Confirmation of Existence of Aurora?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 05:45 PM
link   
My uncle was a U2 mechanic, he couldn't be specific, but he told me about "stuff out of STAR WARS" 20 years ago.




posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Its already in service, in a fleet up to 5, i think. I saw a squadron of 5 triangles, maybe aurora.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   
the aurora is like the sr-71 it flies solo not in a sqaudron.

About 7 were made and they are almost all based on RAF bases and in US bases in Japan. Thats all.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   
That Star Wars reference reminds me of what the former head of Skunk Works said to a reporter before he died a couple of years ago. The report said that he told him "we have stuff out there in the desert 50 years ahead of what anyone can imagine, its right out of Star Wars". Now why would a man like that who was in that position lie?



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Yes, the IFF is Identify Friend or Foe. All allied military aircraft, and even some things like tanks, have IFF transponders on them. The system identifies aircraft. IFF will give you an altitude, flight reference number, etc. The civillian version is used on airliners so they don't get shot down by accident. The military version includes a lot more data so you can identify the exact aircraft that is sqawking the IFF. IFF would withou a doubt be used on a spyplane so US radar operators wouldn't attempt to fire at it when it was RTB.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:57 AM
link   
My Dad may have seen it. Back in the 80's my father worked on an island were other classified millitary things happen (mostly back in the SDI years). He was a contractor. He described almost exactly an Aurora size small, Shape was trangular yet aerodynamic of course. It caused massive vibration and had a pulse soundwith a flashing glow while it was running up on the runway. It had to land at this island due to problems. A C-5 landed withen 12 hours and took it away.

He can't confirm if it had a human pilot as it was to far, and the area was quickly secured by personel aboard a Navy sub that just poped up at the port at this island. This island served as a refuel point for subs/ships in the Pacific so not far fetched that subs would be near. Island personel also monitored "missles tests" during SDI research testing.

Basically the air field was taken over by Navy personel for 24 hours while this aircraft was there.

I am absolutely sure this craft exists and has since at least the 80's. In fact my fathers stories are what caused my interest in ATS type stuff that lives on withen me today.

Kwajalein Atol.. just do search I imagine there is enough net info to back up parts of this story heh.

This is a true story.

X

Found this Island

[edit on 24-4-2005 by Xeven]



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Kwajalein Atol

The Navy does testing there. I know someone who recently went there to assist a test firing of the Navy's TBMD system. The Navy wouldn't have anything to do with Aurora since they don't use spy planes. He may have seen a UAV, the Navy launches those.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Aurora does not fly. Why? Because the congress discussed the old Blackbirds to be used again after the 2001. They would not try to use the old plane if Aurora was not available.
I think that Aurora maybe was tested during early nineties but a/ failed b/was cancelled. The reasoning like "SR-71 are being retired and something must take their place" is nonsense. Remeber that after Cold War many systems/project which were thought not to be needed were cancelled (new long range misilles, Comanche, reduced B2, Crusader).
And besides I think there is no need for such recon plane, not only becaue of cost, bu also because Global Hawks are good enough for 3rd world countries and other countries would be able to track (if not with radar than with IR)shoot down Aurora type planes. Also for thoso who say the satelite use is limited - the Blackbird/Aurora use is limited too (for example it cannot loiter over area long enough).



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   
My personal feeling is that Aurora was cancelled. It probably flew, based on all the sightings, and may have even been operational at one point. But I think if it was in existance during the Clinton era he would have cut the funding for it. He seriously cut all intel spending and cut most projects in development.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Xeven what your dad saw was probably the X-47 Pegasus a Navy UAV, maybe they were testing it back in the 80’s.
And the X-47 Pegasus is probably too small to be the Aurora.

X-47 Pegasus






posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 06:37 AM
link   
In this whole thread, I've seen one post that wasn't pure speculation! Let me point out some things:

1. The term "Aroura" first appeard in an unclassified budget request. This means it is/was a code name for something.

2. Code Names have nothing to do with the name of the aircraft, they refer to the program. (EX: Aquatone= U-2 Spy Plane, Oxcart= A-12 Blackbird, Senior Ice= B-2 Spirit (Stealth Bomber), Senior Sky=F-22 Raptor)

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Why don't people use the search button?

I swear more and more with the new people on the board, they take little time to figure all optional uses of operations.

I believe you can find the Aurora Research project at www.abovetopsecret.com...

Apparently it has been reopened, but I'm not aware, as I seem to not be classed as any form to be notified of updates with ATS or even my own research projects.


Additionally you can find a spotting timeline at the link below:
forums.aagu.net...

Hope these help some.

[Edited to Add hyperlink]

[edit on 4-26-2005 by Shugo]



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Intelgurl that last picture is pretty close to what "aurora" really looks like, except no scram jets on the top, the bottom is totally smooth and there are large strake like intakes on the top side similar in style to the F-117, the rear vert. stabs are a little different, but overall the look is about 80% of "aurora".

It does have PDE as powerplant and speed in excess of Mach 5

But your right about the design time frame.



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghost
In this whole thread, I've seen one post that wasn't pure speculation! Let me point out some things:

1. The term "Aroura" first appeard in an unclassified budget request. This means it is/was a code name for something.

2. Code Names have nothing to do with the name of the aircraft, they refer to the program. (EX: Aquatone= U-2 Spy Plane, Oxcart= A-12 Blackbird, Senior Ice= B-2 Spirit (Stealth Bomber), Senior Sky=F-22 Raptor)

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance

Senior citizen= aurora so i think it does have to do with the name



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Lets not go into the name game issue again, we know that there were a lot of codenames for it, and a lot of planes that were supposed to have cover for it. B-2 being one of them.



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
Lets not go into the name game issue again, we know that there were a lot of codenames for it, and a lot of planes that were supposed to have cover for it. B-2 being one of them.

How did the B-2 cover for it? Its based in Japan and UK thats the only thing i can assure anyone



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 08:20 PM
link   
The B-2A Stealth Bomber?! You need to recheck your sources I think phantom.

Aurora was said by the government to be the B-2A's codename.



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
The B-2A Stealth Bomber?! You need to recheck your sources I think phantom.

Aurora was said by the government to be the B-2A's codename.


oh yea, your right Ben rich said it but its a load of baloney.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by phantompatriot
About 7 were made and they are almost all based on RAF bases and in US bases in Japan. Thats all.


That makes absolutely no sense. Why would we keep an aircraft that can be anywhere in the world in 2 or 3 hours in Japan and the UK? I mean, the whole point of hypersonic flight is that you DON'T need to base the aircraft outside your homeland.

My guess, there are 8-12 'Auroras' (they aren't called Auroras in the military obviously), it isa Mach 7-10 aircraft, has a higher level of radar stealth then the F-117, and is based out of somewhere in the US.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 02:17 AM
link   
I assumed it was operational a long time ago. At least at the time of the SR71 retirement.

Iv'e seen one of many pictures reported to be the TR3-B that was taken with a camera through a telescope. The guy said it was completely noticed by accident while he was focusing the scope toward the looner surface at dusk. It really is an original shot in my opinion. Typical Triangle shape with a wide edge cruising high in the atmosphere.

Dallas





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join