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.

 

past and present black secrets

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

It was a clean sheet design, not a modification. At this point I doubt we'll ever see it white.




posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 01:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: JCG1231
So after many years of following this forum at ATS I have finally brought myself to participate! Needless to say I am excited after all these years of following these great threads and absorbing the ideas and knowledge of some of the great and well informed members who have made this such a wonderful platform for discussion and research. With that I just have a request. I find myself handing my phone or tablet to friends and classmates all the time to check out an awesome thread and inevitably they, and admittedly, sometimes myself, come across an acronym that we are clueless on. Perhaps using longhand once with abbreviation in parentheses before switching to acronyms? I do not intend to seem critical or too lazy to research, just sometimes the acronyms can have a plethora of meanings or simply not enough time to follow up. Anyways again. If this is the wrong place to bring this up I sincerely apologize. I look forward to more great information and again, I am excited and thankful to be here!
a reply to: penroc3



Hello and welcome to the forum. Most of us on here deal with usually the same stuff day in and day out on this forum. So we use acronyms quite a bit. however, that being said, nobody on here will (or should) give you crap about asking what a certain acronym means. we understand that alot of people are just fans of the topic, and not necessarily have a backround in this type of work. So if you have any questions on that sort of stuff dont be afraid to raise them. And if you want to be discrete about it, shoot one of us a message. I know the usual people like myself, zaphod, etc wont mind at all answering questions about those sorts of things.

Again, welcome to the madness...



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 05:55 AM
link   
Q.
How does a Laser Guided Bomb get Laser Guidance from its release platform if it's release platform doesn't have a laser?

A.
By mounting an Apache like radar system in a similar invisible aircraft but without weapons to designate and pass details to the invisible bomb trucks.

Perfect.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Forensick


True, true.

But the nighthawk had one of the best laser designations and I.r sensors of the time so unless there was super bad weather or(to me seems more probable) before the 117 gets there , it's little friend helps knocks down the radars and I.d important time critical moving targets. Paints the important target and bombs away.

I wonder if the shadow was able to strike targets it's self, if not just to take ot radar or SAM sites.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Why do dedicated military aircraft enthusiasts discuss the most obscure aspects of aircraft design and capabilities but never venture into similar discussions about the black triangles? Why wouldn't they want to theorize about those craft that seem to be powered by magical means and what terrific capabilities they must have with their manners of non-aerodynamic locomotion coupled with completely new possibilities in terms of arms, evasion, range, speed, and especially altitude ceiling (if any).

One explanation that comes to mind is that those craft are too much like the typical reports of UFOs and that a line has been drawn so that no connection can be allowed between Air Force equipment and UFOs. That isolation means that any discussion of past, present and future Air Force hardware must have wings and/or jet/rocket engines.

The real exotic stuff is left to another area, probably the providence of the US Space Force which is rarely the topic of discussion by anyone on this site except for those of us that see beyond the veil.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun



I never said I don't believe in BBT's.

But if one follows aviation and science developments closely some of the reports of the BBT's are with in the reach of us mere humans.

Trust me, I'm a believer but I also give humans more credit then most when it comes to 'UFO's. Just because you don't know what it is or how it works doesn't mean really smart and hard working people can't and for one reason or another keep there mouth shut.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: penroc3

Why do dedicated military aircraft enthusiasts discuss the most obscure aspects of aircraft design and capabilities but never venture into similar discussions about the black triangles? Why wouldn't they want to theorize about those craft that seem to be powered by magical means and what terrific capabilities they must have with their manners of non-aerodynamic locomotion coupled with completely new possibilities in terms of arms, evasion, range, speed, and especially altitude ceiling (if any).

One explanation that comes to mind is that those craft are too much like the typical reports of UFOs and that a line has been drawn so that no connection can be allowed between Air Force equipment and UFOs. That isolation means that any discussion of past, present and future Air Force hardware must have wings and/or jet/rocket engines.

The real exotic stuff is left to another area, probably the providence of the US Space Force which is rarely the topic of discussion by anyone on this site except for those of us that see beyond the veil.


well you answered your own question...as soon as you said "magical" you lost most of us. We tend to believe what the science we know about can prove, not what we dont know about. Im not saying they arent real by any means, but as long as there is no concrete proof, then i cant believe in something like the triangles.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: Forensick


I wonder if the shadow was able to strike targets it's self, if not just to take ot radar or SAM sites.



