UFO? Shape shifting worm like tube with strange light...

page: 26
161
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
The closest estimate, and I DO MEAN estimate (it's too dam far away to accurately measure but that lends to the incredible size of this thing) is 1,000 feet long(!).

Going on the very logical possibility that this a solar bag created by someone for science, military or recreational purposes, is that (huge size) realistic or even feasible?

Jeff will hopefully elaborate, later tonight, on the size issue seeing as how he's the one who told me this.

Springer...



80-140 yards, at 3 FT per yard is 270-420FT long.

If the midship truss split, allowing the two legs of our 175FT prototype to strech out, pivoting at the vertex, the length would have been 350 FT end-to-end.

420FT isn't too much longer, relatively speaking.

And yes, a 1000FT long tube IS possible, and not too difficult, to build...If you've got the bucks to do it.

Size doesn't matter.

Money does. (And the gov't gots lots 'o money!)




posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I find it hard to believe that it is 400+ let alone 1000ft long. Of course I'm no expert by any stretch and I'm not trying to imply that Jeff is wrong, just seems a bit unrealistic.

How specific are these estimates? Is there a +/- variable in mind and what would that be? +/- 10ft, 20ft, 100ft?

I could probably contact that guy in France again and ask him just how big they can get and still be feasable.



posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 10:50 PM
link   
It looks like its not a worm, but that worm shape is the front edge of a reflective body that isnt able to be seen unless the front light hits it in just a way, it makes it reflect and almost looks like there is more to the object then what your able to see most the time.



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I think it could be one of these if the supports in the middle broke and it was straightened out.


The website says that they are over 6000ft in length and have an electric propulsion system which would account for the flashes that we see.

www.interactivearchitecture.org...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   
taybes, that's a BRILLIANT FIND!!!!! It's so amazing I just sent the link to a personal friend of Bob Bigelow's (Bigelow Aerospace) in the hope that if Bob is not aware of this JPAerospace project (I would be shocked to discover he's not but I've never heard of it and I read "Aerospace America" every month!) he gets aware seeing as how it dovetails PERFECTLY with his orbiting Hotel which he launched last July.

I AGREE with YOU! This could very well be one of these supports, I hope it's not because that would mean JPA took a financial hit.

Now all we need to do is contact JPAerospace and ask them if they "lost" one of these last spring over L.A.

NICE WORK and 5,000 ATS points to taybes!


Springer...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 05:58 PM
link   
If it was one of these from the company and as lost, as Springer says, the company would take a large financial hit. These platform structures do not look cheap, its a major allocation and outlay of cash, to lose one would be devastating, not only to the pocketbook, but to their schedules as I'm sure they are using the prototype as R&D testbeds...

Could the military be paralleling some of this technology, sure I think that would be a much more feasible idea, if the mil lost one of these, yea we wouldn't hear about it thats fur shur.!

[edit on 6/10/2007 by greatlakes]



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
taybes, that's a BRILLIANT FIND!!!!!
Isn't it the same thing posted here by Bhadhidar?



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Yeah, thanks Springer, but I can't take all the credit. I saw a similar picture on here and just followed up and found the company website. I looked through a lot of photos and I think this thing is the closest to resembling the size and movements.



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 07:31 PM
link   
I'm finding all of this really exciting! I mean, supposing, like greatlakes said -- we are to find out someway, somehow, that the military actually DOES have their own secret black budget parallel JPA project in effect?

And supposing this information along with Jagman's video were to be shown to the general public? -- or to movers and shakers like Michael Moore or some other well known celebrity muckraker who could inform the public about this project, including the millions of dollars invested in it, in a truly BIG WAY.... like a documentary perhaps??

And even though such revelations would only be the tip of the iceberg, it may offer us a springboard to find out more information about what most of us are calling UFOs -- like those mysterious triangle UFOs, for example.

The bottom line is if the general public gets all riled up about how much of their tax money is going into the black budget for things like flying worms, you can bet your boots they will be leaning on their local congressmen to demand that we have right to know what these projects are for and how much they are costing us!



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Springer
taybes, that's a BRILLIANT FIND!!!!!
Isn't it the same thing posted here by Bhadhidar?


