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.

 

Invisible Aircraft ?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:
GSA

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   
www.unexplained-mysteries.com...

have a look at this web page image from 2004. Its extremely similar to apes piccie, even down to the missing aircraft / invisible aircraft.

On the same page is a image taken of what looks like a B-52 trailing contrails, and the difference is startling.

Maybe its been around for a while and the chemtrails theory does have some thing in it after all?




posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   
That main image is clearly a flight of 4 smaller jets, because of the staggered contrails, and if you'll look carefully at the shot of the B-52 and the other photo of contrails with no plane, you will notice that the B-52 has been photoshopped out of the 2nd one (just compare the contrails close up). The guy didn't even do a good job.


GSA

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Fair enough. Then Apes could also be four smaller jets - Is there any way of finding out though (Not some thing I know alot about) ?? But here is an image that seems to show what apes picture does but at very high magnification, darker inner contrail flaire back a bit, but with visible aircraft.

www.kolumbus.fi...

Oh and heres an image of a contrail from a two engined craft that has some real almost surreal properties!
my.opera.com...
and one that I would love to see other angled photos of!! Insane contrail!
www.brianwhittaker.com...

Oh and as there are alot of good aviation people here, could i post a link that shows some kind of nozzle on the back of a USAF plane? It actually looks like a shower head coming off the fixed refueling boom! (don't worry if its some thing you'd rather not look at i'll post a new thread so not to change topics)



[edit on 16/7/06 by GSA]

[edit on 16/7/06 by GSA]

[edit on 16/7/06 by GSA]


jra

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks
And as far as I see, all commercial aircraft also have dead-stright contrails.


Hmm not really...

www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...

Sorry for the excessive amount of examples, just wanted to show it's not that rare either. I think what's happening in IA's pics is just the effect of the atmospheric perspective. The haze is obscurring the aircraft due to its distance. Only the trails show up due to there size and the amount of light they reflect.


GSA

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 06:35 PM
link   
www.brianwhittaker.com...

sorry for the double post but to the above poster, have a look at this totaly awe inspiring but totaly insane contrail! oh and the first link in my above post is a very high mag piccie thats almost identical to apes in its formation.



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by GSA
www.unexplained-mysteries.com...

have a look at this web page image from 2004. Its extremely similar to apes piccie, even down to the missing aircraft / invisible aircraft.

On the same page is a image taken of what looks like a B-52 trailing contrails, and the difference is startling.

Maybe its been around for a while and the chemtrails theory does have some thing in it after all?



The exhaust trails of aircraft are believed by some have suspicious purposes. Conspiracy theorists have claimed that these 'chemtrails' are actually something being applied to fields and even human populations.


"That can't be good!!


GSA

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I have found images on the web (Close and very good detail) of USAF aircraft (tankers) with what appear to be shower heads on the end of the rigid tanker booms! No one can give me a good reason why these should be on there, but hey not to worry, im going to start having a look at these chemtrails and the issues behind them.

Ill start a thread with a link to the images.



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 09:30 PM
link   
I've been strolling this board for sometime and decided that it's time to contribute my first post.

In response to GSA's comment on the USAF tankers having a "shower head" attached to the end of the boom, there is a simple explanation. The USAF's tankers, typically a KC-135, or the fairly new KC-10, refuel primarily for USAF planes that are equiped with a receptacle that the end of the "boom" attaches to during refueling operations. However, sometimes there are operations that take place were the tankers refuel the Navy. The Navy planes aren't equiped with the normal receptacle found in the USAF, however, they have what looks to be like a metal rod that extends from the plane. In order for the tanker to refuel the Navy planes, they have to attach what is called a Drogue...which does infact look like a shower head. The Drogue is actually a basket that is attached to the end of the boom where the Navy's probe or medal rod type of thing slides into the basket for a positive connection in order to refueling. I use to be a boom operator in the USAF, and the probe and drogue was never fun...most difficult to connect.

This explanation is of course without your photo, but I assume this is what you are talking about.

try this link for more info...


en.wikipedia.org...


GSA

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Hi solotech,
sorry about the lack of image, for some reason i had a blank and didnt post the blooming link! really sorry about that, but here is a piccie of the 'shower head' as i call it. Please look and tell me what you think of it, because its really some thing I have never seen before.

Image link:

img144.imageshack.us...

blooming wierd or what?

here is a side view and aircraft markings that carries this equipment.

img115.imageshack.us...

[edit on 16/7/06 by GSA]



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 10:50 PM
link   
They use it to test icing conditions on planes. They shoot water out of it at altitude, which hits the plane flying behind them, and causes icing. Then they can see how the plane will react to icing, and if the deicing will affect it.

