It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Top 6 Military Planes that are mistaken for UFO's.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I just found an article of some airplanes people mistake for UFO's.

Number 2 looks nothing like a UFO. It looks like a plain airplane. Heh.

www.popularmechanics.com...




posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Hmm...they kind of look all like airplanes.
Maybe the Darkstar and Spirit can look like something strange in the sky during night.
But they make a lot of noise and have a straight flying pattern.

I don't know about that.

People mistakenly believe the TR-3B is an UFO: here a pic www.nationalufocenter.com...

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Yeah I can definetly see why that one would be mistaken for a UFO. They do all pretty much look like planes though. Thanks for the post!



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Problem is, the Darkstar only flew for 3 years, so unless the sighting is from '96 to '99, you can cross that off...

It's highly unlikely a Blackbird would have been seen by many, and again, only sightings during their service life could be attributed to it (although it's likely these are still unofficially used now and then)....

The U-2? Again, there's a service life issue, and it's unlikely one would see this as anything other than a plane.

The dirigible is another problem, no real known deployment...

The Nighthawk and Spirit are likely responsible for more than a few sightings though....

PM has a long history of debunking attempts, so not really surprising...nice find though....


[edit on 19-2-2009 by Gazrok]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Yeah, I just saw it on Yahoo news. I don't buy it. I mean, I do believe that a large percent (maybe 60-80%) are indeed top secret or recently declassified military aircraft, but the rest are indeed ET. They would have to be. Besides, there's a post somewhere here on ATS from a guy who supposedly works for Lockeed-Martin.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Notice how he says ""Many" are manmade. I confronted him on it:


Originally posted by mrjenka


Many crafts are MAN-MADE!

Originally posted by impaired


MANY, you said. You did not say all. Is there a slight implementation in that statement that the rest are indeed ET?

Originally posted by mrjenka


yes impaired.. 70-80% are man-made..

However, there is a small % of real ufos.. say 80% are man made.. 10% are real ufos and the other 10% is weather or some other type of phenomena



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Interesting post.

I was fortunate enough to see the SR-71 in 1986 when it visited Vancouver for EXPO 86. I heard it coming so I rushed out to my twelfth floor balconey overlooking False Creek just in time to see the amazing site of the SR-71 flying below my level down False Creek to English Bay on full afterburners. I had never seen a plane like it and it had a very alien and menacing otherworldly look to it. It looked huge and the sound and sight of the afterburner flames spewing out the back was MOST impressive indeed.

The Stealth fighter (now discontinued I believe) and Stealth bomber have similar unique look but they still all look and maneuver like conventional jet aircraft. I've seen both several times.

It is possible that jet pilots report high flying reconaissance aircraft as UFOs, just because they fly at such high altitudes. We sometimes get blimps reported as UFOs to our website as they are quiet and do hover. Sometimes lit up.

We have had one recent sighting of a silent craft hovering near the border which might be some sort of experimental drone or aircraft in testing by/for the US border service (this was in Canadian territory but near the border and on the approach to Abbotsford Airport). What was odd about this aircraft was that it was silent and hovering but had a large blue flame out the back - like the afterburner on a jet engine (obviously not a jet if it was hovering and that quiet).



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegreatobserver
Hmm...they kind of look all like airplanes.
Maybe the Darkstar and Spirit can look like something strange in the sky during night.
But they make a lot of noise and have a straight flying pattern.

I don't know about that.

People mistakenly believe the TR-3B is an UFO: here a pic www.nationalufocenter.com...

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...




Of course, you can PROVE that that pic, taken in Petit-Rechain on 1990, shows a Tr-3B, right? Or, at least, can you prove the existence of Tr-3b?



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jess_Undefined
Number 2 looks nothing like a UFO. It looks like a plain airplane. Heh.