No it's not.


S...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I have contacted the President/Founder of JPA and asked him if they had one of these flying on March 11, 2007 around 11:00AM local time. Whether they lost control of it or not, if they had one flying we'll know what this is at long last.

If they did not have one flying there, then, I'll have this gentleman analyze the video and let us know if this could possibly be a "knock off" of his gear.


If it turns out it was NOT one of JPA's birds AND they believe it's a knock off we'll have a brand new line of investigation to pursue, and pursue it WE WILL.

I am willing to put the necessary resources "up" to figure this out.

Springer...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
I have contacted the President/Founder of JPA and asked him if they had one of these flying on March 11, 2007 around 11:00AM local time. Whether they lost control of it or not, if they had one flying we'll know what this is at long last.
Springer...


Good email Springer, I checked this from what I could find on their website, looking for flights and/or test made in that period, could not find any, and it looks like the project has not been very active of late from whats on the site...

Also checked any pres releases, nothing there as well.

INterested to see what the reply is...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Also, take a look at these videos, do any of these look like possible candidates for our weird worm anomaly? All from the same company....

Balloon Tests.
www.jpaerospace.com...

Ascender
www.jpaerospace.com...

Wouldnt we see lots of blue colors?
www.jpaerospace.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
taybes, that's a BRILLIANT FIND!!!!! It's so amazing I just sent the link to a personal friend of Bob Bigelow's (Bigelow Aerospace) in the hope that if Bob is not aware of this JPAerospace project (I would be shocked to discover he's not but I've never heard of it and I read "Aerospace America" every month!) he gets aware seeing as how it dovetails PERFECTLY with his orbiting Hotel which he launched last July.

I AGREE with YOU! This could very well be one of these supports, I hope it's not because that would mean JPA took a financial hit.

Now all we need to do is contact JPAerospace and ask them if they "lost" one of these last spring over L.A.

NICE WORK and 5,000 ATS points to taybes!


Springer...


No, JPA did not "lose" an Ascender last spring over Los Angeles.


JP Aerospace is actually head-quartered in Rancho Cordova, CA, a suburb to the east of the state capital, Sacramento.

The USAF contract for the Ascender ended quite some time ago, as I've posted previously, when the prototype was destroyed by AF techs attempting a counter-advised, High-Wind launch out of Ft. Stockton, TX.

But, yes, JPA took a HUGE financial "hit" in the process. However this had more to do with the way government contracts are structured, and our unwillingness to deliver anything less than what we had contracted to deliver.

Under the codicils of the contract, JPA was forced to provide "up-front" money for all tooling, materials and other expenses, submit detailed invoices and wait...and wait ....and wait, to be re-imbursed.

I think it is safe to say that our $2 million dollar USAF contract ended up Costing the company tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars.

It very nearly broke the company.


And now it seems that "some one" is trying to fly an "Ascender-type" vehicle again. Good luck.

Your tax dollars at work!


And yes, the folks at Bigelow Aerospace have probably, at least, heard of JPA. JPA has been around for more than twenty years. I came on board in the early '80's.

JPA was one of the first companies to compete for the C.A.T.S (Cheap Access To Space) Prize sponsored by the Space Frontier Foundation. The CATS prize was, in many respects, the precursor to the Ansari X-Prize; though both prizes drew their inspiration from similar competitions at the dawn of powered air-flight.


And Springer, you might also want to read "Jane's Defense". They had a nice little article several years back on the Ascender Near-Space Manuevering Vehicle, as it was called back then.

(According to my friend John Powell, president of JP Aerospace, the term "Near Space" has recently been made taboo for use by any governmental agency; "High altitude" or "Far Air" are the acceptable terms now)



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Springer
taybes, that's a BRILLIANT FIND!!!!!
Isn't it the same thing posted here by Bhadhidar?


No it's not.


S...


Ummm...Yes it is.


Both photos were taken of the Ascender-series prototypes inside our hanger at McClellan AFB, outside of Sacramento, CA.

However, I'm not sure if they are both of the same prototype. We had several in the hanger, each of a differnt size, in the hanger at differnet times.

JP should be able to ID the exact model shown in each of the photos.



