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.

 

B-2 reminds me of quite alot of UFO sightings

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 08:49 AM
link   
I've been reading about alot of "triangular shaped" UFO sightings over the last few decades and I wasn't able to tie it together with posible military aircraft, mainly because of the numerous reports of the UFO "hoovering".

Now when I read up more and more about the B2 and its suspected technology, its starting to look like that specific kind of UFO sightings (V Shaped craft) might have more to do with an actual military jet then first suspected.

Its a quite established fact by now that the B-2 has various Anti Gravity / Electro Gravatic technology in its repertoire. Now, if you take that a step further, where the B-2 wouldn't only use its gravity drive for propulsion and radar cloaking, it could also use it for hoovering and vertical take-off/landing.

Then, the technology of a known(by now 20 years old) military aircraft and its shape would be very much alike as one of the main UFO sighting types of the last few decades. The V and triangular Shape ones. Next to that you still have disks, cigars and others.

Whats your take on this? Anyone have any information that would suspect the B-2 to be able to hoover and land/take-off with its electro gravity technology?

To take one thing out of the way, I know the B-2 in official media takes of and lands like a normal plane, but wouldn't you keep it a secret that your weapon can do that, showing no external features of jet propeled vertical take-off/landing installations, like you can clearly see on Harrier Jets or the X-plane contract race they did a show about on National Geographic(Think that jet was the Joint Strike fighter)?

The part of the B-2 that would make vertacal take-off/landing and hoovering posible, is the same part of its technology that keeps getting denied existence, eventhough there have been leaks about the technology and technological reasoning for the charged wings and exhaust and other features of the plane show there is definatly anti gravatic technology on board.

Whats your take on this? Anyone have any information that would suspect the B-2 to be able to hoover and land/take-off with its electro gravity technology? Or any info on UFO sightings that are suspected to be B-2's?

[Edited on 27-4-2004 by thematrix]




posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix
Its a quite established fact by now that the B-2 has various Anti Gravity / Electro Gravatic technology in its repertoire. [Edited on 27-4-2004 by thematrix]


i never knew that. could you tell me more about it please?



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Check out that research thread. Plenty of info to assimilate.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 12:17 PM
link   

B-2 reminds me of quite alot of UFO sightings


Listen to this person people. I'm hearing a lot of logic FINALLY.

You are absolutely correct. The B-2A model is flat in shap not to mention the fact that it is almost basically a flying key.

I find it very hard to believe that UFO's have even come to Earth after all of the work and research that I have done. The B-2A is most likely the main ground for over 88.9% of UFO sightings to date.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I wouldn't go that far as to say that single plane accounts for 89% of sightings. Theres still all the cigar, disk and other shapped UFO's that aren't accounted for.

But the Wing/V shaped ones definatly make me think of B-2 and other X-plane type military jets.

I've been checking out a load of other Black Project X-planes and alot of them seem to be able to account for V shapped UFO sightings.

But what I really want to get into with this topic is seeing if the electro gravatic systems could give the ability a hoover and vertical take-off/landing capability with the level of technology displayed in anti-gravity field to date.

Not only do I tend to believe there are UFO accounts that are non human(no matter if they are terrestrial of extra terrestrial, some are definatly not human) but also that more then just US military can be held responsible for Unindentifyable Flying objects.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Actually that is proven 88.9% of sightings are B-2's or similar Government planes. The other 11.1% are simply other Government planes.

Aliens have not come to Earth yet. It's the truth... and I stand by it.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 06:26 AM
link   
I find it hilareous that people still think the b-2 usses anti-gravity engines. If it did, why would it use a wing body and not one that is more compact since it doesnt need to create lift? The B-2 travels for as long and carries as much because of its wing -body design.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 10:11 PM
link   
The B-2 is already obsolete.
Antigravitics has been employed for years now...



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 10:36 PM
link   
No, actually that statement is false... they plan on buying more B-2A's as a matter in fact, that and they aren't supposed to drop out until 2030. Calling history and knowledge!



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:13 AM
link   
About the “best” thing a B-2 can do is;
From;
www.af.mil...
“..., and our recent adaptation of the B-2 bomber that General Jumper announced yesterday - - 80 GPS-guided weapons dropped from a single B-2. And every weapon hit within 40 feet of its intended target, from more than 35, 000 feet and 10 miles away, taking less time to target them than the usual eight hours for 16 JDAMS through machine-to-machine target data transfer.”

