Kandahar Mystery UCAV confirmed!, page 2

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 26 times

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 05:05 PM by freakyclown

Thought id keep this thread alive with this cleaned up image I made

It is saved as a tiff...so no recompression!

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 05:34 PM by USAFJetTech

Originally posted by Canada_EH

Anyone have any knowledge of what major base this could of been out of?

[

Probably Kandahar Airfield (31°30'21"N 65°50'52"E)... formerly the international airport its been home to a majority of US troops in the country. It has a 10,500' runway and plenty of support buildings. However, in 2005 the US has turned some of the airfield back over to the host country to to use for commercial flights and the 2009 surge in NATO operations in southern Afghanistan pushed the number of aircraft operations at the base from 1,700 to 5,000 flights a week... making it the busiest one-runway airport in the world.

This huge volume of traffic and presence of international forces is probably the worst situation for top secret test flights... or maybe the best. Can you say "hiding it in plain sight"?

reply posted on 3-12-2009 @ 05:35 PM by firepilot

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
I disagree. All three pictures clearly show the same aircraft. I think the aerial shots were even taken within a few seconds of each other. It's a UAV. There is no cockpit. It would be nice to get a front view, though, so we could finally resolve the issue of whether the two bulges are intakes or sensor domes. Intakes still seem more likely to me.

I agree with most of that, especially about it just being one plane, and it is not manned. But not too sure about the intakes. I still lean towards the intake being on the fuselage in the front. Just not convinced that is what those bulges are for intakes.

However, I think we will be finding out soon though.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 09:11 AM by Canada_EH

Originally posted by USAFJetTech

This huge volume of traffic and presence of international forces is probably the worst situation for top secret test flights... or maybe the best. Can you say "hiding it in plain sight"?

Due to the traffic in the area I would be very surprised if this plane is using Kandahar as its base. Hiding in plain sight means it can still be hiddin. I don't see how you can hide a plane that looks like this is a airport with as many eyes around as Kandahar.

Here are some other options for possible airbases
-Bagram Air Base
-Shindand Airbase
-Herat Airport (now used by the International Security Force)
-Jalalabad Airport (used by the military and new civilian airport under construction)
-Kunduz Airport (now used for passenger service)
-Mazari Sharif Airport (German controlled ISAF airport)

[edit on 4-12-2009 by Canada_EH]

[edit on 4-12-2009 by Canada_EH]

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 09:14 AM by Canada_EH

Originally posted by Zaphod58
In one of the last pages of my thread about this Shadowhawk came in and said there either was or was soon to be a classified UAV declassified. This seems to me to be like when the F-117 was declassified. There were a few drawings, some bad pics, then better, then finally a real pic.

Now that you mention it Zaph it does draw a lot of parallels with the F-117 leaks. I'm not sure if we will see a USAF or CIA news release because who knows if they are still testing it in field. I don't see it being brought white until it is back home.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 09:35 AM by spy66

This UAV looks a lot like the Polecat. But modified. I dont know what you people think.

I found a YouTube video of Polecat. The landing gear on this UAV is not the same, but the tail looks a lot like the on the photograph.
www.youtube.com...

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 10:26 AM by freakyclown

Originally posted by Canada_EH
Here are some other options for possible airbases
-Bagram Air Base
-Shindand Airbase
-Herat Airport (now used by the International Security Force)
-Jalalabad Airport (used by the military and new civilian airport under construction)
-Kunduz Airport (now used for passenger service)
-Mazari Sharif Airport (German controlled ISAF airport)

Actually I am glad someone else is also not sure its at Kandahar Ari Base, Looking at the photo I cant really see where that photo could have been taken at Kandahar

Bagram also doesnt fit in with the background, Shindand has a completely different colour runway as does Mazari! Herat doesnt seem to have the double runway seen in teh photo nor does Jalalabad and likewise for Kunduz

I still think we are looking for yet another base that this photo was taken at, I wish the photographer had not cropped the photo!

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 11:06 AM by Canada_EH

Your looking at a taxi way in the background. As mentioned earlier by myself the blue lights are used for marking taxiways. I'm also thinking the surface the UAV is on is also a taxiway as it seems more narrow but you can't see a centerline or edge markings to confirm this.

[edit on 4-12-2009 by Canada_EH]

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 02:17 PM by TAGBOARD

David Hambling made a good point in his news clip.

Mysteries Surround Afghanistan’s Stealth Drone

...if the Beast is a top-secret craft on a top-secret mission, why leave it out where it can be photographed?

One note of caution: the provenance of the photograph is not known, and it was published “without guarantee of origin.” So it might be some deliberate disinformation to put black plane-spotters off the scent of the real Beast.

With all due respect to others' opinions, I am seeing glaring differences between the first and third images and the second image. This also supports an idea that one or more of the images have been faked, due to the differences. If that is the case, I realize this would not support a Hunter-Killer CONOPS.

Perhaps one of these images are doctored?

Has anyone considered the flora around Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale, CA? Does it match the third released image? That would be a good location to stage a faked image, since Lockheed and Northrop have manufacturing facilities there. I believe Northrop has made a mockup of the X-47B UAV a while back (around 2005).

Why would any photographer release only one photo of the bird? Wouldn't you have a series of these, especially since the UAV is moving slowly or just sitting?

Why would you not show more of the background in the third released image?

