It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Aurora, Does it exist?

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 11:34 PM
i did post on seeing donuts on a rope but after further investigation i have concluded that what i saw was down to the wingtips of a comercial aircraft.

[edit on 22-3-2005 by finch]

posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 02:26 PM
both projects were recently cancelled. The government claimed that triangular black aircraft was the Orient Express, or even the X-33, but both projects were cancelled. But it couldn't have been the X-33 or the Orient Express, because niether of them were ever flown.

posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 08:25 PM
When I was in the Gulf War II, Operation IRAQI FREEDOM. I was on deck watches, everyone on watch saw something "wierd" at night or unexplainable that wouldn't show-up on radar. What they thought was a UFO was likely the Aurora.
I would see a very high flying "craft", within seconds it was at the other end of the horizon.

As for UFOs, the watch section before me saw something so strange, they didn't know how to report it, it was a green point of light that came out of the sea, go up in the sky and stop; five green objects came from several different directions and join up with the one green object, then it bolts out there.

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 09:01 AM
A few days ago after the "sonic" booms were reported in Tampa/Clearwater and surrounding area, I posted the following post here'

Plausibility? Yes ..

5 or 6 booms, seismic readings .. 3/11/2005
Purported to be two F-18's landing at MacDill AFB, Tampa though never verified, aircraft landed under cover of darkness around 8pm EST, booms occurred around 7:40pm

3/23/2005 ... one set of double booms reported by Daytona residents approximately 5:30pm EST, never made any media that I've found yet.

Avon Park Aux Range Facility. --- Questionable use of "main-base" airfield purportedly only has an 8,000' by 150' runway with 1000' overruns on each end. Runway designation 05-23.

---Restricted Airspace...main area is restricted upto 14,000' with one section upto 18,000', area is a skewed rectangle approximately 11nm N-S and 14nm E-W. Subareas include ingress/egress corridors from 1,000' to 4,000' to the north and south-southeast. Surrounded by MOA's (military operations areas) roughly 60nm N-S and 30nm E-W.

Microsoft TerraServer "aerial" photos reveal a "bombing-target" airfield approximately 3-4nm west-northwest of published airfield with a "theoretical" 12,000' runway, though photos do show "bomb" damage.

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 07:42 PM
Found an interesting website with alot of info on the Aurora

also a pic

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:07 PM
what i dont get is why they would need a longer runway for a hypersonic aircraft. its not going to need to be going hypersonic speed to take off, and it wont be landing at hypersonic speed, the reason for the long runway is probably for a long range heavy bomber, or for a fleet of aircraft to land or take off.

posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:58 AM
Area 51 is one of the few places with runways long enouth for the Space Shuttle to land (along with Easter Island, very interesting).

posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 11:26 PM
A long runway is needed for the Shuttle because it has no thrust reversers like modern airliners and larger corporate jets do.

During two shuttle missions that occurred while stationed at McClellan AFB we were put on a "shuttle" alert (non-official term) when Beale AFB with it's 12,000 foot runway was designated as a contingency/emergency landing site for Edwards. McClellan's runway was only 10,600 feet.

From my understanding of the TAV, while it would takeoff like a common aircraft, it's return to earth and landing would be similar to the Shuttle's no engine, glide-home landing. While the TAV might be able to depart from nearly any Air Force, Navy or Marine Corps airfield with atleast 8,000 feet of runway, I believe based on watching shuttle landings and roll-out a comperable or even slightly smaller vehicle is going to need at least 10,000 feet of runway after touchdown.

posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 03:37 PM

Originally posted by Silver Eagle

A few days ago after "sonic" booms were reported in Tampa/Clearwater and surrounding area...

I heard those!!!

Originally posted by Silver Eagle
Avon Park Aux. Range Facility...

I knew it! The shortness of the runway doesn't matter. It could slow down and land like a regular aircraft. It could have a series of Wind catchers and even forward facing thrusters to slow it down.

[edit on 3/28/2005 by TheRanchMan]

posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 03:44 PM

Originally posted by MAVERICK05
what i dont get is why they would need a longer runway for a hypersonic aircraft.

I think they have a longer runway at area 51 because JUST IN CASE an engine malfunction or brake malfunction occurs, it'll have enough landing strip to travel across and use up all of its momentum before needing to use policing foam (a white, sticky foam that is sprayed across runways to slow and/or stop an aircraft travelling too fast).

