Is this a top secret plane?, page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 56 times


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 11:44 AM by ryant7
reply to post by Zaphod58



it does not matter that it is "retired" they fly in and out to go to airshows and aviation exhibits all the time in my opinion that is what it is


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:17 PM by Anonymous ATS
Is there any reason that the photos presented were shot at such a low resolution?

Panasonic DMC-FZ8 is a 7.2 mega pixel camera.

The reason I ask, is in the first image, the 'craft' has a pixelated edge. It appears not to be
Anti-aliased the same as the rest of the image.
Object-based anti-aliasing

A graphics rendering system creates an image based on objects constructed of polygonal primitives whereby the aliasing effects in the image are reduced by applying an anti-aliasing scheme only to the areas of the image representing silhouette edges of the objects. The silhouette edges are anti-aliased by creating anti-aliasing primitives which vary in opacity. These anti-aliasing primitives are joined to the silhouetted edges, and create a region in the image where the objects appear to blend into the background. The method has some important advantages over the classical methods based on the accumulation buffer since it generates full-scene anti-aliasing in only two passes and does not require the use of the additional memory required by the accumulation buffer. Object-based anti-aliasing was first developed at Silicon Graphics for their Indy workstation.


Sorry, but I don't understand shooting a 7 megapixel digital camera at such a low resolution, unless you need to composite a aircraft into the image with Adobe Photoshop Elements 6.0 Windows, because the 3D rendering program used is not of high resolution.

I feel that this is more than likely a hoax.


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:26 PM by miguelbmx
reply to post by Zaphod58



I agree totally, I was going to post something similar, perhaps you can ilustrate it for those who still say "F117".

I do how ever have questions for the person who posted the pictures.

1. Why only 2 pictures?

2. Did it make any noise?

3.How fast was it trveling?

4. WHY ONLY 2 PICTURES?



reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:28 PM by HunkaHunka
reply to post by Curio



You are both missing the point. Looking at the photos up close as posted on the first page, clearly shows that it is NOT an F-117.

This is an amazing find though.


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:42 PM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by ampaf707



Looks like an f-117 that's either been doctored or perhaps an upgraded version of the f117. Def not aurora because (to my understanding) Aurora is rather large.

Burr. When I think of groomlake I get chills up my spine. Alot of innovative ideas but... so much darkness.


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:47 PM by Marcus Calpurnius
reply to post by miguelbmx



Lets be honest here. Most of the speculation is due to the lack of information being given by the OP. I see people suggesting it could be some nuclear powered triangle craft with thrust vectoring, but it seems like that would kick up lots of noise and dust. We're left guessing by the OP.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Marcus Calpurnius]


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:50 PM by Helmkat
reply to post by HunkaHunka



I still want to know the answer to this...

Also, the linked photos say they were taken with a Panasonic DMC-FZ8 which is a 7 mega pixel camera. The EXIF data says however that it's only a 2 mega pixel image. Why downsize the image?

Also if he/she had posted the original image all of the EXIF data would have been attached to the file. It makes me suspicious the file has been modifed if that data is not there. Someone would have to know how to remove that data to do that, which again makes me suspicious.

Come on folks, lets get some answers to this.

Here is more information in talking to my Partner

On the link to the picture on the Flickr site. On Flickr it says what kind of camera it was taken with.

www.flickr.com...@N03/3008567389/

Right hand side under Additional information

Take with a Panasonic DMC-FZ8 and then a link to more properties.

Image width is 1672 x 1254 pixels, that's 2,096,688 or 2 mega pixels. The camera specs state It's a 7mp camera.

All of this "additional info" is some of the EXIF info that should be embedded in the actual file. The image that's on Flickr does not actually contain any of this info, I downloaded it and looked at it, there's nothing there. It's also smaller than stated here.

It also clearly states the image was edited in Adobe Photoshop Elements 6 for windows on November 5th. Maybe the owner just resized it to post it on Flickr, but who knows. Why not post the original image??? That's all I'm saying.

and another comment

I found a button on Flickr that lets you view larger sizes, so I did find the largest size, but it's still not a 7mp image.

If the camera takes 7mp images, why not post that image, why resize it smaller??








[edit on 7-11-2008 by Helmkat]

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Helmkat]


reply posted on 7-11-2008 @ 12:52 PM by safteynet
reply to post by ampaf707


It could be anyone of those mentioned in the responses, but hearing a dull roar makes me question it being an arora also newer technology would be more in line with ram jet tech which would produce more of a popping sound at that altitude. Loved the PICs though, keep up the good work

Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>    ^^TOP^^



In Case Of Videos Of Flying People
  Posted 9 days ago with 9 member flags
First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
  Posted 12 days ago with 4 member flags
Boeing X-37 and X-40 - the ultimate history
  Posted 5 days ago with 3 member flags
F22 mishap or more that meeets the eye?
  Posted 1 days ago with 3 member flags
Its a bird, its a plane, no its a ....
  Posted 14 days ago with 0 member flags