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.

 

Crafts I Saw at 39,000 Feet

page: 5
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Moresby
The OP likely saw some type of space plane test. We may never know the exact aircraft as it might not be a known aircraft. This is not an especially extraordinary claim. It is odd that it occurred in commercial traffic lanes. But one can imagine that happening.

The other possibility is that for reasons peculiar to the situation fairly ordinary aircraft didn't appear ordinary. This seems less likely.

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


I saw something unusual and little did I know at the time how very unusual it was.

Can you explain what you mean concerning ordinary aircraft not appearing ordinary? I want to be sure I understand that part.

As far as me pulling anyone's leg? It will never happen coming from me.




posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: bandersnatch
Thanks for the replies buddy....
The black smoke would possibly indicate afterburners maybe...Zaph will know more about that....
Cruise missiles of some type possibly...(but they shouldn't be loose in our airspace...)
Theres an older fighter called a delta dart you may want to check out...there certainly could be a few in civvy hands...

en.wikipedia.org...


Wow, it's first flight was in 1956. The year I was born and it still looks modern. I sure don't!

Too many aspects are not similar to what I saw especially the narrow, pointed nose and the size of the wings. I looked at all of the pictures on that page... the Cornfield Bomber. Lol!

Thank you!!

I don't know what to think now. I guess it's going to remain a mystery for a while longer.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Moresby

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


IMO it's the most likely explanation of all. None of this stuff adds up. Here's a guy who hasn't flown in ten years, then sees a bunch of these things on two different flights where no one else did. There are no pictures because he's not a cell phone guy, and he didn't tell anyone else, because he's phobic about that--not even a "Hey! Look at that!" And the craft were flying just a little faster "one lane over," giving him ample time to study them, because he's that kind of guy.

And yet his "detailed" explanation doesn't make sense. A "stubby space shuttle" would not be flying straight and level because aerodynamically that simply does not work. And all explanations are rejected.

Ask yourself, what are the chances? What are the chances a single person would see these things outside two commercial flights on two different days? What are the chances that this guy conveniently has no verification because of his own personal issues? What are the chances no one else on either airplane apparently saw these things at all?

The chances are infinitely small, yet this guy is getting a lot of attention. The most likely explanation is that he made up the story. Of course he will claim otherwise, but there's really nowhere else to go with this story. There are only two things to do: Humor him, or act credulous.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby
The OP likely saw some type of space plane test. We may never know the exact aircraft as it might not be a known aircraft. This is not an especially extraordinary claim. It is odd that it occurred in commercial traffic lanes. But one can imagine that happening.

The other possibility is that for reasons peculiar to the situation fairly ordinary aircraft didn't appear ordinary. This seems less likely.

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


I saw something unusual and little did I know at the time how very unusual it was.

Can you explain what you mean concerning ordinary aircraft not appearing ordinary? I want to be sure I understand that part.


Various things can effect what we see, including atmospheric conditions, visibility, position of the sun, fatigue, alcohol, drugs, etc. Any one of these things, or a combination of several, could effect our perceptions. Causing a fairly mundane aircraft to look bizarre or unique.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: Moresby

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


IMO it's the most likely explanation of all. None of this stuff adds up. Here's a guy who hasn't flown in ten years, then sees a bunch of these things on two different flights where no one else did. There are no pictures because he's not a cell phone guy, and he didn't tell anyone else, because he's phobic about that--not even a "Hey! Look at that!" And the craft were flying just a little faster "one lane over," giving him ample time to study them, because he's that kind of guy.

And yet his "detailed" explanation doesn't make sense. A "stubby space shuttle" would not be flying straight and level because aerodynamically that simply does not work. And all explanations are rejected.

Ask yourself, what are the chances? What are the chances a single person would see these things outside two commercial flights on two different days? What are the chances that this guy conveniently has no verification because of his own personal issues? What are the chances no one else on either airplane apparently saw these things at all?

