Identifying help. Unknown concept plane/rendered image/something else?

Originally posted 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]

Do you know how big drone planes do they make? I would like to see some pictures with a proper scale and perspective, to get some idea.. so if you can offer some plane types/names or site to look for pictures, I would be grateful.

Originally posted 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.

I was thinking the opposite. I think the PTB want this kind of stuff released. Let the Chinese sit and think about them.

reply to post by PilgriMage


This is a good place to start to gain some perspective on drone sizes and capabilities.

UAV's

Some have pictures to show just how big they can get.

....and if you recall the movie "Stealth"

it was a movie, but what they have versus what we know they have, well, you know how that goes.

The image with the plane in the hangar is fake. Or at least I can tell it was pasted into it.

If you zoom in and look near the nose of the plane you can see where the cables from the crane intersect with the nose are almost pure black and different from the rest of the cables that do not intersect with the plane.

This would be because they would be very difficult to mask off and thus he used the line tool to add the parts of the cable that pass over the plane.

Also the cable that goes over the back part of the plane is suspect.
This one he managed to mask off. However with it being such a fine line was unable to get all the concrete colored parts and you can see white\gray along the cable where it overlaps the plane.

Also, to the left of this cable in the shadowed area appears to be a line that was not shadowed and remain the same color as the rest of the concrete near it that is not shadowed.
With the angle of light and from what I can tell of the plane there doesn't appear to be a slot on the plane anywhere near there that would let light pass through.

The shadow from the trailing edge of the wing passing over the guy in the white shirt would not be a straight line either if this where real.

Lastly I believe that the very tip of the wing would be visible through the grating of the platform on the stairs. I know you can't see through it very good but I think you would see the very tip of the wing if this were real.

1 - I am having a hard time in figuring why a new super duper aircraft project would use 1950's wing and flap design. This arrangement is near identical to the 1954 Fairey FD2 and its cancelled big brother the Fairey F155T. Very similar arrangements were seen throughout the 1950's and early 60'd, but never since. Its a strange one.

2 - There is no such thing as the X-488. The real programe is the X-48B. Try googling it, theres loads out there.



[edit on 11-3-2010 by waynos]

The hangar image is definitely composited, probably with a computer generated aircraft, rendered from an angle that didn't quite match that of the photo he was compositing into.
The biggest give away is the gantry in the upper right foreground which is casting a shadow onto a vertical pillar face, and that of the wing which is casting it's shadow onto a horizontal floor.

Originally posted by ShadowLink
The image with the plane in the hangar is fake. Or at least I can tell it was pasted into it.

If you zoom in and look near the nose of the plane you can see where the cables from the crane intersect with the nose are almost pure black and different from the rest of the cables that do not intersect with the plane.

This would be because they would be very difficult to mask off and thus he used the line tool to add the parts of the cable that pass over the plane.

Also the cable that goes over the back part of the plane is suspect.
This one he managed to mask off. However with it being such a fine line was unable to get all the concrete colored parts and you can see white\gray along the cable where it overlaps the plane.

Also, to the left of this cable in the shadowed area appears to be a line that was not shadowed and remain the same color as the rest of the concrete near it that is not shadowed.
With the angle of light and from what I can tell of the plane there doesn't appear to be a slot on the plane anywhere near there that would let light pass through.

The shadow from the trailing edge of the wing passing over the guy in the white shirt would not be a straight line either if this where real.

Lastly I believe that the very tip of the wing would be visible through the grating of the platform on the stairs. I know you can't see through it very good but I think you would see the very tip of the wing if this were real.

True. The shadows thou are tricky on the picture, as it seems there are several light sources all over the place. If the wing shape is the same as with the flying picture thou, the wing tip is 'cut off' so to speak.. so I'm not sure if it would be visible anyways. There is also a strange white strike of light on the bottom part of the image which goes through the left wing, tho there is a possibility of a gap in the wing design or a reflection/light source behind the large pillar. I have the most problem with the perspective myself, either the plane nose is heavily lifted up and a bit tilted, or the shape is very peculiar below the wing.

