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.

 

Why are F117's still flying? Well the Air Force has all the answers for you....

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: mightmight
a reply to: TheHans
It's probably been retired around the same time the 117 was. And maybe kept in a similar status. But thats it.

Your assumptions are not accurate for the most part IMO.



I forgot to mention SEAD. I could see the case for a stealth wild weasle. Again, why can’t newer platforms do this?




posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: TheHans
Newer platforms can get the job done. I dont understand why you think this isnt the case? The Companion is not needed anymore with all the new platforms reaching operational capability.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580

So that article says that photos exist of the "bat plane" and they were published in that 1994 issue of "Wired." They were not included in the online version you linked to though....any idea if those pics are still around anywhere?



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: mightmight
a reply to: TheHans
Newer platforms can get the job done. I dont understand why you think this isnt the case? The Companion is not needed anymore with all the new platforms reaching operational capability.



I think it could have existed - just like ANZHA, very skeptical. So let’s say the F/R-119 Manta was a retired ray-shaped SEAD platform that replaced the F-4G. Maybe it was made by BAE? They had some PowerPoint slides floating around showing a plane like that.

The thing I struggle with is giving the US military that much credit and foresight. They have retired so many platforms without direct, credible replacements over the years: S-3s, A-6s, A-7s, F-14s, OV-10s, FB-111s, SR-71s, dedicated supersonic interceptors, etc.

I agree that the F-35 and new generation of drones will do everything. It’s all about multirole and systems networking. In the next few years Lockmart and its international partners will produce more F-35s than all the F-117s, 119s, 121s, and Auroras combined.

The future is more terminator and iPhone than Star Wars. As cool as it is to think about a bunch of F-22s and SU-30s dogfighting and doing cobra maneuvers, and special purpose Phantasms, it’s probably more likely that it will be Swiss army knifes and swarms of things, some attritable, overwealming defenses. That’s just my opinion.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TheHans
Foresight about what? I dont get your argument.
The Companion was not build as the Companion. It had a different mission set initially and only evolved into its eventual role when it turned out the 117s would need some support.
To understand what the Companion was, you need to look at what was going on in the mid 70s not the 80s. It was just happenstance that the platform turned out to be pretty adaptable.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 10:25 AM
link   
One nice thing about using an LO platform for SEAD/DEAD is that the power-level needed for a radar to burn through jamming for tracking is proportional to RCS. And, inversely, the LO platform can get by with proportionately lower amounts of jamming wattage.
So if an F-4G has an rcs of 5m^2 in the relevant band, and an F-16 with Have Glass gets you to 1m^2, then the enemy has to use 5 times the wattage to burn through the jamming to acquire the F-16C than an F-4G at the same range. And since we're using the inverse square law, that means the F-16 with the same jamming capacity would get much, much closer to the threat without being tracked. And hypothetically, if we used an airframe with 0.004m^2 instead of 5m^2, it can safely approach even more closely. And the closer it gets to the transmitter/receiver, the more effective it's own jamming can be protecting the strike package which is still farther out.
If you had an LO platform with enough wattage to just flood all the frequencies across certain bands, that might be useful a very long time.
edit on 6-3-2019 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I’m not really arguing with you. I understand the need at that era, and the reason it would stay secret for a while because it would steal some of the stealth’s thunder and glory if it came out that it needed some help to accomplish the mission - especially, if you were interested in exporting stealth technology to allies.

Just skeptical that the Manta existed is all. It’s one of those elusive internet legends like the Aurora that’s always just out of reach. There’s always some magazine no one can find with pics, some radio transmission nobody can locate, some pics that disappeared, etc.

I want to believe like Fox Mulder, Steve Douglas, and Bill Sweetman!





edit on 6-3-2019 by TheHans because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Vader rubs hands together and in a menacing deep voice, between labored mechanical breathing: “ATS’s comments betray you. The F-117 has a sister, a twin sister. Aviation Week’s failure to break a meaningful story in years is complete. If the F-117 won’t join the fight anymore, maybe the Manta will, and together we will rule the night!”

Goes back to playing Fortnite in the basement...



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TheHans

There's evidence of what Aurora was, and it wasn't a mach whatever phase pulse detonation engine aircraft. This isn't their first rodeo. The Air Force is pretty good at making things disappear and hiding them.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: PokeyJoe

I doubt that images exist anymore.

Maybe a drawing. I wish I knew.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Some very generous members ITT.

Early Merry Christmas Hans



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: PokeyJoe

I doubt that images exist anymore.

Maybe a drawing. I wish I knew.


There is a blurry still of Steve Douglas’ video and an artists interpretation of what he allegedly witnessed at the following link. Still not very conclusive. There’s a lot of artistic liberty in the rendering. HOW do you get that cockpit detail from a blurry video? The image could totally be that of an F-117 in my opinion. Here you go:

unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com...



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TheHans

Watch the "companion" really be a black, triangle-shaped (but very conventionally powered) aircraft called the "Manta". The ensuing salt amongst the "secret space program" folks and black triangle hunters would be amazing to watch.
edit on 8-3-2019 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: TheHans

Watch the "companion" really be a black, triangle-shaped (but very conventionally powered) aircraft called the "Manta". The ensuing salt amongst the "secret space program" folks and black triangle hunters would be amazing to watch.


Right... the disappointment will be immense. It’s probably powered by two GE TF-34 Hoovers and tops out about 500 knots and 45,000 feet. No liquid mercury, graphene aerogels or intergalactic warp drives on the Manta!



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 06:38 AM
link   
the first true stealth was like that, you have to remember 5 companies were approached to produce an aircraft and Lockheed wasn’t even one of them, it was only Ben rich practically begging and even offering to do it for free that he was allowed. Perhaps one of the other companies produced something that wasn’t a great stealth bomber but they had use for it somewhere else.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Off memory werent Skunk Works doing something for the Navy at the same time they were doing the F117?



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

Is that part of the same rumour that something was built along side the F117 with a partition between the 2 different planes?



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   
It was Ben Rich,s Skunk Works book so potentially yes.



posted on Mar, 11 2019 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackfinger
It was Ben Rich,s Skunk Works book so potentially yes.


It’s long been rumored that there was a flyoff between Northrop and Lockheed of ATB demonstrators in the early 1980s:

“Some say a flight test also occurred of at least one technology demonstrator from one of the companies involved. There has even been odd slipups amongst those who were involved with the ATB project who mentioned testing in the air as well as the ground, although this has never been proven.”

www.google.com...

Wonder of Lockheed built a smaller Senior Peg demonstrator and that became the companion 119 thingy.



posted on Mar, 12 2019 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluto76

originally posted by: Blackfinger
It was Ben Rich,s Skunk Works book so potentially yes.


It’s long been rumored that there was a flyoff between Northrop and Lockheed of ATB demonstrators in the early 1980s:


ATB prototypes are a different story. www.abovetopsecret.com...




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join