This topic is in the Aircraft Projects discussion forum.  (rss)


White Unmarked 747 at Cargo Terminal In Alaska


<<  1    2  >>



reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 10:28 PM by Anubis Kanubis


reply to post by 2ciewan



Ted Stevens International Airport

Arrived Yesterday, afternoonish.

Thank you.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 10:42 PM by Zaphod58


This may not help without the flight number, or tail number but www.flightaware.com is a great tracking site for following flights. It also shows airport activity if you have the four letter airport code.

[edit on 12/4/2007 by Zaphod58]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 4-12-2007 @ 11:13 PM by Zaphod58


reply to post by Anubis Kanubis



Sorry, had a long stressful day at work, and when I read your post saying that it was too polished and clean to be a used aircraft, it just pushed me over the edge, and came across as saying I didn't know what I was talking about, even though I've spent most of my life around planes.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 12:21 AM by x-phile


I'd be more worried about the MIB in black SUV's now that you've blown your cover by snapping pictures at an International airport in this post 911 world we now live in

LOL



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 01:06 AM by C0bzz


It constantly amazes me when people don't trust people who've worked there entire lives on aircraft, then proceed to tell us that we're wrong because it definately has no identification markings with no evidence what so ever, except of course, there 'eyewitness reports' and a extremely low resolution picture.

Look harder, there ARE identification numbers on the tail of those, you implied it yourself when you thought it was A6-GDP, which DOES have a tail number on it.

And the white paint jobs, imply NOTHING. White paint jobs have got nothing to do with whether the owner is government or not. Typically when an airliner changes owners, they paint it white till a check. An example of this is in akmakm post. Your plane and his plane are two diferant planes. The engines are completely diferant.

Aircraft also do not typically have dents of them, and provided they're well taken after, they look pretty new. I should know, I work on warbirds.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 01:27 AM by akmakm


Cobzz, You can tell that the aircraft has dent from looking at that blurry picture???

If we have a proper picture maybe we can tell the difference..

Ashok



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 02:39 AM by C0bzz


reply to post by akmakm



The OP stated that it looked new because it didn't have any dents in it, and that, really, means nothing. Planes do not usually have dents in them and are VERY strong machines. Today we had a winch smash into the tail of a Trojan and the winch was more damaged than the plane.

[edit on 5/12/2007 by C0bzz]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 04:28 AM by Zaphod58


reply to post by akmakm



You can tell that they're different planes just by looking at the engines. The engine cowling on the pic taken recently goes much farther back than the cowling does on A6-GDP. As I pointed out in a previous post.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-12-2007 @ 06:16 AM by defcon5



Originally posted by 2ciewan
Yes, they get painted... but ive yet to see one fly without so much as a registration on the aircraft.... don't think that really happens unless its military or ex military.

As I have said, I have personally seen it happen, and I have personally worked on aircraft in that condition.


Originally posted by 2ciewan
This is the same for most countries, and for an aircraft to be airworthy, it must display markings, for ATC and ground operations identification.

Again, if the aircraft was purchased from another airline the certificate was already issued under the old owner.


Originally posted by 2ciewan
"FAA 100% all the time, either because its not practical, or because of time/money, sometimes they just take the fine." - thats not true.

Absolutely 10,000% true, if you like it or not.
Again, this is something I have seen in person. I have seen aircraft fly with lists of no-ops that would make peoples hair stand on end. The FAA only has to deal with a relatively small group of professional companies when they deal with airlines. If you think they have some kind of traffic cops who ride around out there and enforce all their rules, then you obviously don’t know much about the subject. They entrust that the airlines will follow the rules they set forth, and will fine them if they are caught violating those rules. Many of the rules are nothing more then guidelines anyway (hence that they are called FAA GUILDLINES), and not really rules per say. The airlines have their own sets of operational rules that they follow, which in many cases are even more stringent then the FAA’s rules. It does not behoove an airline to get caught breaking those rules, or to operate in an unsafe manner as that would hurt their customer reputation. However, that said, it can and has happened. The times I have seen it has been with new or restarted airlines, who don’t have maintenance departments at most locations, have to contract out their ramp operations, and don’t have aircraft to ferry in to replace the aircraft being taken out of service.

The FAA does not look for those tail markings anyway, they don’t really use them in their operations, what they FAA is concerned with is that the aircraft ID shows up in the transponder ping so they can identify it on radar. Those markings are used to identify the aircraft if they had to have another aircraft identify the tail number in-flight, and for the ramp to ensure they are parking the correct aircraft at the correct gate then loading/fueling the correct aircraft with the correct load.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-12-2007 @ 12:56 AM by C0bzz



I have seen aircraft fly with lists of no-ops that would make peoples hair stand on end.

I'm curious....

What are the worst no-ops you've ever seen?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-12-2007 @ 04:19 AM by Anubis Kanubis


I did state when I posted the comparison pics that you could kind of see a row of identification behind the fence wire. It is right where the UAE plane identification is. Later, I saw it with the lights the on same way and it was the same engine.

Although I understand that it is possible to see white aircraft. This one fit all of the profile of the sheik's horsecraft. It isn't too unconceivable to think it would overnight here. Anchorage is the passage to the East. Maybe if something is on the verge of happening, the sheik wanted all of his possessions gathered?

Sorry about the picture quality, it is hard to remain legal and take good night photos at an airport.

[edit on 12/6/2007 by Anubis Kanubis]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-12-2007 @ 05:37 AM by Zaphod58


No, actually it DOESN'T fit the profile of the sheik's aircraft. As I pointed out in my previous posts, it uses different engines than that aircraft. It is definitely NOT the sheik's aircraft.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 01:17 PM by habu71


reply to post by Anubis Kanubis



Looks like a B747-200, doesn't it? Kalitta Air does alot of transpacific ops and their -200's are solid white.....



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


<<  1    2  >>







Top Topics Right Now:



Active Topics Right Now:



ATS MIX Podcasts:











Newest Topics:




























ATS Thread Tag System
Members can add a custom descriptive tag to any thread on ATS. Thread Tags will help categorize our site content, help to cross-reference similar threads, and improve the searchability of all ATS threads. This thread is currently defined by these tags:

(no tags)
















ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.003 seconds
Page processed in 0.110 seconds
7 total database queries (1)









The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.





thread