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.

 

Wes Owsley discusses NASA and UFOs

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
I'm not given to many wacko and out there stuff, and I have a reputation around here with the tin-foil hat crowd to be some sort of prude who sounds like a broken record at times when it comes to my disbelief of 99.996% of the claims on here.


I can vouch for that statement based on reading so many other posts you made where you disbelieve a lot of theories, it's one reason I found your post so interesting.




posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
I actually could, if I wanted to, provide evidence to my claims, but of course I don't want to
Some on here know me, and also know I wouldn't spit stuff like this out casually. I'm not given to many wacko and out there stuff, and I have a reputation around here with the tin-foil hat crowd to be some sort of prude who sounds like a broken record at times when it comes to my disbelief of 99.996% of the claims on here.


Well thank you for finally coming out of the closet
And like you I would love to lay the 'cloaking' on the table... as you say it is quite ingenious.

Now I got a letter a few months back and a certain source told me his gag order has been lifted on a certain patent...
Let me write him today and see if that includes the nanotech... I know Bigfatfurrytexan has been chomping at the bit to release this stuff...

To those who think I am crazy...




Hi, Ron...Good Morning!

I just wanted you to know that yes...I keep very busy and I'm on a 'mission'! My Mission is to keep America safe through development of some very exotic technologies....

...snipped to remove private details...

And yes, I've worked on/with HAARP. If you want to learn more about that see US Patent #xxxxx. If you read the patent you'll understand the relevance to HAARP and the Stealth Bombers, etc. You're an intelligent man and I'm certain that you'll be able to make the connection. If you read US Patent #xxxxx, you'll understand (a little better) my connection to/with and collaboration with these men. LOL...suffice it to say that the 'Predator' (as in the movie) is alive/living at Los Alamos!


He is NOT talking about the Alien... but the technology




Hi, Ron...Good Morning!

Thanks for the note and you certainly touch on points of similiarity and interest (proving that great minds think alike!).

I am free to talk about any of my published US Patents which are in the public domain. I am, however, under an edict from DoD under the NSA to 'report any inquiries relative to the stealth patent'. I had a phone call from a person who identified himself as an 'Undersectetary of Defense' and the person read a statement to me which I later found was excerpted from the National Security Act, as amended. I was 'ordered' to report any inquiries of any kind, by anyone, to DoD relative to that case (patent). I've only had to do that one time in 20 years when a group of Isreali's, based in Philly, contacted me relative to undertaking collaboration on some 'project' in Haifa. I reported this as instructed and the group 'disappeared' shortly thereafter.


Edit to add... this gentleman was a NASA contractor and holds several top secret patents along with several in public domain. The patent in question lists uses for 'public' but has some items deleted...

One thing I can say is that this 'substance' applied to a license plate on your car... would make you beat those speed traps
but don't ask, because I am still waiting for mine



[edit on 19-9-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Today, the Pentagons clearly stated goal is called "full Spectram Dominance. The intent is to "own" & weaponize space has resulted in the military deploying assets via 20 years of

At 1st. there were public shuttle missions & "named" secret missions, which were soon merged into a single NASA mission. This was welcome news for NASA as it gave them extra money for each mission from the military black budgets, & all they had to do is piggyback a military asset with the big deal payload NASA was promoting on a particular mission.

Vandenberg Air Force Base in California is another Pentagon delivery system. I always enjoy their launches because every one is military, always calling each other 'sir'...yes sir, no sir...such a different culture than NASA 'speak'!

One new "exotic" weapon is called "Hyper Velocity Rod Bundles" which I am told is nicknamed 'Rods from God'. These are designed to burst from space into the atmosphere at high speeds...a weapon of 1st. strike capability...

& Electric Lasers, having been successfully tested are now going to go into space without the huge problem that chemical Lasers had presented the SDI scientists. There are "killer" tethers. The PR says they are satellite catchers which help ease dead satellites to burn up...but they are really offensive weapons & "Tethers Unlimited" develops them. Is this what was really going on with the STS-75 tether break, which was called a success! A success at tether 'control'?

