Still no details on what the YF-113G or YF-24 are prototypes of. The pilots aren't talking because this specific information is classified. The YF designations are essentially arbitrary. They are simply unclassified designations for use in the pilot's Form 5 (Flight Log). Thaey are assigned in no particular order.

The designation system was initially used for the Red Hats/Red Eagles aircraft as an expedient way of loging flight time in classified aircraft. Naturally, it carried over to other classieif projects (SENIOR TREND, TACIT BLUE, etc.). Many of these were one-of-a kind technology demonstrators. They were never intended to be operational platforms.

The Mission Design Series (MDS) designators are assigned by an office in Battle Creek, Michigan. Many planes that should be X-planes have some other designation and planes with a YF designation should be X-planes. Look to the X-32/X-35 JSF competition as an example. They should have been YF models like the YF-22 and YF-23 ATF contenders.

The X is for experimental aircraft. When the F-32/35 program first started that's exacty what they were. They were experiments to see if they were feasible. The Y is for the prototypes once the program started and was headed towards acceptance. The -32/35 stayed X designations because they weren't sure if they were going to buy the design, or if it was going to prove feasible. The F-22/23 were more traditional designs that everyone KNEW would work, so they never went through the experimental phase.

I'm rather interested in the code names, red refers to the Russians, HAVE DONUT(MiG-21?) and Have something...MiG-23...

Have donut probably refers to the intake in the front of the MiG-21, I can't remember exactly though...

But, project BLUE BOOK refers to Blue (as in out of the blue) and Book (as in information on the subject), out of the blue is often used in conjunction with ETs, my point is, HAVE BLUE, as in Having UFO technology like RAM? just a thought thought.

Same with project TACIT BLUE, referring to blue, the dictionary definintion of Tacit is "Not spoken: indicated tacit approval by smiling and winking." as in something that is not to be spoken of referring to the ET technology?

again just a thought

If still skeptical about the ET pressence, I highly recommend to read posts by Gazrok, a very highly respected moderator of this board, usually to be found in Aliens and UFO's.

Blue is also used to designate friendly forces. Hence Blue on Blue to refer to friendly fire incidents during war.

That is quite true, thanks Zaphod...

The X-32 and X-35 JSF technology demonstrators were no more experimental than the YF-22 and YF-23. The X-designation is supposed to be used for pure research aircraft (i.e. the X-1, X-15, etc.), but it has been applied more recently for developmental prototypes (which should be Y-planes). The choices are often fairly arbitrary. The D-558-2 and HL-10 should have been X-planes, for example. The X-32 and X-35 should have been the YF-24 and YF-25 (or YF-25 and YF-26 since YF-24 has been used for a "classified prototype"). To make matters more confusing, aircraft numbers are carried forward when the X changes to an F or A designation (i.e. F-35A and A-45).

The words in codenames and nicknames are supposed to be meaningless (i.e. HAVE DOUGHNUT, TACIT BLUE, etc.). That is the whole point. The name is supposed to be unclassified, so it can't contain any information about the program if the program is classified. Nicknames for unclassified programs are occasionally more revealing.

You can take a look at most designs that were built for the military and find an X version of them, with a few exceptions where they liked the design so much that they just ordered it straight out. At some point most designs were at least somewhat experimental, while they figured out if they were worth flying or not.

You are confusing the XF, XB, etc. (i.e. XB-52 or XF-90) experimental prototypes with the simple X designations (i.e. X-1 or X-15) used for research aircraft. If the JSF had been the XF-35 instead of the X-35 it would have made more sense. The X-35 was not a research aircraft in the truest sense.

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
The words in codenames and nicknames are supposed to be meaningless (i.e. HAVE DOUGHNUT, TACIT BLUE, etc.). That is the whole point. The name is supposed to be unclassified, so it can't contain any information about the program if the program is classified. Nicknames for unclassified programs are occasionally more revealing.

Close! The first word in a code name tells what kind of program it is. HAVE and TACIT are used for technology demonstrators. SENIOR is used for operational systems or activities. The second word is a randomly picked word with no assign meaning.

