|
|
Topic started on 31-8-2009 @ 08:30 AM by Stoo
|
Kinda an offshoot from the thread here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
But more specifically, can anyone identify these aircraft, sitting on what apparently is a grass/gravel airstrip:
Map
You can get a bit closer in GE.
Using the GE measure tool, it looks to be around 40ft nose to tail, with a wingspan of about 30ft
Any ideas folks?
[edit on 31-8-2009 by Stoo]
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Aircraft Projects topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 08:51 AM by network dude
|
I believe they are F-15s fro Elmendorf AK.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 08:55 AM by kingoftheworld
|
To me they look like F-16's but i could be wrong.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 08:58 AM by Stoo
|
Originally posted by network dude
I believe they are F-15s fro Elmendorf AK.
*nod*
That came up in the original thread, but the measurements don't appear to match - the F-15's are well over 60ft in length..
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 09:04 AM by Stoo
|
Originally posted by kingoftheworld
To me they look like F-16's but i could be wrong.
Closer in size, but still too big by about 10ft, and the unknown a/c appear to have twin tails?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 09:13 AM by l_e_cox
|
reply to post by Stoo
What I find interesting is their deployment. Sitting outside little sheds in what looks to be the middle of a big forest. They definitely are shaped
like fighter jets.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 09:50 AM by Stoo
|
Yeah, I'm leaning towards mockups due to the small size
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 09:55 AM by exile1981
|
The body shape looks more like an F-18 than a F-15 or 16.
www.aerospaceweb.org...
The F-18 is about the right lenght and if yyou look at the right one of the three in a row you can see that it has the flared body shape of an
F-18.
They could be mock ups though, there is no reason they have to be real. Didn't the Russians used to have air bases hidden in the forets? Maybe it's
a training base for troops on how to take them out.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 10:29 AM by 3vilscript
|
TomCats maybe? Don't know much about sizes but some of them look like F-14's with retracted wings.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 11:21 AM by Stoo
|
I did have a look at the most obvious suspects, but the shortest of them is hovering around 50ft, but those only scrape 40ft in length - hence why I
was pondering 3/4 scale mockups - perhaps MiG 25/29?
[edit on 31-8-2009 by Stoo]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 01:21 PM by RichardPrice
|
Originally posted by Stoo
Using the GE measure tool, it looks to be around 40ft nose to tail, with a wingspan of about 30ft
Any ideas folks?
[edit on 31-8-2009 by Stoo]
I really wouldn't be confident relying on those measurements - a 10 foot margin of error would be nothing at those calibrations.
In my opinion, they look like F-16s.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 02:12 PM by Stoo
|
Yeah, it may not be 100% accurate, but measuring other aircraft (such as the F-15's at a couple of the nearby bases) it's not far off the published
specs?
In fact, in GE measuring the F-16's at Eielson AFB comes out at around 50ft, the published specs are 49.5ft, so I don't think the accuracy is in the
order of 10ft out?
[edit on 31-8-2009 by Stoo]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 02:24 PM by RichardPrice
|
Originally posted by Stoo
Yeah, it may not be 100% accurate, but measuring other aircraft (such as the F-15's at a couple of the nearby bases) it's not far off the published
specs?
That does not mean anything at all for the given pictures - if the plane doing this survey had its calibration off by so much as 0.1% then theres your
difference in size. Comparing other places means nothing.
In fact, in GE measuring the F-16's at Eielson AFB comes out at around 50ft, the published specs are 49.5ft, so I don't think the accuracy is in the
order of 10ft out?
[edit on 31-8-2009 by Stoo]
Again, the accuracy of one set of photos means sod all for the accuracy of another set. Google Maps is a conglomeration of hundreds of thousands of
different surveys, taken by thousands of different companies, from planes and satellites.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 02:24 PM by jmiaic09
|
hey does anyone remember a couple years ago a post put out here about some papers called ...the blue planet project??, i need to talk to the person
who has that...
