Area 51: Darkstar

I have been snooping around Area 51 on the internet. Recently I have been checking out the Aurora Project, and while doing so, I came across an aerial Project called DarkStar. It seems to be a plane but I can find little more on this subject. Can someone assist me on this topic?

Well one thing is for certain it is an UAV(unmanned aerial vhicle) The image is even named that. It does look familiar to a UFO sighting in Alaska, ithink anyways. I'll try to see if i can get more pics.

Well, just doing an ATS search, I came across several threads regarding the Darkstar:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Lockheed Martin/Boeing RQ-3A DarkStar (Tier III Minus) unpiloted aircraft were built as advanced concept technology demonstrators (ACTD) for a high-altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (HAE-UAV) design. The first two air vehicles were flown at Edwards Air Force Base, California, with support from the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) managed the program on behalf of the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO). The first air vehicle (article number 695) arrived at DFRC on 6 September 1995. It made a successful maiden flight, but was destroyed on takeoff during its second flight. The second air vehicle (article number 696) arrived at DFRC on 16 October 1997. Following five successful flights, the program was cancelled on 28 January 1999. The aircraft returned to the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works facility in Palmdale on 18 February 1999. A third air vehicle was built but never flown. Below are the flight logs.


AV-1 (695)

Flt. 1 / 29 MAR 96 : Aircraft functional checkout.

Flt. 2 / 22 APR 96 : Aircraft crashed immediately after takeoff.


AV-2 (696)

Flt. 1 / 29 JUN 98 : Aircraft functional checkout.

Flt. 2 / 13 SEP 98 : Fully autonomous flight from takeoff to landing utilizing differential Global Positioning System (GPS), reached altitude of 5,000 feet.

Flt. 3 / 30 SEP 98 : Envelope expansion, first attempt to reach 20,000 feet.

Flt. 4 / 27 OCT 98 : Bank angle envelope expansion, stability and control demonstration, over-the-horizon communications link check out.

Flt. 5 / 09 JAN 99 : Envelope expansion, reached altitude of 25,000 feet.

To be honest, to me it looks alot like a shot taken at great distance of
a b2 bomber that is on final-> comming in to land.

but... i can be wrong.
also i excuse me for the bad englisch spelling but this is not my nature language



greets Degreef Steve

reply to post by stewen


It has some of the same shape characteristics but it is much smaller.

upload.wikimedia.org...

Now that i took a closer look to the picture i see that there are no windows in it.

I didn't notice that before.
It also looks heavy, if u take a look at the wings, u can see that they are bending under the weight of the fuselage.

greets Degreef Steve

Ok, I was just talking to an army guy and it was replaced by a UAV called the global hawk, The darkstar has better Stealth, but the Global hawk has better surviellence.

There are reports that U-2 pilots over Iraq and Afghanistan were having problems almost colliding with a UAV that looked just like the Darkstar, but bigger. They were flying at their normal altitude and had several near misses.

Nevertheless, although the stealthy Darkstar UAV was officially cancelled back in Feb 99, there have been persistent reports that, as part of a ‘black’ programme, a larger derivative of this UAV was developed by Lockheed Martin and has been used in operations over Iraq. These rumours have been given added strength by the apparent inability of current UAVs to meet a long-standing USAF requirement for a very low observable, high-altitude UAV that can fly 1,000nm to a target area, penetrate a modern air defence system, loiter for at least 8hr and then return to base.

Little if anything has been said by Lockheed Martin about the new ‘Super Darkstar’ or Quartz or whatever name it has been given, other than the tacit admission recently by some well placed individuals from Lockheed Martin that the vehicle exists and has been used successfully in operations. They also confirmed that, whilst it cannot carry the same payload as a U-2S, it nevertheless is capable of carrying an LPI synthetic aperture radar as well as infra-red and electro-optical sensors. A number of U-2S pilots reported seeing an unknown high-flying vehicle, operating at or above the height of their own aircraft, whilst flying over Iraq. Lockheed Martin will probably attempt to keep this new UAV out of the limelight for as long as possible. Presumably the USAF have been willing to pay considerably more for this vehicle, compared to the non-stealthy Northrop Grumman Global Hawk, because of its capability to penetrate highly defended airspace undetected and the quality of intelligence it provided.

www.spyflight.co.uk...

thank you! ^^ You are all quite helpful!

reply to post by Zaphod58


The Global Hawk can fly 3000nm and loiter for 24 hours. There is no need for something secret as you described. I haven't seen those U-2 reports, but if the UAV is one of ours, you can bet a U-2 won't be flying into it. That is why we have flight controllers.

global hawk

reply to post by gariac


You really think that a U-2 at 80,000 feet is talking to a fight controller? Seriously? That altitude is uncontrolled. The only time that an SR-71 or U-2 would deal with a controller is climb out and decent. Many times controllers didn't even know they were there.

