Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Mystery Plane Identified (theory)!

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   
How much solid evidence of a successor to the SR-71 is there?

I mean... does there necessarily have to be a successor to every plane? In my honest opinion, the SR-71 was the last of the line. UAV and Satellites would have done the job just as good. Even now, those are all you need. If a successor to the SR-71 flew, it doesn't anymore IMO.

Shattered OUT...




posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Originally posted by Ghost01



I mean the general shape of the aircraft is simular to the MODEL that was sold as the F-19.


Tim, sorry to keep pressing the issue but are you saying the model airplane that you posted was sold as an F-19? Who produced and sold it? Thanks.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear



This is also the version MicroProse used for their computer game F-19 Stealth Fighter.



[edit on 22/11/06 by Implosion]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Originally posted by Implosion


This is also the version


Thank you Implosion. But I am asking who produced and sold the model of the F-19 that Ghost1 posted. Not the Testor's model that I posted.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   
The other model came from Monogram. It was based on artwork from a magazine advertisement for Raytheon.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Originally posted by dragon72


This is a whiff ( what if ) of a old model of a F-19. The modeler altered it to be a navy fighter hence the folding wings.




It's one of several different ideas of what the fictional F-19 would look like.



Dragon72 these pictures seem to have the same model in them as Ghost1 posted as the new SR-71. Where did you get these pictures and do you know where the models came from? One of them is the Testor's F-19 but the others are not.. Also, who is the guy in civies, dark glasses and wearing a kevlar flak jacket on the left saluting the pilot? Thanks.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Originally posted by Shadowhawk



The other model came from Monogram. It was based on artwork from a magazine advertisement for Raytheon.


Thanks Shadowhawk. Do you have a copy of the Raytheon ad?



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Originally posted by dragon72



This is a whiff ( what if ) of a old model of a F-19. The modeler altered it to be a navy fighter hence the folding wings.


Dragon72 checking all the pictures available on the web of this Monogram F-19 it appears that they all have the folding wing. It does not appear that it was altered from the original kit by 'the modeler'.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Tim, sorry to keep pressing the issue but are you saying the model airplane that you posted was sold as an F-19? Who produced and sold it? Thanks.



Yes! It was made by Monogram in the late '80's and earily 90's. I have a copy of it in my personal model collection.

The base that comes with the model Reads: F-19A Stealth Lockheed Specter

I haven't seen the model for sale in years, I believe that it was discontinued a while back. Mine is one of the Snap Tight versions that can be assembled without glue.

Tim



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Originally posted by Ghost01



Yes! It was made by Monogram in the late '80's and earily 90's. I have a copy of it in my personal model collection.

The base that comes with the model Reads: F-19A Stealth Lockheed Specter

I haven't seen the model for sale in years, I believe that it was discontinued a while back. Mine is one of the Snap Tight versions that can be assembled without glue.


Great. I would appreciate your help if you could help me pin down the exact date of Monograms model. The reason is the pictures I posted of the "Monogram" model are identical to the model pictures you posted and were sent to me in 1982 and have been on my den wall ever since.

Thanks for the help.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Dragon72 these pictures seem to have the same model in them as Ghost1 posted as the new SR-71. Where did you get these pictures and do you know where the models came from? One of them is the Testor's F-19 but the others are not.. Also, who is the guy in civies, dark glasses and wearing a kevlar flak jacket on the left saluting the pilot? Thanks.


Sorry I can't remember exactly where I got these pictures. It was some modelling forum



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Great. I would appreciate your help if you could help me pin down the exact date of Monograms model.

Thanks for the help.


That would be 1987! The one I have is a 1987, 1/48 scale snaptite. Here's a link to a picture of the Exact kit I have. The Tail number of my model is 477, just like this one:

F-19 Stealth fighter model

I hope that helps! If you need anything else, let me know.