Tim

Close, Tim!

HAVE programs also include materiel collection activities, scientific & technical exploitation, Test Pilot School student projects and a host of others.

SENIOR programs also include research & development projects, technology demonstrators, support activities, etc.

When I said they are "supposed to be meaningless," I meant that they are not supposed to have any words that give information about a program. The words HAVE or SENIOR do not necessarily indicate the nature of the project (i.e. reconnaissance, low-observables, etc.).

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
Close, Tim!

HAVE programs also include materiel collection activities, scientific & technical exploitation, Test Pilot School student projects and a host of others.

SENIOR programs also include research & development projects, technology demonstrators, support activities, etc.

Right Shadowhawk,

Thanks for clearing that up! Now, what does "TACIT" mean? Is it similar to HAVE? After all, there is TACIT BLUE!

Tim

So far, I can only find two TACIT programs.

TACIT BLUE (YF-117D advanced technology demonstrator)

TACIT RAINBOW (AGM-136 Autonomous anti-radiation cruise missile/uav)

I think it is largely a coincidence that both were built by Northrop. I think the significant connection between the two is that the TACIT programs were directed by SAF/AQ (Secretary of the Air Force for Aquisitions).

The first word usually gives some indication about the using organization. HAVE programs are directed by AFSC (now AFMC) or elements thereof (FTD, ESC, ASD, RADC, etc.). VOLANT is used by MAC (now AMC). SENIOR programs are directed by USAF HQ/RD and SAF/AQ. Just to cite a few examples.

Originally posted by Fisha05


I have no idea what Area 51 is. .

It's a storage facilty for all of the Top Secret Aircraft that have been developed but never put into service. Where do you think all the prototypes go? Surely, they don't want them in plain view; if one were able to examine these planes, it probally wouldnt be to difficult to get a greater grasp on the design processes, thus makely it likely that they will be reverse engineered, and we certainly don't throw them away.

Think about it, the wheather is perfect (dry, so little to no rust / corrosion) and the substrate is perfect for construction of a vast underground hanger. It is patrolled by a private security firm as there are no active military operations out there (aside from support staff).

Every now and then they roll them out for additional data that may be useful in current projects.



[edit on 28-9-2005 by crisko]

Test aircraft from the Groom lake facility have met a variety of fates. The U-2 redeployed to Edwards, CA, and Del Rio, TX. The A-12 and D-21 airframes were stored at Palmdale, CA, and Tucson, AZ, respectively. Some of the Soviet MiGs were transferred to museums. HAVE BLUE and SENIOR PROM were buried at the test site (although it is rumored that at least one SENIOR PROM was stored for posterity). The F-117A (SENIOR TREND) redeployed to Palmdale and the first two airframes were placed on display at Nellis AFB, NV, and the Air Force Museum. TACIT BLUE was going to be buried at the test site, but it was rescued for the Air Force Museum. Bird of Prey was stored at an unknown location until it was placed in the Air Force Museum.

Most of the facilities at Groom are for active test projects. There is a "boneyard" and storage building on Pistol Range Road, however. Any aircraft stored at the site have to remain indoors due to satellite coverage.

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
Most of the facilities at Groom are for active test projects. There is a "boneyard" and storage building on Pistol Range Road, however. Any aircraft stored at the site have to remain indoors due to satellite coverage.

Where is this? I'm sorry, but I've never seen a Pistol Range Road on the map!

Are you thinking about the Weapons Dopot in the desert near Flagstaff, AZ? I have been looking into this for about a month now. I first heard about it from an Uncle who made a delivery out there.

Tim

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
Most of the facilities at Groom are for active test projects.
There is a "boneyard" and storage building on Pistol Range Road,
however. Any aircraft stored at the site have to remain indoors
due to satellite coverage.

Originally posted by ghost
Where is this? I'm sorry, but I've never seen a Pistol Range
Road on the map!

It's visible on the dreamlandresort pages in the
panorama photos. It's on both the Freedom Ridge
series from 1995 and the newest Tikaboo series
from Aug 2005. Those pages discourage linking so
I can't post a direct link.

South end of the complex, backed up into the Papoose
foothills. You can see the pistol targets behind the
range building. And you can see the "skeletons"
in the bone yard in the same area.

Of course, I don't think any of us mortals actually know
the name of the roads at Groom. It's simply the road
that leads to the pistol range.


Sarge

Originally posted by SgtCamo
South end of the complex, backed up into the Papoose
foothills. You can see the pistol targets behind the
range building. And you can see the "skeletons"
in the bone yard in the same area.

Nice work Sarge! So Groom Lake does have it's own Bone Yard. It's a pritty nice size bone yard at that. Do we know if it's for perment storage? If so, that Bone Yard is home to some historic aircraft, Including the Have Blues , and the First F-117 prototype.

Tim

Ghost it was nice of you to take up some of your time to post us information about groom-lake and area 51 but sadly it was a waste of time. Because there is no real hard evidence of what you said, i hope you dont mind if you could answer these questions that be great.

Q1. Did you or Do you work at groom-lake and area 51?.

Q2. Did you get this information from someone else?.

Q3. Do you have actuall evidence that this is all real?.

Q4. Are you into the paranormal? etc ghosts, the third dimension etc.

Q4. Do you just have a strong believe in UFOs, Aliens?.

Q5. Have you ever saw a UFO with your own eyes and not from the t.v. or from a movie?.

Q6. Have you ever seen a Alien yourself, and i dont mean from a t.v. show or movie?>



Please answer these questions, thanks.

you obviously havent taken the time to research this thread or read the previously posted replys. Their is no reference to aliens or ufos or paranormal in this thread. If you knew anything about area 51 you would know that if someone worked there they certainly wouldnt make it public. With a total of eight posts since June it may be a good idea if you would read previous posts in the thread before you post yours.

Originally posted by IKnowSomethingYouDont
Ghost it was nice of you to take up some of your time to post us information about groom-lake and area 51 but sadly it was a waste of time. Because there is no real hard evidence of what you said, i hope you dont mind if you could answer these questions that be great.
Please answer these questions, thanks.

Sure, I have nothing to hide!

Q1. Did you or Do you work at groom-lake and area 51?.

No Sir! I have Never even worked for DoD or Any Government Conrtator. I Haven't even been out to the area Groom Lake. The closest I've ever been to Groom Lake is living in North Las Vegas as a boy.

Q2. Did you get this information from someone else?

Not Directly, I did research using a variety of Media, Print, and Electronic Sources. All of my sources are listed in the research forum. Please feel free to review them.

Q3. Do you have actuall evidence that this is all real?

As I have said, I used public sources to get all my data. I don't have any proof that you, or anyone else can't get yourself. ALL of our Sources are listed in the ATS Archives along with the dates we accessed each of them. If you fallow the link that I provided in my origional post, you are welcome to check out my source list for yourself and review all of our sources. I'm a serious researcher, and I welcome you to criteque my work and give me feedback. If you decide to review our research, take your time because there is a lot to look at!

Q4. Are you into the paranormal? etc ghosts, the third dimension etc.

Yes, I'm Native American and the realm of the paranormal/supernatural is a very important part of my beliefs and my culture.

Q4. Do you just have a strong believe in UFOs, Aliens?.

I belive in it to some degree, but I honestly have made up my mind on it yet. I try to stay away from the topic because I personally don't think it really has a connection to Groom Lake. Until I make a firm dicision about where I stand on it, I'll stay away from the big debate.

Q5. Have you ever saw a UFO with your own eyes and not from the t.v. or from a movie?.

No Sir! That is one of the reason's I'm trying to stay out of it.

Q6. Have you ever seen a Alien yourself, and i dont mean from a t.v. show or movie?

Also a NO!

I thank you for your questions! I'm always willing to accept peer review on my work. If anyone else wishes to ask me questions, please feel free to do so. I feel that to get the truth, we need to share the truth. Feel Free to give me feedback.

Tim