I found something on Element 115 at:
www.theodoregray.com...
Here are some facts on this strange element:

1. It's a gas at room temperatrue
2. There is no "Offical" difinitive proof of it's existance
3. "If" it real it is a totally synthetic element that would have to be made in a lab
4. Scientist Predict that it would have a half-life of only a few nano-seconds (1/1'000'000'000 of a second)

These facts make me question the utility of Elements 115. If it really has such a short half-life, how can anyone use it? You'd need several Billion tons of the stuff for your supply to last for a second under the most Ideal conditions. These Facts make me think this element would be more of a Lab curiosity then a fesibal fuel for any kind of aircraft. I beleve we should take the "Element 115 clames with a grain of salt.

Tim

Based on the last find, to me the Element 115 theory does not seem fesibal. I think we should try to pick up the electrogavitational theory as the focus of our efforts. I think our next central focus should be learning how they produse enough electrical power to run the system. Any Ideas?

Tim

This is more of a little known/discussed fact than a reveloutionary find. The B-2 was the first aircraft to use sensor fusion technology (now a hyped feature on the F-22). Sensor Fusion is the ability to take information from several sensors and combine the data on one screen. It was the extensive use of sensor fusion on the B-2 that allowed a two man crew to operate the complex systems of the plane. As I've said, it's not a reveloutionary find, but it does give us a window on the technology of the B-2.

Tim

If you look at the B-2 Spirit, its color seems to vary from a light grey-blue to a flat black. But acording to the Airforce the B-2's all use the same paint scheme. This suggests that the B-2 May use a color changing paint or even a color changing skin. I don't know, but I would think that this technology may work on a princple simular to how the color changing fiber optics decorations work. When you think about it the technology may have evolved from Project Yahodi in world war 2. As our historians should know, Project Yahodi was the effort to hide torpedo bombers from the lookouts on German U-boats by putting light on the outside of the plane and adjusting their brightness to match the background. Project Yahodi was terminated because RADAR had made it obsolete. Years later the development of stealth technoloy has made it possible to hide a plane from radar detection. With the radar theat countered by modern stealth technology, Is it not possibal that they brought back the Yahodi concept in a modernized form useing color change fiber-optics technology?

LOOK AT THIS!
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Optical Stealth may be even more realistic then we thought. Check out Project Rainbow A.K.A the Philadelphia Project. In July 1943 the US Navy made the U.S.S. Eldridge disappear from Delaware Bay. the report states:

" Some scientists have developed the theory that the Navy was working on a way to make the ship invisible to vision. However, it didn't involve warping space time or any complex task of a similar nature. This theory suggests that the Eldridge was equipped with high frequency generators that would heat up the surrounding air to cause a mirage, making the vessel invisible.

This phenomenon is naturally occurring, and there have been cases where entire islands have disappeared from view in the right weather conditions. The high frequency generator would heat up the surrounding air and the water (creating a green-colored fog that was said to have engulfed the ship), causing a mirage to form, concealing the ship from view. "

I recommend that any scholar with a ligitiment intrest in the truth take a serious look at this ATS report. Fellow Scholar Tassadar pointed this report out to me in a discussion on the Aircraft Projects fourm. While it not proof, it is a reasonable theory worth looking into.

[Edited on 19-11-2003 by ghost]

Just so that I can organize my thoughts, here’s a summary of this research in order thus far:

* Aviation Week, March 1992 – Black world engineers….
* Air International, Jan 2000 – Bill Gunston’s article… one of the best in my opinion.
* LaViolette’s theory with illustrations
*Short statements on the classified stall speed
*Mentions the electrocution fatalities of ground crew
*The fact that Admiral Inman’s (who’s retiring by the way) Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) is “working” on anti-gravity propulsion.
*Townsend Brown’s electrokenetic diagrams and explanations
*Element 115 – Bob Lazar’s UFO reverse engineering story
*Nuclear Gravitation Field Theory – Links…
*Retired USAF Colonel Donald Ware’s claim about the B-2 untilizing electro-gravitic propulsion.
*Boeing’s involvement with Podkletnov’s work
*Statement that B-2 can’t fly in the rain
*Statement on Element 115 – problems with it’s existence
*B-2’s sensor fusion revelation
*B-2 optical or visual stealth suggestion



*Regarding Aviation Week article referring to ”Black World Engineers”
The black project engineers referred to in the Aviation Week article actually “blew the whistle” to the author of the article, Bill Scott. They told him of amazing technologies supposedly being developed in the deep black environment – One of these related to “electrostatic field generating techniques” in the B-2.