Current space weapons integrate space sensor platforms using a space based kinetic energy kill vehicle. Yet the U.S. has spelled out an unknown need for an armada of space weaponry & technology.



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   


One new "exotic" weapon is called "Hyper Velocity Rod Bundles" which I am told is nicknamed 'Rods from God'. These are designed to burst from space into the atmosphere at high speeds...a weapon of 1st. strike capability...


SPACE-BASED WEAPONS
Long-Term Strategic Implications and Alternatives
Captain David C. Hardesty, U.S. Navy


The Evolutionary Air and Space Global Laser
Engagement (EAGLE) concept will use “airborne, terrestrial, or space-based lasers in conjunction with space-based relay mirrors to project different laser
powers and frequencies to achieve a broad range of effects from illumination to destruction.”4 Another, the Space-Based Radio Frequency Energy Weapon, will “be a constellation of satellites containing high-power radio-frequency transmitters that possess the capability to disrupt/destroy/disable a wide variety of electronics and national-level command and control systems . . . typically . . . used as a non-kinetic anti-satellite weapon.”5 A third, “hypervelocity rod bundles,”would “provide the capability to strike ground targets anywhere in the world from space.”6


WARNING .mil secure link MUST accept certificate to get file

PDF FILE

Have you seen my NAVY space program thread?



NAVY Space Command Uncovered
www.abovetopsecret.com...


You can always subscribe to a copy of
"Air and Space Power Journal" from Maxwell AFB

Its public released stuff but still very interesting


Spring 2009 Issue

From Page 66


The UniTed STaTeS has plans to weaponize space and is already deploying
missile-defense platforms.1 Official, published papers outline long-term visions for space weapons, including direct-ascent antisatellite (aSaT) missiles, ground-based lasers that target satellites in low earth orbit, and hypervelocity rod bundles that strike from space.2 according to federal budget documents, the Pentagon has asked Congress for considerable resources to test weapons in space, marking the biggest step toward creating a space battlefield since the Strategic defense initiative during the Cold War.3


[edit on 19-9-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Large Advanced Mirror Program (LAMP)



4 meter diameter mirror


To demonstrate the ability to fabricate the large mirror required by an SBL, the Large Advanced Mirror Program (LAMP) built a lightweight, segmented 4 m diameter mirror on which testing was completed in 1989. Tests verified that the surface optical figure and quality desired were achieved, and that the mirror was controlled to the required tolerances by adaptive optics adjustments. This mirror consists of a 17 mm thick facesheet bonded to fine figure actuators that are mounted on a graphite epoxy supported reaction structure. To this day, this is the largest mirror completed for use in space. This LAMP segmented design is applicable to 10 m class mirrors, and the Large Optical Segment (LOS) program has since produced a mirror segment sized for an 11 m mirror. The large dimension of this LOS mirror segment approximates the diameter of the LAMP mirror


Here is some old tech...

Alpha High Energy Laser (HEL)





Megawatt class power levels were first achieved by the Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser (MIRACL) originally sponsored by the Navy, later by DARPA, and then by BMDO. Because the design was intended for sea level operation, the MIRACL laser does not achieve the optimum efficiency necessary for space-based operation. DARPA launched the Alpha laser program, with the goal of developing a megawatt level SBL that was scaleable to more powerful weapon levels and optimized for space operation. In this design, stacked cylindrical rings of nozzles are used for reactant mixing. The gain generation assembly achieves higher power by simply stacking more rings. In 1991, the Alpha laser demonstrated megawatt class power levels similar to MIRACL, but in a low pressure, space operation environment. Alpha demonstrates that multi-megawatt, space-compatible lasers can be built and operated.



