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.

 

*Hunting the Fast Movers*... back to the past!

page: 12
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: penroc3

Interesting note. The last pic of the tr....uhhh....the triangle has a hump in the top center. Thats very similar to the one i saw except the hump was smoother and more rounded.


That made me laugh!.


From now on, I am going to refer to a certain craft as a "TR-Uhh."




posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: wirehead

no, not like that. it's a strange effect. the light had 'arms' that would twist around the light and the 'arms' were all different lengths and were always straight and if light could have weight i would say they had weight


mostly blue with some white and colors in between


Sounds like plasma..



posted on Sep, 3 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10
a reply to: punkinworks10

Ima gonna wander a sec;
Wichita, what was that all about?
It is pretty obvious we showed that off, but to what end? Just showing we have some new un acknowledged airframe isnt that scary, its not in production. Then I was thinking maybe we showed it to them in the visible spectrum to show off that it is invisible to other spectra? Possible.
Now what if you take your virtual airframe amd turn that decidedly subsonic platform and make supersonic. It was seen by the peeping boris over wichita, then maybe again, some where it shouldnt be seen, cause it aint that fast. And maybe it still doesnt show up in those other spectra.
How intimidating would that be, an extremely stealthy loitering bomber that has supercruise?


Nothing as exotic as an invisible teleporting bomber, I suspect.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: wirehead
Invisible teleporting bomber,
that is for the other ATS crowd.
Just faster than it should be and harder to see than it should be



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: wirehead

Howd you make leap to invisible teleportating bombers. Sounds like character assasination to me.
edit on 4-9-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-9-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Okay okay, what I meant to say is that I don't think it's as exotic as a supercruising mostly-invisible bomber, not a teleporting invisible bomber.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Sounds like some type of Stealth to me..



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 03:50 AM
link   
People need to think about what the current state of "stealth" might actually be given that "Gravimetric Radars" using gravity induced quantum interference could be something that matured in the 90's....



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Jukiodone

If i was a vehicle tasked with loitering over a combat zone for days id want to be invisible physically and id want to have a way to mask my mass.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

www.google.com...

Filed in 2006.
Could have been around for a lot longer.

China are recently claiming similar feats.

If you thought about it as a potential consideration in lets say ...1990..... that gives you 27 years to come up with some countermeasures if the Chinese are not overstating current capability.



posted on Sep, 4 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Jukiodone

I dont know about quantum entanglement. But check out this article and then ponder if you could make a quantum version of this and use it like a radar. www.popsci.com...

Id imagine the math and number crunching a computer would have to do to accomplish this is tremendous. Lots of fractals and math and probably harmonics and other stuff to compute and sort through to get a clear picturr. But what if you did get the math right and did have software to make sense of it all. wonder if it would be extremely hard to detect this type of radar. That it would be able to extrapolate and see for very long distances. That it would provide almost high definition photo quality resolution of objects. To me id think it would be fantastic.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: GrumpyBollocks

Check out messages in the other place



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Anyone hear of a fast mover being used in the early part of OEF? I heard some rumors and have seen some anecdotal evidence that one was used sometime between 2001 and 2006 with tankers from Manas refueling. Might have even used JP-7 because all of the "T" model tankers seemed to always end up there.



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Do you have any additional info on this?



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: SpeedFanatic

Well the U.K did pretty much conceive the first working prototype of the turbojet engine all through Germany implemented the technologies far better than we did to begin with.

Is not inconceivable to surmise that we have been working on hypersonic or pulse jet/wave technologies in secret, possibly in conjunction with our western allies, to design and build an aircraft with similar operational characteristics to these alleged "Fast Movers".



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Pulse jet engines are awesome, for cruise missiles and small platforms. They've never been able to get over about Mach 2, even with a large scale testbed.



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

There are at least 2 other ways of going fast that would be way more effective

But may not be economical .

If I was going to build a platform that I wanted to go fast, I would make it a SSTO OR a two stage to orbit craft. With the 2 stage just build a mothership and a parasite craft.

In orbit or low orbit you get rid of allot of the issues you would run into in the atmosphere
edit on 8-9-2017 by penroc3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
Anyone hear of a fast mover being used in the early part of OEF? I heard some rumors and have seen some anecdotal evidence that one was used sometime between 2001 and 2006 with tankers from Manas refueling. Might have even used JP-7 because all of the "T" model tankers seemed to always end up there.

In my opinion its unlikely any high speed recon assets survived the Clinton terms anywhere close operational capacity.
Its a no brainer they had something going when the Cold War was still on. Reagan was increasing defense budgets like crazy, investing the odd billion for a couple of years to fund something like a two stage orbit craft wouldnt have been an issue.
Maybe such a program went even went operational in the early Nineties when Bush I was president and before the big cuts happened but when the Dems took over they started shrinking the Military like there is no tomorrow.
And why would you need some one of a kind / one mission asset anyway? There are no near peer enemys left, satellites are getting better and better, drones are fun too and they never used if for years at this point etc.
Then 9-11 happened and suddenly there was a war, an axis of evil and the new found need for a rapid ISR capability.
Thus the Green Lady happened. They took something collecting dust somewhere, upgraded it and had IOC late in the decade.



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Does not need to be pulse jet technology they use through.

I'm sure there are a variety of other propulsion techniques kept in relative secrecy that could accomplish hypersonic velocity.



posted on Sep, 8 2017 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Some kind of stealthy Mothercraft that can launch, possibly even retrieve and coordinate hyper sonic drones has got to be on the cards at some point in the future. To be honest, it would make the perfect weapons system/platform, especially if it also had low Earth orbit capabilities.
edit on 8-9-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join