Dr. Paul LaViolette & Electrogravitics
Electrogravitics researcher Dr. Paul LaViolette took this Aviation Week article and coupled it to his own knowledge of TT Brown’s patents and projects and drew the conclusion that the B-2 was the embodiment of Project Winterhaven… TT Brown’s 1952 proposal for mach 3 saucer shaped interceptors utilizing electrogravitics…. Also known as Anti-gravity.

*Regarding B-2 Ground Crew Fatalities, Etc.
I have been around B-2 crewmen and ground crew – I have spoken to them. These are regular USAF guys, not spooks, CIA, NSA or NRO. If there were any “anti-gravity” switches on the B-2, someone would have leaked it over the last 13 years these planes have been around.
This points to Nick Cook’s (Jane’s Defense Weekly) assertion that the electrogravitics involved are built-in. Are you familiar with the Bumble Bee?
Sure you are, bumblebee’s are big insects that physicists say should not be able to fly and yet somehow it does anyway. This description parallels the B-2. It is grossly underpowered – ask any aeronautics engineer, the B-2 which weighs-in at between 330-375,000 lbs should not be able to even take-off with only 4 General Electric F-118 GE 100 turbofans, each with an output of 17,300 lbs thrust… that’s 69,200 lbs of thrust to launch a 350,000+ lb aircraft and carry it to 400 knots+. What’s wrong with this picture? Yes, even when you consider the large lifting section this is problematic.

Just to put this in perspective, here’s a quick review:
1) No anti-gravity switch according to crew –
2) Grossly underpowered –
Conclusion: This would point to a passive, "hybrid" anti-gravity method similar to the way in which electric/gasoline hybrid Honda and Toyota cars are designed & operated.
In other words, the anti-gravity lift that is generated is seamlessly built into the design and operation of the plane (piggybacked on the stealth technology) just as electric & gasoline motors are seamlessly built into the design & operation of the hybrid car, with no need for anyone to “flip a switch” because they are designed to work in tandem.
From a security point of view this would be very desirable; since it would enable ground crews to be able to do maintenance and repairs without ever having to work on an "anti-gravity drive", thus further reducing risk of the technology leaking out to the general public.

Misinformation from development engineer to Jane’s DW editor:
Nick Cook, aviation editor for Jane’s Defense Weekly caught a Northrop B-2 development engineer in a deception (lie) – the engineer apparently told Mr. Cook in an interview that the B-2 could not have electrostatically charged skin, because it would turn the airplane into a giant lightning conductor eluding that this would fry all the assets onboard. This was misinformation – as the Jane’s Defense Weekly aviation editor pointed out, the internals of the B-2 are actually housed in a “Faraday Cage”, in other words, it doesn’t matter how much electricity you pump across the skin, leading edges, etc, the inside of the plane remains insulated from the outside current.


Nick Cook, Jane's Defense Weekly

A little background on this electrostatic technology:
In 1968 Northrop submitted a paper called “Electroaerodynamics in Supersonic Flow” to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Although the paper is now missing from the AIAA’s archives, the paper pointed to electronic charges reducing drag on airliners, thus cutting heat friction as well as increasing fuel range. It was only when someone noted that a plasma shield around an airplane could reduce its radar signature that the military woke up to the idea.
The Jane’s editor also states that the B-2 clearly uses some kind of skin-charging mechanism to lower it’s radar (and quite possibly it’s heat) signature(s). But it is also clear from the nature of the 1968 Northrop paper, that the origins of this electric stealth effect were actually rooted in ‘drag reduction” and electrostatic lift.
Therefore one can conclude that;
1. There is an electrostatic charge on the 2 billion dollar per unit B-2’s, most likely in the manner of the LaViolette illustrations.
2. This electronic charge has a 2-fold effect, a) reduce radar signature and b) to generate electrogravitic lift.
3. That the effect is generated without any switch being flipped, it is built into the normal operation of the plane.