Radar/SAM sites can also be knocked out by quite conventional means using AGM-88 HARM missiles deployed by any aircraft platform that has the capability of launching them.

iirc the UK was using Tornado and Jaguar aircraft 30 seconds apart at low level during Gulf war 1.
One aircraft flies past at high speed causing the SAM/Radar site to power up to track it then the following aircraft sent them a HARM missile as a return gift


Regards,

M.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: murlock




Very true. But say you have a high value Mobil target Identified very deep in contested airspace and only a very stealthy platform can get to it, how would you get to it with out risking your conventional weasels?

If you already had a stealthy ISR platform with limited strike capabilitys hanging around for the nighthawks why not use that to target or even take out said target?



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

Boomer, didn't you once post about refueling aircraft you had never seen before and haven't seen since?

I cant remember where it was but it did jog my memory seeing you post here


also as it says on your avatar N.K.A.W.T.G. Surely these supposed "black triangles" or Low RCS/Observability platforms still require mid air refueling due to the long loiter time that they can enjoy due to such systems on board.
That is if they are powered by conventional means/fuels of course.

Although I do agree with previous posts about conventional aircraft looking more and more like the reports we get of U.F.O's. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't believe what people talk about unless you have had to pass it fuel at some point due to your level of clearance that has allowed you to refuel some of the most rare and exotic airframes that the US has available (and probably cant mention).

Many thanks to people like you and Zaphod that help keep us all honest and down to earth on subjects such as these and others regarding exotic airframes currently employed/deployed.

Sorry if this post is a bit random and unorganized. I am quite an articulate person but don't really have the literal expertise to put my thoughts into a 100% legible post.

Regards,

M.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

I agree with what you say, but I'm pretty sure that platforms like this are so deeply classified that you wouldn't be able to get any information from anyone here as they would be breaking so many laws to give that info out. Let alone getting a name and/or model number for them


I recall Zaphod chiming in on a recent strike made by the F-22 Raptor saying that it wasn't the raptor that was interesting about it. More the platform that had taken the target and bomb damage assessment photos


Regards,

M.
edit on FebuThu, 05 Feb 2015 10:14:32 -0600Thursday20152015-02-05T10:14:32-06:00k by murlock because: 2nd paragraph



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: murlock
a reply to: boomer135

Boomer, didn't you once post about refueling aircraft you had never seen before and haven't seen since?

I cant remember where it was but it did jog my memory seeing you post here


also as it says on your avatar N.K.A.W.T.G. Surely these supposed "black triangles" or Low RCS/Observability platforms still require mid air refueling due to the long loiter time that they can enjoy due to such systems on board.
That is if they are powered by conventional means/fuels of course.

Although I do agree with previous posts about conventional aircraft looking more and more like the reports we get of U.F.O's. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't believe what people talk about unless you have had to pass it fuel at some point due to your level of clearance that has allowed you to refuel some of the most rare and exotic airframes that the US has available (and probably cant mention).

Many thanks to people like you and Zaphod that help keep us all honest and down to earth on subjects such as these and others regarding exotic airframes currently employed/deployed.

Sorry if this post is a bit random and unorganized. I am quite an articulate person but don't really have the literal expertise to put my thoughts into a 100% legible post.

Regards,

M.


Yeah there are a couple airframes ive only refueled once and never again, but those were when flying out of edwards afb on support missions for groom and nellis. As for the triangles, i try and bring that up all the time to people who say they are real and the fact that neither myself, or any other boom operator i know have ever refueled them. They just say that they have some exotic propulsion system that doesnt need fuel or whatever. And i get it i really do. Theres quite a bit of circumstancial evidence to support the black triangles, but im one of those people that need to see something concrete to believe in it. Just like with the YF-24 or any other aircraft talked about on here. If i hadnt seen it with my own eyes I would have a hard time believing it was real. Well ok maybe the 24 because of the pilots bio, but you get the idea.

