Mystery of the "Baby B-2" revisited!

A few months back I posted about Mark Farmer reporting that he saw a small flying wing aircraft at Groom Lake that resembled a B-2 Stealth Bomber in shape. At that time, I was asking if it was related to the B-2 Spirit. Thanks to some great inside knowlege from Shadowhawk, we established that this mystery plane has NO connection the the B-2.

Having ruled the B-2 out, I went back to the basic question: What was the Mystery Aircraft that Mark Farmer saw over Groom Lake? Well, after some research I think I have a plausable theory: A Stealth Spyplane!

For years there have been many roumors of a Top Secret spy plane in Neveda and California that observers have dubbed the "Black Manta" because of it's manta ray like shape. Now noone knows for sure what exactly this plane is for or which agency of the Pentagon is using it. What is know however is that this aircraft is said to be quite a bit smaller then a B-2 stealth bomber, with a wing span Estimated to be about 60 to 65 feet. If this plane is real, I'm guessing they might have used the B-2's general shape for two reasons:

1. The B-2 is very stealthy and hard to see with radar, which would be an advantage for a spy plane!
   
2. They might have been counting on the simular shape to confuse people into believeing that it is a stealth bomber
   

Could the US Government be hiding a Top Secret spyplane that is shaped like the B-2 Stealth bomber?

Tim

Although this theory is plausible, it is difficult to prove since the only real proof present for the baby B-2 is an eyewitness. People aren't usually liars, but they can be easily confused. Wingspans are difficult to figure out on a flying aircraft since we haven't got anything in the background to compare it to as we would were it sitting conveniently on the ground. If we could have some sort of picture, even slightly blurry of a B-2 shape but noticeably smaller, your theory would likely hold some water. But since we don't have that present to my knowledge, it is difficult for me to accept the existence of such an aircraft, plausible though it may be.

Good Point,

I'll see if there is a way to contact Mark Farmer. I know he works with and is a friend of Bill Sweetman. Also, if I remember correctly, Shadowhawk knows him. I'll see what I can do!

Tim

I havent read the other thread, so this may be covered:

IS it certain he didn't see the Lockheed Polecat UAV?



www.flightglobal.com...

Originally posted by RichardPrice
I havent read the other thread, so this may be covered:

IS it certain he didn't see the Lockheed Polecat UAV?

Yes! Shadowhawk found out that ALL of the polecat flights were in the Day Time. Mark Farmer's sighting was at night. Also the Polecat made it's first flight in 2005, but Mark's sighting was Before that. Third Polecat was at Area 6, which is in a different part of the Nellis Range than Groom Lake where Mark saw this aircraft.

It was a great though, but it doesn't fit with the facts we have gathered!

Tim

I don't really trust any night sightings of alleged triangular aircraft. Many of the reports rely on placement of lights on the aircraft and a vaguely visible dark shape.

I live under the flight pattern for aircraft operating from AF Plant 42. A wide variety of airplanes fly low overhead day and night. They include U-2, F-117A, F-18, F-22, B-2, C-130, C-17, C-5, B-52, KC-10, and many, many more. I have come to know many of them by sound alone.

At night, they are flying above me at relatively low altitudes, illuminated by the city lights. Sometimes they are below the overcast which is also illuminated, thus providing a whitish background for the darker shape of the aircraft. Even when I know what I am looking at (from the sound), I still can't make out the shape. I am usually trying pretty hard, simply as an exercise in testing the viability of night time sightings of mystery aircraft. It just isn't that easy to make out the shape of an airplane flying at night, even under optimium lighting conditions.

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
I don't really trust any night sightings of alleged triangular aircraft. Many of the reports rely on placement of lights on the aircraft and a vaguely visible dark shape.

Good points Shadowhawk!

However, right now it's all we have to work with. Sorry, can't change what Mark Farmer saw, I can only report it.

Tim

"Yes"


there is your answer lol. I would be surprised if the US goverment and airforce wasn't hiding an airframe of some sort. Now the question of it being the aurora like some people who would post here would say I disagree with. When I first joined the ATS forums I did think the aurora was possible but now my position has changed and I doubt its real but I wont go as far to say its not possible.

Now for the manta I hvae less info/ been awhile since I heave read anything on it. Anychance you could expand on your connections between the mini B-2 theory and the manta ghost?

I would be willing to lay money that ATS's very own intelgurl knows what this would be. Sadly she probably wont be able to discuss it for a good 20yrs. One thought though, can we be sure they haven't tested the Polecat at night. Afterall it would be easy to confuse it as a "small B-2" in the dark, and we only have their word that it didn't fly at night.

Then again we dont know what other goodies they have in the bag

LEE.

Polecat only made three daylight flights within the NTTR from Area 6 (Yucca Flat). It crashed on the third flight. Also, the Polecat flights took place years after Mark's sighting.

I talked to intelgurl shortly after the Polecat crash. if your interested in the relavent informatioon on her take on the crash visit my thread at www.abovetopsecret.com... Honestly intelgurl was amazing with getting a responce during some downtime away from where she is currently working though it sounds like she will be there for sometime to come. Her insights are missed

I should add that information was edited and left out in lou of respecting intelgurls wishs and the fact that her employer doesn't want her taking part in blogs etc. The information that I posted is derictly related to polecat.