Now notice how in each case I posted it is the NAVY that pops up? That is why there is little point asking any NASA or ex NASA guy about any secret space program that the NAVY is working on... and in the NAVY thread I posted a contractor bidding report that the deadline for bids ended JULY 2009... with an UNLIMITED budget for the NAVY Space Engineers

1991

In 1991, the Alpha laser demonstrated megawatt class power levels similar to MIRACL, but in a low pressure, space operation environment

This is TRW's project... TRW is an automotive parts manufacturer. Recently they sold their Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) and Electronic Warfare department to Northrop Grumann



Directed Energy Dictorate Kirtland AFB Your DEW weapon central for the Air Force (The NAVY stuff is at China Lake where they have SELENE, the laser that can beam power to a moon base
)

www.de.afrl.af.mil...

Heck even NASA knows about SELENE... beaming power to satellites etc..

NAOMI/SELENE site design


The Birchum Mesa SELENE (Space Laser Energy) facility will be dual use facility as it provides for progressive development of high power Free Electron Lasers (FEL) and commercial laser beam power transfer to space-borne vehicles. The facility will be comprised of SELENE mainsite containing two laser system bays and supporting facilities with transport tunnels coupling to the Beam Transfer Optical System (BTOS) which is the active optical array space beam director with its supporting facility. The first generation commercial grade laser will operate at 100 kW of quasi-CW laser power with a planned growth to 10 MW of output power. The BTOS beam director will direct a focus compensated laser power beam to provide power service to space vehicles within a +/- 50 degree (half angle from zenith) tracking cone service field. An underground hardened site is proposed for this facility to mitigate any potentially hazardous effects from operation of a very high energy CW electron beam laser, to protect the facility from inadvertent weapons splashdown during range Test and Evaluation operations, and to create minimum environmental impact upon historical and ecological elements of the range.


adsabs.harvard.edu...


Advantages of China Lake for laser power beaming
Bennett, Harold E.
Proc. SPIE Vol. 2376, p. 280-296
Laser Power Beaming II, Harold E. Bennett; Richard D. Doolittle; Eds.



Abstract:

The site for the proposed National Advanced Optic Mission Initiative (NAOMI) facility will be in the mountains near China Lake, California. This location has 260 clear days per year (more than any other feasible site in the U.S.). In 1993 there were 5 completely overcast days all year. The area near the proposed site is unpopulated. The solar insolation in this general area is the greatest of any area in the United States.

The NAOMI system will be installed at an altitude of 5600 feet. Astronomical seeing there is excellent. Even at a less favored site than that planned for NAOMI the average Fried seeing coefficient ro is 12 cm in the visible region and 20 cm values of ro (comparable to the best observatories) are commonly observed. The area is centrally located in and entirely surrounded by one of the largest restricted airspace/military operating airspace complexes in the United States, 12% of the entire airspace in California. Electrical power is available from either the nearly Coso Geothermal plant, second largest in the United States, or from the even closer cogeneration plant at Trona, California.

Cooling water can be obtained from the nearby area or from the lake itself. Although a dry playa, the lake has a high brackish groundwater level. Most of the commercial satellites over the U.S. could be reached by a laser/telescope system located on government land at the Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) military reservation at China Lake. This telescope/laser system will be a prototype for five other systems planned for around the world. The complex will provide laser power beaming to all satellites and put the United States into the position of world leader in satellite technology and power beaming to space.


adsabs.harvard.edu...

Now the part about beaming power via laser to the Moon

Beam Transmission Optical System (BTOS)
SELENE




Introduction

The development of the Beam Transmission Optical System (BTOS) is a portion of a larger project entitled SpacE Laser Electric ENErgy (SELENE). The SELENE project utilizes a high energy, free electron laser to transfer energy from the ground to orbiting spacecraft or other space targets such as a lunar base [1] BTOS is the systcm that delivers the beam energy from the laser to the target.