I agree. I doubt this has been mistaken for a UFO at all. Popular mechanics will pretty much say anything to try and "debunk" UFO sightings.
They still can't explain the circular UFOs that move erratically, turn on a dime, and accelerate with speeds that would kill any human pilot.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I think B52s are mistaken for a lot of the black triangle sightings:



If you see them at night, they have bright lights all around the wing but not on the nose or tail, so they look very strange and triangular.

Not all of themof course.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I'm willing to bet that some of the early sightings from the late 40s through the 50s are most likely military in nature such as these remember a lot of early sightings of UFOs were said to be cresent shaped not saucer







posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
And I'm pretty sure they played around with some of the captured german stuff after the war like this one
Horten Flying Wing





posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by internos
Of course, you can PROVE that that pic, taken in Petit-Rechain on 1990, shows a Tr-3B, right? Or, at least, can you prove the existence of Tr-3b?


NO, that picture was just an example for the OP to show how a TR-3B looks like in the night-sky.
I saw one by myself. Makes noise.....

[edit on 19-2-2009 by thegreatobserver]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegreatobserver


NO, that picture was just an example for the OP to show how a TR-3B looks like in the night-sky.
I saw one by myself. Makes noise.....

I had to point it out, because to claim that the 1990 UFO waves was due to a tr-3b invasion is not just wrong, but even very unlikely:

The Belgium UFO wave, Petit-Rechain, april 1990



UFOs were spotted by radars making manoeuvres impossible for the (known) terrestrial aircraft, at impossible (for us) speed/accelerations and so on.

1) Object witnessed at Eupen, Wavre, Leige and Brussels
2) Reported in over 2,600 statements to police
3) Photographed by many people on both Video and Camera
4) Detected and Confirmed by radar stations on the ground
5) Detected, Confirmed and photographed on aircraft radar screens
6) Pursued for over an hour by two F-16s.


Glons radar confirmed the sighting of an unidentified object at an altitude of 3,000 meters. Semmerzake radar confirmed the Glons detection and passed its confirmation onto the Air Force. The radar scans were compared with the previous Eupen radar sightings (see Eupen Case) by Semmerzake and Glons and were found to be identical.
Several police patrols had witnessed the same phenomenon before. It was a massive triangular shape with the same lighting configuration as seen at Eupen four months earlier.




Colonel Wilfred De Brouwer, Chief of the operations section of the Air Force, said: "That because of the frequency or requests for radar confirmation at Glons and Semmerzake - and as a number of private visual observations had been confirmed by the police - it was decided that as these parameters had been met, a patrol of F-16 aircraft should be sent to intercept an unidentified object somewhere to the south of Brussels"

As a consequence, two F-16 aircraft of the Belgian Air Force - registration
numbers 349 and 350 = flown by a Captain and a Flight-Lieutenant, both highly qualified pilots, took off from Bevekom.
Within a few minutes - guided by the Glons radar - both pilots had detected a positive oval-shaped object on their on-board radar at a height of 3,000 meters, but in the darkness saw nothing. This oval configuration, however, caused the pilots some concern. It reacted in an intelligent and disturbing way when they attempted to 'lock-on' with their on-board radar.

Changing shape instantly, it assumed a distinct 'diamond image' on their radar screens and - increasing its speed to 1,000km/h - took immediate and violent evasive action.




Photographs of the actual on-board radar of the F-16s recorded a descent of this object from 3,000m to 1,200 in 2 seconds, a descent rate of 1,800km/h. The same photographs show an unbelievable acceleration rate of 280km/h to 1,800km/h in a few seconds. According to Professor Leon Brening - a non-linear dynamic theorist at the Free University of Brussels - this would represent an acceleration of 46g and would be beyond the possibility of any human pilot to endure.
It was noted that in spite of these speeds and acceleration times there was a marked absence of any sonic boom. The movements of this object were described by the pilots and radar operators as 'wildly erratic and step-like', and a zigzag course was taken over the city of Brussels with the two F-16s in pursuit. Visual contact was not possible against the lighting of the city.
This same procedure was repeated several times, with this object - whenever an attempt at radar 'lock-on' was made - pursuing a violently erratic course at impossible speed and losing its pursuers.


