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.

 

Musings about the F-117 companion

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580
One of the few childhood treasures I have is a small scale toy of that airframe from Micro Machines. It was a 3 pack that came with a SR-71, the "Aurora" and the "TR-3" Black Manta.

a reply to: drwire

Yeah it got me good as well, still such a beautiful aircraft though.



edit on 1-9-2015 by StratosFear because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-9-2015 by StratosFear because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

Is THAP the f117 companion/callsign jabba?



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

No. None of those callsigns are related to any classified aircraft.



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So I feel like you answered halkf my question...



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

THAP has nothing to do with it. Those callsigns are all unclassified and have nothing to do with it.



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Damn. Well back down the rabbit hole.



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
So what did Northrop have at the time for F-117-sized designs?


Actually Northrops entry in the competition was different but Similar to Have Blue (Heck even had the inward canted tail) not lot of pictures exist except the one on the RCS pole.



Northrop XST
edit on 9/1/15 by FredT because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/1/15 by FredT because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/1/15 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 11:33 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

I was always under the impression that the XST was more of a Carter or even a Ford-era design that established that stealth without ECHO-1 was possible, but not much more.

For comparison, I was talking about the early 80's when Senior Trend was finalized, a time at which the basic lessons of the XST had already led to Northrop's high and low-altitude penetrator designs from ~79-80 or so, which would merge and go on to evolve into the B-2.

Supposedly Tacit Blue built on the philosophy of the XST and tested the "clay-sculpted stealth" concept, but this is more about the idea that Tacit Blue wasn't the only Northrop stealth craft of it's size flying in the 80's.



posted on Sep, 1 2015 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Actually I,m about to cry as soon as i think i have it figured out a new post comes out and I realise I dont..



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 01:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: Zaphod58

That's it? You're one of our resident experts in this field. I would expect more from you...

Then you expect too much. Knowing something and being able to comment on it are two very different things.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Ain't that one purty.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 03:51 AM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Did the XST ever fly? Or was the competition just a pole-off with Have Blue?



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 04:39 AM
link   
a reply to: gfad

No, just the winner flew.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 05:01 AM
link   
a reply to: StratosFear

If only that was a pic taken by a boomer :-)



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
So IF the companion wasn't a Lockheed product, that more or less means that it HAS to have been a Northrop design, if only because the General Dynamics/McDonnell Douglas stealth designs were much more primitive at the time.


Are we sure about this? I have once read or heard somewhere that during development of the A-12 Avenger II by GD/McD somewhere around '89/'90, there were reports of flying triangle prototypes very similar to early A-12 designs. They were supposed to be build by General Dynamics in parallel but without knowledge of the A-12 team.
This lack of sharing of experiences regarding stealth construction and develpment by GD among themselves and by the U.S. Navy was one of the reasons the A-12 project got so out of control and the A-12 team was very angry about that.



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   
Just speculating, but because the shape is so unique could the 'companion' be a design by a more obscure company that maybe was doing stealth at the fringes. Maybe it was a very late Rockwell design (based on stealth experience gained from the B1) or something out of LTV (Vought), or possibly Grumman alone?

But I do maintain that the possibily of something unique coming out of GD's hat while working on the A-12 could be plausible. could also explain why nothing of a similar shape has been build since. The basic shape must have worked great if it has been in operation undetected this long.
edit on 292015 by spaceman42 because: typo



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Ran across this.
Has some old papers from 91 talking about the companion craft.


space-man.de...

Pages 11 and 12

maybe more.

.
edit on 2-9-2015 by grey580 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
Ran across this.
Has some old papers from 91 talking about the companion craft.


space-man.de...

Pages 11 and 12

maybe more.

.


Interesting read. Seems the companion is sort of an open secret, at least in the military community.
I am just really surprised that in all those years, not more information has slipped out somehow. Expecially since it has served oversees.
TR-3, I guess we will never, ever get rid of that designation



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580

If I read that correctly they are supposing that the Boeing THAP design went on to become the infamous TR-3A?



posted on Sep, 2 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

What TR-3A?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join