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
No, JPA did not "lose" an Ascender last spring over Los Angeles.

Interesting information! I certainly noticed no information past around 2005 or so on the ascender model and research on the website. Can you give us some more info on this technology and the arrangement (that you can) with the gov/mil contratcs you had. Also what happened to all of the prototypes, you mentioned one was lost in TX, were there other survivors?

Any other companies doing this tech, picking up where you left off, and could the mil be picking up this technology as well. There is a DARPA project request out that focuses on an orbiting platform, development as a related piece of info.



posted on Jun, 10 2007 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakes
Interesting information! I certainly noticed no information past around 2005 or so on the ascender model and research on the website. Can you give us some more info on this technology and the arrangement (that you can) with the gov/mil contratcs you had. Also what happened to all of the prototypes, you mentioned one was lost in TX, were there other survivors?

Any other companies doing this tech, picking up where you left off, and could the mil be picking up this technology as well. There is a DARPA project request out that focuses on an orbiting platform, development as a related piece of info.


JPA's role in the Ascender project ended with the failed luanch in TX. The company has continued to privately develop its ATO (Airship To Orbit) concept. Current focus is on development and testing of sub-systems and components. And the company, as always, is actively promoting space-oriented education opportunities in schools through its "PongSat" program.

Contract details would be JP's bailiwick. I did not want any involvement with the financial aspects of the operation to avoid a "conflict of interest" situation with my "regular" employer, the State of California.

As far as technology is concerned, I believe I've covered that in prior posts:

The vechicle consisted of several helium-filled lifting cells contained within a "rip-stop" nylon envelop, forming two roughly cigar-shaped cylinders, or tubes. The envelop connected the lift-cell segements in such a way that when filled and mounted to the support truss, the construction formed a "V" shape.

The support truss served as sort of a keel to the airship. He truss was made up of carbon fiber rods, bolted at the ends to form a light-weight triangular truss ( a 100 FT long 18 inch high truss section weighed less than 20 LBS!).

Three of these trusses were joined together to form an "A" shape, when viewed from above.

Now imagine inverting the "V", like this "/\", and superimposing it over the "A"-shaped truss structure.

Most of the other hardware was either off-the-shelf, or based on off-the-shelf equipment. For example; as the vehicle was designed to operate at altitudes above 60-80,000 FT, the profile of the electrically-driven propellers was based on, but modified from, the design used by NASA's HELIOS solar-powered aircraft.

As far as I know, the earlier prototypes have been disassembled and either placed in storage, or scavenged for components..."Waste Not, Want Not!" Is a JPA motto!

Could other companies, or the military, have picked up where we left off?

Anything is possible.

(P.S.: Springer, if you want to get JP's attention with your e-mail, make sure your "Subject" line is really long and mentions "Ascender NSMV". Or offer to sponsor an AD on the next "Away" flight and get his immediate attention! :lol



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Hi

I just wanted to say that I saw the same sort of sausage shaped object about two weeks ago.
Flying low over Birmingham city centre of all places.
I thought it was some sort of balloon as it looked like it weighed nothing and seemed to float along as if full of helium.
It was a dark grey colour but every now and then it glinted as if made of metal.
It was right above me at one point and I can tell you this thing had no visible propulsion.
It was cylinder shaped, smooth with rounded ends.
I watched baffled as this thing slowly floated this way and that over the city centre; I can’t believe no one has reported seeing it as well.
Now I was nearly convinced it was a balloon when it did the most shocking thing.
It was travelling along horizontally (across the skyline) then it preceded to tip vertical (straight up) with no bending what so ever; not gradual either. Within a few seconds it was climbing higher into the sky (still vertical) then tipped back to horizontal again and carried on its little way (the crazy thing is I watched it bend this way and that so I know it was flexible).
As far as me and the few people I have spoke to about this agree no balloon could complete a manoeuvre like that without bending in the middle and it was not WIND. I triple checked the direction of the wind and this thing was not obeying the normal behaviour of your average balloon in the wind.
I have no evidence to back this up apart from sum crap video on my phone so let this be a lesson to anyone who does not carry a good quality camera (wish I had).

Good Hunting.

