It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Air Force 5.6 airborne Holographic Projector.

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 08:05 PM
Hey everyone at ATS! i don't know if this is the right section to post this in,but, I had come across the famous Project Blue Beam and i thought that this would be relative to the NASA conspiracy.

This clip makes me think that maybe the Gov of the US has actually got us by the dingleberries, How would we be able to tell what's real and what's not?
I don't know anymore... I guess we have to be real careful with what's to come out in the future,The only thing i wonder is why go through all this disinformation when most people in the world have yet to believe in UFO's and the New World Order why??? So much money goes into their efforts! Why?? Can someone help clarify some of these questions?

Here's the video and article.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:48 PM
I havent heard anything substantiating that the U.S. air force has used or currently posseses holographic technology. That in itself could be a piece of disinformation out there.

However, I do not believe the Phoenix lights incident was based on a holographic projector.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 10:02 PM

I took a fast read through there and it's the usual stuff.

Yes, there are such things as "holograms", as described
in that 1976 link in the middle of the article. They're great!
You can buy your own from Edmund, at least you could when
I was a kid. Are they evil projections ala Star Wars? No. It's
an image captured on photographic film (usually) formed by
interference patterns between a reference laser and the
reflections from the object being holographed. The resulting
"photo" looks like gray muddy poop, with lots of weird moire
patterns and circles, at least until you shine the reference
laser back through it.

Then you see the image again, in 3D! Not projected into
space, but appearing behind the film, like you're looking through
a window. Now, the link tries to describe it as though THIS IS
EVIDENCE!! but it's just a description of dirt-common holography.

The next link - "making three dimensional holograms visible from all sides"
uses multiple projections into a block of aerogel, not exactly useful
in the field unless you can create blocks of aerogel on demand.

The other links are to the usual "what will combat be like in the 21st
century" WAG pieces.

Now, there WAS a lot of research into holographic projection of
solid images in the field in the 1999 time frame.
As far as I know a lot of money was spent
but no one managed it. Oddly, the sound part of it DOES work,
it's wild and crazy but the image part never worked.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 11:12 PM
I hope they make this technology soon availaible for consumer electronics.
I imagine a video-game console with free air 3D graphics.

This holographic projection has nothing to do with the traditional method of capturing
a picture on a plate. It projects a photorealistic image of anything into free-space, maybe a fighter-plane or something.

The Air Force Study 2025 in which this technology is described, shows some cool
devices for the future. But you can be sure that they have all of them, at least for
a couple of years. So, also the holographic projector is already there, for use in some top-secret operations maybe by the CIA.

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 05:07 PM
2025 doesn't describe technology they already have. It's a blue-sky "what if". Read the preface. Some of it was done by cadets at the AF academy.

They stroked out many a fruitless tax dollar to Northrop and Lockheed in the 1999 time frame for a solid image hologram that could be used in the field. Oddly enough, one of the civilian uses listed (they have to dual-use everything these days) was for video game displays.

However, the sound part they got back during the first burst of 'hologram fever' back in the late '80s. It ended up producing two field-ready prototypes, one of which we got to play with. They were going to use it in GW1, but shelved it since we won so fast.

I don't know where they ended up. I know where they were then.

It was really spectacular, but it's voice only. No it's not an LRAD. Much more dramatic.

BTW, that "if I see it described then it's a decade old and they already have it secretly hidden away" thing, it's way off base. I've worked on many a project that not only was described, but funded, and they ended up not using it after it was developed. Case in point, the RAH-66.

[edit on 17-8-2006 by Tom Bedlam]

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 08:45 PM
Actually, this idea is not soo hard to believe. I may be alone, but i doubt that i'm the only person who saw Maddonna perform last year in that Awards show with the Gorrilaz...they were not the usual animated version that fans are used to see'ing. They actually used some sort of 3 dimensional method to project them onto the stage in actual size and preportion.