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 03:15 PM by Stoo
|
Originally posted by RichardPrice
That does not mean anything at all for the given pictures - if the plane doing this survey had its calibration off by so much as 0.1% then theres your
difference in size. Comparing other places means nothing.
Originally posted by RichardPrice
Again, the accuracy of one set of photos means sod all for the accuracy of another set. Google Maps is a conglomeration of hundreds of thousands of
different surveys, taken by thousands of different companies, from planes and satellites.
I do understand how GE imagery is created, but I've now measured a lot of aircraft at a lot of different bases, over the time periods available in
GE, and all of the aircraft I've found so far is within a foot or so of the published specs..
Given that, the odds of that one photo being that far out seem to be unlikely, try it yourself, it's surprisingly accurate if you can get a fairly
high-res image
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 03:49 PM by Stoo
|
ajsr71 has come across some information which seems to point out that these are indeed mock-ups, so it's more likely the mock-ups aren't 100% scale
rather than GE measurements being vastly out..
Cheers for the assistance though peeps
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-8-2009 @ 05:00 PM by fraterormus
|
F-16s? Are you kidding me? The above profile looks NOTHING like the aircraft in the image! F-14 Tomcat is out of the question too, although a much
closer guess than an F-16. At least the Tomcat has the right number of Vertical Stabilizers!
I personally don't think they look like F-15s either. The shape of the wings is too different, and the Vertical Stabilizers are too angled.
My guess would be a Lockheed F-35 Lightning, F-22 Raptor, Mikoyan MiG-29 (although I thought all of the ones we had were at Wright Patterson AFB, but
that might just be the working ones...apparently of the 21 we purchased some were not flight worthy and were immediately moth-balled), or a Sukhoi
SU-27 of which our Military currently owns four for Aggressor Training. They all have very similar silhouettes from Satellite view.
There are F-22 Raptors stationed as part of the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska.
You stated that the estimate would be a 28ft wingspan, 31ft length, 12ft width between Vertical Stabilizers.
F-35 35 wingspan, 51.4 length
SU-27 48.3 wingspan, 72 length,
Mig-29 37.3 wingspan, 57 length
F-22 44 ft 6 wingspan, 62.1 length
Assuming your calculations are correct, there isn't many things with a 31 ft length and 28 ft wingspan. The only type of aircraft with the dimensions
you have given would have to be pilot-less. Even the tiny F-5E is going to be 27 wingspan x 47 length...and those have nothing close to the
silhouette shown in those photos (same for the T-38 Talon Trainers). To meet the specifications you obtained from the GE Tool, the planes would have
to be Drones (but why would they have cockpits if they were).
If you ignore the dimensions given by the GE Tool, I'd go back to my list of F-35/SU-27/Mig-29 or F-22...the F-22 and Mig-29 being the most
likely.
EDIT: I wrote this and got distracted from posting it. I didn't see all the other posts since when I originally started the post. If it is a
Scale Mock then that would make sense. It wouldn't make a good satellite decoy, but it may be part of the Bolio Lake Range Complex for testing of
Military Equipment. These could be targets for 30km and 50km test firing of weapons.
[edit on 31-8-2009 by fraterormus]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 12:36 AM by C0bzz
|
reply to post by fraterormus
Only a couple of F-35's are occasionally flying, and they are not even close to Alaska...
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 02:36 AM by firepilot
|
Most likely is target ranges for Red Flag Alaska, either retired aircraft or mockups.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 06:53 AM by RichardPrice
|
Originally posted by Stoo
I do understand how GE imagery is created, but I've now measured a lot of aircraft at a lot of different bases, over the time periods available in
GE, and all of the aircraft I've found so far is within a foot or so of the published specs..
Given that, the odds of that one photo being that far out seem to be unlikely, try it yourself, it's surprisingly accurate if you can get a fairly
high-res image
All I am saying is you are relying completely on something you cannot rely on - correct calibration in one area does not correlate to correct
calibration in another.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |