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.

 

Area 51/Groom Lake Research Project

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:20 PM
link   
For the purpose of helping the team stay orginized and Up to date on our research and current leads, I will do periodic status updates. In these Updates, I will post our major finds and leeds for all to see. Since this post is a summery of all Research, I will include Everyone's work in this post (But not in detail). This post is stictly to aid us with orginization, Not to take Credit from anyone! Thanks to the fallowing People we have the info in this post: Infinite, FredT, machinegunjordan, and ghost, and DeltaNine This is the second update on the project.

On the 25th of July Infinite left our team and Delta Nine Joined! Best of luck Infinite! Welcome Delta Nine, and thanks for the help!

We also might have a research project ATS soon that was born from some Info that this team has found. (more on this in future updates as info is avalible)

Here's what we have!(arranged by goal):

#1: To find out exactly when the base was first built and to construct accurate and more complete time line of the base's history. (See Time Line Posts) summery: the current time line goes from 1955 to the present. We have had many additions and updates of the time line. The US military was active in the Groom lake Area in the 1940's

#2: To determine who owns and runs the base today.
Still unknown, but may be a joint effort of the NSA/USAF/DARPA (our latest finds suggest that the NSA may have replaced the CIA as the base's primary Intelligence agency)

#3: Identify likly areas of technology and science being researched at the base and how they apply to Defense and National Security.

What we have: Advanced Stealth, UAV's, Intelligence/Reconnassance systems,

#4: Determine what government Departmets/Agencies are at the base

US Department of Defense, US Air Force (Det 3 AFFTC), CIA, DARPA, NSA

#5: Learn how the base ties into other covert government activities beyond research (EX: Intelligence, SpecOp's, ect.) We've linked the Base to Intelligence operations based on who's there. Also Many of the base's secret projects seem to be linked to intelligence gathering hardware or Projects (EX: spyplanes, the MiG's that were tested).
The NSA seems to be the main party in these activities through the CSS. The base appears to support SIGHT & ELINT missions using secret new aircrafts.

#6: Answer the Big question: does the base have an Official name/ if so what is it?
Still not known! The base does not seam to have an offical name, but is known by the radio Call Sign of it's Air Traffic Control Tower "Dreamland" (still being fallowed up on, but this seems to be the latest consensus!)

This Summery shows that we are doing very well with this project so far. I'm very impressed with both the Quality and the quanity of the research that the team has provided. Keep up the Great Work!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance




posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ghost
I say that because federal regulations require all aircrafts and all ground stations to have a standard call sign for Air Traffic Control and ID Purposes. What do you think?


I like it. The ATC program would no doubt see non stealth plaes. At least a skin paint, and most would have to have a trasponder to transit ATC areas. I rereading an F-117 book by Paul Crickmore, there was a discussion about testing the F-117 for tanking with the KC-10 and KC-135. These were done out at sea and NOT over Groom or Nellis. You would have to get LA ATC for permission to transit the airspace. A common call sign would simplyfy matters and make things safe. ATC controllers would know (esp Nellis ones) that a "Dreamland" call sign would have priority at the very least. I don't know any ATC controllers, but tommow I will see if I can find out any information from the FAA regarding how they handle classified military flights through civilian airspace.



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by ghost
I say that because federal regulations require all aircrafts and all ground stations to have a standard call sign for Air Traffic Control and ID Purposes. What do you think?


I like it. The ATC program would no doubt see non stealth plaes. At least a skin paint, and most would have to have a trasponder to transit ATC areas. I rereading an F-117 book by Paul Crickmore, there was a discussion about testing the F-117 for tanking with the KC-10 and KC-135. These were done out at sea and NOT over Groom or Nellis. You would have to get LA ATC for permission to transit the airspace. A common call sign would simplyfy matters and make things safe. ATC controllers would know (esp Nellis ones) that a "Dreamland" call sign would have priority at the very least. I don't know any ATC controllers, but tommow I will see if I can find out any information from the FAA regarding how they handle classified military flights through civilian airspace.


Fred, not to be mean, but I think you might have misunderstood me! Dremland applies Only to the base's air traffic control tower, NOT to any of the base's aircraft. Just as each aircraft has it's own unique Call Sign that it does not share with any other aircraft, the same is true of Air Traffic Control Towers. So, Dreamland is unique to the Air Traffic Control Tower at Groom Lake, noone else can use that call sign.

