DeBunked Thread Ideas, page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times

reply posted on 23-9-2008 @ 06:02 PM by Zaphod58

reply to post by Canada_EH

Original of the first pic:

Still looking for the second pic. I don't know if we can ever find the original for the second pic. Both aircraft are fakes. That's supposed to be an F-86 (I think) but the aft fuselage and tail are too thin to be a Sabre, or any member of the Sabre family. The horizontal stabilizers are all wrong too. They're too wide for such a thin tail.

[edit on 9/23/2008 by Zaphod58]

[edit on 9/23/2008 by Zaphod58]

reply posted on 23-9-2008 @ 10:02 PM by _Del_

That's an F-84, not a F-86. Other than that, I can't help you.

reply posted on 23-9-2008 @ 11:16 PM by Canada_EH

reply to post by Zaphod58

Thats the bell X-1AorB something is it not in the link? And Thanks thats exactly the image I was looking for. Closes that part of the fake for 100% now that we have it linked.

As for the 2nd one I'm not nearly as worried about it. Its much more obvious that its a fake and CG etc. So if you can't find it don't worry to much about it the motive of the CG artist is clear now and shouldn't be take as real by anyone who sees the first example which is much better done.

I may have some more fakes that require some more joint work to speed things up but we shall see. I'm gone for a bit so I wont ahve time to work on the stuff till I get back next week. Till then feel free to post anything else of interest though. This thread needs a bit of a kick in the pants

reply posted on 24-9-2008 @ 09:30 AM by ajsr71

reply to post by Canada_EH

The picture wwas faked. They were created by Michael H. Schratt to “illustrate” what he “believed” were craft that probably did exist.

Of course, without that context, the pictures started a life on their own. Mr Schratt’s website usafflyingsaucers.com went offline (still accessible through the waybackmachine although the images do not show up on this site) and a new myth was (deliberately) born. There is a link to a PDF Document with the so called photos

PDF DOCUMENT

reply posted on 24-9-2008 @ 03:19 PM by Shadowhawk

Schratt basically just took photos off the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center web site and superimposed his fantasy disk planes over them. In some cases he left the NASA insignia on the hangars even though NASA is not a part of his myth.

The picture that most often makes the rounds is the one that originally featured the P2B-1S (modified Navy version of the B-29), two F-86 chase planes, and the D-558-2 Skyrocket research plane. Schratt also modified some F-18 Advanced Aeroelastic Wing (AAW) images and others.

To find the original images, just keep searching the NASA Dryden image Gallery.

reply posted on 14-10-2008 @ 12:36 PM by Canada_EH

Thanks for the info guys. I knew what I knew but couldn't back it up and this has fixed that issue. Hopefully I can keep getting everyone involved in this type of stuff when stumped. Also PLEASE post any images any of you may have.
-Thanks EH

reply posted on 11-12-2008 @ 08:06 AM by Canada_EH

WEll I got another photoshopped image of a F-22 that was found by one of our members "121200".

The images has been altered to appear more like the proposed F/B-22 version.
The image was pulled off of this site - www.ausairpower.net... and the explanation of the image was as follows.

The FB-22A 'regional bomber' is a enlarged derivative of the F-22A with a larger wing, proposed primarily to provide a stealthy, supercruising F-111/FB-111A class strike platform (U.S. Air Force original)

Needless to say most of you who are familiar with the B version proposal know that it never got off the drawing board after the 2002 proposal to the USAF. The proposal was dropped completely after the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review. Thats at least the "facts" of the history of the concept. So where did this image come from then?

On closer inspection of the image a couple things turn up. One is that the tag given to this photo is the following "Proposed F/B-22 (Artwork (c) 2003 Carlo Kopp)". Carlo is a analyst for the many projects that go on in the RAAF. So it would appear that this photo was either create by or for Mr Kopp. The end title to the explanation given though is more then a bit misleading "(U.S. Air Force original)".

Here is a standard F-22 image from a similar angle during the first SBD test. If compared to the above image you may notice the following: the fake appears to have 2 landing gear doors, the fake appears to have had identification cleaned off the tail also the fake image appears to repeat identical highlights off the side missile doors.

I'm interested in tracking down some additional details though. So anyones help with any of the following questions posted would be great.
-What munition is the "B model" dropping in this image? Its not the SBD and to the best of my knowledge thats the only munition that could be carried at such a high # by a 22.
-Does anyone know of the original photo that this was manipulated from? I'm thinking it would have to be from a AMRAAM or GPS guided bomb test of the F-22.
-Any other information that anyone else has would be great.

reply posted on 11-12-2008 @ 08:18 AM by Canada_EH

Looks like I may have found the photo. Its from a AMRAAM test like I thought. Problem is its low quality at this point. Heres the site I found it at though, its at the bottom of the page.

www.edocorp.com...

Also the tail may not be a PS job. It looks like Raptor 002 may have flown some tests with it tail painted like that.

[edit on 11-12-2008 by Canada_EH]

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 11:39 AM by Deson

reply to post by Zaphod58

I hope that this is of help.

Link

reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 11:46 AM by Anonymous ATS

reply posted on 18-3-2009 @ 03:26 PM by Canada_EH

well this is dumb. All images in the debunked thread are no longer linked. Sorta torn if its even worth going back and trying to relink them all with help from a mod. Huge mistake making this change in my opinion as it make all threads like these obsolete.

Any one have any thoughts on this? Is it worth the work to re work the thread? Is there a need for the thread?

reply posted on 23-3-2009 @ 11:21 PM by Deson

I think that there will always be need for this thread, so yes, please do some re-links. I've noticed that at least the link in my post is still valid so at least that's one less thing to worry about.

reply posted on 13-5-2010 @ 01:30 AM by noomy

reply to post by Canada_EH

Just wanted to say hi and thanks for an amazing thread, been slowly making my way through your posts (my dialup holds me back a bit on some of the larger images).

Also in regards to the Aurora, i noticed something odd that no one has mentioned yet. In the second image (not the Discover! magazine) in the bottom right corner there's some kind of a pin, notice the shadow for said pin is completely incorrect. It's quite obviously a pin, yet the shadow is that of a thumb tack...kind of stood out to me. I also read on another thread that this image was taken directly from a video game (ads more sense to the error in the shadow).

On a side note, i've done loads of photo editing over the years, and (at a guess) 90% of these images you've posted immediately scream "FAKE" to me, not sure if it's because i have an eye for these things or if it's because they're all just really obvious (hehe, some people huh?) I'll keep perusing your thread, maybe there are a few images i can add my "expert" opinion to.

Thanks again for an awesome thread, gets an S&F from me!

reply posted on 20-8-2010 @ 07:47 PM by Canada_EH

Hey thanks for your kind words. I tend to come and go from the ATS thread nowadays due to the nature of some threads but there are some great people on this site for sure.

I agree that some of the photo do scream fake but the main point of this thread was to be a running and updatable catalog of known fakes so to have a place to quickly direct people and shut down threads reposting said material.

I'd love to have people keep using the thread for that purpose and add their own fakes they run across and who knows maybe I'll spend some time here again too

reply posted on 27-5-2011 @ 07:27 PM by gearturbine