It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

JANET in the UK!!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Boscome is very south of me - but we did have some heavy stuff out recently - we have HS-125s and Gulf Vs out recently - 146s are normal - but we did have a VERY big bird go off in the last week - so im giving this a plausible I watched the bird lift off and that is eye witness.




posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 07:26 PM
link   
What kind of bird was it though? A Janet 737 is hardly big.



posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 09:50 PM
link   
kinglizard, Zaphod58,

I am not saying that in-flight refueling is the way it is. I'm not even saying it is likely. I've not even implied it's ever been done. I am, however, stating it is highly possible for the military ......... the military known for its, and its goverments, secrets ........ to take an aircraft bound to the continental US, and make it inter-continental aircraft without anyone ever seeing the difference. It's the military, much of the game is subversiveness. It's the military, anything can be done if they wish. It's the military of the secret sort we speak of, which makes money no object. There is no "can't be done".

You are saying it is not possible to do so. The motto of this site is what?

NN



posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   
I'm saying that in 25 years of working on a USAF flightline, I NEVER saw a plane with IFR capability that didn't have obvious markings and doors for the receptacle. You HAVE to have the markings or the boomer doesn't have a frame of reference. Just because it's the military doesn't AUTOMATICALLY mean they're trying to be subversive or that they can do something. NONE of the smaller planes they fly have IFR capability, because it would be too expensive/difficult to modify them. Even most of the 707 sized planes are NOT IFR capable.

How is it denying ignorance to talk to people that have experience with this sort of thing and saying "It's the military, they have a reputation for being secretive and they can do something without making it obvious for anyone to know."?



posted on Jul, 3 2006 @ 11:39 PM
link   
I flew US-Europe for 25 years, DC-8, B-707, L-1011. Loaded up with px or cargo, all were short legged. Preferred fuel stop Gander and Shannon. Gander has excellent approaches, runways and service. Crews meal are good too and a well stocked duty free. Same for Shannon. I imagine the Janet flights used Gander and Shannon just like the rest of us.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 03:57 AM
link   
RAF Boscombe Down

Link to the airbase above. Its used for aircraft experiments so the fact that a JANET 737 may have been seen there is a bit suspicious. This base is also in the same county as the MOD base where the 'golden chair' i have made a thread about is. (i think it was in salisbury, wilts.)

Golden Chair



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by evo1981
I believe that they had an accident with a US black Project being tested there sometime in the 90's. Back then there were reports of Janets, and other US craft flying in & out

www.dreamlandresort.com... link is form dreamland resort.com



Good read, interesting aswell.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Ok these “ JANET “ flights are supposed to be passenger transports for secure facilities in and around NEVADA , USA . Has one EVER been photographed outside its “ accepted “ area of operations ?

Without further evidence , above and beyond the word of the OP


Extra ordinary claims require at least some evidence

To address a few of the points raised I this thread , in no particular order of relevance :

In flight Refueling :

Why would the JANET 737 be fitted for IFR – in its NORMAL operations it would NEVER require it , and The various arms of the us military and government have thousands of planes , of various capabilities

If JANET personnel needed to range further afield – they would co opt a plane from the USAF


ferry tanks and extended tankage

Yes you can Strip out the internals , install ferry tanks and such , but again WHY ? When a existing A/C with the capability to make a nonstop flight Could be requisitioned with a single order ?

Flying by legs

Yes it is technically possible to fly by legs – refueling at airbases along the route , But again , why would you ?? when you have access to squadrons of planes capable of making the trip in one stage .

The obvious point is That you expose the flight to plane spotters , watchers and ground crew at every layover point

And NO ONE has seen fit to comment on , and or photograph an unusual aircraft turning up out of the blue

plane spotting

Airliners.net , returns a number of images for “ janet “ and none of the relevant ones has been photographed outside of the NEVADA area by a contributor to that site

airliners.net_JANET _search results

Same for BOSCOMBE DOWN there is page after page , and no sign that a JANET 737 has ever visited while spotters with cameras were in attendance

Though they did manage to snap thousands of other planes – isn’t that strange


airliners.net_boscombe_serarch results

redeeming points

The only rational reason for a JANET to be in the UK , is The argument that 737 # N5177C has some unique fixtures and fittings that cannot be transferred , replicated etc on any other aircraft

This begs the question – what , and then why is it needed in the UK ??

