It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Black Triangle UFOs: 'Not piloted by alien beings'

page: 9
12
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Aliensun
 


One wonders what happened to good science.





posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
I have been puzzled by this phenomena over the past few months. I see these without fail EVERY night sometimes 6 sometimes as many as 12. They all seem to vary in their light configuration at the time I see them. However what bothers me the most is if they are government black projects what the hell are they doing in bum# MEXICO?



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 05:26 AM
link   
I remember a story in a UK ufo magazine in the mid nineties. Some army barracks somewhere in England were awakened one night and told they were to go out into the fields and test some night vision gear. They thought that was strange, it had never happened before and the night vision had already been tried and tested.

Out in the field a black triangle hovered above them and herded them around against their will via a beam of light that shone on top of them. They had no choice but to follow the light. Surprisingly an American accent coming from someone they couldn't see was also giving orders from the shadows.

Fast forward a few months and up the road from where I live a family in their car spotted an FT coming towards them. They screamed in fright and it backed off. Later they would see it parked in a field with HUNDREDS of alien greys and a few very tall tan coloured supervisors nearby. These things shot towards their car, some floated in starlike cocoons, and surrounded them. There were hysterics, obviously. At the same time some huge mast at the top of a hill was flashing a huge light in sequences of three.

All bizarre, it's no wonder, until someone gives a proper explanation, we're left bewildered.



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 06:55 AM
link   
I did not read the complete thread but a number of us abductees have flown small black triangles. I know people will say I'm making this up but so be it....

Rich



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Son of Will
 
They very well maybe ours but that doesn't explain all of the other different 'shaped'craft being reported..



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Most of these sightings are the stealth blimp. www.thestealthblimp.com...
Lockheed showed designs for a small rigid airship in the late 70's that they specifically said could be made in all shapes and sizes out of carbon fiber composites. Stop looking for anti gravity and start thinking about how easy it would be to fill it with helium and do amazing things. Think about it. When you don't have to use "wings" for lift, you can fly in any bizarre manner you want including 90 degree turns and motionless hover.



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by alexander_delta
 


Whatever amazing things they can do with helium, wouldn't it be slow? FT's are reportedly able to move extremely fast.



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightrun
I would say they are extraterrestrial simply because of the crazy moves they do in the sky and then dash off and disappear.
20 Years ahead in technology doesn't instantly mean antigravity ships.

[edit on 2/9/2010 by nightrun]


Exactly.


Just go back 20 years in time to eh 1990... wow can't believe it's been 20 years. Anyways, in 1990 we didn't have supercomputers or smart phones like today, but one can easily trace the technology to the transistor as well as better computer interfaces, microwaves (like for your cell phone not heating your food), etc. The point is you see us basically using the same technology, albeit more refined.

"Anti-Gravity" technology needs to be defined, not just loosely thrown around. The ability to instantly accelerate a mass that large to speeds = thousands of miles per hour isn't 20 years ahead.... never quite figured out why so many people on this website believe that??

You can't accelerate a mass that large like that. That takes an act of God. Or aliens.



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by alexander_delta
Stop looking for anti gravity and start thinking about how easy it would be to fill it with helium and do amazing things. Think about it. When you don't have to use "wings" for lift, you can fly in any bizarre manner you want including 90 degree turns and motionless hover.


Good link. Stealth blimps can explain some sighthings, but they are severely limited in their ability to withstand acceleration forces.... for obvious reasons.

I'm not sure why the military would invent such a craft either? What purpose does it serve other than scaring people into believing in aliens?



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by wigit
reply to post by alexander_delta
 


Whatever amazing things they can do with helium, wouldn't it be slow? FT's are reportedly able to move extremely fast.

Imagine if you stuck an F22 engine in it. It could out maneuver an F22. The F22 needs to generate aerodynamic lift to stay in the air. A "triangle" lighter than air craft with a composite airframe like the F22 would be a real untouchable monster.



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scramjet76
I'm not sure why the military would invent such a craft either? What purpose does it serve other than scaring people into believing in aliens?




The Walrus operational vehicle (OV) was intended to carry a payload of 500-1,000 tons (that’s 1-2 million pounds) up to 12,000 nautical miles, in less than 7 days and at a competitive cost. Given these enormous capacities, they would mostly be used to deploy full-scale fighting units (for example, the components of an Future Combat Systems Army Unit of Action) quickly, getting them to their site with a minimum of equipment reassembly work required. The ideal is that transported forces should fully ready to fight within 6 hours.


www.defenseindustrydaily.com...

Next question....

How fast can a blimp be pushed through the atmosphere before the skin that holds the Helium collapses?

Test on Friday



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Well....


Even in a "Blimp", it is not the "skin" that holds the helium in; the "Lifting Cells" actually contain the gas. And the "skin" you refer to contains the lifting cells, as well as cantenary, a series of cables, which is used to distribute the weight of the control gondola to the top of the envelope (skin).

The only limit to the speed of a Lighter than Air Vehicle (LAV) is the drag produced by the material of the envelope.

The experimental inflatable "Space Hotel" flown recently by Bigelow Aerospce, you'll recall, is actually quite similar to what most people would think of as a blimp in that it is, basically, a non-rigid enveloping structure inflated by a gas to maintian its shape.

