 |
|
Topic started on 22-3-2006 @ 01:19 AM by NWguy83
|
I wonder if maybe the USN did this on purpose, because it was mad at the USAF for caneclling the J-UCAS program...
Janes
Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works is believed to be developing a high-altitude, stealthy unmanned aircraft system (UAS) for the US Air Force (USAF) under
a secret programme, funded with money taken from the terminated Joint Unmanned Combat Air System (J-UCAS) project.
The existence of a classified air force UAS project was disclosed in a navy Fiscal Year 2007 budget document, which stated that the Pentagon
"directed the J-UCAS programme to split into two separate programmes: one air force classified programme and a navy UCAV [unmanned combat aerial
vehicle] programme".
The new UAV, sometimes known as the Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHAE), is believed to be capable of operating at the 70,000-80,000 ft
altitudes used by the U-2.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
The new UAV is much larger than the small stealth UAV that has been evaluated operationally in Iraq.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
[edit on 22-3-2006 by NWguy83]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2006 @ 05:24 AM by st3ve_o
|
hey, when you say 'black' do you mean black as in the (f-117, b-2)?
because ive seen americans get excited by the prospect of another 'black' aircraft project and i think why?
its only paint really, i actaully think (in stealth) black is not the best option, you think about it - you look up in the sky and you see this black
aircraft flying (it will stand out a mile).
but if you have a 'shinyish' type of aircraft
www.theregister.co.uk...
it will reflect off the sun and be ^A LOT^ harder to visibly see,
but yeah black looks the part and is good for 'night time' strikes, but daylight its no good.
[edit on 22-3-2006 by st3ve_o]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2006 @ 06:51 AM by ghost
|
The source states that the US Navy revealed a secret US Air Force Black Project. Black Projects are special access and very tightly controlled. They
aren't shared between services unless it's a joint program. I didn't see any indication that this is a joint program. How did the Navy find out
about a Black Project that belongs to the Air Force?
I surprized that noone else picked up on that. The Fact that the Navy had access to a black project they weren't working on leads me to seriously
question the reliability of this Information and it's source!
People Need to watch for inconsistencies like this! That is how we spot Disinformation and Misinformation.
Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance
[edit on 22-3-2006 by ghost]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2006 @ 08:26 AM by intelgurl
|
Originally posted by ghost
The source states that the US Navy revealed a secret US Air Force Black Project. Black Projects are special access and very tightly controlled. They
aren't shared between services unless it's a joint program. I didn't see any indication that this is a joint program. How did the Navy find out
about a Black Project that belongs to the Air Force?
I surprized that noone else picked up on that. The Fact that the Navy had access to a black project they weren't working on leads me to seriously
question the reliability of this Information and it's source!
People Need to watch for inconsistencies like this! That is how we spot Disinformation and Misinformation.
Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance

Well, actually no where in the Janes article does it say that the USAF program was a "Black" or Special Access Program, and not all classified or
even secret programs are SAP's. Therefore it is quite concievable that Navy brass could have known about the USAF's PHAE program.
There are plenty of gray UAV programs (unacknowledged but not black) going on at Edwards and Indian Springs (Creech) - while I was at Indian Springs
for the past 18 months I saw many Navy brass observing programs that were primarily funded by the USAF. This is not an unusual occurence and I see no
reason to consider this misinformation.
[edit on 3-23-2006 by intelgurl]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2006 @ 09:01 AM by Jadette
|
Originally posted by st3ve_o
hey, when you say 'black' do you mean black as in the (f-117, b-2)?
because ive seen americans get excited by the prospect of another 'black' aircraft project and i think why?

It's not the color. Black in this context means top-secret.
From:
en.wikipedia.org...
 In the United States a black project is a top-secret military/defense project, unacknowledged by the government, military personnel, and defense
contractors. Familiar examples of U.S. military aircraft developed as black projects are the F-117 stealth fighter and B-2 stealth bomber, which were
highly classified and denied to exist until ready to be announced to the public.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2006 @ 11:33 AM by NWguy83
|
It said secret program, so I assumed it was a 'black' project.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2006 @ 12:54 PM by Jadette
|
NWguy83:
I was replying to st3ve_o, if you check his quote in my previous reply, he wondered why anyone would get excited by a black aircraft, saying that it
would be easy to see in the sky as opposed to a silvery one. he seemed confused about the meaning of 'Black' taking it to mean painted black.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 03:41 AM by NWguy83
|
Originally posted by Jadette
NWguy83:
I was replying to st3ve_o, if you check his quote in my previous reply, he wondered why anyone would get excited by a black aircraft, saying that it
would be easy to see in the sky as opposed to a silvery one. he seemed confused about the meaning of 'Black' taking it to mean painted black.

Jadette:
I was replying to Intelgurl.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 06:38 AM by ghost
|
Originally posted by intelgurl
Well, actually no where in the Janes article does it say that the USAF program was a "Black" or Special Access Program, and not all classified or
even secret programs are SAP's. 
Good point! I think I confused the thread title with the actual article. My mistake, sorry!
Tim
PS: For all posters, Please note that the term "Black" referrs strictly to Unaknowlaged Special Access Programs. Please double check your
infomation before saying something is black in order to avoid confusing others.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 09:46 AM by Jadette
|
Originally posted by NWguy83
Jadette:
I was replying to Intelgurl. 
Ah, my apologies.
I guess I got a little confused since we're all talking about 'black'.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 03:58 PM by Pyros
|
All Special Access Programs are coordinated at directed by the Special Access Programs Operations Committee (SAPOC) which is a joint organization
under one of the varous USD's. SAPOC is comprised of representative from all service branches, as well as DoD civilians. There are no SAP's that
one service "hides" from another service.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 04:30 PM by planeman
|
This aircraft is officially White! Do not adjust your sets....
external image
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 06:50 PM by ShatteredSkies
|
When we say "black" We are not referring to the color of the aircraft. We are refering to the Access status of the aircraft. Black are Classified
Special Access Programs, but not all Special Access Programs are black.
Black aircraft normally pertain to the recon area, classified combat aircraft are normally SA Projects. Although there are Black combat aircraft, most
black aircraft are cloaked in secrecy as recon. Our spy planes are what need to be shielded, not our combat aircraft.
And when flying at night(which most black planes do), black is your best friend.
Shattered OUT...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 06:58 PM by planeman
|
So this aircraft isn't red, it's really black????
external image
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 06:58 PM by Enkidu
|
Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
And when flying at night(which most black planes do), black is your best friend.

Not necessarily black, but certainly "non-reflective." The point is to blend in with whatever you're around -- black sky, blue sky, gray sky --
and the best way to do that is not to show any kind of reflection that might produce a noticable contrast. Black works well, but that kind of
"furry" dull gray that the SR-71 uses is probably best.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-3-2006 @ 10:33 PM by ZPE StarPilot
|
Actually, the dark grey does work best. Even flat black will be noticable at night. This doesn't stop air forces around the world from continuing to
use good old black paint. Must have bought a lot of it, and need to use it up.
Actually, current paint systems are something else entirely, and not subject to much discussion. (That means it's secret.) It's very detailed, and
there is lots of variations. It's also expensive, so the realy techie stuff isn't used everywhere.
What is noticable, is that if you're at an air show and take a picture of something with a modern camouflage paint job, it probably won't show up in
your picture very well. It will look all dark and a bit fuzzy. No details will be visible. Absorption and scatter of normal light wave lengths seems
to work very well, regardless of the color of the paint.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 25-7-2006 @ 03:40 PM by ConservativeMan
|
Looks like this report turned out to be at least partially true.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
[edit on 7/25/2006 by ConservativeMan]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |