It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Top-Secret Aircraft Mistaken for UFOs

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 05:33 PM
Found this article this morning about aircraft that are mistaken for UFOs. It does not explain all of the sightings but could explain some of them.
source article

Spy and stealth planes — some with bizarre, bat-shaped wings, others with triangular silhouettes that imply otherworldly designs — have long generated UFO sightings and lore. And official denials feed rumors that the government isn't telling us about alien ships.

The CIA estimates that over half of the UFOs reported from the 1950s through the 1960s were U-2 and SR-71 spy planes.

At the time, the Air Force misled the public and the media to protect these Cold War programs; it's possible the government's responses to current sightings of classified craft — whether manned or remotely operated — are equally evasive.

[edit on 3-6-2009 by spiracy]

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:19 PM
Whenever they unveil the super secret technology I will just
laugh as they try to obscure the Tesla technology they are

ED: Here is one of those bat planes flapping wings UFOs:

[edit on 6/3/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:28 PM
fox news-

ewwww.. and this argument has already been beaten to death

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:32 PM
Fox news has put out (3) articles in the past 24 hours attempting to debunk the UFO phenomena. I wonder how close we really are to disclosure when the media is trying really hard to focus only on reporting debunking material, when there is plenty of creditable accounts of UFO's.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:56 PM
Isn't what's posted in the article true? So what if it's Fox News? How about arguing what is said, instead of who says it?

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:05 PM
I'm sure some sightings are of such aircraft. The F-117 when seen edge on, looks very much like the classic "saucer" shape with the pointy crown top in the middle.

That doesn't explain all such sightings however.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:06 PM
One of my favorite pics of a UFo vs. classifed black project is in this thread:

Was Tacit Blue Flown Over Iran in the 1980's

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:12 PM
I don't think there's any doubt that a percentage if not majority of UFO reports have a prosaic explanation. Certainly, a secret government project would likely be called a UFO, since it probably wouldn't be able to be identified.

One of the huge problems in this field (IMHO) is the readiness so many have to call "UFO" on things that can be explained. You've got so many people who want, oh so terribly want, for there to be interstellar aliens visiting that it colors their judgment.

The people who claim to have had up-close physical contact with actual beings are a whole other phenomenon. I sure can't prove they haven't, but I've been given no compelling evidence beyond the anecdotal to believe they have.

I think there are things buzzing around up there that mystify even the government. I have no more idea than the average guy what they might be.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:20 PM
Well the top secret aircraft explanation would only explain a few sightings here and there. Not something like the phoenix lights, what was the deal with that? Let's take this top secret plane and fly it over the most populated part of a state that is mostly empty desert.

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:54 PM
reply to post by Blueracer

Oh my bad! Sorry you took offense. What I was referring to was not the network itself but rather they focused on debunking. They are absolutely correct in stating the UFO's sightings can be military projects, but there are plenty of things in opposite of that they fail to mention. I was pointing out that the article is an opinion piece based around some facts, maybe even a majority of the facts, but doesn't touch on the unexplainable phenomena that they've caught with their own cameras even.

To me what this article is saying is that WE have craft that can decloak, move at high velocities of speed, and change direction instantly. Yet we still use rocket propulsion to go to space and risk lives each time we do. By their own admission (and yes I'm reading into it a bit) all those accounts of UFO's are our top secret projects.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 01:04 AM
As was stated in the OP... not every single sighting can be explained away as military craft. When a flying wing flew overhead in the 50's people didn't know what to think.

Flying wing pic:

We all know about the aurora craft supposedly developed and used by the military, but if you consider that the stealth bombers were designed and worked on for decades before they went public, you could understand that someone could mistake a stealth bomber for a Ufo.

I'm not a big military person. I'm not into war or the machine that drives it. However Military tech is really novel and awe inspiring at times. Standing next to an SR-71 will really blow your mind. The space shuttle even more so.

Good stuff.

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:24 AM
The Northrop flying wing series of planes should be on this list before the U-2 spy plane.

The U-2 was a very conventional looking plane that wasn't especially fast. What was special about it was its' ability to get to 85,000 feet. The Blackbird came along and that was the end of the U-2.

Certainly these planes account for a great many UFO sightings . . . over some parts of the world. Do they account for sightings over places like Africa, South America, Australia, Antarctica? Probably not.

new topics

top topics


log in