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.

 

Is this the Aurora in a satelite pic?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 08:23 AM
link   
An old satelite photo of Area 51, I don't know what year (I recall 1968 for some reason) taken by either the US government and released by accident of by a spy sattelite from Russia. Not sure. Got these from a Spanish? site, so I have no idea what they had to say or where they got them. Just thought I'd share. The second image is a bit edited, because the site had a big F-115 and Aurora? with arrows on it. I haven't been able to find the site again, I'm afraid, but I believe I came across it when looking up S4. The second one looks like the contrast was edited, but I didn't do that.




EDIT: Found the site.
ovni.do.sapo.pt...
Translated:
Translated version

Translated, the stuff about the aurora is:

Spanish:
En la imagen siguiente vemos el HANGAR 18 adonde permanecen los aviones de la "clase" AURORA. Es el mas grande hangar del mundo !

English by Google:
In the following image we see HANGAR 18 where they remain the airplanes of the “class” AURORA. It is but the great hangar of the world!

Spanish:
Hace poco tiempo que eso fue checado por una foto recogida para uno satélite ruso:

English:
Recently time that that was checked by a photo gathered for one Russian satellite:

Spanish:
Ampliando la foto, verificamos que el tamaño del AURORA es mas pequeño que el F-15:

English:
Extending the photo, we verified that the size of the AURORA is but small that the F-15:

[edit on 1-10-2006 by EBE 17]

[edit on 1-10-2006 by EBE 17]




posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I've seen this image before but never seen a definitive explanation of what it was, although I remeber it being attributed to a project called 'Artichoke' rather than Aurora. Artichoke was supposed to be akin to the F-117 but of a different design as I recall but I've heard nothing of it since.

The only think I can say for sure is that the image cannot be from 1968. The F-15 did not exist at that time, 1978 may be more believable, or even 88.



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Could the Aurora be an aircraft that's designed specifically for travels to the moon
and mars? In other words it will never make it to the public in regard like the b2.

Just a thought cause of seeing this documentary
video.google.nl...

And this on youtube:
www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 09:59 AM
link   
It's difficult to tell much... the planform especially the aft part tells a little, maybe. How many exhaust apertures? Are those aero suraces at the aft apex tips... wouldn't they get hot from aero-heating stickin' out like that? How would they get around that? Materials, cryo, hide it in the bubble at speed?

It reminds me a bunch of the F-117 shape-wise and maybe a little X-33-ish too. Which "works" like that shape most? The colour or lack there-of might say a bit too... magic paint, night use. I would have thought really high mach stuff might have had a differnt proportionality... but I suppose modern avionics (Fly-by-wire) and perhaps other unacknowledged tech. ostensibly would allow one to fly many unstable shapes at a wide variety of speeds. Neat photo thanx, I'd not seen that one before... I'll have a prowl and see if I can track the photo source and date and post back if I find anything.

Victor K.

38'

[edit on 1-10-2006 by V Kaminski]



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   
hey nice pictures you posted - never seen it before, so thanks for sharing. Pity my spanish is so poor so as not to be able to read the web page - im sure we miss alot in translation on the english version....

Cheers again for sharing.



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I would think it's a hoax but can't prove that wither way. Except that it's VERY unusual to get a lighter reflection off the canopy in a satalite image - could be explained by a lighter coloured sun cover but my guess is that the artist added a lighter patch to give the impression of a canopy, not realising it would look more faked.



[edit on 1-10-2006 by planeman]



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Definitely not 1968. The SR-71 was new and inservice then and the Aurora wasn't around or the F-15 either. Also no matter what year it is the delta-wing ship is too small to be what the Aurora would have to be. It's no larger than the F-15.

It's probably another one of the lifting body crates they've tinkered with over the years.



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I think planeman raises a valid point... I might add that something doesn't look "right"... is it just me or does the triangle seem bi-laterally of different angles?

Could shadow and camera angle "stuff" account for that... without some better pics? Or at least some way to verify "non-chopper"... I still liked the photo and I haven't run across that one in particular for sure... seems like a "shape" that might be used for such stuff. It would be funny to run across the same photo without the "triangle".

Victor K.

38'



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   
It looks to me like an F-16XL. It seems to have the same cranked arrow delta wing. Did anyother aircraft have that feature?



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I believe this image was debunked as a hoax a few years ago, either ATS or Dreamland Resort. It was modified from the satellite image taken in 2000.



posted on Oct, 1 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   

and released by accident of by a spy sattelite from Russia


maybe i am just geting old and intolerant -- bit phrases like that just make me switch of -- once they make cailms of " released by accident " i have lost interest .



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Well, glad you could get a look in at it, everyone. I'm interested in what it may be, hoax, Aurora, or something other. If I get some time I'll do some more searching to see what I can find.



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 12:28 PM
link   
As I said it is way too short to be anything like what the concept of the Aurora is. It is actually shorter than the 63 foot long F-15. The SR-71 is 107 feet long. The protruding horizontal tabs at the rear are also not in line with normal delta layouts which use elevons. It's too small to carry enough fuel for any hope of long-range recon ops.

It could be a craft with a completely different mission role than long-range recon.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
It looks exactly like an F-16XL. the image could have been taken during the competition between the F-15E/F and the F-16E/F. Plausible?









[edit on 3-10-2006 by danwild6]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:59 AM
link   
The Aurora is said to be about 90ft or so long, in that pic its SMALLER than the F15 next to it. No way any mach 5+ plane is smaller than an F15.


Dew

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 03:45 AM
link   
The photo was published in Aircraft Illustrated in 2000 (Mar issue IIRC).
As someone else mentioned - it has been debunked (sorry - no proof!).
I looked the photo up recently when Aircraft Illustrated recently ran their 'Area 51' articles, and one article referenced the photo (and issue). My father has all the back issues, so I looked it up.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
There is no aurora in fact for sure!!!!



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by danwild6
It looks exactly like an F-16XL. the image could have been taken during the competition between the F-15E/F and the F-16E/F. Plausible?









[edit on 3-10-2006 by danwild6]


My thoughts exactly.
I'll review the F-16 development timeline.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
I figure whatever the Aurora was, it is no longer. Remember they took the SR-71s out of service. They wouldn't have done that unless there was something to take its place just as it replaced the U-2. Then it was like 2 years later they were pulling some of them out of mothballs and using them again. Most assuredly there was a successor for the Blackbird. There couldn't not be since we don't function that way. There never has been a case of a front line aircraft not being replaced by something better to fulfill its mission role. I figure the SR-71 replacement didn't perform as expected and it was withdrawn from ops.



posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   
I think it actually is the F-16XL.

This is a picture of the F-16XL flying alongside an SR71


www.dfrc.nasa.gov...


Notice both bare NASA emblems, not USAF. Hmmm

Here's a top-down shot of the F-16XL


www.dfrc.nasa.gov...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join