy, and will probably eventually be released into the civilian world in a few years.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: parad0x122

Besides having a light post in the shot the two are very different in my opinion. The resolution of the video is much lower than Astr0's shots, The light posts are different (Astro's was single light element, this one shows double), Astr0's shot also had a middle light between the three corner lights.



Did you see the FREAKING plasma bloom at around 1:50-2:00 mins? Damn great vid i think. Could the larger tri had been 3 docked together? or is that just one with 4 lights total? And did you see the red scanning beam? looking for dreams to harvest with magnetic resonance laser beam perhaps?



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: parad0x122

They have similar triangle pattern but in Astr0's it had a central light where as the one in the video did not. May be something different, who knows.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Three different types, for different missions.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

That video is a compilation of several different things from a atmospheric grazing meteor to some hoaxes. The one with the red laser was actually built by an RC enthusiast for a UFO making competition. Really neat RC too, he had the laser on a servo that he could turn on and off from the controller.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Not going to lie, I threw up in my mouth a little when I saw the video titled "TR3-B"

Smh.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
MbKennel, Zaph, anyone,

Are these plasma actuators able to create high and low pressure zones? ie..could these actuators create say a high pressure zone below a craft (with a lot of juice or a way to capacitate a lot of juice over a respectable time frame) and a low pressure zone above the craft. Creating a positive buoyancy?


I think they work more by putting an attractive force---insert charges in the air, then attract them---which pushes the flow around, the change in lift is a consequence. (Obviously the thrust from a modern jet turbine is enormously larger in total force imparted, so these are tweaks, not an engine as far as I know)

A wing is something that, in the presence of a good fluid flow, creates a high pressure zone under a craft and a low pressure zone above a craft, it isn't buoyancy though. Flow modifications are part of many decades long efforts to making them work better across various performance regimes.



Does polarity (or any asymmetry of + & - charge potentials) , frequency (or phasing of, maybe for energy propagation efficiency) or wave form (saw toothed, sine, square etc) variances in the the plasma discharge effect it's interactions with the environment and by extension what it does to the vehicle. Would certain materials or skins enhance this effect or the potential for it?


I'm sure everything makes some difference at some level but it sure seems that very specific applications are proprietary commercial technology. You have many degrees of freedom and enormous complexity in the flow interactions, and no doubt the optimum changes for different flight regimes. Think of it this way, with mechanical flow devices you might have 6 or 8 different things that can change the flow, and that's taken many years to understand. Now you might have many dozens, and the effect is less predictable (because plasma fluid mechanics is complicated and potentially chaotic) and there are more things you can do with them, like change the waveform shape and frequency that you didn't do with your usual control surfaces. There's many decades of R&D to go.

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

In my opinion all of the triangles looked fake in that video. At least none of them resemble the one I saw. The color of the lights is wrong. I personally don't feel there is a center light. I know what everybody says. But the one I saw did not. Could be different models like Zaph said but to be honest I think a center light is a dead giveaway it's a fake. Maybe the older models used the center light.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

But if you apply such a boundary to one surface while leaving the opposite exposed to air, would that not create buoyancy? The air particles are only throwing their momentum at one side of the craft and slipping around the other. Obsviosuly not a lot of buoyancy, given air pressure at 14 psi, but if its a lighter than air craft that should be more than enough for a nice blimp takeoff.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So Zaph, I cordially invite you to my first, weekly, online party where you ingest ungodly amounts of scopolamine and/or sodium pentothal and let us pick your brain... though thinking about it, it might not be a continuing event...

However, the bits and pieces are seemingly already out there ... but folks, like me on most days, just can't swallow the big picture of just HOW advanced our black op tech really IS.

Whether or not Astr0 was 0% to 100%, the facts are that there is a "break away" civ out there that spun off of all the research and is termed the military industrial complex. All the things Astr0 spoke about are at the least possible... with the previous high civ, their AI and consciousness aspects the most far out, but if one digs, it's been speculated about anyway... and if he was fibbing by weaving a story out of existing threads, then his narrative will prove mostly right at some point, anyway, imo.

And I'm back to the "alleged" private confirmation and hints about verification of at least some of the secret and RK info... or info Astr0 related that was, indeed, "insider" knowledge that was verified by disinterested parties...