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghost
Fred, not to be mean, but I think you might have misunderstood me! Dremland applies Only to the base's air traffic control tower,
Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance


I got you the first time
. But the tower may help clear the airspace for the flight from groom. Sorry, I wan not clear in my responce. Yes no doubt each aircraft would have its own call sign.

BTW. The F-117 carries a removable radar reflector, looks like a geometric blister to enhance Degrade its stealth abilites in controlled areas.



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I was down at SRI Internationa in menlo Park today and came accross something interesting in the hallway. SRI is a reserch center that among other things developed the mouse, has multiple classified projects and has highly restricted areas. Biometric passes etc. (I worked in the Credit Union one summer and still have an account there).

Anyway my son and I were looking at one of thier "Look at what we have done boards" and for a period in the 70's and 80's it said:

Researched and developed composite materials with novel electromagnetic deflection and absorbtion properties for aerospace applications

Hmmmmm what could be using these?????



posted on Jul, 30 2004 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Went back to USGS to see if they had any information on older maps of the area. No luck. They do archive historical maps, but they generaly do not sell them. You have to go to Washington area to do the research. The University of Nevada at Reno School Of mines has information, but you would have to go down there. If we take a trip to Lake Tahoe, I may try to stop by, but we will see. (It won't be anytime soon).



posted on Aug, 1 2004 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Having done some research into the topic, talked to our resident mining engineer (my dad) looked at mining projects both in literature and first hand (more on that later) I have come to a conclution about the possibility that a large underground base exists specificaly at the Area 51 Complex.

Putting on my best Don Corleone Voice "I must say no to you, and I will give you my reasons"

1) The biggest question is what to do about the "muck" and derbits that a huge underground complex would entail.

Yesterday I spent part of the day at the Niebaum-Coppola Winery. We have "Rubicon" level membership there (took 4 years on a wait list) to pick up a few bottles of wine. One of the recent projects has involved tunnling into the mountain side to create caves to age their flagship wine "Rubicon" (If you can find it, the 1997 and the 99 are pretty kick ass). The project did not take a huge amount of time but the resulting muck created alot of headaches. I was talking to one of the staff at the winery and came away with a few points. First, the costs of hauling away the muck was almost the same as carving the tunnell itself. Disposal was an issue, but for some reason the staff member did not want to discuss that. The hauling away of the muck did considerable damage to the roadbed. The point of this other than getting to sample some good wine is that the waste created is a huge problem for public disposal let alone covert. Furthermore, the base would need to be constructed and the muck disposed of in a manner that would not draw the attention of the public, people not cleared for the project, spy and commerical satelites etc. The other recent tunnling project is Bostons "Big Dig" which required huge amount of manpower and disposal of the muck also gnerated problems. They backfilled in an area to create an island. This option would not be avalible to someone building a covert base.

Now with that in light lets consider the circumstances of Groom lake:

1) Site, somewhat covert, however since the early 80' untill the AF annexed all of the surrounding mountains, one was able to directly obsever the base from a distance. None of the reports from area 51 observers ie. Glen Cambell, never talk about any signs of mining or digging activity at the base (at least not in large scale). In the mid 90's the advent of both declassified Soviet spy satelites and commerical satelites do not reveal any huge derbit fields anywere near the base. Nor does it show any signifigant construction of hardened dirt roads that would allow big trucks to move the muck soemwere else on the Nellis Range.
That leaves the period of the 50' and the 60' when the base had not attracted any attention. We do have the Soviet Satelite shot of Groom lake in the 60's that shows a much smaller base, but again no indication of large sacle mining or digging activity. GooseUK's suggestion of usuing old mines has alot of merit and the possibilities are there. This hypotisis is directly supported by Richard Sauder's book "Underwater and Underground Bases" However, even he indicates that the best area for this is under Stripmines both active and inactive. they are huge areas, usually have underlying solid rick, and covert tunneling can be acomplished with the muck blended into overall mining operations. These complexes are HUGE. Last november, we spent 2 weeks driving through the SW of the US. Came across a strip mine in Arizona and it went on for mines and miles. You could easily conceal a miliraty base under the strip mine itself with no problem. However, none of the shots of the base show a strip mine old or new. We know from the USGS maps that there are numerous mines and claims dotting the area. However, most of these are in the groom range. not on the lakebed itself. As I pointed out, there is no indication past or presence of a hardened dirt roadway that would allow transportation of the Muck to dump them in the mine. Part of my november trip involved alot of off roading in death valley and near Josua Tree. We cam across numerous abandoned mines. The entrances were really tight and would involve alot of work to get the muck down there. These guys want these project to involve the minimum amout of people possible.

