Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

landing on i20?

page: 5
222
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   
I must agree with the people that say : "The best way to hide something is to hide it in plain site"...
As for throwing a tarp over it, you would still notice the general shape and that would intrigue alot more people.

As for the escort cars, that would be normal, as by the looks of it the payload is approx 4m wide (standard lowbeds being 2m55 wide). normaly you need 2 unmarked convoy cars (one for back and one for front) on main roads, and a police escort through populated areas. (it's a part of my Job)

I would be curious to know how many axles the lowbed had, to give an approximate idea of the weight of the payload (apparenty isn't very long) a 2 axle standard lowbed would do the job (which are approx 9m usable platform lenght in standard) but if the used a 3 axles (or upwards) that would mean they needed the extra payload capacity (so that the payload weighed more than 20ton, which also means theres little chance they would make something that heavy just for a movie...)
It was said to be an 18 wheeler, which is most commonly a 3 axle tractor unit with a 2 axle semi trailer (18 wheeler because it has 18tyres alltogeather) but people just say 18wheeler to destingnate a common convoy truck...

I wouldn't think it's for the movie set of district 9 as the film is coming out in sept, I would imagine that the movie has been finished for quite a time and almost ready to distribute.
Viral marketing maybe, but as apparently, the radio stations where called telling them to shut their gobs, it's all the contrary of viral marketing, where the main aspect is to be talked about as much as possible... At the moment the information isn't circulating that well... a few websites and that it...

Anyway just my opinion...




posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I just realized while I was reporting my experience to UFO casebook, Where the heck is the " WIDE LOAD " sign that it placed on ALLover-sized equipment transports. If this is just some innocent machinery being transported, where the heck is the freakin sign????? Who cares about a missing tarp, where is the wide load sign???? Isn't it a law???



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clickfoot
reply to post by Tifozi

Maybe you're right. But the fact that people called the police, and made that thread in the first place, suggests this wasn't simply fireworks. Maybe some of those people saw/heard fireworks. But the fact is, those reports are there, and unless all those people are idiots, it shouldn't be ruled out. I know damn well I wouldn't mistake fireworks for anything else.


Again, we are just throwing opinions away... I want to believe that is something that is very important and they are transporting some precious cargo (high-tech sh#..
).

But some things that are being pointed out could lead us on the wrong way.


Originally posted by sickofitall2012
I just realized while I was reporting my experience to UFO casebook, Where the heck is the " WIDE LOAD " sign that it placed on ALLover-sized equipment transports. If this is just some innocent machinery being transported, where the heck is the freakin sign????? Who cares about a missing tarp, where is the wide load sign???? Isn't it a law???


Have to disagree on that... The pictures are too blury for you to see any signs on the rear of the truck.

And besides, with all that escorts, "wide load" signs aren't necessary... I think...



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by sickofitall2012
I just realized while I was reporting my experience to UFO casebook, Where the heck is the " WIDE LOAD " sign that it placed on ALLover-sized equipment transports. If this is just some innocent machinery being transported, where the heck is the freakin sign????? Who cares about a missing tarp, where is the wide load sign???? Isn't it a law???


Yes it is law, and it is necessary (and even with "watch vehicles") as the signs are designed for the other drivers on the road of course so they know not to go do stupid manoeuvres, but signs do not have to be lit up, and the photos are to blury to see (the wide load signs are necessary on the trailer not on the payload) you can't even see the number plates...


[edit on 11-8-2009 by WeSbO]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by WeSbO
 


I remember those wide load signs being pretty big, and in the second photo I can see the back of the truck and the object pretty clearly as it appears to be lite up by the lights on the escort cars. I see no evidence of any kind of banner or license plate.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
ok what im seeing now is what i said at the first of my post....THIS IS BEING BURRIED! the stations where the guy called in their email is not working, the twitter blog that had the first people talking about it and it was the first(i think) to get the pics online is now not working....whats going on??? CENSORED!



