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: 95
134
<< 92  93  94    96  97  98 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: yak055h

If the two sonic bombs your hearing is in close succession to each other, it's probably the double boom from a single aircraft.
If that is the case it would also suggest that the aircraft causing the booms is on the larger side, as double booms are not very perceptible from fighter size aircraft.

edit on 2-1-2016 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Are we still talking about the companion?

I thought we already posted some pics of what it might of looked like.

I'm gonna have to spend a night rereading threads.

Until I re read the threads. Here's a UFO caught on tape.




posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: yak055h

you know, last month I camped out off the 14 and heard some similar speculation from Leo's. I think your report it spot on. bird with no boom . ...



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Lockheed's had that quiet boom demonstrator for a while. I'd imagine they've got the tech down by now.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 11:19 AM
link   
The companion is made by Northrup as well as the fast moving gap filler that made the booms from the early 90s. The companion used smooth edges and curves to deflect the radar signals, so you can figure out the shape based on that. Also it did not broadcast any radar signals hint hint.
edit on 3-1-2016 by BornSecret because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-1-2016 by BornSecret because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: BornSecret

So you've seen this plane up close eh?




posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: BornSecret

If thats the case then the companion is similar to the B-2. When the B-2 rolled out of the hanger, people were surprised as it had been so radially different than the F-117. So my opinion is the Companion is a small scale B-2 type flying wing with a more sharp angle with no vertical stabilizers and a rounded, smooth surface such as the now public Northrup 6th gen fighter shape.

How close am I?



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

This would me my guess, a patent Northrop filed in 1993.



www.google.com...



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Northernhollow

If the companion is as deep-black as Zaphod is saying there is no way they're going to be patenting the design!



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Northernhollow

Look at the patent date.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Too young?

I'm more interested in that SHARC-style toothed chin inlet. Between this patent and the SHARC design, something similar HAS to have flown, right?



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: gfad
a reply to: Northernhollow

If the companion is as deep-black as Zaphod is saying there is no way they're going to be patenting the design!


Actually youd be surprised. There has been a patent for the Black triangles way to reduce air friction for a while on file. Although it wont say what craft it is for though. the B2 also uses it on their wings.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I'll take that as confirmation that that is the companion.

Look at the shape, almost identical to F-117, except the obvious differences. Flatter vertical stabilizers, smoother skin, and when viewed from below, looks the same as the F-117.

So, whose ready to admit this is the real deal?



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

No. The patent was filed in 93. The companion was flying with the F-117 when it was still black.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I was going to say, isn't the companion more or less a contemporary of Sneaky Pete and Tacit Blue?

So to the patent hunters: look for designs from between 1978 and 1988 or so...
edit on 6-1-2016 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

More or less.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
O'course, if something like that existed, which I am not admitting to or denying, you might find patents in the open on the general sort of stealthiness/slipperiness enhancement. But you wouldn't find the ones on how to actually DO the thing. Or how to not have all sorts of fried equipment, or whoopsies if the slippery fell off. Or what not.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

What I'm saying is it doesn't mean they didn't wait 15 years later to file the patent.

Are we close on the shape?



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

You might find patents for sub systems, but you won't for the airframe.
edit on 1/6/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That unusual (or usual?) of a design, eh?



new topics

top topics



 
134
<< 92  93  94    96  97  98 >>

log in

join