And, as you also will recall, this structure was flown in space in low Earth orbit.

Orbital velocity is aproximately 17,000 MPH.

Not too shabby a speed for what is essentially a "blimp"!


In truth, the maximum airspeed of lighter than air vehicles is only limited by the material comprising the the craft's envelope. Since an LAV must keep vehicle weight to a minimum (as All aircraft must), the envelope has traditionally been made of materials that were relatively thin and therefore, easily flexible.

At higher airspeeds, the flexiblity of these materials negatively impacts the aerodynamics of the airship by increasing drag.


Now, if a light-weight, but rigid, material could be found (or developed), something like Graphene perhaps, that limitation would soon disappear.


If we could develop an extremely strong and very lightweight material we might even begin to see the development of LAV airships which abandon lifting gases altogether, and instead, utilize vacuum cells to provide all the lift they need to get the craft into space!



posted on Oct, 5 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
reply to post by zorgon

Even in a "Blimp", it is not the "skin" that holds the helium in; the "Lifting Cells" actually contain the gas. And the "skin" you refer to contains the lifting cells, as well as cantenary, a series of cables, which is used to distribute the weight of the control gondola to the top of the envelope (skin).

The only limit to the speed of a Lighter than Air Vehicle (LAV) is the drag produced by the material of the envelope.


Zorgon said: How fast can a blimp be pushed through the atmosphere before the skin that holds the Helium collapses?

Bhadhidar Said: In truth, the maximum airspeed of lighter than air vehicles is only limited by the material comprising the the craft's envelope. (skin) ... At higher airspeeds, the flexiblity of these materials negatively impacts the aerodynamics of the airship by increasing drag. (collapse)



And, as you also will recall, this structure was flown in space in low Earth orbit. Orbital velocity is aproximately 17,000 MPH. Not too shabby a speed for what is essentially a "blimp"!


yeah I am tracking those on my site... but then those "blimps" don't encounter much air resistance



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by sherpahowever as always with footage of that calibre can we really be sure


Pop on over and I will take ya out for a day trip, though I hear after 3 am is better


LOL!

11:47 PM Last night was cool!

Has anyone noticed the 3 white lights under the UAV Zorgon posted. I know they are landing lights but it does look cool on a moonless night.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Scramjet76
 


There is a very good purpose. The load carrying capability is 10 times conventional aircraft, they can go up to the edge of space without losing too much lift, some can can stay in the air for years if neccessary, they are quiet and 'stealthy', they can act as antennaes or substitute satellites...

There is a well known relationship...as volume increases the relative surface area needed to envelope the volume decreases. Therefore I'm thinking the bigger an airship is the better it's performance (it craft won't break up in flight as easily) as it can use a heavier and stronger 'skin' to keep it's integrity better compared to a smaller airship as there is not as much 'skin' required. Maybe that's one of the reasons these things are so huge (apart from the fact that a bigger airship should be able to carry more stuff).
edit on 16-1-2011 by ManInAsia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scramjet76

Originally posted by nightrun
I would say they are extraterrestrial simply because of the crazy moves they do in the sky and then dash off and disappear.
20 Years ahead in technology doesn't instantly mean antigravity ships.

[edit on 2/9/2010 by nightrun]


Exactly.


Just go back 20 years in time to eh 1990... wow can't believe it's been 20 years. Anyways, in 1990 we didn't have supercomputers or smart phones like today, but one can easily trace the technology to the transistor as well as better computer interfaces, microwaves (like for your cell phone not heating your food), etc. The point is you see us basically using the same technology, albeit more refined.

"Anti-Gravity" technology needs to be defined, not just loosely thrown around. The ability to instantly accelerate a mass that large to speeds = thousands of miles per hour isn't 20 years ahead.... never quite figured out why so many people on this website believe that??

You can't accelerate a mass that large like that. That takes an act of God. Or aliens.


They say that because they don't really understand physics so it doesn't make any difference to them if they throw in a random but cool sounding term like 'anti-gravity'
. I mean what is anti-gravity...when I throw a ball in the air I am using my anti-gravity force of my hand and muscles right?



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
double post
edit on 16-1-2011 by ManInAsia because: double post



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by CheapShotArtist
 


See that's the big red flag. This idea that the government has technology 20 years ahead of the rest of us. Yet these things were seen in 1987. Okay, well, it's 3 years later than 20 years past that, and we still don't have anything remotely close to it.

That's why you can't rule out aliens.



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
You can't rule out aliens, but if you read triangle reports the vast majority are of a slow moving object passing low overhead in the darkness and they are usually near air force bases. The odd report mentions amazing acceleration etc..there might be something otherworldy about a few of the reports, but even then I am wondering how accurate many witnesses are when they state it took off in an instant etc. Usually in that case they describe it as moving off rapidly not instantly (actually usually they describe them as moving slower than an airplane...which just screams blimp).

!987 was well within stealth blimp territory, these things have probably been under development in one form or another since the 1960s.

The technology to create a stealth blimp is not really that advanced actually, it is a blimp that flies at night and is black and operates silently..not out of this world is it? There are also commercial builders of similar aircrast as has been pointed out already.
edit on 23-1-2011 by ManInAsia because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join