*Regarding the B-2's Classified Stall Speed:
The actual stall speed as is the top speed of the B-2 is indeed classified – However, there are factory specs on the B-2 stating that the minimum approach speed is 140 knots.

*Regarding Element 115 – the Bob Lazar Connection:
Element 115 apparently has nothing to do with the physics employed on the B-2. Ok, I admit it, I don’t believe Lazar – so my opinion is subjective but let's approach this from a logical as well as practicalpoint of view. Admittedly the B-2’s technology is definitely classified but to bring in something as exotic as alien elements, etc would be too great a security risk.


Bob Lazar - makes US military UFO
allegations - references to Element 115
comes from his assertions


In the last 2 decades we very rarely hear reports of “American black triangles” or other ufo’s over-flying war zones – and should these vehicles truly be in the US inventory then there is a very good reason for this, SECURITY RISK.
If such an exotic antigravity device fell into the hands of an enemy by the unlikely senario of a B-2 getting shot down, it would require the bombing of that enemy without mercy right into the stone age to keep them from acquiring the technology and and sharing debatably the US's deepest, darkest secrets with other enemy states.
Specifically, along this line of reasoning it would be too far outside security protocols to allow a bomber that goes over enemy territory to incorporate the deepest secrets of the US. It is for this reason I would have to exclude the possibility of exotic alien elements being utilized in the B-2’s technology.


Black Triangle sighted over Belgium

*Alternatives to the E-115 Theory
Rather than Element -115, the best possibility of "anti-gravity" technology being involved points to the charged air as described in the LaViolette section, (not meaning to be redundant), this charged air along the wing's leading edge as well as the charged exhaust would have a 2-fold purpose as discussed earlier.
a) it creates an artificial “lift” (electrogravitics)
b) it further helps in the stealthiness – (see articles on Russian “active” stealth utilizing plasma)
www.lns.cornell.edu...
www.aeronautics.ru...




Sources:
Aviation Week - March 1992
B-2 Crew interviews - anonymous crew members
B-2 Crew interviews - Nick Cook, Jane's Defense Weekly
The Hunt for Zero Point - Nick Cook
Jane's Defense Weekly
Northrop-Grumman
Common Sense and deductive logic - Intelgurl



[Edited on 19-11-2003 by intelgurl]

The government lied about where they tested the B-2 bomber. They clame it was tested at Edwards AFB. I have proof that the B-2 was tested out at Area 51 Groom Lake.Check this out:

www.geocities.com...

If the goverment lied about somethimg as simple as where they tested the plane, you have to ask yourself, Why?! what are they so desprate to hide!

As we know the Dreamland base out at Groom Lake is Reserved for the most sensitive and secret of America's black projects.

Tim

Check this out:
www.aeronautics.ru...

Accoring to this artical US made Radar Absorbsion Materials (RAM) work on the Plasma Principle. If this is the case then we've found theree new things: Russia isn't the only one with plasma Stealth,and second, so-called "passive" stealth may not be as Passive as we though. Third, since Plasma relies on electricity, you can turn it on and off at will.

Tim

This would be around about the time that they would not acknowledge that the base existed, therefore it would make sense to say it was tested elsewhere.

After reviewing the team's research on the Antigravity aspect of the project so far I've come up with a new theory: what if the Antigravity technology is built into the B-2's Radar Absorbing skin and not some special engin?

Tim

Electro-Aerodynamics - An Alternative to the Electrogravitics theory:
One thing that remains a constant as we have researched the B-2 and possible electrogravitics is that the leading edges and exhaust are apparently charged electrically.
That being the case I would like to offer up an alternative to the "anti-gravity" theory.

B-2, Electrostatically Charged:
Antigravity? Electrogravitics?
Maybe... Maybe not; but one thing that I do believe concerning the B-2 is that the leading edges are indeed charged with high voltage, and quite possibly the trailing edges or the exhaust as well. I've read it in authoritative aviation publications and I've spoken to B-2 grounds crew - and I believe it.

Sure, the military & defense industry provided the news media/general public with some information about the craft's outward design, and low radar and infrared profile, but there is much they continue to be silent about.