One area I really want to see a shot of is the Groom Mountain Range that is north of the lake bed. A dirt road cuts through it and that is the loaction of most of the mines on the groom mine Quad (the map the base is on) In every shot of the area, it is impossible to see the range from overhead.

If there is an underground componet to the base, I will put money that there is an istallation located somewere in that range.

2) The giant hanger concealing an elevator. Hanger 18 at Groom was mention in a previous post as possible concealing an elevator. This idea also has merit, however, I submit that this was built for mating ships like the Brilliant Buzzard, or for servicing the Venture Star which may have had a black counterpart. If they are moving ships up from below, would they need such a huge structure?

3) Base Logistics. While I have never claimed to be an imagry analysis from the NRO, I have not seen anything that resembles powerlines or a huge generation plant that would supply the base with power. So were does the base get its power? Nuclear would be a sound option for an underground base. And it would have been easy to construct in the 60's. Also the base is not subject to any US environmental regulations and that gets renewed each year by the president. I have not been able to verify even by rumor of such a plant existing. Underground powerlines would also have given some indication from the overhead imagry. The other issue for deeply buried bases that I picked up from the Saunders book is that due to the amount of heat that deep in the ground, the surrounding rock has to be chilled over a period of a few years prior to habitiation otherwise the equipment and people wont be able to function. The plant also has to have an ongoing cooling operation to maintain working temperatures. Again all of this requires alot of power and infrastructure. Non of the pictures show this.

These are just some of the points I have considered when looking at an undergroud base. I would appreciate feedback on this. I am not married to my conclutions here, but I believe them to be sound

Fred



posted on Aug, 1 2004 @ 08:33 PM
link   
wow guys, this thing has grown. i may have dug something up about where planes leaving groom fly to.a base that most people havent heard of. im looking into it. IMO there is more underground in groom. or groom is actually a distarction from whats the real deal. because we have never seen top secret aircraft in pictures surrounding groom. i think groom has things goin on but some maybe just enough to grab the attention of ufo buffs and stealth watchers. to create a diversion.i think i may know where this base is. and whether groom is a diversion or not can all be answered by whats inside of hangar 18. also from sattelite pic analysis of area 51. looks to be some construction going on. i will look into that.



posted on Aug, 1 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Digging through the CIA archives I came across this little tidbit. The CIA formed a separte depatrment to coordinate the activites of th U-2 and Oxcart programs and thier deployment to Groom.

Its called "The Office OF Special Activities" It coordinated activities with the Special Assistant For Policy Coordination (R. Bissell at the time who played a role in U2 Development)

It also coordinated in CORONA development untill it had to give up the program to the NSA
I have the URL if people want to look at the actuall 5 page document.



posted on Aug, 1 2004 @ 09:20 PM
link   
More nuggets from the CIA:

I was looking at a declassified evaluation of a request to use the A12 in setting speed records. They basicaaly spent time telling why this was not a good idea, and made a reference to an SR-21? Is this a mistaken refenece to the M-21/D-21 combo?

/6fq2v



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

I got you the first time
. But the tower may help clear the airspace for the flight from groom. Sorry, I wan not clear in my responce. Yes no doubt each aircraft would have its own call sign.

BTW. The F-117 carries a removable radar reflector, looks like a geometric blister to enhance Degrade its stealth abilites in controlled areas.



Sorry Fred, I missed you point on the first go around. Thanks for clearing that up.

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 08:09 AM
link   
I agree with Fred. While the base (in my oppinion) does have some underground levels (AKA Building with regular basements), based on the evidence, I don't see a large underground base at Area 51 as a realistic possibility.