Anyone care to confirm (or have the cajones'), without providing ANY details, that there was "outside" verification of some of Astr0's info... thus solidifying him a bit for those of us w/out that private verification ...at the least?

I know this was hinted at... just curious if it can be stated plainly... without any dangerous details.


edit on 8/8/2014 by Baddogma because: clean up for clarity



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: framedragged
a reply to: mbkennel

But if you apply such a boundary to one surface while leaving the opposite exposed to air, would that not create buoyancy?


Hold on, buoyancy is the result of having something which is lower density than the surrounding air. The gradient of pressure with altitude under gravitation results on there being a buoyancy force which wants to push it up as the air above would energetically prefer to be lower if the object is lower density. Lift from fluid flow is something different.

You can't create buoyancy by charging once side and then pulling up from the other side, it would be like the literal pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. You wouldn't go anywhere. You could make an 'ionic lifter' by throwing ions down but that barely works for small toys massing a few grams.

How the actuators work as far as I know is that towards the more leading part of the flow you insert in charge, and then soon thereafter apply a voltage to a nearby electrode which results in a force from nearby (like a few inches) which pulls the charged air along a little bit. This happens with AC waveforms so it's a very fast charge-pull-charge-pull-charge-pull cycle, but the space scale is inches.

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

Thanks for your detailed reply, always appreciated.

Have you checked out the NASA WEAV design the University of Florida is working on. Domo1 (excellent find BTW Domo ) sent a link earlier in this thread I believe. Was wondering what your thoughts are regarding it's proposed propulsion mechanism.

It reminds me a lot if you read the report attached (which is pretty interesting ) about the plasma thrusters. They are apparently Cylinders that glow from the plasma discharge. They sound and look very similar to the lights I saw on the triangle sightings I had a few months back. Exact same color. They were perfectly round discs on the bottom of the craft. Looked flush to the skin but I couldn't tell exactly. Was wondering if they were maybe embedded in the hull and only the business end of the plasma thruster is exposed to the outside. Appearing like a flat glowing disc of blueish light when in fact it's a cylinder. Guess I'm just thinking out loud. But would love some of the members feedback. The triangle did have on one occasion what appeared to be a plasma sheath along with a coronal discharge looking phenomena at times.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Was wondering if they were maybe embedded in the hull and only the business end of the plasma thruster is exposed to the outside. Appearing like a flat glowing disc of blueish light when in fact it's a cylinder. Guess I'm just thinking out loud. But would love some of the members feedback. The triangle did have on one occasion what appeared to be a plasma sheath along with a coronal discharge looking phenomena at times.


No, the actuators are thin and superficial, all the stuff happens on the outside. The cylinder used in experiments was to have a well defined classic shape for experiments in fluid flow, because there is a hundred+ years of scientific results on fluid flows around cylinders.

edit on 8-8-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Yeah, I tend to think Zaph is correct (when is he not) that there may be many different models over the last 50 years. I mean how many different aircraft designs have been flown over the last 50 years?
One of the reasons that lead to this conclusion (for me at least) was Astr0's photo showed a center light, which I believe to be genuine and the one that you saw had no center light and it is obvious to me, just by reading your account of it, it is also genuine.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

No no no, not like that. Buoyancy was a very wrong term and I'm not talking about the charged aspect. I should wake up more before I post lol.

I'm trying to clarify whether or not the plasma boundary prevents air molecules from imparting as much momentum to the craft as they would if they just pinged the skin alone. I.E, one surface of the craft is in an effective vacuum, surrounded by a plasma sheath, and the other side of the craft sees full air pressure.

If the plasma sheath is so slippery to air, then shouldn't the air pressure from the unsheathed side push the craft through the slippery air on one side? I'm sure the air is imparting some amount of momentum to the plasma, but it can't be as much as it would get from pure elastic collisions with the air, no?
edit on 8-8-2014 by framedragged because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

In the report they are not Actuators but called thrusters. They look like cylinders. A charged plate on both ends and aero gel in the middle. They claim it causes propulsion. Just wondering if I saw something similar to what they are discussing in the article. In the article they even talk about breaking the thrusters "actuators" discharge plates up into two separate discharge points in a single cylinder. Maybe they decided breaking it up into three discharge points and thus t he triangular overall shape.



new topics

top topics



 
134
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join