If you saw it, you like myself were amazed as they were able to move about the stage alongside Maddonna, and were even putting their arms around her. As she walked among them, it was as if they had actual mass, When she walked behind them, or them in front of of her...( arm, hand, leg ) became covered just as when a person puts their arm around another person or object.

If they are making projections that advanced for commercial use, i'm sure that Nasa and the Air force have something similar, if not a bit more advanced.

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 09:47 PM

See, that's the problem. A lot of people call various types of projection 'holography' that have nothing to do with holography in fact.

Like I said in some long gone thread, you can't turn a projection TV rig on the garage door and call the picture a hologram. Holography is very specific, and what you saw on "Star Wars" ain't it.

Neither was the Grammy thing with Madonna. It's a modern version of a trick we used to use at haunted houses called "Pepper's Ghost". There is a thin semi-transparent film they project images on using a big DLP projector. They are calling it a hologram, but it is not. We used a clean piece of glass. The film they're using is called eyeliner, and it's a big improvement, obviously. You see Pepper's Ghost all over the place, if you've ever been to Disney's Haunted House that's how a lot of it works.

The company that makes the projector/film system is called Musion.

They try to pump some extra marketing jazz into their system by calling them "holograms", which they aren't.

You can see the weaseling at the Gorillaz web site, obviously someone called their hand on this:

"Q. Will the Gorillaz appear as holograms on stage?
A. Technically speaking, no. Holograms are created by a special method of photography, which isn't
going to be used in creating the visuals for the Gorillaz tour. The technical definition of a hologram
can be found on wikipedia here:- . However, it might be argued that the word 'hologram' can be used to describe any convincing three dimensional-looking image, - gorillaz definitely will be appearing as holograms in this sense. "

I would, of course, argue that the term 'hologram' has a definition, and it doesn't include every "three dimensional looking image".

In this particular case, they have several planes of this saran wrap stuff set up, and they're projecting images onto them with a big projection TV setup. She's walking in and out of the saran wrap on stage. So it looks like she's moving behind and around the characters.

I guess you could have a helicopter towing around saran wrap and have another with a really big TV projector. Doesn't sound like it would be real convincing if the wind was up though.

Here's a much less hyp-ey web site describing it.

The Eyeliner system is a whole new way of projecting video. All of the images used on a Musion system are 3-dimensional images, but projected as two-dimensional images (2D/3D) into a 3D stage set. The mind of the audience creates the 3D illusion. This means that production costs are minimal, needing only single camera lens for filming and single projector for the playback - hence the phrase, GOGGLE FREE 3D.

[edit on 20-8-2006 by Tom Bedlam]

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 10:42 PM

Originally posted by allMIGHTY
I hope they make this technology soon availaible for consumer electronics.
I imagine a video-game console with free air 3D graphics.

actualy THERE WAS a video game back in the late 80's early 90's that used holligrams. it was interesting to play but there were only a few moves that you could make which made it unpoppular, as well as boreing to play. it was also more expensive to play. it was cool though you could actualy put your hand through what was being dispayed.

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 10:50 PM

Originally posted by Conluceo
I had come across the famous Project Blue Beam and i thought that this would be relative to the NASA conspiracy.

Gee, maybe they could even cloak a missle in flight to make it look like a 757.

The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception management. It is also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary.

Capabilities of the projector include, precision projection of 3-D visual images into a selected area, PSYOP and strategic deception management, and it provides deception and cloaking against optical sensors.

posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 09:41 AM

posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 11:06 AM

Here's the gov't web site on it

All you guys quoting 2025 really need to read the rest of it instead of skipping to the appendices and pretending it's a list of fielded weapon systems. I know this is the link that gets passed around, but you really need to look at the background of the project first.

Air University class members of all military services formed into research teams composed of AWC and ACSC students. Approximately forty AWC students, some two dozen AWC civilian and military faculty members, nearly 120 ACSC students, and over 20 ACSC faculty members were participants in the study. These Air University teams were the nucleus of the nationwide network of military experts, academicians, scientists, industry leaders and creative thinkers participating in the study.