[edit on 3/28/2005 by TheRanchMan]

posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:07 PM
Plus, when it lands on the runway, it could have a lage parachute, larger that the shuttles, so it could slow it down considerably on the runway after the thrust reversers in the engine, the air brakes and reverse thrusters have done their job. Now, this is ONLY a theory. A logical one, but a theory nonetheless...

posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:50 PM
People say that Avon Park is just a bombing range. Its full name is Avon Park Air Force Gunnery Range. And the gov't says that Nellis is just a bombing base. Its full name is Nellis Bombing and Gunnery Range. Not alot of bombing. There's not a lot of bombing in either places. Someone on this post said the live about ten miles away. They said that the USAF isn't there full time anymore. I don't mean to sound rude, but just how do you know?! The gov't said that there was NOTHING in the Nevada Desert. But that surely isn't true now is it, lol.

posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 06:05 PM
Auora Over Port Charlotte from Jim DeVoy, Requires RealPlayer

This is the video that may prove Aurora's existance. I mentioned it before about how if it was landing in port charlotte, it would have a perfect vantage point to Avon Park. For those that live near it, you may not think of it as any other normal jet craft because, as a stealth feature to make it sound like another craft, it could be equipped with regular fighter engines. That may be what is on the top of the plane here:

P.S. Sorry for all the consecutive posts. I have a bad memory, if I wait to post I'll most likely forget.

[edit on 3/29/2005 by TheRanchMan]

posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 10:16 PM
In 1991, my ex bought me a model from Testor Models called The S4 UFO. Ya, same company that makes B25s and Ford 'stangs. In the box was a 'bonus' leaflet. In the leaflet were 'pictures' of the Aurora. Supposedly someone who worked around it had snuck pictures of it. Testor even offered a model of the Aurora at that time.
for what it's worth

posted on Mar, 30 2005 @ 01:42 PM
You don't still have that leaflet do you? If you do, could you scan it and post it? That would be greatly appreciated.

posted on Mar, 30 2005 @ 02:09 PM

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC

2) Sightings of arrow-shaped aircraft with knotted contrails over the North Sea

[edit on 3/10/2005 by SwitchbladeNGC]

Hey, wow that's the first time I have ever seen the arrows mentioned here. I've seen them. Back in 1995/1996 I was living on a farm in South Eastern Australia. One night about 10pm I was watching tv and I heard my ex husband shout at me from the front of the house, just as he shouted the tv went off to a fuzzy grey snow. I walked out the front to my husband and he was pointing up at the sky and there was two arrows. One was next to the other trailing just behind the first and they were moving across the sky. They were clearly an arrow shape and with a bright steady orangy yellow light colour, after they moved away from overhead, the tv came back on. The next morning my best friend rang up, who lived on another farm a few miles away and told me all about the two arrows she had seen the night before. So it wasn't a figment of my imagination as it was witnessed by quite a few people in our village.

posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 11:38 PM
Check this out rather

posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 06:48 PM
Is it possible that there is no advanced technology spyplane?

I think it might be.

It's hard to imagine the various military branches and 3-letter agencies not wanting one, but I think any missions done by such an aircraft could be done cheaper with sattelites and UAV's.

I believe the Aurora was alive and kicking at one time, but I really think it's possible the project was cancelled due to budget constraints.

I'm a defense contractor at a small Navy test/eval/training site and we had over US$1M taken from our budget so far this year to help finance Iraq. I've seen some projects cut that I never thought would be to save money. I really think this could have happened to the Aurora.

Having said that, there are too many black triangle sightings to deny a top secret black traingle aircraft. With our current military mindset/policies/strategies it's most likely either a bomber or a very fast, stealth transport designed to rapidly insert troops and material into hostile environments. It could even be used to transport UAV's and launch them for recon missions. In my limited experience, UAV's and sensors are where all the technology and money are going.

Just my two cents...

posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 07:07 PM
there were some reports of it crossing the atlantic and landing at a base in the uk . i used to know the location that it apparently landed. any information on this would be great as ive lost everything i had on aurora

posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 04:50 PM

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime

It's hard to imagine the various military branches and 3-letter agencies not wanting one, but I think any missions done by such an aircraft could be done cheaper with sattelites and UAV's.

Ironically that's what Clinton thought till they "had" to resurrect, albeit temporarily the SR-71 program.

The Shuttle uses approximately 8,000 to 10,000 feet of the KSC or EDW runways on landing with chutes.

Avon Park would be a good cover area .. good place to check it out for any "covert" ops would likely be the Lake Kissimmee State Park and Campgrounds located about 4 miles north of the northern perimeter of the central restricted area.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in