Some key secrets about the B-2 were leaked to the press in the March 9, 1992 "Aviation Week and Space Technology" magazine, in this issue it was reported that the B-2 electrostatically charges its exhaust stream and the leading edges of its wing-like body. Janes Defense Weekly and other reputable publications also picked up on this and many field related acamedicians, intrigued laymen, industry professionals and conspiracy theorists alike began to hypothesize why this was done.

A little history:
In 1968 Northrop submitted a paper to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics entitled "Electro-Aerodynamics in Supersonic Flow". The thrust (pun intended) of the paper had to do with drag reduction and cutting heat friction and fuel burn. It was also noted in this paper that plasma surrounding an aircraft actually reduces it's radar cross section.
This is a dual-purpose technology that Northrop, the designer and manufacturer of the B-2 has known of for well over a quarter of a century.
The Russians too caught onto this and now the internet is filled with web sites touting Russia's "Plasma Stealth Technology" as the latest and greatest thing... and yet it is technology that Northrop had back in 1968.

Moving forward in history we come to the time that the Advanced Technology Bomber (B-2) was being developed, with Northrop winning the contract over Lockheed's Skunkworks...That in itself is pretty amazing actually.
So perhaps, (and this is just as "perhaps"), Northrop won out over Lockheed based on their knowledge and continuing progress in electrically reduced radar cross section & electro-aerodynamics simultaneously.

A Few Considerations:
So, IF the various reports are indeed true about the B-2 charging it's leading edges, could it be that this grossly underpowered, 325-375,000 lb flying wing utilizes this charge for a duality of functions.

1. What is also clear by the nature and implications of Northrop's 1968 research paper, is that the electrostatic field could actually provide a significant parallel reduction in drag and a concomitant improvement in lift - even to a sub-sonic vehicle.

2. A benefit that piggybacks on the electroaerodynamics and yet is an integral part of the B-2 equation; a form of electrically charged stealth, whether it be Plasma or some alternative electrostatic form of reduction of radar cross-section.

Conclusion:
Electro-Aerodynamics instead of Electrogravitics, some form of Electro-static stealth perhaps plasma stealth... and it all stems from Northrop's research paper "Electro-Aerodynamics in Supersonic Flow" written back in 1968. The B-2, I believe, is the embodiment of that research.

I posted this information in another forum but thought it could be of benefit here.

Documents referenced :

AIAA 6th Aerospace Sciences Meeting "Electroaerodynamics in supersonic flow" by M.S.Cahn and G.M.Andrew from Northrop Coporation - N°68-24 January 22-24, 1968.

AIAA 3rd Fluid and Plasma Dynamics conference "Recent experiments in supersonic regime with electrostatic charges" by M.S.Cahn and G.M.Andrew from Northrop Coporation - N°70-759 June 29-July, 1970.

"Disruption Mitigation Using High-Pressure Noble Gas Injection on DIII-D" A study in Cold Plasma, CJ Lasnier, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA (US Dept of Energy, Grant #DE-FG103-95ER54294)

"Aviation Week and Space Technology" magazine, March 9, 1992

"Nick Cook, Aviation Editor for "Jane's Defense Weekly" - "The Hunt for Zero Point" July 2002

This isn't true research, I'm comparing two deffrent theories on the B-2 in order to give everyone a look at the merits of out two major avenews of study so everyone can compare them. Please note: I am including my oppinion of some of the data to give reader a perspective on issues being descussed !

1. The aircraft is electrically charged in flight. this supports either theory because both theories depend on electrically charging the aircraft

2. Dr. T.T. Brown demonstrated Electrokinetic levitation in a 1953 experiment. this supports the Anti-gravity theory.

3. GE (the maker of the B-2's engins) worked with SAIC on an inductive coupling system to couple electric and gravitational forces for the USAF's Philip's Lab. this supports the Anti Gravity theory

4. Element 115: Antigravity theory

So antigravity seems to be the main theory right now

Tim

< offtopic > Due to a lot of work at college and other factors I haven't been able to contibute to thid project as much as I'd like to.
Therefore I have made a deal with Intelgurl, she will take over the project from me, to try to work towards bringing this project to a conclusion.

I do appologize, but I simply do not have time for this project (anymore).

Good luck!

ZM

< / offtopic >

I don't know if it will pan out, but I found a post in the aircraft form from a member claiming that there is something strange about the B-2's engines and APU. I replied to his post to see if he may be able to link us to his source so we can chase the theory.

