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.

 

5th Sept 2017 Nevada crash

page: 10
11
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 04:54 AM
link   
The secrecy surrounding this tells me it wasn't a SU-27.

Perhaps it's something not as exotic as the Green Lady but may be a proof of concept or some air frame we haven't heard about yet.

It makes me wonder more about what kind of aircraft or the circumstances surrounding the crash where a very experienced pilot couldn't eject.




posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: dzeleniak

Ejections can cause very serious injuries, or even kill someone. If you're not in the right position when you eject, you can quite easily break bones. Even if you're in the right position, it can cause pretty bad injuries. When the B-2 went down on Guam, both pilots ejected. One of the two spent a short time in the hospital, because of the ejection related injuries, and was back flying in a week or two. The other pilot was airlifted to Hawaii, and spent two months at the Tripler Army Medical Center due to his injuries. He spent something close to three months total in the hospital.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
So Zaph,,,, crickets, or what are you hearing,, or?



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: SonofaSkunk

I'm hearing things all over the map. It's been pretty much decided he was with the Red Hats. Other than that, talk to three different people and you get three different stories as to what he was flying.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well, not far from what I figured. Thanks for the reply and I'll stay tuned to this channel. May he RIP. Test pilots are heroes, no doubt about it.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 09:38 PM
link   
The story becomes more bizarre.

Usually I don't want to link to Tyler Rogoway, but linking to Russian propaganda is worse.

Report Claims Famed Russian Test Pilot Warned Schultz Before Fatal Crash Near Area 51

EDIT:


Individual loops are the loops, performed by each of the 4 aircrafts separately..

In Russia it is called the loop of Nesterov. Pyotr Nesterov is a famous Russian pilot who is considered to be the founder of aerobatics. It was Nesterov who performed the so-called “dead loop” for the first time; in fact this extremely difficult maneuver is more often referred to as “Nesterov’s loop.”

russ-pilot.ru...



Nesterov believed an aircraft could fly a loop, a feat not previously performed. Despite the doubts of his peers, Nesterov proved his theory on 9 September 1913 (27 August by the calendar then used in Russia) and became the first pilot to fly a loop.

en.wikipedia.org...


In other worse, Russian test pilot telling Eric Schultz not to loop a Su-27. I think the story is BS, and that's without discussing the unusualness of an apparent Red Hats commander talking to the Russian version of Chuck Yeager.
edit on 16/9/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I know injuries can and do happen some times. It just made me wonder about it. It's sad that an experienced pilot lost his life doing something he loved to do.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz
Ummm looping is pretty standard in many planes..As long as you have enough altitude and speed to recover..The Hunter crash at Shoreham was a loop that started too low with not enough speed to recover safely.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

The Nesterov Loop was performed with the engine either off or at very low power during the dive portions of the maneuver. He went into a dive and cut the engine, used full power as he pulled up, then cut the engine as he came over the top, and proceeded to spiral down to land.

If it was being performed in the same way, then power could be lost, and possibly not regained. If it was an exploit flight, he might have stayed with it too long trying to save it.



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 09:15 PM
link   
Well here's an interesting twist. According to this article (it has to be translated), it was either an Su-27 or Su-30. First time I've seen that possibility mentioned anywhere.

govoritmoskva.ru...



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Well here's an interesting twist. According to this article (it has to be translated), it was either an Su-27 or Su-30. First time I've seen that possibility mentioned anywhere.

govoritmoskva.ru...


That is the article linked in Tyler's article. So we are subject to the quality of Google translate, as was Tyler.

Tyler's article



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Any new aerobatics are done at high altitude before they get proficient enough to do them at lower level.If it was a dead loop before landing it would be done ON landing and not in the middle of nowhere..
Im thinking its either an Su27 or somehow the new company has got the bits required to update one to a Su30 spec in regards to avionics and maybe engines.



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

It's entirely possible that we got an Su-30 from one of the African nations, or someone else. It wouldn't be the first time we got an aircraft through them, and it would probably be something we'd want to keep pretty quiet.



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 10:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

i wonder if anyone has had any of the jets mentioned crash or otherwise be rendered not flight worthy recently

that way we could get our hands on the jets without raising any eyebrows, i mean who's looking for crashed jets



posted on Sep, 19 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

My bet would be on a nation strapped for cash, but honestly most of the smaller nations, barely get mentioned even on aviation related sites when there's an accident. Just going by Wiki, Algeria would be a good option. They have 52 Su-30MKAs, with another 14 on order in 2015. Just about everyone else that would be in a position to, and have a need to get rid of one doesn't really have enough of them to make it easily hidden.

Of course, this is assuming that they did get their hands on an Su-30. I don't know for sure that they did, as I haven't heard anything about them getting one.
edit on 9/19/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 02:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Blackfinger

It's entirely possible that we got an Su-30 from one of the African nations, or someone else. It wouldn't be the first time we got an aircraft through them, and it would probably be something we'd want to keep pretty quiet.


Then again, the base went out of their way to show they had a SU-27. They flew the article while there were photographers present and also made mock up targets for the drones at Creech.

So if they don't care about a Sukoi, then we are back to a classified project.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:22 AM
link   
"stealth" frankenhornet? (4.5 gen vs 4th gen testing)



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: E92M3
"stealth" frankenhornet? (4.5 gen vs 4th gen testing)


We could be here for quite a while if you are wanting a definitive answer...

Classified stuff does seemingly stay classified if the LRSB decision, Wichita and Amarillo are anything to go by.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:47 AM
link   
I know, been awhile since someone mentioned the stealth hornet hehe...



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 03:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

From who would they want this quiet exactly?

Don't the Russians track their sold Su-30's ?
Or when reported crashed, want to see the remains for investigation/learning?
And when they actually start flying the thing, wouldn't the Russians intelligence know ?





edit on 20-9-2017 by EartOccupant because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join