Theres just so much out there that the public doesnt have a clue about and its really hard to bite my tounge and not say something sometimes. Especially when people are really really close or going in the completely wrong direction. For example, somewhere in this 2 page thread is the name of the f-117's companion. Not like someone tried to guess its name or anything like that. But the word was written by someone here and as i was skimming i was like, well damn there's its name right there and nobody knows...(no im not going to say what word it is but theres probably 20,000 words in these two pages so feel free to guess. lol). But hell getting a phone call from some agency telling me to keep a certain picture off the internet because there is something classified hanging off the wing is enough to scare me into doing the right thing. Which is keeping a lid on some things.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: murlock
a reply to: penroc3

I agree with what you say, but I'm pretty sure that platforms like this are so deeply classified that you wouldn't be able to get any information from anyone here as they would be breaking so many laws to give that info out. Let alone getting a name and/or model number for them


I recall Zaphod chiming in on a recent strike made by the F-22 Raptor saying that it wasn't the raptor that was interesting about it. More the platform that had taken the target and bomb damage assessment photos


Regards,

M.


Well thats not really that much of a secret. it was most likely the RQ-180. We kinda knew it was something new because of the clarity of the images in the first place. And since its operational it made sense.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
I'm a firm believer that there's a "military within the military" that operates the BBT's, so that 99% of the armed forces never have any clue about them. This is how danged compartmentalized this type of platform would be for it to remain a secret for so long.

The only reason we even are aware of them is because of the handful of sightings by sane people.

I'd even go as far as to say the people that scrub the information off the net about the BBT's probably don't know what and why they're scrubbing it -- they're just doing a job they're told to do. A lot of the information is probably in the form of scientific papers that touch upon some of the technology in bits and pieces.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

Totally agree with you. I wouldn't expect you or anyone else here to start blurting out classified information here and I wouldn't want to believe anything I haven't seen with my civvy eyes.

There is, like you say plenty of circumstantial evidence regarding the existence of "black triangles" but it's just that.. circumstantial.

I've been a lurker here for many years, spending a majority of my time in either the aircraft and the UFO forums in particular. Nothing has become more apparent than the fading of the line between supposed Alien and terrestrial craft.

Given the amount of time that it takes to make an idea on paper become an actual flying craft and admissions from retired senior executives of various companies such as Lockheed, Boeing and Raytheon etc, on them being 50+ years ahead of anything we have flying today. That has served to fade the line even further.

I want to believe in extra terrestrial craft but i just cant find any solid proof... Likewise I'd love to see what we have up there but I'll just have to wait and hope that these exotic platforms come into the white world where we can look in awe and say "wow we really did that? Then that's where all the UFO reports have been coming from"


I understand that secret is secret and it needs to stay that way. I guess there's a lot we will never know about stepping stone projects that help to evaluate and test new components and ideas for future craft and while there is a lot of information out there it's down the the individuals ABS (anti bull#) system to try and separate fact from deliberate fiction.

Once again many thanks to people like yourself and zaph and others that take the time out of your day to help us out and either drop subtle hints to lead us in the right direction or say "nope that's not the case"

Regards,

M.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So you're saying I'm sane Mystik? That's the nicest thing anyone's ever said to me.


As for the triangles. They exist. Don't know how they operate but they definitely are real. And my impressions were very human and ours. And no it didn't appear to be conventionally propelled.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

Tremendous post and having people like you around certainly makes this digging around lark a lot more fun.

I threw my toys out when the SwitchBlade (loved that design) didnt become a reality and lost touch with aviation projects but I'm finding my interest is growing again due to the knowledgeable people who take the time to post.

I wont guess right now but you might consider that 20,000 word search estimate a bit overly optimistic once you run a word macro to remove duplicate words, dictionary words + anything by yourself and Zaph....

edit on 5-2-2015 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

So as I read that my brain just went into overdrive. would you care to share the information about the craft you saw please?
As you seem very certain about it.

Also if you are sane then you are one of very few


Regards,

M.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

Well just because we have a name doesn't mean we'll be able to find out anything about it!



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135


Ohhhh man so many words....funny how it seems to work, people inadvertently getting something right.

*** pulling that pic seemed a little dramatic I thought that was a simi-known about thing,was it a 18 or 22 I forget now.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join