CUE FURTHER BASELESS SPECULATION


Of course this is quite incompatible with the notion of stripping the internals to reduce weight and make room for internal fuel ferry tankage etc etc

The “ advertised “ function of the JANET planes is passenger ferries for workers and VIP guests at various levels of comfort .

They , at least to me do not seem to have any great cargo or materials handling capacity – certainly they don’t have any sort of extra / modified / enlarged cargo hatches

Are there other cargo carriers that do dedicated service to A51 and other restricted bases ??

I could go on , but Alas , The entire OPs post smells of trollism .

The plane , if he is to be believed , has left the Nevada area un noticed – and with out any signs of its transit , It has “ magically “ re appeared @ Boscombe down .

Without been spotted en transit , and with no obvious credible explanation how or why it would or could make the journey .

And only he noticed this ,

A snide question – is the OP related to “ madgreebo “ – I thought we had seen the last of him



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Well, I know as much about Janet airlines as the next person, which is to say, nothing significant. What I can do is just throw out some random thoughts based on whatever background I have and you can do what you will (grains of salt at next window, please).

Some of you know that I had a chance to go to Yeovil and Boscombe Down (and Westland-Super-Mare) back in the mid-nineties when Westland was building our AH-64D under license. I don't know if any of you have been to Hollie s in Yeovil, but it is known here in Mesa, Arizona as "the Pub that Boeing built". The entire Salisbury Plain ("Sarum") is a beautiful place indeed, even though your beer is a bit warm for an old desert rat like me.

Janets are pretty doggy airplanes (I know it's heresy for me to say that about one of the greatest aircraft ever built, but...). they have the old engines, no winglets and seem to match their use just fine -- cheap commuter buses for various contractor worker bees involved in classified projects.

And, since the workload at Groom probably ebbs and flows just like it does at any military/aerospace/defense facility, there are going to be time when one of the aircraft will not be needed -- either for a six month period, or maybe never.

So you could well have an old B737-200 sent to another base which might need it more. And getting one there certainly wouldn't be a major problem. An Apache helicopter can fly from Mesa to Boscombe down (with ten or twelve refueling stops between here and Gander, then pop on the four aux tanks in place of the HELLFIRES and 2.75s, then Gander to Shannon and so to the UK); a B737-200 could self-deploy, too.

I doubt the Janet airplanes have anything special about them except for maybe a COMSEC suite. why should they? Admittedly, their probably use os to carry guys with special access clearances to and from classified sites, but these special access dudes probably have the same butt size as any other worker, ao a seat on and airplane is just that -- a seat on an airplane.

My guess is that if they were transferring any special equipment (like death rays or Little Purple Spaceship Guys) they'd get a newer and more reliable plane because those kind of things are much more valuable than a bunch of sorry-@$$ engineers and technicians -- even those with special access clearances!

[edit on 4-7-2006 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Janet Aircraft are just like you say, buses, nothing fancy. I have taken many military filights overseas, the stops described are fact. I do not believe a Janet aircraft is in England. No reason. The techs who work these jobs are well taken care of. They would not be made to suffer a Janet flight of this distance.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
A couple of things,
1. 'Janet Airlines' or EG&G also have Beechcraft 1900C and B200C and C-12s.
2. Both a Boeing 737 (aka T-43) and a C-12 were seen over a period following an 'incident' at Boscombe Down in September 1994.

So if it is not exactly easy to get a 737 from Nevada to the UK, surely it is harder to get a twinprop across the pond??



Also visible, apparently, was an unmarked Boeing B707.
On the same night as the C-12 and B707 were seen, another unmarked aircraft appeared at 'the Down' - this time even more significant!
It was a Boeing 737 of US Government property, commonly known as a T-43.
What is striking, is that these T-43's had the famous EG&G markings and are used as "Janet" flights - to ferry workers to and from Area 51, Tonopah and Palmdale / Edwards. So, what was this aircraft here for? Was it really here? According to Witnesses it was. Don't forget, the MoD and DoD deny anything happened at this RAF Base, yet what's all this US Activity doing here?


