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.

 

"F-19" confirmed (cough cough) at Tonopah Test Range

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2017 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: B2StealthBomber
a reply to: Forensick

The companion is very real, it's also not called the f-19, it follows the f-117 in its designation but not the fighter part.


Have you got any more info you can share on that?




posted on Jan, 6 2017 @ 02:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Forensick

The other problem with the "companion" hypotheses is the F-117 does not use any radio frequencies in theater. So how would it communicate to a "companion?" And no, please no one suggest optical communications.

The F-117 is truly stealth. No "low probability of intercept" avionics. It is silent running. Now as I alluded to in my other post, the USAF probably doesn't like that kind of operation since no follow on aircraft operate in that manner. If you really want to get technical, the DoD cancelled some F-22 to pay for more Growlers, so not everything depends on stealth.



posted on Jan, 6 2017 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: gariac

Hi gariac.

Although i see your side of the argument as valid and well constructed, Everything from what ive heard around is that the companion was/ is real.

My personal hypothesis backed up by anectodal heresay by people over the years that i trust in their experience and knowledge is that the usaf has a nifty and very stealthy way to communicate between their assests if the right equipment is installed.

Everytime i try and inquire and ask " what do you mean? What kinda method of communication?" ive always gotten across the board. " errr uhhhh.. I really really dont want to talk about it"

whatever the method is its something they take very seriously in protecting and are very loyal to their oaths regarding.

So from my paradigm. The companion does indeed exist and that they do have some sneaky way of relaying info to the bomber. Or at least their bombs. F117 flies in. Releases bombs when told. Something else handles everything else. F117s continue on and egress. Keep themselves as quiet and as low a profile as possible and sneak off.

But again thats just my understanding. I coyld have miss interpreted what i thought i was hearing.



edit on 6-1-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

The target location is pre-programmed before the plane takes off. The pilot simply says release or not. No "companion" required.



posted on Jan, 6 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: gariac

The interceptor



Looks like Firefox.



posted on Jan, 6 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Hi Bro! Good to see you!

Hey man, batten down the hatches! Big storm coming!



posted on Jan, 15 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   
I've never heard of an F19. I'll have to do some research.



posted on Feb, 1 2017 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

I heard the reason that the "companion" wI'll never come out into light is because of where it got its budget from.
I've also heard that you can find/ hear radio comms of the F-117's companion on the dark web during the Persian Gulf war...
But I'm too much of a sissy to check.
Miss being on here. Went out to area 51 late november.
Security was not happy of us being there on a moonless night. I'll try to be more active here, but I've gotten enough
"Don't poke the bear!!" Warnings recently to stand down from forum talk.



posted on Feb, 1 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: HomeyKXTA

Camo dudes are perpetually cranky.

If you really want to annoy the base, stay multiple days on Tikaboo. I often thought it would be fun to tag-team Tikaboo. Get multiple people to cover it for a week.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Looks like Firefox


It looks rubbish.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: HomeyKXTA
a reply to: BASSPLYR

I heard the reason that the "companion" wI'll never come out into light is because of where it got its budget from.
I've also heard that you can find/ hear radio comms of the F-117's companion on the dark web during the Persian Gulf war...
But I'm too much of a sissy to check.
Miss being on here. Went out to area 51 late november.
Security was not happy of us being there on a moonless night. I'll try to be more active here, but I've gotten enough
"Don't poke the bear!!" Warnings recently to stand down from forum talk.


Ive read about the radio comms being out there before but impossible to find now.I wish someone that knows where to look would go in and bring it to the surface and share it with us.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: B2StealthBomber

O/A-118

or taking 'follows' a little bit more literally...

O-117B



??? hot? cold?
edit on 22-2-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-2-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Forensick
a reply to: Shadowhawk
all seem perfect without a companion, I don't see any missing part a companion could offer?


Think 1985 technology, and requirements (fight USSR in Europe).

Laser guided bombs on real-time identified targets of opportunity, potentially moving, versus inertially-guided bombs on pre-programmed fixed locations. Case #2 doesn't require companion, but case #1 does.

The A-6 missions in Desert Storm used two people for this kind of mission. Likewise the F-14.

F-117A has only one person who is busy flying the routes which don't get too close to enemy radar. And what if the other person designating was in another aircraft?
edit on 22-2-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 02:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: Forensick
a reply to: Shadowhawk
all seem perfect without a companion, I don't see any missing part a companion could offer?


Think 1985 technology, and requirements (fight USSR in Europe).

Laser guided bombs on real-time identified targets of opportunity, potentially moving, versus inertially-guided bombs on pre-programmed fixed locations. Case #2 doesn't require companion, but case #1 does.

The A-6 missions in Desert Storm used two people for this kind of mission. Likewise the F-14.

F-117A has only one person who is busy flying the routes which don't get too close to enemy radar. And what if the other person designating was in another aircraft?


But elvira made the routes easier and if another stealth aircraft communicated targets it would light up with its emissions?

Plus, and this is pure speculation, in GW1 and 2 most of the targets in the early days, the Steals primary purpose, were infrastructure, you shut down the system forcing them to move to plan B. But to do that you need (and we still do today) people on the ground. Searching for moving targets is like a needle in a haystack, SF were sent in to try and find mobile scuds, today CIA assets are used to find targets before you send a drone to loiter.

In the nineties, in my opinion, it is highly unlikely a stealth platform would have the optics to spot, say Comical Ali getting in an armoured limo and patching the target to a F-117 on its way to take out his palace to retask to hit a moving convoy.

I am open to it as it is feasible, but just my thoughts on what I think is against the scenario you posted.

Alas I dont think anyone will come forward so we will all be speculating.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 03:23 AM
link   
If Boomers credentials were real (can see no reason to doubt) then any comments about triangles and companions should be taken with a pinch of salt as his anonymity would not survive a cross check of personnel records with flight data.

Dont think it was mis/dis info- but was probably just a joke that came at a time when people were a lot more receptive to mystery aircraft due to recent events.

Cant see any evidence of a companion like others say.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jukiodone
If Boomers credentials were real (can see no reason to doubt) then any comments about triangles and companions should be taken with a pinch of salt as his anonymity would not survive a cross check of personnel records with flight data.

Dont think it was mis/dis info- but was probably just a joke that came at a time when people were a lot more receptive to mystery aircraft due to recent events.

Cant see any evidence of a companion like others say.

Which recent events?



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Jukiodone

the companion is a very real and it has been sited a few times....

the name of it is even in this forum, not this thread but it's here



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 04:40 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

Not literally



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 04:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Forensick

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: Forensick
a reply to: Shadowhawk
all seem perfect without a companion, I don't see any missing part a companion could offer?


Think 1985 technology, and requirements (fight USSR in Europe).

Laser guided bombs on real-time identified targets of opportunity, potentially moving, versus inertially-guided bombs on pre-programmed fixed locations. Case #2 doesn't require companion, but case #1 does.

The A-6 missions in Desert Storm used two people for this kind of mission. Likewise the F-14.

F-117A has only one person who is busy flying the routes which don't get too close to enemy radar. And what if the other person designating was in another aircraft?


But elvira made the routes easier and if another stealth aircraft communicated targets it would light up with its emissions?

Plus, and this is pure speculation, in GW1 and 2 most of the targets in the early days, the Steals primary purpose, were infrastructure, you shut down the system forcing them to move to plan B. But to do that you need (and we still do today) people on the ground. Searching for moving targets is like a needle in a haystack, SF were sent in to try and find mobile scuds, today CIA assets are used to find targets before you send a drone to loiter.

In the nineties, in my opinion, it is highly unlikely a stealth platform would have the optics to spot, say Comical Ali getting in an armoured limo and patching the target to a F-117 on its way to take out his palace to retask to hit a moving convoy.

I am open to it as it is feasible, but just my thoughts on what I think is against the scenario you posted.

Alas I dont think anyone will come forward so we will all be speculating.



Searching for moving targets is like a needle in a haystack, SF were sent in to try and find mobile scuds, today CIA assets are used to find targets before you send a drone to loiter.


I read much of F117 missions, and recon isn't one. The plane flew in a very regimented manner.
www.f117sfa.org...

Note the mission planing comment in the link above. Not a whole lot of freedom for the F117 pilot. The target is the mission. You fly, attack, and get out of Dodge. Even hitting the tanker depended on strict timing.



posted on Feb, 23 2017 @ 04:53 AM
link   
a reply to: weavty1

Recent at the time of Boomers comments- meaning Amarillo and Wichita sightings.

a reply to: penroc3

Yeah I'm sure it is but what evidence do we have of an actual aircraft?

Boomers comments might be the best evidence (that I've seen) however given his public presence and credentials- we must assume he was joking as highlighting design elements would be knock at the door territory.

If we assume he wasn't joking and that the speculated information is correct, we are still left with the obvious question of why something that operated in the early 80's alongside the pinnacle of stealth is still classified in 2017.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join