Colonel De Brouwer added "Immediatley after the operation, the pilots said they had never seen anything like it. Certainly the flight pattern and echo on their screens was in no way that of a conventional aircraft"
The Belgian Minister of Defence in the Belgian parliament stated that "The
Government did not know what they were".

The explanation based on ZERO evidences that it was a military craft does not make sense, especially if we look at the data:


Acceleration data


Radar data


Colonel W. De Brouwer, Belgian Air Force, with the radar videos of one of the F-16s at the press conference of July 11th


Blow-up of the image on the bottom screen above.
The 990K is the speed of the object in knots.
990K = 1830 kilometers per hour = 1.5 Mach.



Speed changes of up to 410 knots in one second.
Heading changes of up to 70 degrees in one second.
Altitude changes of up to 3000 feet per second (1,777 knots) maintained for one second or less and typical ascent / descent rates of 1000 feet per second (592 knots).



The nature of these manuvers and their coincidence in time is also visible in this graph, which only shows the value of the changes:



Text file of the radar contacts of one of the F-16s
www.geocities.com...

Sources, more infos and references:

www.ufoevidence.org...
www.ufoevidence.org...
ufos.about.com...
www.ufoevidence.org...
www.geocities.com...
ufologie.net...
/ypsaz9

Original article related to the pics (recovered)
/2hrdam



What happened over Belgium on 1990 was unexpected, unexplained AND unexplainable, and can't be dismissed as some experiment, less than less as a "TR-3B which falls into the same basket of "Grey aliens": it wasn't Minnesota or Texas, it was BELGIUM. And it happened, for REAL.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Hello ATS users, around the year 2001 or 2002 (don't remember exactly) while in military school in south america in Ecuador I saw this exact same craft shown in this video
hovering at an altitude lower then a plane would fly but as high as a helicopter would. It came in really fast, paused for about 20 seconds (felt like 30) then after the center light grew brighter it took off to the right and up at an unbelievable speed.
It was at a perfect altitude for me to see detail and I asure you it was the exact same type craft as in this video (TR-3B I believe). Untill today I had sworn it was extraterrestrial which I am not yet 100% sure it wasn't seeing the movements of this one compared to the professionalism from which the one I saw come in to a dead stop then leave at the speed it did, reading the mechanics of the way the TR-3B works, I don't see the speed and precision of the one in the video equivalent to the one from my experience with the exception of the end part of the video (^.^) I can't conclude if the end clip of the video is real (even though it does exactly what the one I saw did) if maybe someone can explain the departure of the craft alittle more scientifically It would help because I don't see magnetic propulsion being capable of an exit like so. Unless we are dealing with some type of rotating electromagnetic field of some sort ^.^ hint (philadelphia experiment) anyhow, lol

If anyone has any information on this TR-3B and would know if it is possible that this craft would have been in any way close to Ecuador around those years please post because I am fairly certain of what I saw and it was EXACTLY what is in this video. ps (F.A.E. #3) Ecuadorian Air Force is where I attended and I happened to have been about 1:30hr drive from the base es.wikipedia.org... So unless the United States were spying on the Ecuadorian Air Force at that time... Yeah,... es.wikipedia.org... is the exact base where I was attending.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegreatobserver
People mistakenly believe the TR-3B is an UFO: here a pic www.nationalufocenter.com...

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...





people mistakenly believe that the TR-3B is a physical aircraft

if you drop that fallacy and look at the logic of a ` tier 3B ` program - then all official documentation makes sense



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Anything can be considered a UFO if you dont know what your looking at.
UFO Here



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Yeah I can definetly see that one being mistaken for a UFO.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Anything can be considered a UFO if you dont know what your looking at.
UFO Here


I'm pretty sure he is joking. I'm pretty sure this is a fake and any aeronautical engineer would laugh at this.

But it is good for a laugh.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join