Stealth blimps the new black helicopters?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I've been seeing snippets of info both on tv and in magazines about lockheed martin's development of stealth blimps. It's been thought that these same types of crafts are behind the surge in black triangle sightings in recent years.

We all know that black helicopters were clearly used in the past for surveillance and possibly other fiendish type activities.

Nowadays, black helicopters have become more of a punchline than a topic. But I've been wondering if these stealth airships are up to the same behavior as their whirlybird cousins? In case you aren't aware of what a stealth airship is, here's a link: Stealthy Airship




posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Before anyone comes on board to argue that "Airships and blimps are to big to be Stealthy", just remember that balloons, blimps, and airships can be designed to fly higher and quieter than any other aircraft, and they do not rely on materials easily identified by conventional radar.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I dont know why but the word stealth and blimp sound like opposite in my mind.
Invisible to radar but very visible to the eye.
If they are monitoring you with those big blimp, you could probably outrun they with your car, no worry.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
I dont know.

Aside from the size issue which has been brought up it seems like using blimps would be step back in military technology.

Why would we want to use such a huge, slow object that is filled with gas?

Using such an object would be VERY easy to hit as it is so slow and does not move around easily. If it were hit it would cause a huge explosion which would cause a risk for innocent civilians.

We have much better and much more appropriate technology to use for missions that require stealth. That is what we will use. I can not see us taking such a huge step back and using blimps... If we do these blimps will be a huge failure. Blimps would just get in the way. Stealth fighters and bombers are and will continue to be in the form of planes.


[edit on 14-3-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Jigore
 


Once they're in service they'll loiter at 65,000 feet and use radar to scan for targets. There is no way that you could outrun them with your car. They won't be in service until about 2015 or so though.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


Actually, it will loiter higher than almost every fighter will be able to fly. The altitude will let the radar look for at least hundreds of miles, if not farther depending on the radar that's used.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Jigore
 


Once they're in service they'll loiter at 65,000 feet and use radar to scan for targets. There is no way that you could outrun them with your car. They won't be in service until about 2015 or so though.


You are kidding me. They are actually going to use blimps?

That just seems incredibly dumb to me.

Granted I dont know that much about blimps, when I think of them, I think big and slow. It seems like they are just one big flying target filled with gas for an added explosion....

I dont know, It just doesnt seem wise to me.

Are you saying that they would be high up enough that shooting them down would be out of the question? I hope so.

What of the stealth fighters and bombers currently in use? It seems like there speed is or should be important.

Unless this is some kind of new blimp wouldnt it be incredibly slow? Or does speed even matter that much?

Would these blimps be the replacement for the stealth fighters and bombers or would they be used in addition to them?

Keeping in mind I do not know much about aircraft in general, What would be the pros and cons of using stealth blimps over stealth jets?

Please bear with my questions here. I just do not know much about it and I am trying to learn and understand.


[edit on 14-3-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
This topic is covered here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
And here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


They'll be hard to shoot down because of their altitude, and because they can loiter so far back from the front lines and still see into their targets.

The higher the altitude the longer the range on the radar, because the horizon moves so far back. With the exception of the OTH-B (Over The Horizon-Backscatter) radar, no radar systems can see below the horizon, without linking to another radar further out. By putting your radar up at 65,000 feet you have an insane horizon.

The reason not to use stealth planes is that they aren't designed with this mission in mind. You would have to redesign them with new recon systems. The other big thing with these is the fact that they can loiter for weeks or months at a time with the solar panels on top to provide power. With an aircraft if you don't happen to be over the target at the right time, you will miss what you're looking for. With a blimp that sits there for weeks at a time you don't have to worry about being there at the right time.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
This topic is covered here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
And here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



The first thread is about black flying triangles and the last post was 11/6/08. I am not seeing any relationship between that and the potential use of stealth blimps in the fure.

The second one is about stealth blimps but the last post was made in february 2006.This one is cleary no longer active. The first one is not all that active either for that matter...


This thread is ok IMO. But then again It is up to the mods really now isnt it?




[edit on 14-3-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
IMO it just seems like it's not a very logical aircraft when attemtping to gather information in a stealthy manner.