Tim



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
More nuggets from the CIA:

I was looking at a declassified evaluation of a request to use the A12 in setting speed records. They basicaaly spent time telling why this was not a good idea, and made a reference to an SR-21? Is this a mistaken refenece to the M-21/D-21 combo?

/6fq2v


I think so! SR-21 sound awlful close to SR-71 and M-21(itself a mistake the plane you are thinking of is the M-12which was paired with the D-21)

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Digging through the CIA archives I came across this little tidbit. The CIA formed a separte depatrment to coordinate the activites of th U-2 and Oxcart programs and thier deployment to Groom.

Its called "The Office OF Special Activities" It coordinated activities with the Special Assistant For Policy Coordination (R. Bissell at the time who played a role in U2 Development)

It also coordinated in CORONA development untill it had to give up the program to the NSA
I have the URL if people want to look at the actuall 5 page document.


Office of Special Activites? Let's take a look at this! Also, what does NSA have to do with the Corona Spy Satellite? I would have expected the NRO, which manages spy satellites, but NSA?
Are you sure it was NSA and NOT NRO?

I like to get a look at this document. This sound really intresting!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghost
Office of Special Activites? Let's take a look at this! Also, what does NSA have to do with the Corona Spy Satellite? I would have expected the NRO, which manages spy satellites, but NSA?
Are you sure it was NSA and NOT NRO?


Sorry I misspoke, The NRO would control the satelites and thier tasking via. Onizuka AFB here in Sunnyvale. However, I may be wrong, but I thought the NSA controlled the NRO
Here is a link to the document:

/6a2cz



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 01:17 PM
link   
I like the idea. Im not sure that they would be big enough for a huge complex, but they would be a great place for them to hide activities etc. I will trek on down to USGS and see if the area has the geology for Karsts, caves etc. It could be a good link....

Good pick up Tim



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 02:50 AM
link   
Talked to the USGS guys at the map store. He said he would ask a geoligist frined at USGS and try to get an answer. In regards to tunnling and muck, in Richard Saunders first book he does show a patent for a nuclear powered subterrine that melts its way through rock adn the muck simply hardeneds into smooth glass like walls. It may sound far fetched but it is a possibility.

Other areas to look into. Do we have an accurate account of the total number of Janet flights each day? Are they more or less than in the past. One of the items I have put forth in another thread is this:

What if Area 51 was used for some testing etc, but its main purpose beside that was to serve as a way station to toher more sensative areas in the Nellis Range?

Other items. Ina Paul Crikmore book there is a killer panorama of the base looking west. The mountain range 9above the gravel pit/cement plant area looks pretty untoutched. Not that I am a photo expert mind you. The only thing is what appears to be tower on one of the peaks overlooking the base. No signs of roads, caves or tunnel enerances. I would love a ground mapping rafar or IR shot of the whole area. Id also like winning lottery tickets as well.



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 11:49 PM
link   
This is the only picture of the Groom Mine are I have been able to find. For refernce the mine are is located NNE of the base int he Groom Range approx 4 miles from the base. I assume the view is to the south





posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
I like the idea. Im not sure that they would be big enough for a huge complex, but they would be a great place for them to hide activities etc. I will trek on down to USGS and see if the area has the geology for Karsts, caves etc. It could be a good link....

Good pick up Tim


You brought up a good point, most caves are not huge. A giant complex seems unlikly, but maybe we need to look for smaller facilites in the mountains. Also, can you find out from those maps about how much area the base itself covers(approxiamte Sq. miles)? You are starting to make me think that if there are undergroud facilities out there, they may have been design for maximum concealablity, not maximum size. My current thinking is that they might have used the mountains to try to hide some of the base's most secret labs. Thanks for helping me stay on the facts intead of chasing the wild roumors. Let's look into labs,maybe we'll get lucky!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 06:30 AM
link   
I Just found a link to some of Groom Lake's current stealth research. They have panels that can be applied to aircraft that create the illusion that the aircraft is transparent and invisible to the human eye. The aircraft fitted with these pannels are currently being flight tested out at Groom Lake. these panels form a "Stealth Skin" for the aircraft. Here is a link to the new Stealth Skin for Aircraft

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join