See www.dreamlandresort.com... for the full witness reports.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   
A friend of mine (we flew in Laos together for CASI) was chief pilot for EG&G Special Projects for 20 years. He is retired and lives in Oregon. I know a little about Janet but not much more than you. My opinion is that if someone saw a Janet flight in England then it was indeed there. They go a lot more places than you think.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hyacinth
A couple of things,
1. 'Janet Airlines' or EG&G also have Beechcraft 1900C and B200C and C-12s.
2. Both a Boeing 737 (aka T-43) and a C-12 were seen over a period following an 'incident' at Boscombe Down in September 1994.

So if it is not exactly easy to get a 737 from Nevada to the UK, surely it is harder to get a twinprop across the pond??



Also visible, apparently, was an unmarked Boeing B707.
On the same night as the C-12 and B707 were seen, another unmarked aircraft appeared at 'the Down' - this time even more significant!
It was a Boeing 737 of US Government property, commonly known as a T-43.
What is striking, is that these T-43's had the famous EG&G markings and are used as "Janet" flights - to ferry workers to and from Area 51, Tonopah and Palmdale / Edwards. So, what was this aircraft here for? Was it really here? According to Witnesses it was. Don't forget, the MoD and DoD deny anything happened at this RAF Base, yet what's all this US Activity doing here?


See www.dreamlandresort.com... for the full witness reports.


My only issue with these witness reports are that Janet planes DON'T have EG&G markings on them. The only markings are a red stripe on a white fueselage, and the registration number.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Thanks John - I couldnt confirm my sighting - but i do know that at the airfield that I am pretty damn near (erm I have to stop on the road when planes are coming in) We dont ofton get much big stuff in and out - as i stated. But this was definatly a big jet - and was passenger liner size - these are normally routed through Brize Norton - so its significant enough for me to chime in here. Sorry IA i see no troll - just a question - and having seen a bird that fits the description I offered my opinion - as you are welcome to yours.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
A friend of mine (we flew in Laos together for CASI) was chief pilot for EG&G Special Projects for 20 years. He is retired and lives in Oregon. I know a little about Janet but not much more than you. My opinion is that if someone saw a Janet flight in England then it was indeed there. They go a lot more places than you think.

Agreed on the Janets. They have other areas of service and easily can hop from one place to another if their tasked to do so.IMO. Not much is known of them. Maybe they have equipment fits of some type to require their use. They look suspiciously plain on the exterior also IMO.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I find it interesting that the whole "JANET" nomenclature, which was originally derived from intercepted radio communications, is actually incorrect.

The people who for many years crawled around in the desert with scanners, listening to gov't aircraft comms, were the ones who overheard references to "JANET" aircraft, when in actuality what they were hearing (and misidentifying) was the term "JANAP".

These aircraft are not JANET aircraft, they are aircraft with JANAP callsigns. The gov't is quite happy to let everyone believe that they are called JANET, so when asked they can safely reply "we don't operate any aircraft designated as JANET".......



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Sorry about my lack of knowlegde about the Janet. But one question.

Whats so special about this old plane? Because the JANET is originally based on Area51 (Dreamlandresort) ? Or because nobody knows, if JANET needs kerosene to fly?

I just read this thread without any background information, you know.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Its obviously true that the aircraft could concievably have been there but the more pertinent question is why? There is absolutely no reason as far as I can see for a JANET plane to be in the UK.



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
Conventional or not there is no port for re-fueling and the jet can't jump the pond. End of story.....

Sure you can dream up all sorts of scenarios...they disassembled the aircraft and lifted it over, they landed on an aircraft carrier and sailed to the UK but that's far from a reasonable conclusion.

The fact remains...the 737-200 is incapable of making that flight...period.


Maybe there are U.S military bases on Greenland to refuel, and then pop over and land in that base...

edit.

this plane might have taken off from a different airport then its las vegas one.

imo.

[edit on 7-7-2006 by puhatek]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dacruz
Sorry about my lack of knowlegde about the Janet. But one question.

Whats so special about this old plane? Because the JANET is originally based on Area51 (Dreamlandresort) ? Or because nobody knows, if JANET needs kerosene to fly?

I just read this thread without any background information, you know.


Janet flights are a group of 737s operated by the EG&G corporation (who seem to have their fingers everywhere), that fly from Las Vegas to Area 51, Tonopah Test Range, and Edwards AFB. Those are the planes that the workers get on and take to work.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join