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Sometimes it's not the MIB. Sometimes it's embarrassment that causes things to go off the radar



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by sickofitall2012
reply to post by WeSbO
 


I remember those wide load signs being pretty big, and in the second photo I can see the back of the truck and the object pretty clearly as it appears to be lite up by the lights on the escort cars. I see no evidence of any kind of banner or license plate.


If I can remember rightly, the signs have to be at least 10"x60", but most commonly 12"x72.

And on a side note, just a far fetched idea, could it have anything to do with this event that happend on the 7th of jan. 2009 :
ufoweek.com...



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
some one got some good info on the subject here

another post on the same topic



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   


Jeff Bridges Reply » | Report Abuse | Judge it! | #49 2 hrs ago Tweet from same guy: It was basically a full scale F35 model built to test for stress and such. pretty funny seeing the web report. we are all LOAO


Source, Page 3 - Post #49

I-20 UFO Picture #2, rear view side by side with a F-35 Joint Strike Fighter rear view.



F-35 source
UFO Picture #2 source

To me, IMHO, looks close, remove the wings/tail/engine.. Just leave it with a chassis.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ratphour
 


Doesn't look anything like photo # one. I know what the front of a jet looks like and that is not it.
Good try though. I want to know why there was no wide load sign across the back. Lockheed doesn't have to follow transport laws? I have a sneaky suspicion about this. Why would the radio station hide that?

[edit on 11-8-2009 by sickofitall2012]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by sickofitall2012
reply to post by ratphour
 


Doesn't look anything like photo # one. I know what the front of a jet looks like and that is not it.
Good try though. I want to know why there was no wide load sign across the back. Lockheed doesn't have to follow transport laws? I have a sneaky suspicion about this. Why would the radio station hide that?

[edit on 11-8-2009 by sickofitall2012]


No idea why there is no wide load sign, then again, the pictures are blurry. Ok, for picture #1, which is a rear side view, strip everything off of the jet, nose, cockpit, wings, tail, all you got is a main chassis. That is the only explanation I can think of. Later, when I wake up I'll dig around for a video on how a F-35 is made (remember seeing a documentary on Military channel)



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   
It looks like the Third Generation Sliver Bug.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ratphour


Jeff Bridges Reply » | Report Abuse | Judge it! | #49 2 hrs ago Tweet from same guy: It was basically a full scale F35 model built to test for stress and such. pretty funny seeing the web report. we are all LOAO


Source, Page 3 - Post #49

I-20 UFO Picture #2, rear view side by side with a F-35 Joint Strike Fighter rear view.



F-35 source
UFO Picture #2 source

To me, IMHO, looks close, remove the wings/tail/engine.. Just leave it with a chassis.


Doesn't the military use........military transports?

I find it difficult to believe that any military project woulnd't be transported by military personel and vehicles.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Tifozi
 


Lockheed is a private company, manufacturing the jet.

When I was in the Army, I was a M1 Tank Mechanic, we used civilian contractors to move the hull of a damaged M1. Then again, we were stretched thin, this was just after I got back from Desert Storm.. ohh.. 17 years ago.. wow, I am getting old.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I love the government and their mysterious ways. I heard the F-22 had stop being built is that true?



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 03:30 AM
link   
It is not a f-35 chassis, look at this photo galery of the construction process and you will see why ...

www.jsf.mil...



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 04:29 AM
link   
alien really?

it could be a secret craft ... not so fast saying alien



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Okay well I haven't had time to read all the tweets or replies, but what I see is a saucer being transported down the road on a truckbed or something, first of all, the saucer is not covered by a tarp or anything, it might as well be an oscar meyer weener mobile advertizing hot dogs, in this case advertizing UFOs, which leads me to believe it's some prop made by someone, maybe a UFO shop, or for a UFO themed party, those things can be rented you know, that's just what it has to be, nice blurry camera photos though, if you saw a high rez photo you'd probably see a bumper sticker on the thing.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Larryman
An alien ship would not land on a busy highway, when there are plenty of large empty parking lots available.


Cool, so how long have you been an alien?

You know, since you know what they would do and why.

[edit on 12-8-2009 by BaronVonGodzilla]






top topics



 
222
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join