Tim

I haven't been around ATS for a few months. Could I have a link to this?

You would Still need something to provide the electrical charge to the skin.



The other argument that the engineer gave is also very badly flawed. He stated that all aircraft have small wire aerials on their wingtips to discharge the static electricity the build up as they move through the air (this much is true) and that adding to the static buildup with man-made charges would be very risky since there would not be a way to discharge it quckly enough. That would be correct if the B-2 was designed like most aircraft, but with it's sawtooth trailing edge it, in effect, has 7 wingtips from which to discharge the buildup. The B-2 can effectively discharge static buildup 3.5 times faster than a conventional aircraft.



I used to work at a Science Museum and one of our programs I did was on electricity, specifically static electricity. We used Van de Graff Generators (a.k.a. Electrostatic Generators) in our program. One of the things we would do as a demonstration was to put a stack of aluminum pie plates on the generator and turn it on. The pie plates would "take off", on their own, one at a time and "fly" a short distance (2-3 meters maybe more on a dry day). Worth looking into.

Also, I ran across a report for AF Wright Aeronautical Laboratories at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. It is called ELECTROGRAVITICS SYSTEMS: An examination of electrostatic motion, dynamic counterbary and barycentric control. And is an interesting development.


[edit on 3/15/2005 by SwitchbladeNGC]

Ok, first, I know that this (www.seaspower.com...) has been posted here before, but I'm looking at something diffrent than the rest of the people that looked at it. Just above the section on the B-2 is this:


Taking that information I decided that it might be easier to determine if those tests existed and what the results were that to determine if the B-2 was using the "electrogravitic drive". I found the following site www.setv.org... One thing they mention in that is:


That reminded me of a previous site that I encountered, www.globalsecurity.org... which talks about upgrades to the B-2, including the following:

This leeds to the thought that currently the B-2 does not satisfy this requirement. Why would it not? Unless it is surrounded in an electromagnetic bubble which would break up communications just as it would radar.

Another thing that interested me in my research is the engines that are supposedly used on the B-2. The engines used on the B-2 are supposedly GE-F118 turbofan engines, and according to GE's website on the engine, www.geae.com..., it is also used on the U-2. The fact that those two aircraft are the only ones to use thatt engine strikes me as odd. I don't find it odd that there are only two aircraft that use the engine, as there are some engines specifically designed for only one aircraft. What strikes me as odd is that, the two aircraft have entirely diffrent roles. If you look through the other engines you will see that, for the most part, the aircraft that use the same engines are very similar to each other. That isn't anything conclusive, but I did find it to be quite interesting.

Well I am proud to be added to the scholar team and proud to be working on the B2 Electrogravitic Technology project. Not only will I be talking about the B-2 Spirit, but I will also be discussing the S/R-71 Blackbird, trust me, history will help. I appreciate the oppurtunity to be the team leader of this project.


* Is Antigravity Technology being Employed in the B2 Bomber?

www.americanantigravity.com...

Stealth technology actually started out with the S/R-71. The Blackbird was a model way ahead of its time. The actual cause of the stealth ability of the blackbird was believe it or not, the vertical stabilizers. Facing inward, they actually evaded radar waves into a different direction, much like how the ECM works on the F/A-18 hornet, except with much more electronic technology. The blackbird was the first stepping stone to radar evasion technology.


My thoughts:

I think it is pretty interesing to come to a conclusoin that a 2.2 billion dollar aircraft, would not have to have anything impressive on it. There are many more secrets that this world has that is 50 years ahed of its time. I was watching a show yesterday about Bob Lazar. And they interviewed this guy about knowing somebody that works at area51. He said that he asked his friend at lockheed martin what kinds of Technology the U.S.A has. He said if you can think of anything from star trek, we alreay have it, plus more. I believe that the B-2 has alot of impressive technology, cloaking technology, and the ability, to have super Electronic Countermeasures. It gets the job done, The source was very valuable information. This concludes the B-2 Project for now. I am sure that more information is to arise here.

Regards,
brodband

Edited by myself, SimonGray, as the original author of the excerpted article has requested the article be removed.

[edit on 22-11-2005 by SimonGray]