The primary mission objective of SELENE is to provide energy for operation of geosynchronous satellites including steady-state power for operations, periodic low power for station keeping, periodic high power during eclipses, and high power for transfer orbit apogee burn. [2] SELENE will also provide energy for operation at middle and high earth orbits (MEO) of 3000+ kilometers. Another possible usage for SELENE will be to provide energy to a laser-augmented solar-electric orbit transfer vehicle wherein a low earth orbit (LEO) vehicle transfers to geosynchronous orbit (GEO) through a spiral trajectory path. Finally, SELENE will provide continuous steady-state energy for operation of a lunar base.[3]


Structural Design Considerations for the Beam Transmission Optical System
Paul D. MacNeal and Michael C. Lou, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California

As I said I will create a new thread on the LASER POWER Transmission as there is a lot to cover... I just wanted to show the tie in with the NAVY SPACE PROGRAM and the BEAMING OF POWER VIA SUPER LASERS TO SPACE

CHINA LAKE
Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD)
www.navair.navy.mil...

Weapons Division PAO: About China Lake - Ridgecrest
www.navair.navy.mil...



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by secretnasaman
 



having been successfully tested are now going to go into space without the huge problem that chemical Lasers had presented the SDI scientists


My Father worked on SDI. I know SDI was more than just lasers in space, and some of the money went to more exotic uses of modified conventional technology. And yes, some of that hardware ended up in space.


One new "exotic" weapon is called "Hyper Velocity Rod Bundles" which I am told is nicknamed 'Rods from God'. These are designed to burst from space into the atmosphere at high speeds...a weapon of 1st. strike capability...


Not so new, it was being developed in the 70’s and the 80’s. As far as I know there is an operational system of such a nature, the stuff I know about and the guys I have talked to about it call it Kinetic Weapons. I personally know two people that have worked on the “targeting system” for these in the early 80’s.

reply to post by zorgon
 


Well thank you for finally coming out of the closet . And like you I would love to lay the 'cloaking' on the table... as you say it is quite ingenious.

Now I got a letter a few months back and a certain source told me his gag order has been lifted on a certain patent... Let me write him today and see if that includes the nanotech... I know Bigfatfurrytexan has been chomping at the bit to release this stuff...


No no, I am still firmly in the closet! I’m not looking to get mixed up in some of the stuff I know you have your hands in.

The “cloaking” has to do with several factors, but as you guessed it one of the technology layers involved in it is special nanomaterial coating and application process. I know one of the other has to do with the type of satellite it is, the orbit in relation to other commercial satellites (cough, cough) and the method in which it can maintain and change orbit as necessary. I don’t know too many extensive details other than a generalization of what/how it works. Most of that is gained during the usual contractor talk who are working on the same program, close to the same area. It's not like they sit anyone down and explain more than the individual needs to know in order for them to do just their part. But people talk within those environments (as you now know) on a regular basis.


I can’t see them declassifying certain materials for years because of national security reasons. For example, the shuttle is using ridiculous tile-based heat protection and suffers through all the risks associated with such a delicate method, and there are operational materials and methods out there that put that to shame. I figure even after astronauts die because of such stuff and they still don’t investigate switching over, that this stuff is well beyond NASA and the military would prefer it not to be used in such a “leaky” program.

But Zorgon, again, I ‘m not coming out of the closet. I am still a skeptic, however the stuff I am discussing is nothing alien or UFO related in any way, and in fact (other than a few advancements) doesn’t really use very exotic technologies (i.e. no laws of physics are getting broken or even bent a little, lol)



posted on Sep, 19 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
But Zorgon, again, I ‘m not coming out of the closet. I am still a skeptic, however the stuff I am discussing is nothing alien or UFO related in any way, and in fact (other than a few advancements) doesn’t really use very exotic technologies (i.e. no laws of physics are getting broken or even bent a little, lol)



Okay okay... I acknowledge that you are not 'discussing nothing alien or UFO related in any way" And believe me... if Greer, Henry Deacon and Project Camelot keep up with their current path I may join you in that closet...