Also true about some of the cables, thou I still have a problem with the multiple lightning and all the stuff around casting shadows, could alter the cable colours too. Gonna check them out more closely now, thx mate.

edited: some typoes

[edit on 11-3-2010 by PilgriMage]

Originally posted by aegis80
The hangar image is definitely composited, probably with a computer generated aircraft, rendered from an angle that didn't quite match that of the photo he was compositing into.
The biggest give away is the gantry in the upper right foreground which is casting a shadow onto a vertical pillar face, and that of the wing which is casting it's shadow onto a horizontal floor.

What you think of the wing shadow? It gives an impression like the main light source is directly on top of it and some additional light comes from the sides. The angle of the cranes' (going on the middle of the image) shadows doesn't quite match with the shadow of the plane/wings, but it could be because of multiple light sources, there seem to be a few fluorescence tubes around, besides some heavy light coming from the top of the image?

it looks like a mock-up for a possible UCAV or out and out fake.

Originally posted by Kurokage
it looks like a mock-up for a possible UCAV or out and out fake.

I think I'll go with the latter on this one.

It's very unlikely that anything like thise would emerge from Finland. Our aerospace sector has only few comppanies, with Patria being the onlyone with full system R/D capability. Others are mainly component (electrical) manufacturers. And one is making UAV catapult systems (not the UAVs).

I have very good contacts in both Patria and Finnish military and i haven't heard anything about "home built" UAV:s. There are some secret projects in the works, but nothing that flies.

BOGUS
Here's why...


The design: looks like someone took a 3D model of a D-21 and attempted to modify it.
The wing configuration says "fast", but the forward end of the fuselage is blunt, large and says "slow".

The flaps: as Waynos pointed out - whats up with the ancient tech?

The engines: 3 engines?
Left and right under-wing (hard to be stealthy when you light up the IR sensors on every heat-seeker in a 50 mile radius)
A single center-line rear fuselage engine - and what the hell kind of fuel is that thing running? I have never seen a standard jet engine burn that bright.

The images: the image in the hangar is total BS. Check the depth of field, the focus hardly changes from the railing in front of the camera (lower right) all the way down to the ground level.
But..
See how the people below the wing are slightly out of focus? How interesting that the wing of the aircraft is in perfect focus - With that depth of field from that distance, the wing edges should be just as out of focus as the people standing directly under them.

Conclusion:

Classified aerospace project, no.
Art school project, yes.

[edit on 3-13-2010 by intelgurl]

Originally posted by intelgurl
BOGUS
Here's why...


The design: looks like someone took a 3D model of a D-21 and attempted to modify it.
The wing configuration says "fast", but the forward end of the fuselage is blunt, large and says "slow".

The flaps: as Waynos pointed out - whats up with the ancient tech?

The engines: 3 engines?
Left and right under-wing (hard to be stealthy when you light up the IR sensors on every heat-seeker in a 50 mile radius)
A single center-line rear fuselage engine - and what the hell kind of fuel is that thing running? I have never seen a standard jet engine burn that bright.

The images: the image in the hangar is total BS. Check the depth of field, the focus hardly changes from the railing in front of the camera (lower right) all the way down to the ground level.
But..
See how the people below the wing are slightly out of focus? How interesting that the wing of the aircraft is in perfect focus - With that depth of field from that distance, the wing edges should be just as out of focus as the people standing directly under them.

Conclusion:

Classified aerospace project, no.
Art school project, yes.

[edit on 3-13-2010 by intelgurl]

Good points, thou one could argue about the 'ancient' technology and engines.. As we wouldn't possibly know the specifications of the plane (whether it should be 'stealth' and stuff like that) ..

I'm starting to believe too it's some sort of hoax or art project, as I agree with many observations made here.

(The focus thing is interesting, most of the stuff which can be seen further away is still on focus, except for the ppl..)

You don't really need to know the spec to see that wing design is very basic first generation supersonic.

It even has visible hinge points! I suspect these were added to give it 'detail', it is however of the wrong sort.

It has all the hallmarks of a time when we knew that sharply swept deltas would go fast, but we weren't quite sure how to do it right. A description which may also apply to the artist that drew it

reply to post by waynos


The 2nd image is a fake too. For instance its obviously a relection of part of something else - see how the lighting (and everything else) matches about the centerline. if it was on its side like that thered be top to bottom shadows up high in the bright sun.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by angvzp0x]

www.cas2.com...

definitely a reflected gripen - just look at the scorch marks around the apu

[edit on 31-3-2010 by angvzp0x]