O and it was definetly not this ( www.interactivearchitecture.org... ) that someone posted a picture of earlier on in the thread so dont even suggest it lol



posted on Jun, 12 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Some solar balloons can be radio controlled. They are often fitted with video cameras as well.

Not assuming that this is what you saw, just passing more info along.



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 04:00 AM
link   
OK, talked with my friend John Powell (JP) the President/owner of JP Aerospace, on Monday (June 18,2007).

I showed him the pictures and he watched the video. I then asked him, "Was it one of ours?" and if not, then whose?

According to JP, what we are seeing in the the LA video is definetly NOT one of JPA's airships run amok; although he said it did look very similar to a much earlier flight vehicle, dubbed "Away16".

With the exception of the now defunct "Ascender"-series, which was flown out of Fort Stockton, Texas, all JPA vehicles are launched from Black Rock, NV.

Now this is where it gets interesting.


If it wasn't one of JPA's vehicles, who could have lofted such a thing?

JP concurred that the USAF had, under the terms of the contract, retained all the Ascender prototypes, including the wreckage from Ft. Stockton. And, although he offered no evidence, he implied, with a degree of certainty, that the Air Force had re-built and test-flown the rig. However, he insisted that not even on it's worst day would anyone in the USAF be reckless enough to launch an Ascender-type vehicle anywhere near a populated area, certainly not one the size of downtown Los Angeles!


So if not an experimental airship, what was it?

JP speculates that what we are seeing is an inflated architectural structure known as an "Air Beam", that somehow has broken free of its moorings.

Air Beams are typically fabric-covered, air inflated tubes used to support various temporary outdoor shelter structures. Things like hangers and field hospitals and mess tents. They can be huge in that they are designed to span large internal areas without additional internal support columns.

The problem with air beams is that because of thier size, JP said, they contain huge amounts of air, and when that air is even slightly warmed by the sun, it generates an enormous amount of lifting force; just like a hot air balloon. Unfortunately, a lot of the folks erecting these inflated structures fail to recognize this solar heating lift factor, and as a result, fail to properly and sufficiently anchor the air beams to the ground.

JP suggests that, given the date, the time, the geographic location of the sighting, and the speed and direction of the prevailing winds at the time of the sighting, it should be possible to locate the launch point of the structure. He then suggested that we check the building permits office for that locale;


anyone seeking to erect a structure as large as the one this air beam appears to have escaped from, would have been required to have filed for a building permit.


It is unlikely that whoever lost this thing is going to report it. The potential liability issues involved (a large air beam can weight hundreds of pounds when deflated), in terms of personal injury, property damage and as a hazard to air navigation and ground traffic, are extreme. Consider; during the day, solar heating might keep the thing aloft, but as night falls, the warm air in the beam cools and the beam, all hundreds of pounds of it, falls to earth.


So there's your mission, should you decide to accept it!

Who lost their air beam in LA that day? Who had filed for a building permit for a large inflateble structure in the area, and then didn't report its loss, thus risking the public's safety? There's your "worm".


On a side note, and in a kind of "David vs. Goliath-esque"vein, JP does know Mr. Bigelow of Bigelow Aerospace, and would love to have some of BA's money. But JP concedes that the likelyhood of that happening is rather remote. Seems there is a bit of an unofficial rivalry going on between the two companies: and JPA seems to have the upper hand currently.

Appears that, as part of their marketing strategies, Both companies had offered their clients the opportunity to have their corporate logos photographed "From Space" (for a fee, of course!). I'm told that none of the Bigelow photos turned out to be useable: their camera malfunctiond and all the shots were blurred.

Meanwhile, every JPA client has recieved a crystal-clear shot of their logo with the limb of the earth as a back-drop...for considerably less than Bigelow was charging.



Also, JPA plans to roll out an entirely new vehicle in the Fall of 2007, possible as early as September. JP would not tell me just what this new vehicle was; simply that it was "something entirely new"and "never seen before".


And finally.

I can now say that I have seen Proof that the "Airship-To-Orbit (ATO)" concept CAN work! But I will say nothing more on that topic ...

Suffice to say that Revenge is a Dish Best Served Cold, and it is Very cold at the edge of Space!





new topics
top topics
 
161
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join