The AU students participated in a series of lectures designed to broaden their intellectual base through discussions about creative thinking and problem solving; future world conditions and the accompanying geopolitical environment; the nature of future conflict; land power, naval power, air power, space power, and information power; and emerging science and technologies. Speakers such as futurists Alvin Toffler, Dr. Dennis Meadows, Dr. Peter Bishop, Dr. Edward Teller, and Dr. Martin van Creveld; creative expert Bob King; the creators of Hollywood movies such as Star Trek, RoboCop and Terminator; Kevin Kelly, the editor of WIRED magazine; and others, visited Maxwell AFB to provide their perspectives in these areas.

This major study spanned the 1995-96 academic year at Air University and was integrated into the existing curriculum. The study was conducted in three phases. The first, or idea generation, phase started in August and continued through January. During this phase, participants used multiple sources, including a homepage on the worldwide internet, to look for insights and innovative concepts in science, technology, organizational structure, doctrine, and strategy which will improve the effectiveness of the Air Force in the future. Nearly 1,400 ideas about future air, space, and information capabilities were submitted by almost 900 individuals representing nearly 500 firms.

I'll beg ATS's indulgence for the long's all relevant.

"2025" is a class project from Air University. It's mostly driven by cadets, who brought in advisors from industry and the military. In short, it's the 1996 senior class project at a military school. They brought in writers from Star Trek, Terminator and so on. They surfed the web. They read sci-fi books. They brought in lots of guest speakers. And what they created was a bunch of college kids' vision of what war would be like in thirty years, based on, to a great extent, what they saw in TV and the movies.

Not that they were bad ideas. You have to applaud them, it was a great effort. But you have to understand, it's an Air Force command staff and war college senior class design project, not the Diary of Dr Evil. We're talking AFROTC here.

In order to place what you read in 2025 in proper perspective, you HAVE to include the boring parts up front. Here's the master URL for the entire thing:

Now, take half an hour and read through the introduction. It's a very clear background of who the players were, and how the thing was done. Make sure you catch the welcome letter, the quick look, and under the executive summary, make sure you at least read the disclaimer and Part I. If you don't, you're not being intellectually honest.

Most of the 2025 horror mongers will direct you to the appendices and then try to hype it up as being some sort of guide to modern covert weaponry, as if it were the Dungeonmaster's Monster Guide or something. But I notice they NEVER explain to you what 2025 WAS, nor who wrote it, nor why. Ok, I will. There is the link to the index, not the appendices. Now that you have the links to the entire work, go take a peek for yourself.

It's MAFB's Air University 1996 senior class project, for God's sake. It's a big 'what if' based on science fiction written by college seniors, not some battle plan that someone left lying around on NIPRNET by mistake.

[edit on 22-8-2006 by Tom Bedlam]

posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:18 PM
Hey, I did a full site download of Project Bluebeam and then did local searches on the files, there's a reference to holographic projection over a battlefield at the following link:
Under Volume 3, Chapter 10 - Surfing the First and Second Waves in 2025: A SOF Strategy for Regional Engagement.
"Along the same lines, a Holographic Projector43 could be used as a
deception or PSYOP tool projecting images in the sky above the target audience."

The 43 is a number to a reference, included as a quote below:

"43 Spacecast 2020, Air University into the Future, 36." - So what they are referencing is on page 36 of that book...I found the book on, but haven't bought it.

Further on-subject paragraph from the Volume 3, Chapter 10:
"Broadcasting “free TV” 24 hours a day
to specific targets groups could render them “immobile, infuriate the masses, or launch them into new
directions.” For example, broadcasting MTV, “Soaps,” Talk Shows, and/or Educational TV for teens, and
“fictional CNN” for the general public, business, military, and government could pay high dividends with
minimal investment. The key is knowing the desired goal and the target audience, and then broadcasting the
appropriate propaganda to achieve it."

That's it.

top topics


log in