Identifying help. Unknown concept plane/rendered image/something else?, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 10:22 PM by Captain Reynolds
reply to post by PilgriMage



I've never seen anything like it, and a quick Google search doesn't turn up anything about a "NordRaven" Plane. They're probably just concept photos though, as doubt the government would allow pictures to be taken of in-development spy-planes.


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 10:25 PM by Horza
reply to post by PilgriMage



The first image is a computer generated image. I can't offer any legitimate analysis to support this opinion other than I have been working with computer generated images a lot lately and, to me, that this is clearly what the first image is.

The second I can't really tell, but I would lean towards computer generated as well.



reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 10:35 PM by PilgriMage
Originally posted by Horza
reply to
post by PilgriMage



The first image is a computer generated image. I can't offer any legitimate analysis to support this opinion other than I have been working with computer generated images a lot lately and, to me, that this is clearly what the first image is.

The second I can't really tell, but I would lean towards computer generated as well.


By first one do you mean the one on fly or on ground? I'm having a headache with the perspective of the both pictures, but can't still prove it's a computer image.. I did the usual stuff (invert/level/gamma/channel mixer etc.) but the picture(s) are both pretty clean to my eye. The one with the plane on the ground appears like the plane is somewhat elevated from the front and maybe somewhat in angle..

Same with the flying picture, the perspective looks weird.. on the other hand, the shape is nothing I'm familiar with at the moment. Can't say how it really should look.

Can you hint me some things to look for on the pictures, as you're sure at least the first image is computer generated?


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 10:50 PM by TXRabbit
Originally posted by Oaktree
I am far from an aviation expert, but it looks a bit like Bill Sweetman's rendering of the Aurora, here:



figure 2.


I think that's the closest rendering to the shape I've seen. Good find Oaktree

The thing though is the Aurora has been talked about for almost 2 decades now and I'm sure if a "anon picture" like the one linked by the OP would come around, not only would people be blasting it as "OMG I SAW TEH AURORA!!1" but there'd be tons of hits on Google Images etc when looking for it.

We can only hope though :-)


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 10:53 PM by UberL33t
reply to post by TXRabbit



I don't know about the tons of hits for these specific photos.

These pictures were only placed on this Flickr acct. 5 days ago, by a person who most likely created the acct the same day. Perhaps they are authentic, perhaps they are a hoax, one could go both ways with the way they were presented.

Edit to Add:

Hoax: just add some CG images from some video game, and throw on some official looking aerial jargon and Mil spec jargon. Instant following.

Authentic: It's real, and not jargon. Instant following.

[edit on 3/10/2010 by UberL33t]


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 10:56 PM by TXRabbit
reply to post by UberL33t



Great point. I forget sometimes that not everything is as efficient as we'd like, ala Star Trek hehe.



Phil - any ideas why this pic would be included in your friend's upload? Does he have a background in aviation etc?



reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 11:02 PM by PilgriMage
Originally posted by UberL33t
reply to
post by TXRabbit



I don't know about the tons of hits for these specific photos.

These pictures were only placed on this Flickr acct. 5 days ago, by a person who most likely created the acct the same day. Perhaps they are authentic, perhaps they are a hoax, one could go both ways with the way they were presented.

Edit to Add:

Hoax: just add some CG images from some video game, and throw some official looking aerial jargon and Mil spec jargon. Instant following.

Authentic: It's real, and not jargon. Instant following.

[edit on 3/10/2010 by UberL33t]


Ok, I need to point out now, that the FLICKR account is my own.. I made it especially for this images. I can definitely delete the account and use ATS media instead or something. So the pictures are from my FTP, and I'm the one who uploaded them to flickr to ask some opinions.


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 11:08 PM by PilgriMage
Originally posted by TXRabbit
reply to
post by UberL33t



Great point. I forget sometimes that not everything is as efficient as we'd like, ala Star Trek hehe.



Phil - any ideas why this pic would be included in your friend's upload? Does he have a background in aviation etc?


It's actually my free FTP server for my "tinfoilhat friends" .. We always share everything even remotely insteresting (videos/pictures/pdf/you name it) via my FTP to each others. As far as I know this friend isn't especially interested in aviation. Not that I would be myself either, but the pictures were interesting and I see a lot of planes around here too, I kind of film them every now and then.

I live very clsoe to the "Lapin lennosto" (www.ilmavoimat.fi...) so I'm somewhat interested thou.


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 11:19 PM by UberL33t
reply to post by PilgriMage



Assuming this is authentic, let's try to examine this from the picture taker's point of view.

It's going to be someone that has been working on, or in conjunction, with the project. The Shipyard photo, with the Gulf of Finland and the Gulf of Bothnia, there are plenty of shipyards I would guess. I believe the person in question was on site to take this specific photo, why the craft would be at a shipyard, ehh multiple scenarios come to mind, testing, secure facility, etc. On that notion I feel this pic is plausible.

The aerial pic is plausible and although probably not taken by the individual specifically, it was accessible because of their involvement in the project.

I believe this, if found to be authentic, is definitely a drone.

[edit on 3/10/2010 by UberL33t]


reply posted on 10-3-2010 @ 11:20 PM by PilgriMage
Originally posted by TXRabbit
btw the closest thing I was able to find relative to the shape - the hardest part being the blending of the delta with the top of the craft was the Boeing X-488

Boeing X-488 concept


Nice plane. I wonder what's the point of those spikes on the tip of the wings. Some nifty way to direct the airflow perhaps? To be honest, first thing I thought after looking the picture was 'those turbines/motors look so vulnerable there..' I wonder why don't they use some kind of covered air flow pipes like on the cars. (Maybe they can't get enough air with that design or something). I already pictured a bunch of birds flying into the turbines..
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



In Case Of Videos Of Flying People
  Posted 9 days ago with 9 member flags
Lockheed and Boeing may have seen my design
  Posted 19 days ago with 9 member flags
First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
  Posted 12 days ago with 4 member flags
Boeing X-37 and X-40 - the ultimate history
  Posted 5 days ago with 3 member flags
F22 mishap or more that meeets the eye?
  Posted 0 days ago with 2 member flags
Its a bird, its a plane, no its a ....
  Posted 14 days ago with 0 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Santorum wants more fracking!!!
  US Political Madness, Posted 13 hours ago, 53 replies
Pass Me My Rifle
  World War Three, Posted 9 hours ago, 52 replies