That's how they confirmed that the ATR-42(IIRC) from American Eagle that crashed due to icing was affected by Clear Ice on the wings.

It's an NKC-135E btw.

[edit on 7/16/2006 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Regarding the First post by ignorant_ape:

In the first 2 pictures where the aircraft is supposedly invisible there is a much higher amount of haze between the observer and the aircraft than in the last picture linked to that shows a clear image of an aircraft.

I really do not think this is an example of active camoflage, but rather a higher level of humidity in the air.

That said I do believe there are a couple of projects ongoing involving visual stealth on aircraft - but a large 4 engine passenger airliner or cargo plane is probably not the ideal test bed for such. Think FB-22, X-47 and GH block 20.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 03:12 AM
link   
These are definitely four jets flying at high altitude. The reason the plumes curve like that is because the four jets are flying independently of eachother and their movements as well as their jetstream are making it bend. The jets are invisible because they are actually WITHIN the the smoke as they barrel through the sound barrier together.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:52 AM
link   

. . . because the four jets are flying independently of each other and their movements as well as their jetstream are making it bend.


I find this hard to believe because in both of the photos the outer contrails are curving away from the centre two. I could understand one if the outer jets were making adjustments (at the same time), but two separate photos? And even if they were doing it in the first one, then the second should have the outer contrails farther away from the inner two. Not so. The contrails even form up into two lines at the same distance. There should at least be some variation.

IA, how far apart did you take these shots? 2 seconds? 1 minute?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Theres a possibility that no ones put forward, and that is of a VC-10 with attendant fighters about to tank off it.

VC-10's use drouges, not the extending boom like a KC-135, so it can tank two at a time.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Nope. Once again, the distances between the contrails does not match up:

VC-10 Giving Fuel



As you can see, the VC-10's 4 engines are relatively close together compared to the distances of the fighters' engines, while in IAs pic the outer two contrails originate comparitavely close together.

Also (once again!) the outer two contrails are angling to the sides. Aircraft would fly in the exact same direction as the tanker, or otherwise risk a collision or damage to equipment. Even if two were pulling away at the exact same time, which I think is agaisnt regs, the chances of this happening as each pic was taken are very slim. Very very.


GSA

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   
If you look at many of the pictures above watch the rocks you will see that in them alot of the contrails angle off to the sides / spin /make unusual shapes.

I found a great site that details why this happens, but in short its all down to altitude, temp and humidity and the actual aircrafts movement itself. a rising or descending aircraft will produce varied contrails due to the aircrafts mass itself affecting all of the variables.

Im still going with IntelGurls appraisal. Normal aircraft with alot of haze. Still a great piccie though.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
More on the "Icing Tanker". As of 2002 it was switched to a KC-135R.


Airborne Icing Tanker returns from PACER CRAG modification
Article by Pam Cronk and Max Padilla
412th Test Wing

February 15, 2002

2/15/02 – EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. – The Global Reach Combined Test Force here is one step closer to having a national test asset that will allow for the testing of aircraft in ice and rain conditions.
The Airborne Icing Tanker, or AIT, a modified KC-135R tanker aircraft, recently returned from British Aerospace at Mojave, Calif., after receiving modifications to its navigation system that will bring it in line with operational KC-135 aircraft.

The PACER Compass, Radar and Global Positioning System, known as CRAG, upgrades a portion of the KC-135 mission avionics and increases the navigation and flight management capabilities of the aircraft.

The $12 million AIT program, which began in February 1999, will reinstitute an environmental test capability to simulate airborne rain and ice conditions under controlled conditions.

"This simulated rain and ice testing will save the Department of Defense time and money, while ensuring a safer test environment, by eliminating the need to deploy our test aircraft to other parts of the world in hopes of finding the right kind of natural icing conditions," said Lt. Col. Jeff Smith, Global Reach CTF commander.

www.edwards.af.mil...


GSA

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   
wow cheers zaphod for that : )


that was an amazing read -and some thing I had never thought about before! I just presumed (wrongly) they just got a hanger sized freezer some where to see what happens...

Thank you for linking that I appreciate it.


: )



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 09:26 PM
link   
They do actually, but the way the plane freezes on the ground and the way it freezes in flight are different. So they do both.




GSA

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Blooming hell that looks VERY cold in there!

Again I thank you for the reply and info - very helpful : )


I guess if i get to ever see inside area 51 Id have to ask where they tested deep space craft for temperature resistance.....



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join