If the UAV is taxiing, do we see a distortion of the air due to the exhaust gas leaving the nozzle behind the UAV? The navigation lights are on since we see a red light, one might assume the engine is running.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 03:37 PM by Zaphod58

reply to post by TAGBOARD

That`s probably one of the BEST places to test under real world conditions. No defenses to speak of, crummy flight conditions, etc. Even if the pic in question was taken somewhere else this IS operating in Afghanistan. There are too many reports of an unknown UCAV there, all describing a similar vehicle. There is a drawing by someone that is a dead perfect match, etc. There is entirely too much evidence that it`s there. As for the three pics, I see the same aircraft in all three. Why don`t you try to highlight the differences you see for us?

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 05:26 PM by Canada_EH

Well it looks like the USAF has just released info on UAV in question!!!!

The U.S. Air Force has confirmed to Aviation Week the existence of the so-called "Beast of Kandahar" UAV, a stealth-like remotely piloted jet seen flying out of Afghanistan in late 2007.

The RQ-170 Sentinel, believed to be a tailless flying wing design with sensor pods faired into the upper surface of each wing, was developed by Lockheed Martin's Advanced Development Programs (ADP), better known as Skunk Works. An Air Force official revealed Dec. 4 that the service is "developing a stealthy unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to provide reconnaissance and surveillance support to forward deployed combat forces."

www.aviationweek.com...
links to direct article don't work. article is currently on front page. If you can't locate it search for USAF Confirms Stealthy UAV Operations - David A. Fulghum.

Wow all I can say is we so called it way back when the Lockheed polecat crashed. Makes you wonder if it was a staged accident to begin with.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Time line as best as I can determine for what could be significant dates in the project
-Sept. 1, 2005- The 30th RS was activated as part of the 57th Operations Group
-Dec. 18, 2006- Lockheed Polecat demonstrator crashes on its 4th flight after flight termination ground equipment is accidentally activated
-July. 17, 2007- 30th RS squadron patch was approved
-May. 15, 2009- Kandahar UAV sighting and photo taken
-Dec. 4, 2009- RQ-170 Sentinel confirmed to be a UAV operating in Afghanistan by USAF

[edit on 4-12-2009 by Canada_EH]

[edit on 4-12-2009 by Canada_EH]

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 05:41 PM by Zaphod58

reply to post by Canada_EH

Two interesting things pointed out on the Ares blog.

1. The designation is "wrong". RQ denotes and unarmed recon platform, like Global Hawk. The Reaper and other armed platforms have all been MQ. There is at least some evidence that this is capable of carrying weapons.

2. Every picture (what few there are) is of the left side.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 05:55 PM by Canada_EH

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Canada_EH

Two interesting things pointed out on the Ares blog.

1. The designation is "wrong". RQ denotes and unarmed recon platform, like Global Hawk. The Reaper and other armed platforms have all been MQ. There is at least some evidence that this is capable of carrying weapons.

2. Every picture (what few there are) is of the left side.

That and it is confirmed the pods on the wings are for sensor packages. A interesting placement that means that I would assume the underside of the UAV has some sort of viewing ports under them in order for them to be downwards facing. That or the possibility that it could be side scan like a large number of the SR-71s equipment was.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 06:04 PM by Zaphod58

reply to post by Canada_EH

I`m willing to bet it`s a combination of the two. We KNOW it flies near 80,000 feet, which is where sidescan is perfect, but it would also need some way to see below it to be of use to frontline troops. Especially if it`s armed.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 06:29 PM by freakyclown

Maybe it was taken at Camp Bastion.

Located pretty close to Kandahar, although for some reason I can not locate this MASSIVE base on google/bing

Clicky for map This map shows where camp bastion SHOULD be...but

Bing and Googlemaps are either massivly out of date (it was started in 2006) it has a 2,350 metre long and 28 metre wide runway and was built in 2007.

The few pictures I have found seem to show a similar colour tarmac as well as similar looking taxi lights.
*edited to add this link* Two pics showing taxi lights
What do people think?

[edit on 4-12-2009 by freakyclown]

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 10:28 PM by holleycop

Interesting that the USAF unveiled this today. In the AWST article, it was cited that the aircraft has been operating out of Tonopah, which as I recall it, was where Intelgurl indicated with certainty that some advanced UAV work has been ongoing. As interesting as this is, I think it also lends to her credibility on these matters.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 11:10 PM by firepilot

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Canada_EH

Two interesting things pointed out on the Ares blog.

1. The designation is "wrong". RQ denotes and unarmed recon platform, like Global Hawk. The Reaper and other armed platforms have all been MQ. There is at least some evidence that this is capable of carrying weapons.

Or, that could be evidence that much of the speculation was wrong too, and that it actually is unarmed and is meant more for stealthy snooping than anything else.

reply posted on 4-12-2009 @ 11:22 PM by Zaphod58

reply to post by firepilot

It could, but I remember at least one witness report mentioning what appeared to be weapon bay doors for an internal bay.

The first description of it in April describes two large doors between the MLG.

[edit on 12/4/2009 by Zaphod58]

reply posted on 5-12-2009 @ 07:43 AM by TAGBOARD

I think the "In From the Cold" blog puts it well:

The Beast of Kandahar has a Designation

With the Sentinel's existence now confirmed, that raises the inevitable question: what else does the Air Force (DoD) have that we don't know about.

reply posted on 5-12-2009 @ 12:03 PM by Helmkat

Originally posted by TAGBOARD
I think the "In From the Cold" blog puts it well:

The Beast of Kandahar has a Designation

With the Sentinel's existence now confirmed, that raises the inevitable question: what else does the Air Force (DoD) have that we don't know about.

Love the quote. If the armed forces had their way they would have us believe they are still flying Sopwith Camels LOL.

Anyway this is a facinating little bird. The wing sensor pods are interesting and given the conditions in Afghan. I wonder what it is monitoring? some sort of electronic communications I would wager. I bet shes real quiet too...

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^