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.

 

A tough question for chemtrail believers.

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Time to start zapping those perverted peeping watchers with X Marks the Spot for a military 'zapper' Ground Laser.




posted on Apr, 21 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Tristran

x's are bad. that one has a 3 axis cross, so it's likely really bad.
I'd put some tin foil on the windows.



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 03:46 PM
link   
This was likely the result of a rare software bug that has surely been self corrected by now.

The planes are fully autonomous with advanced AI programs controlling take off, landing, optimal spraying altitude / location based on real time/future weather analysis. They also draw from various five eyes databases on near real time locations of civilians in order to optimize the cost/benefit ratio.

The primary reason that there has been no leaks regarding this phenomenon is that the vast majority of the planes conducting these experiments are fully vertically integrated with AI software all the way from reloading dispersants to optimizing fleet management in addition to command and control. The program is almost entirely autonomous requiring minimal human input.



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Essentialy

And yet they can't come up with a decent UAV to replace manned aircraft. Funny that they have all these planes that don't even need ground crew, but they can't come up with an air to air, or even decent air to ground UAV.

And where exactly do these mystery planes land?



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well that is due to compartmentalization of research/technology. Besides, airline customers would not accept fully autonomous flight even though the vast majority of commercial activity is already autonomous.

The planes rarely land in the same location for obvious reasons. Their primary landing zones are in remote areas of the oceans (they have amphibious capability) where they rendezvous with a nearly fully autonomous fleet of nuclear powered stealth submersibles that, among other functions, recharge the planes (they are electric) from electricity generated via their nuclear reactor . This is just my speculation, but the subs likely employ some kind of acoustic metamaterial exterior coating to remain undetected by global oceanic surveillance networks operated by the navies of the world.

I also speculate that the stealth subs can communicate with the autonomous plane fleets while they are at great ocean depths by employing a retractable tether based antenna that is disguised as a whale shark or perhaps as dolphin that surfaces in order to transmit/receive.



edit on 26-5-2017 by Essentialy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Essentialy

Wow, this just gets better. It's compartmentalized, but you seem to know every detail about it. What about the maintenance crews? Why hasn't anyone ever seen these obviously huge amphibious planes anywhere? An amphibious plane doesn't look anything like normal aircraft that requires a runway. Do you have any idea how hard it is to hide a large number of aircraft?

And since when has the airline industry been even remotely autonomous? There is nothing even remotely autonomous about the airline industry.

You should also try to understand underwater communications. Any antenna "disguised as a whale shark or dolphin" would have to be tethered to the sub in question.

It's always amusing how compartmentalization is the answer for everything, and then huge fleets are talked about.
edit on 5/26/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I am referring to the use of flight control software on commercial airliners that is employed shortly after take off which results in dramatically reduced human input.

Maintenance is performed by humanoid service robots (similar to the boston dynamics units) that are aboard the stealth subs. It is unknown if these humanoid robots are human controlled via full body virtual-reality telepresence systems utilizing omni-directional treadmills or if they too are fully autonomous. The Subs are equipped with all of the most likely components to fail aboard the aircraft, standard consumables, etc. The aircrafts themselves are equipped with multiple forms of stealth technology to evade detection. For example, the top side of the aircraft is equipped with active camouflage to mimic the ocean while it is floating. Newer models can likely submerge to a shallow depth (10m) in order to avoid detection. Keep in mind these autonomous systems employ total AIS and ADS-B surveillance which enables them to steer clear of curious surface vessels , planes, subs, etc. They are designed to look as similar to a non amphibious commercial airliner while still retaining optimal operational functioning. Enough to land at an international airport if need be.



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Essentialy

That's called autopilot and is under the control of the pilots in the cockpit. It's not autonomous and never has been.

An amphibious aircraft can land at a normal airport, but there is no way to make it look like a normal commercial aircraft. You've obviously never seen an amphibious aircraft. There's a very good reason they are designed that way. Just as there is a very good reason a commercial aircraft is designed the way it is.

So what's next, this is getting good.



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm not here to argue the semantics of autonomy. Lets keep it on topic.

No need to be rude. I have clearly seen amphibious aircraft.

I have been responding to your questions on operational logistics / capabilities. The ball is in your court.


edit: On my way out, will have to respond later
edit on 26-5-2017 by Essentialy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Essentialy

And you're the one making the ridiculous claims. Prove it.

It's not semantics either. An autonomous system operates without human intervention. Autopilot on an aircraft operates with human input, therefore it's not autonomous. If you're going to make wild claims at least claim the right things.

As for amphibious aircraft, as I said, there's a damn good reason they're built that way and not like a commercial aircraft. The two are not interchangeable. There is currently one jet powered amphibious aircraft operating, and if would never be mistaken for a regular commercial aircraft.

So again, prove that anything you have said so far is anything but imagination. You made the claims, let see you back them up.



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


There is currently one jet powered amphibious aircraft operating, and if would never be mistaken for a regular commercial aircraft.
What aircraft is that?



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   



posted on May, 26 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Essentialy

Something vaguely resembling proof would be nice, especially since that's rather a bold claim to make in the face of current technology...

Sooooo?



posted on May, 27 2017 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I wonder if my friends here are missing essentialy's point. Any conspiracy theory (chemtrails, this time) that require this level of pure mental gymnastics, invention and fantasy to make it workable is clearly completely insane and thus has no chance of being real.

That's the sublet and clever point being made here, isn't it?



posted on May, 28 2017 @ 07:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Essentialy


You should also try to understand underwater communications. Any antenna "disguised as a whale shark or dolphin" would have to be tethered to the sub in question.



That was already within my post. Nice try though.




I wonder if my friends here are missing essentialy's point. Any conspiracy theory (chemtrails, this time) that require this level of pure mental gymnastics, invention and fantasy to make it workable is clearly completely insane and thus has no chance of being real. That's the sublet and clever point being made here, isn't it?


I in fact do not believe what i am writing



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join