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: 96
134
<< 93  94  95    97  98  99 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
What's the saying again? The loser gets patented while the winner goes black? If nothing else it could be a clue as to what their designers were thinking back in the early 1990s.

Maybe it's an outgrowth of Tacit Blue (which flew from 1982-1985). At least on the systems side anyways.
edit on 6-1-2016 by Northernhollow because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Northernhollow

This is a total WAG on my part, but it MAY have been part of a classified program in the early 90s that was canceled.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

what aircraft are we even talking about in the last few posts/pages. i ducked out of the thread for two days come back n im lost.

the companion? the crash at boscombe? the green machine?
edit on 6-1-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

All of the above.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

ok the post of yours just above nmy last post.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

The patent design a page or so back.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

right on.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

And you MAY be quite right about that
The patent is most certainly not the "companion"...



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Im not big into patents but why bother, I mean china and russia basically copy everything anyway and a pencil drawing, can you hold it up to scrutiny, yeah it looks similar, but is isnt, its a foot longer or 2 degrees pointier..

Its like patenting the law of physics. A wing is a wing, if i decide to build one of a similar shape, how can you say it was copied, its design is driven by the performance you want to get out of it?

How does it work??

Confused.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 03:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: BigTrain
a reply to: Zaphod58
So, whose ready to admit this is the real deal?


Not me!



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 04:12 AM
link   
Change it by 10% and its your own design



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: EBJet

I'm guessing ATA.

edit on 7-1-2016 by robi1000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 08:11 AM
link   
There's a companion thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I posted this

space-man.de...

Look at pages 11 and 12 in the pdf...




look at the date on this patent.

Aircraft of low observability




.
edit on 7-1-2016 by grey580 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580

That looks exactly like what was seen in kansas and TX last year



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

ehh. it resembles what was seen over Kansas last year. I don't think THAP was what that was though. also got issues with the patent having only one exhaust nozzle where as Kansas had two. then there's the size issue.

as for texas. totally different trailing edge.


Wait scratch that, just found out big trains right.

of course Texas and Kansas were the same thing and obviously THAP. now that you've figured it out. I invite you to sit back, not post for a while, and see how the forum manages. you know to see if the rest of the members can figure it out. give em a good long month to try. maybe more!! you've already probably got heat on you for figuring it out so another good reason to lay low.



edit on 7-1-2016 by BASSPLYR because: had an update

edit on 7-1-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-1-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Active military aircraft, especially classified ones tend to not have publicly available patent drawings available.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

well one can dream



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580

It's fun to see the ones that are out there, and sometimes you find a gem, like the one a couple pages ago. Just don't think you're going to find the LRS-B, or companion in there.



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I'd mentioned previously that I swear I saw something similar to a YF-23 take off at Edwards just a couple years ago. It was with a couple of F-16s. All took off on a very steep climb, and veered off into the distance.
That was an "early 90s cancelled project...."
Is it a variation on that theme, Zaphod? (He asks knowing full well that Zaphod isn't going to tell him anyway...)



posted on Jan, 7 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Badgered1

Could you possible describe the sighting in a little more detail? Time of day, where in relationship you were to Edwards, size of the unknown aircraft compared to the F-16's, paint scheme, ect.?




top topics



 
134
<< 93  94  95    97  98  99 >>

log in

join