But I would LOVE to print your first woo woo remark to me
It was priceless




[edit on 19-9-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by secretnasaman
Vandenberg Air Force Base in California is another Pentagon delivery system. I always enjoy their launches because every one is military, always calling each other 'sir'...yes sir, no sir...such a different culture than NASA 'speak'!


Here's a statement that is plain not true and can be debunked by simple research by anybody with an open mind. Why would Martyn make such a carelessly inaccurate assertion, easily disproved? I offer no explanation -- perhaps he can.

All payloads headed for sun-synchronous orbit take off from Vandenberg -- NASA payloads, commercial payloads, NOAA payloads, others. It's just astounding that Martyn seems to think that nobody can find this out in five minutes.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by secretnasaman
At 1st. there were public shuttle missions & "named" secret missions, which were soon merged into a single NASA mission. This was welcome news for NASA as it gave them extra money for each mission from the military black budgets, & all they had to do is piggyback a military asset with the big deal payload NASA was promoting on a particular mission.


Well, the reality is that SECRET-level DoD shuttle missions ended about, oh, 1992, and the SECRET-level control infrastructure in Bldg 30's Mission Control Center was torn out by the roots as facilities were converted into support of the entirely unclassified International Space Station. Once and aswhile shuttles carry suitcase-sized hitchhiker payloads for various government agencies, including the DoD -- hardly weapons.

Where are the weapons-related payloads on the shuttle? I can't find any.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by secretnasaman
One new "exotic" weapon is called "Hyper Velocity Rod Bundles" which I am told is nicknamed 'Rods from God'. These are designed to burst from space into the atmosphere at high speeds...a weapon of 1st. strike capability...


Scary paper studies -- no sign they were ever approved, or prototyped, or built. Somebody thought it was a good idea, but apparently the DoD didn't.

Is there any evidence the idea was ever even partially realized? I've never seen such evidence.

All orbit-based ground-attack systems suffer the same unavoidable drawback -- they cannot strike a specific target more than a few times a day, often after delays of many hours. Hardly a useful tactica; weapon.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
duplicate message deleted

[edit on 20-9-2009 by JimOberg]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by secretnasaman
There are "killer" tethers. The PR says they are satellite catchers which help ease dead satellites to burn up...but they are really offensive weapons & "Tethers Unlimited" develops them. Is this what was really going on with the STS-75 tether break, which was called a success! A success at tether 'control'?


The tether applications for satellite orbital decay that I'm familiar with call for each satellite to have its own tether system to increase its drag at the end of its lifetime, dropping it out of orbit in a few months rather than decades. I'd like to see the PR that Martyn refers to that describes an available tether system to take out a non-cooperating target, although I've heard of some proposals for discussing such an idea with other national satellite owners. But as far as I can tell, that remains a proposal without any budget, much less actual flight testing.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

All orbit-based ground-attack systems suffer the same unavoidable drawback -- they cannot strike a specific target more than a few times a day, often after delays of many hours. Hardly a useful tactical weapon.




You are certainly wrong about the usefulness of such a weapon.

Regarding the delays and drawbacks you speak of - they do not seem to deter the Air Force or NAVY.

Here is one strike from one Advanced Tactical Laser (Airborne and capable of Encompassing the entire 'kill chain'):


(Picture: Boeing)

Check out what one Analyst had to say about the benefits of this sort of weapon:




"The target would never know what hit them," says Pike. "Further, there would be no munition fragments that could be used to identify the source of the strike."

- www.newscientist.com...



I'd add that It would be more difficult to identify the source of the strike, if that strike originated in orbit instead of an C-130h...