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]

Canada_EH Wrote:
Any chance you could expand on your connections between the mini B-2 theory and the manta ghost?

With Pleasure! I believe that the mini B-2 is in fact the Black Manta. The name Manta isn't an Official name, but a reference to the aircraft shape and color (similar to how the A-12 Avenger got the nickname "The Flying Dorito" because of it's triangular shape. In flight it looks like a black manta ray. I believe that Northrop might have developed this spy plane by scaling down the basic design of the B-2 stealth bomber and modifying it to carry reconnaissance sensors in the bays that house weapons on the B-2.

I believe Northrop used the same basic design because of it's proven stealth qualities and to confuse people who might see it by accident into Believing that the plane is a stealth bomber. In essence it a scaled down B-2 that has traded its weapons for advanced intelligence sensors!

Basically, picture a B-2 that has a wing span of Around 60 to 65 feet and maybe about 25 feet long. (This works out to Roughly 1/3 scale)

There is a "Newer" references to the Black Manta on the internet. I will quote a few for you here.

A site called Area 51 Headquaters

There have been many sightings of a triangular craft with rounded wing tips flying over Groom Lake. This craft is one of the Governments newest "black budget" aircrafts called the TR-3A Black Manta. This bat-winged stealth is a cross between the F117A and B-2. The TR-3A is a tactical reconnaissance plane that is a follow-up on the F-117A Stealth Fighter.

I also believe that while the basic external shape looks like the B-2, there are differences in the airframe to make it more suitable for it's mission of gathering intelligence in a highly covert manor. Even though most think it's "Tactical Reconnaissance" plane, I think it's more likely to be used in a mission similar to the RC-135 fleet of SIGINT aircraft. My guess is that they might use it for covert observation of nuclear testing in denied territory.

Tim

[edit on 6/11/2007 by Ghost01]

why would they want it to look like a bomber. if an enemy sees what appears to be a stealth bomber that only the us has they will want to retaliate assuming they are about to be bombed by the us.

it would have made more sense to come out will the spyplane ,then a bomber mimicking the shape of the spyplane so the enemy will have sighted "a spyplane" and they would have been bombed by an "unknown craft" shortly after the sighting of the spyplane. they would probably assume the spyplane was spotting for the bomber if they believed it had anything to do with the bombings.

[edit on 20-6-2007 by Live-Free]

Originally posted by Live-Free
why would they want it to look like a bomber. if an enemy sees what appears to be a stealth bomber that only the us has they will want to retaliate assuming they are about to be bombed by the us.

it would have made more sense to come out will the spyplane ,then a bomber mimicking the shape of the spyplane so the enemy will have sighted "a spyplane" and they would have been bombed by an "unknown craft" shortly after the sighting of the spyplane. they would probably assume the spyplane was spotting for the bomber if they believed it had anything to do with the bombings.

[edit on 20-6-2007 by Live-Free]

Form follows function - a bomber that has had its design parameters altered in such a way that it *must* look like something else will produce a less efficient bomber.

true, just pointing out that a spy plane designed to look like a bomber makes little to no sense.

anyway a bomber looking like a spyplane would be caught onto pretty quickly, even if it was efficient...

[edit on 20-6-2007 by Live-Free]

Originally posted by Live-Free
true, just pointing out that a spy plane designed to look like a bomber makes little to no sense.
[edit on 20-6-2007 by Live-Free]

As you said earlier: Form follows Function!

What you didn't think of here is that the primary factor in the shape of the B-2 wasn't the bombing aspect of it's mission, but the Stealth. The B-2 Spirit was design to be nearly impossible to find and track on radar. It's shape was dictated by how it would appear to a radar screen.

So if you want to build a spy plane that your enemy won't see coming, copying the design of one of the world's stealthiest airplanes makes perfect sense. The idea with a spy plane is for your enemy to be completely unaware of it's presents.

Tim

Originally posted by Ghost01
It's shape was dictated by how it would appear to a radar screen.

An interesting point as I have heard quotes from northrup people saying the plane was designed from the outside in which created alot of work.

Also I have found some more sketchs that show the single beaver tail that the orginal design had. they look to be scans of the original drawings of some sort. Any baby B-2 may have this design espesially since the Polecat had one too.

Originally posted by Canada_EH
Also I have found some more sketchs that show the single beaver tail that the orginal design had. they look to be scans of the original drawings of some sort. Any baby B-2 may have this design espesially since the Polecat had one too.

Great find!

What Canada_EH has here is the origional Hal Markarian concept sketches for Northrop's ATB. They were origionally drafted in 1979 for an internal study of a flying wing based stealth aircraft. They formed the origional templet of the B-2 bomber. It wasn't until 1980-81 that a DOD study on stealth was published suggesting that the ATB should possess low altitude penatrating capibility to compliment the LO charateristics of the bomber, that Northrop revised the design and added the now familiar "Double W" trailing edge.

Note For followers of my Theories: This proves that NO B-2's were flying before 1988! When I origionally concocted my theory, I forgot to account for the time lost in the Redesign effort. When you adjust for the redesign the first B-2 would have been finished in Late 1988 or Earily 1989. If we account for ground testing, this puts the first flight in July of 1989, right where air force records say it was!

No conspiracy, just a few overlooked facts! (Once again Shadowhawk was right!:up

Tim