So they upgrade a computer system, and cheat the USA taxpayer blind...
Read the whole debacle behind the B-2 program. Rumsfeld’s connected to the Contractors (what a surprise!). He’s pushed for the whole program since 1995...



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ixataar
www.af.mil...


This document is out of date. Look 10/2003, the recent information released was from March 2004 and calls for 40 to 60 maybe even 70 new B-2A's.

Statements above are false again. The government changes... so does the arsenal.


[Edited on 4-5-2004 by Shugo]



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:27 AM
link   
Why doesn't the USA taxpayer just pay Rumsfeld and his cronies the money direct, and save stuffing about with this ILLUSION, that you will ever see 50 (HA!) B-2s ever roll off the production line.

Its NOT going to happen...



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ixataar
Why doesn't the USA taxpayer just pay Rumsfeld and his cronies the money direct, and save stuffing about with this ILLUSION, that you will ever see 50 (HA!) B-2s ever roll off the production line.

Its NOT going to happen...


Explain that to the bill that has already been passed. Maybe he'll catch on fire. They already ordered those bombers. It's already been done... so take this information to the fiction section.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Ok,
so when will we see these (already approved, signed-sealed and delivered) B-2s?????

Any idea mate?
Next week, next month, next millennium??

Just because MONEY has been appropriated - does not mean that they will come to fruition.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Ok then argue with the pros:


Originally posted by Zion Mainframe

hehe from what I've understood from a recent post from Intelgurl, the air force has plans to increase the B-2 fleet to 40, or even 60.
Northrop claims they can build them for $700M per airframe

This is what I found via google:

www.globalsecurity.org...
(scroll down to the sixth paragraph)

www.aeronautics.ru...


Want the thread for proof?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Stifle your ignorance!



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Yep, they have been planning since 1978, and if you look back at the history of the aircraft, they first planned 180, then 130, then 90, then 70, then 50, then 60, and on and on and on...
The only real pattern here is that the number of planes actually going to be PRODUCED is ever-dwindling, whilst the FUNDS keep pouring in.

A recent example, from;
home.iae.nl...
“Prime contractor: Northrop Grumman Corporation
Nation of origin: USA
Function: Strategic stealth bomber
Crew: 2/3
Year: 1989
In-service year: Complete delivery by 2000”

Ahhh, that’s four years late…where are these?
You have a fleet of 21 of them (plus an undisclosed amount on Nuclear standby).
That is ALL there will ever be…

Stifle your common sense mate...



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Hey, you're not fighting with me anymore... since you obviously lack in listening skills. Now you can talk to Zion Mainframe about all of this... since I'm obviously not smacking you with a hard enough baseball bat.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
My listening skills are shocking, because I don't believe your crap...I like to research and make my own opinion.
Smack me more with your "second-hand" baseball bat mate. I'll return in kind with my Peacekeeper ICBM...



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Woah... that was signifcantly off topic...

I thought we were talking about the B-2A... not only that isn't the original name of this topic "B-2 reminds me of quite alot of UFO sightings"?

BACK ON THE OFFICIAL TOPIC NOW!
Yes, the flat layout of the B-2A could remind almost anyone of a UFO. Also the flying wing design, someone could easily mistake it.

[Edited on 4-5-2004 by Shugo]



posted on May, 5 2004 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by roniii259
I find it hilareous that people still think the b-2 usses anti-gravity engines. If it did, why would it use a wing body and not one that is more compact since it doesnt need to create lift? The B-2 travels for as long and carries as much because of its wing -body design.


Thank God someone else had the brains to say this!


The flying wing was used for the B-2 because it creates a LOT of lift. Thus, it could house many more nukes, as it was designed to do.

The idea that the B-2 uses anti grav tech is silly. If it did have anti grav crap on it, don't you think that the US would have kept it more hush hush? The plane clearly uses engines to travel, not gravity displacement - you can even see the engines on it.

The ONLY ESTABLISHED tech it has that has any hint of anti gravity tech is how the leading edge of the plane is electricly charged, and even this is in the common knowladge realm of science. As I understand it (bear in mind I am NOT a scientist) the high charge allows for greater aerodynamic interaction with the air that the B-2 travels through, and thus would boost it's lift. Even this, as exotic as it may be, is not really related to antigravitational method of flight - it simply enhances the performance.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join