*How would that one go, I wonder:

"It wasn't us - It was someone else with laser weapons flying around.... "





[edit on 20-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg
All orbit-based ground-attack systems suffer the same unavoidable drawback -- they cannot strike a specific target more than a few times a day, often after delays of many hours. Hardly a useful tactica; weapon.


That's a valid point for one orbital weapon, but couldn't that problem be solved by adding more weapons in orbit? With enough of orbiting weapons, it seems like the delay could be minimized if not eliminated.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


You are right about the efficacy of such a system being increased with the deployment of multiple platforms. I'm sure current planning takes this into account:






Current SBL planning is based on a 20 satellite constellation, operating at a 40° inclination, intended to provide the optimum TMD threat negation capability. At this degree of deployment, kill times per missile will range from 1 to 10 seconds, depending on the range from the missile. Retargeting times are calculated at as low as 0.5 seconds for new targets requiring small angle changes. It is estimated that a constellation consisting of only 12 satellites can negate 94% of all missile threats in most theater threat scenarios. Thus a system consisting of 20 satellites is expected by BMDO to provide nearly full threat negation.

www.fas.org...



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by JimOberg
All orbit-based ground-attack systems suffer the same unavoidable drawback -- they cannot strike a specific target more than a few times a day, often after delays of many hours. Hardly a useful tactical weapon.


You are certainly wrong about the usefulness of such a weapon.


I'm not sure you even understand the point I was trying to make. As a satellite orbits the Earth, it passes over specific areas beneath its orbit, and can 'see' areas a few hundred miles left and right. Any specific target area on the surface could be hours away from the next satellite overflight. So hitting a convoy might have to wait half a day -- assuming the convoy were cooperative enough to park on the road waiting for the satellite to line up its run.

One way around this is to have a hundred satellites in different orbits -- one might be within half an hour of a strike opportunity. It's just expensive building a weapons system where you guaranty 90% of the weapons will never fire a shot in anger.

You could put the satellites into higher, slower orbits. That costs twice as much to launch, and radiation weapons lose strength by the inverse square law. Ten times as high is a hundred times as weak.

It's true, lots of 'high ground space strategists haven't ever realized this either, so you're not alone in your error.

It's cute being told I'm 'definitely' wrong, by the way.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg


One way around this is to have a hundred satellites in different orbits --




.....Or Twenty (see my last post).

Maybe even twelve....



It is estimated that a constellation consisting of only 12 satellites can negate 94% of all missile threats in most theater threat scenarios. Thus a system consisting of 20 satellites is expected by BMDO to provide nearly full threat negation.
www.fas.org...






[edit on 20-9-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 

For tactical purposes the weapons platform has to be quite mobile. Orbital platforms are not. You can't just move a satellite(s) from here to there when you find a convoy. It takes time (and fuel).

There is also the matter of weather. Lasers don't do well burning through clouds. Dust, rain, fog, all reduce the power of the beam.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Dust, rain, fog, all reduce the power of the beam.


And yet not so much that it deters the Air Force and NAVY from pressing on.




posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Actually I was thinking the GPS satellites seem to provide pretty good coverage, and there are 30 of those, right?

But I agree, weather would be an issue.


Originally posted by JimOberg
You could put the satellites into higher, slower orbits. That costs twice as much to launch, and radiation weapons lose strength by the inverse square law. Ten times as high is a hundred times as weak.

It's true, lots of 'high ground space strategists haven't ever realized this either, so you're not alone in your error.


The inverse square law applies to diminished intensity resulting from a spherical emission of electromagnetic radiation, right? A laser is highly directional and thus does not obey the inverse square law. With a "perfect" laser, the intensity would only be diminished by dust, atmospheric distortion, etc, but of course there's no such thing as a perfect laser. Still a laser should maintain intensity far greater than an inverse square calculation would suggest.

If we were to put an electromagnetic emission weapon in space with a spherical emission pattern, that would in fact follow the inverse square law as you suggest. I'm confident we could come up with more directional designs than a spherical emission pattern.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join