As for the Global Hawk, yes it can do those things but it's not the most stealthy UAV out there.

There are too many sources asking about a UAV based on Dark Star to just dismiss the idea out of hand. There's even a PDF that I've read about Heavy UAV/UCAV systems that asks if there's one based on Dark Star because we lack a sucessor to the Ryan 147 and SR-71.

reply to post by Zaphod58


In a war zone, air space is tightly controlled. It is not a free for all. Read this book:

rand report

In Afghanistan, they were dropping bombs through multiple levels of aircraft, including civilian.

Further, the DoD generally doesn't try experimental aircraft in theater. You fight like you train, and it is hard to train with something not approved for use. Now the Predators were rushed into the Balkans, but it wasn't like the project was a one of a kind experimental device. About half the Predators ever made have crashed. You certainly don't bring a one of a kind plane in theater.

How many aircraft do you think are flying at 80,000 feet in the war zone? They don't have to control airspace that high, even in theater, because the only thing flying up there is the U-2. You don't have weapons fire to worry about.

Who says it's one of a kind? We don't have enough information about it to know how many were built. They could have been building these for several years, and have a number of them built.

What makes you think planes at 80KFT can't be detected? Hard to shoot down, yes, but quite easy to detect.

What makes you think programs that are not approved are used in theater? You offer no evidence whatsoever of this craft being used in theater. None, Zip, Nada.

Where is the USAF report from these U2 pilots encountering unknown aircraft at 80KFt?

If you want to just make up stories, why implicate Dark Star. Why not say they use a Bob Lazar saucer?

I prefer the Dark Star (aka Tier III Minus UAV)to the Global Hawk (aka Tier II Plus UAV)
as it was stealthier and sorry if I am a bit vain when I say it, but its looks were a lot better in my own opinion.

reply to post by gariac


Now I'm making them up? Whatever. I have seen several sources that report that U-2 pilots had problems with aircraft at their altitude. But you're right. I'd rather make things up and be called a liar than to report things from various sources. Or are the other people that reported this liars too? I'm not the only one that has talked about these aircraft. Or how about other sources that talk to Lockheed that have asked questions about this plane? Are they liars too? I guess we're all lying and making things up as we go along right?

You do realize that the point of Dark Star and her kin is STEALTH right? Stealth at 80K is going to be MUCH harder to detect. You do realize that if there is a black project related to Dark Star it's going to be classified, and they're probably going to keep sightings covered up as well. But you're right, you have access to every single USAF report that has ever been written, and I just lied about this.

[edit on 12/23/2008 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by gariac
If you want to just make up stories, why implicate Dark Star. Why not say they use a Bob Lazar saucer?

Look! More people making things up!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Even Aviation Week is making it up!

The aircraft is described by a U.S. Air Force official as a derivative of the "DarkStar" (Tier 3-minus) program that was canceled after the demonstration aircraft was test flown and then declared operationally unsuitable. The new Lockheed Martin UAV is "highly reliable," in part because of a much improved flight control system, the Air Force official said. "It's the same concept as DarkStar, it's stealthy, and it uses the same apertures and data links," he said. "The numbers are limited. There are a couple of airframes, a ground station and spare parts."


The classified UAV's operation caused consternation among USAF U-2 pilots who noticed high-flying aircraft operating within several miles of their routes over Iraq, a distance they considered too close for comfort. The mysterious aircrafts' flights were not coordinated with those of the other manned and unmanned surveillance aircraft, they said.


"It has the hull form of the DarkStar, only it's bigger," agreed a U.S. Navy official. "It's still far from a production aircraft, but the Air Force wanted to go ahead and get it out there. They have to determine if the intelligence they can gather from it is worth paying several times more than the cost of the [non-stealthy] Global Hawk."

Source

I'll take that apology now.

[edit on 12/23/2008 by Zaphod58]

It is a Dark Star. The Global Hawk and U-2 use and did use the same Air Space in conflict. Sometimes it was an issue when focused on a particular AO but otherwise deconfliction was not an issue.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Ah yes, Aviation Leak. Well that settles everything. ;-)

Like I said, things are supposed to be coordinated, a claim you dismissed.