Tim



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The A-17 Ghost, B-17 Switchblade and the F-19 Spectre. Have any of you guys wondered how many black aircraft we actually need? They all can't be real can they? I've researched these craft myself abd from the articles I've read on these craft they all have one thing in common. They were supposed to replace the F-111 in the hi-lo-hi tactical strike mission. Makes sense to replace a non-stealth strike plane with a stealthy one if you ask me. Could they all have been developed for some secret competition? I find that highly doubtful myself. It costs alot to develop a stealth based warplane. I don't think any company whether it be Lockheed-Martin or Northrop Grumman could take the hit from losing such a competition and survive.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thank you Implosion. But I am asking who produced and sold the model of the F-19 that Ghost1 posted. Not the Testor's model that I posted.


Thanks John, wasn't trying to answer your question, just adding another little detail into the F-19 lore gathering in this thread.



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by danwild6
It costs alot to develop a stealth based warplane. I don't think any company whether it be Lockheed-Martin or Northrop Grumman could take the hit from losing such a competition and survive.


Well, I think History would tend to disagree with you:

Lockheed lost the ATB competition that became the B-2 Spirit, The ATA, now canclelled A-12 Avenger, the Darkstar (competed aginst Global Hawk and lost)!
Nothrop Grumman Lost the XST precurcer to the F-117, the ATF (Now the Lockheed F-22), and the JSF (Now Lockheed F-35). Both Northrop and Lockheed are still very much around and as busy as ever.

I think that would tend to disprove your asumption!

Tim



posted on Nov, 24 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by danwild6
The A-17 Ghost, B-17 Switchblade and the F-19 Spectre. Have any of you guys wondered how many black aircraft we actually need? They all can't be real can they? I've researched these craft myself abd from the articles I've read on these craft they all have one thing in common. They were supposed to replace the F-111 in the hi-lo-hi tactical strike mission.


F-19, a replacement for the F-111?


May I ask where you heard this? I know about the A-17 and as for the Switchblade ATS lists the Aircraft as the AX-29, not the B-17 (which was a WWII bomber).

Tim



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by prototism
i bet you $100 that the picture you are speaking of is this one:

www.movie-gazette.com...://images.movie-gazette.com/albums/20050811/stealth-13.jpg

if you didnt know, this is a screen capture from the movie "stealth"

www.imdb.com...


Nope, that wasn't the same as the photo I saw. I one I saw looked like this "F-19" but with the rear wing wider(front to back) than the model shown here. On another note, oh what I would do to Jessica Biel!



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by PapaHomer
I one I saw looked like this "F-19" but with the rear wing wider(front to back) than the model shown here.


This would happen to be the one you saw, would it:



I scanned this in from a book I own.

Tim



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   
The problem with a successor to the SR-71 is that its role has been filled and any other roles are not practial.

1. If we look back to why the SR-71 was developed, you will see that it was supposed to fly around the perimeter of a country and take pictures inward. That job has been taken over completely by sattelites with such high resolution they can make out the date of a dime on the ground.

2. As long as the concept of "high speed" or over mach 2.5 is still in the equasion, there is no way its a fighter. The SR-71 takes the entire state of Alabama to make a 180 degree turn. If you were flying at mach 3 in the SR-71 and you pulled the stick back suddenly, the aircraft would literally fold in half and at mach 3 you would die before you even realized it was happening

3. This leaves the option of a bomber, which I dont think is a good idea with an aircraft that small, it might be able to carry some SDBs I guess but thats a waste.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackWidow23
The problem with a successor to the SR-71 is that its role has been filled and any other roles are not practial.

1. If we look back to why the SR-71 was developed, you will see that it was supposed to fly around the perimeter of a country and take pictures inward. That job has been taken over completely by sattelites with such high resolution they can make out the date of a dime on the ground.


That's how it was USED! when the CIA origionally contrated for the A-12 version of the Blackbird, the intent was for overflying targets like the U-2 did.

Tim






top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join