The chances are infinitely small, yet this guy is getting a lot of attention. The most likely explanation is that he made up the story. Of course he will claim otherwise, but there's really nowhere else to go with this story. There are only two things to do: Humor him, or act credulous.


Think what you like. What I described is true. Because something doesn't add up in your particular mind doesn't mean it's not true. What you wrote carries no weight for me. My word is my honor, online or off. Take it or leave it.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby
The OP likely saw some type of space plane test. We may never know the exact aircraft as it might not be a known aircraft. This is not an especially extraordinary claim. It is odd that it occurred in commercial traffic lanes. But one can imagine that happening.

The other possibility is that for reasons peculiar to the situation fairly ordinary aircraft didn't appear ordinary. This seems less likely.

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


I saw something unusual and little did I know at the time how very unusual it was.

Can you explain what you mean concerning ordinary aircraft not appearing ordinary? I want to be sure I understand that part.


Various things can effect what we see, including atmospheric conditions, visibility, position of the sun, fatigue, alcohol, drugs, etc. Any one of these things, or a combination of several, could effect our perceptions. Causing a fairly mundane aircraft to look bizarre or unique.


None of those things apply but thanks for the explanation.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: Moresby

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


IMO it's the most likely explanation of all. None of this stuff adds up. Here's a guy who hasn't flown in ten years, then sees a bunch of these things on two different flights where no one else did. There are no pictures because he's not a cell phone guy, and he didn't tell anyone else, because he's phobic about that--not even a "Hey! Look at that!" And the craft were flying just a little faster "one lane over," giving him ample time to study them, because he's that kind of guy.

And yet his "detailed" explanation doesn't make sense. A "stubby space shuttle" would not be flying straight and level because aerodynamically that simply does not work. And all explanations are rejected.

Ask yourself, what are the chances? What are the chances a single person would see these things outside two commercial flights on two different days? What are the chances that this guy conveniently has no verification because of his own personal issues? What are the chances no one else on either airplane apparently saw these things at all?

The chances are infinitely small, yet this guy is getting a lot of attention. The most likely explanation is that he made up the story. Of course he will claim otherwise, but there's really nowhere else to go with this story. There are only two things to do: Humor him, or act credulous.


You must always entertain the possibility that people are lying. Because people lie.

But let's break down what happened to the OP to its simplest form:

An inexperienced flyer looks out the window during a flight and sees some aircraft he cannot identify.

That's not an extraordinary claim. In fact, it's rather mundane. He gave some descriptions of these aircraft which some find odd. But the OP isn't a pilot. Nor is he an expert spotter of aircraft. So we can take those descriptions with a grain of salt.

And even if we accept his description. That only means he may have seen some lifting body aircraft or space plane. We do have such aircraft. It would be rare to see one. And two flying together seems unlikely. But he didn't claim he saw a pterodactyl. He claimed he saw planes. Well, we have planes of all manner of configurations on planet earth.

So, yes, maybe he lied. But it isn't a grandiose lie. It was a unique event. But a conceivable one.
edit on 9-4-2016 by Moresby because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby
The OP likely saw some type of space plane test. We may never know the exact aircraft as it might not be a known aircraft. This is not an especially extraordinary claim. It is odd that it occurred in commercial traffic lanes. But one can imagine that happening.

The other possibility is that for reasons peculiar to the situation fairly ordinary aircraft didn't appear ordinary. This seems less likely.

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


I saw something unusual and little did I know at the time how very unusual it was.

Can you explain what you mean concerning ordinary aircraft not appearing ordinary? I want to be sure I understand that part.


Various things can effect what we see, including atmospheric conditions, visibility, position of the sun, fatigue, alcohol, drugs, etc. Any one of these things, or a combination of several, could effect our perceptions. Causing a fairly mundane aircraft to look bizarre or unique.


None of those things apply but thanks for the explanation.