I mean blimbs are huge, very easy to shoot out of the sky weather it's dark or not.

And I doubt they would be traveling at super sonic speeds either which would make catching them far easier than spotting them now wouln't it?

I mean I could understand if they were doing it to spy on us domestically, that would make sense, nobody is really gonna be looking for a blimb in Mid Western USA or anything.

Actually that notion kinda scared me


~Keeper



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 

Don't get me wrong just trying to share info on the subject.
Still a good post despite any other coverage.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
IMO it just seems like it's not a very logical aircraft when attemtping to gather information in a stealthy manner.

I mean blimbs are huge, very easy to shoot out of the sky weather it's dark or not.

And I doubt they would be traveling at super sonic speeds either which would make catching them far easier than spotting them now wouln't it?

I mean I could understand if they were doing it to spy on us domestically, that would make sense, nobody is really gonna be looking for a blimb in Mid Western USA or anything.

Actually that notion kinda scared me


~Keeper


Yeah see that is what I am thinking. Arent blimps really slow though?

that seems like it would make it even easier to shoot down...

It doesnt seem like a wise choice.

Not to mention the nice size explosion that would come with shooting down a blimp that would be filled with flammable gasses....

I fail to see the any good reason to use blimps anymore, especially considering we have much better technology. We even have unmanned spy planes now!

Why use a blimp



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 

Don't get me wrong just trying to share info on the subject.
Still a good post despite any other coverage.



oh ok. Fair enough. Hopefully I didnt come across as rude.

I do that sometimes unintentionally.

peace and love my friend



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


You and Gimme_Some_Truth are over thinking this though. You're talking about an aircraft that can be anywhere from directly overhead to 1000 miles away, that will probably have an RCS smaller than an F-22. It's going to loiter WELL out of range of any shoulder fired missile, and many other SAMs, even if they could SEE it. You would have to find it, and have the capabilities of hitting it to take it out. In a situation like Afghanistan or Iraq it could sit there forever and no one could probably touch it.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


You and Gimme_Some_Truth are over thinking this though. You're talking about an aircraft that can be anywhere from directly overhead to 1000 miles away, that will probably have an RCS smaller than an F-22. It's going to loiter WELL out of range of any shoulder fired missile, and many other SAMs, even if they could SEE it. You would have to find it, and have the capabilities of hitting it to take it out. In a situation like Afghanistan or Iraq it could sit there forever and no one could probably touch it.


Ok so then slowness and size is not really a factor then?

So basically it sounds like it would be used to spy and do surveilance. So let me ask this. What can a blimp do or see that one of our sattelites can not?

Cant a sattelite do just as good if not better than a blimp? I mean, they would be further out of reach than any blimp could be...

Or am I missing something and these blimps are going to be used for more than surveilance and spying?

Once again, please pardon my ignorance and thank you for your help so far.



[edit on 14-3-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Could it be we are looking at this type of vehicle in the wrong way? as an attack plane or something?
An aircraft like this could carry huge payloads to deliver tanks,artillery,troops and such delivered at the enemy gates under cover of forward battle groups.
A blimp sounds slow but what if this thing flies fast with massive payload?



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


An airship can lioter at an altitude far higher than most aircraft, and many surface to air missles, can fly.

An Airship can be made of materials that are virtually "invisible" to radar, and their lack of "speed" makes them even more difficult to detect using targeting systems that rely on high speed motion to interpolate position.

And, given that its extreme high altitude provides an airship visual coverage of an area second in size only to that of a satelite, the airship is likely to see an aggressor making its attack long before the aggressor is within range to attack to the airship.

It's a simple matter of "If I see you before you can see me, you die".



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


They were going to have the Walrus as a transport, but they canceled that project.

The problem with satellites is twofold. One is that they're predictable. The other problem is that unless they're in a geosynch orbit, they only pass over a given area once every 90 minutes or so. This thing will be able to stay in the same area for as long as the systems hold out and it has power.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


Well in light of that information that makes alot of sense then.

I could see how something that is 1000 miles away but gathering intelligence that's as accurate as a Satellite could be very useful in coordinating ground troops and the like.

I always enjoy being wrong
Means I learned something!

~Keeper





new topics
 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join