Some of them apply. There were atmospheric conditions. The sun was positioned somewhere in the sky. There was a level of visibility that day.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby
The OP likely saw some type of space plane test. We may never know the exact aircraft as it might not be a known aircraft. This is not an especially extraordinary claim. It is odd that it occurred in commercial traffic lanes. But one can imagine that happening.

The other possibility is that for reasons peculiar to the situation fairly ordinary aircraft didn't appear ordinary. This seems less likely.

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


I saw something unusual and little did I know at the time how very unusual it was.

Can you explain what you mean concerning ordinary aircraft not appearing ordinary? I want to be sure I understand that part.


Various things can effect what we see, including atmospheric conditions, visibility, position of the sun, fatigue, alcohol, drugs, etc. Any one of these things, or a combination of several, could effect our perceptions. Causing a fairly mundane aircraft to look bizarre or unique.


None of those things apply but thanks for the explanation.


Some of them apply. There were atmospheric conditions. The sun was positioned somewhere in the sky. There was a level of visibility that day.


They, the items you mentioned, don't apply in the way you are suggesting. That's not the answer to what I saw. I'll wait. I may find my answer yet. I have time.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: Moresby
The OP likely saw some type of space plane test. We may never know the exact aircraft as it might not be a known aircraft. This is not an especially extraordinary claim. It is odd that it occurred in commercial traffic lanes. But one can imagine that happening.

The other possibility is that for reasons peculiar to the situation fairly ordinary aircraft didn't appear ordinary. This seems less likely.

And the final, and imo least likely explanation, is he's just pulling our legs.


I saw something unusual and little did I know at the time how very unusual it was.

Can you explain what you mean concerning ordinary aircraft not appearing ordinary? I want to be sure I understand that part.


Various things can effect what we see, including atmospheric conditions, visibility, position of the sun, fatigue, alcohol, drugs, etc. Any one of these things, or a combination of several, could effect our perceptions. Causing a fairly mundane aircraft to look bizarre or unique.


None of those things apply but thanks for the explanation.


Some of them apply. There were atmospheric conditions. The sun was positioned somewhere in the sky. There was a level of visibility that day.


They, the items you mentioned, don't apply in the way you are suggesting. That's not the answer to what I saw. I'll wait. I may find my answer yet. I have time.


If those things were effecting your perception. You very likely wouldn't know.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Nope....I'm a trained observer.....when we see craft.......we know and remember it was quite precisely

edit on 9-4-2016 by GBP/JPY because: our new King.....He comes right after a nicely done fake one



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: boncho

Hey Boncho, where is the cockpit positioned on that scary looking thing.... underneath ?



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: nomad2
a reply to: Zaphod58

yeah, and i'm sure advanced aircraft use older engines


The Pratt & Whitney JT8-D was introduced over 50 years ago and are found powering many Boeing 737s, the most commonly used airliner in the US.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Nope....I'm a trained observer.....when we see craft.......we know and remember it was quite precisely


But the OP is not a trained observer. As I noted.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   
10-4.....by the details of his insisting.....we have our decision......credible by the details, even the intangible details.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

lol that reminds me of this.

flying brick.




posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy
a reply to: boncho

Hey Boncho, where is the cockpit positioned on that scary looking thing.... underneath ?


She be a drone. A very fast one.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie

Four pages into the post and no-one has asked you to draw a picture rather than describe?
Really?
Can you please draw a picture of what you think you saw?



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy
a reply to: boncho

Hey Boncho, where is the cockpit positioned on that scary looking thing.... underneath ?


That one is unmanned, so... somewhere on the ground? in some Air Force office with a bunch of tech plastering the walls. It used to be a DARPA project, but they scrapped it and gave it to the USAF. Makes you wonder what DARPA is working with instead, if this is from their reject pile.

link



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: boncho

DARPA didn't scrap it, it was designed for the DoD all along, since they didn't have an independent orbiter capability that they had wanted for a long time. The Air Force continued the X-37A program, using a lot of the data from that program to build the X-37B. The X-37A validated the technology, and performed three drop tests, before being retired.




top topics



 
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join