New imagery at the Lockheed Martin Yucca Lake facility

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   
36°55'35.80"N 116° 0'25.74"W

The is one cool "barn door". I can't say I ever saw that kind of hangar design.




posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Not to mention this is only a few kilometres from Area 51
. Maybe this is where the keep the flying Saucer


That sure is an interesting shape for a hangar though; especially the opening...



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


It is quite "suggestive" isn't it.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   
For those who don't have google-earth





posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


Did the same thing i guess i'll post it from a different angle





posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 01:49 AM
link   
For those who haven't tracked this facility or don't recall my old posts, use the time slider to get back to 3/21/2007 That is the imagery with a PC-12 and C-12 on the ground. Presumably one of the Lockheed Martin PC-12 shuttles that leave KVGT or KBLD, and of course the Beechcraft Janet C-12.

This facility was built with dubious public input. There is a post on ATS where I posted a study from the NTS approving the construction of this facility. But it was never revealed to the public prior to construction, but rather just the Desert Research Institute IIRC. When the new runway appeared on Google Earth, I phoned the NTS reading room and got the run around. Checking with Nevada environmental got me no where either. So they did the environmental study in a very backdoor under the table manner. Then a few years after it was done they just dumped the environmental study on the net with no real announcement.

Note that there is new 2009 imagery around Site-4 (not S-4) near Tonopah, and some nearby areas. They didn't put new imagery up for the TTR or the Keno airstrip, but it wouldn't surprise me if it showed up soon.

Back to this new Lockheed facility, I'm stumped as to the design. So we have small hangars that lead to a large hangar with a curved door. What does a curved door buy you? Why are the buildings interconnected?

It is believed Polecat flew from this facility. This canyon is very hard to snoop on. A bit of the new facility can be seen from Bonanza Peak and perhaps Mount Stirling.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
Back to this new Lockheed facility, I'm stumped as to the design. So we have small hangars that lead to a large hangar with a curved door. What does a curved door buy you? Why are the buildings interconnected?


Thanks for your interesting pieces of information everytime gariac, I enjoy'em very much!

As for the quoted text did you ask rhetorical questions or do you really don't know? (Because I'm interested in what you have to say about your own questions
)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Dalbeck
 


Nope, the interconnection seems goofy to me. At the very least, should something bad happen regarding noxious fumes, you might want the barns isolated. Some of these UAVs run on hydrazine.

If the large barn was squared off, the building might be in the way of the wing of a plane using one of the other barns. Note the tightness of the taxiways. Of course with no limit on desert dirt, they could just space out the buildings further and get around that problem. But if you needed to curve the front of a barn, this carousel scheme they used for the door would be the only solution. However, it wouldn't also have to expose the top area near the door.

This might just be a way to set up a work facility where the butt end of the plane and exhaust goes to this rounded portion of the hangar. Often in the desert they use a roof on poles, i.e. open air on all surfaces but the top, for maintenance structures. This way workers can stay out of the sun. But if you had a secret UAV, you might want more privacy.

These are all just rambling guesses.....



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
I wonder what UAV it is they are testing there. Looks like the two barns have about a 57 ft. width, the curved door on the main hangar about 71 ft.

This, maybe?
www.lockheedmartin.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Hey, don't know if you ran across this, NVH1 was mentioned in this Honeywell doc. www51.honeywell.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by FosterVS
I wonder what UAV it is they are testing there. Looks like the two barns have about a 57 ft. width, the curved door on the main hangar about 71 ft.

This, maybe?
www.lockheedmartin.com...


In one of the pdf docs gariac posted listed one of the hangar's name as "Falcon Hangar". Maybe Lockheed's Falcon? Just a fun thought.
edit on 3/25/2012 by DesertWatchdog because: spelling



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


I have a few threads on this facility. I don't believe I mentioned that document, but that is my source. You can use the search function on NVH1 and/or Yucca. This is the one I like because I suspect a county supervisor got the facility named after her.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
This facility just popped up on Google Earth. No environmental reports until way after it was built. Clearly a few civilians knew it was being built. Except for Groom Lake, all construction needs some environmental review.

This airport is mighty tough to observe from the "free world." It shows you how a real spook planner can site a project versus some clown like Lazar. However, it might also be that the other side of Yucca dry lake is used for the chemical spill facility, and perhaps they wanted some distance from it.

When you tour the NTS, you cannot bring binocs. This facility can be seen, but just barely. You can't bring a camera either, though some moron took a shot of Gate 700, probably from a cell phone camera. Crap like that can cause the tours to be eliminated.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


I have a few threads on this facility. I don't believe I mentioned that document, but that is my source. You can use the search function on NVH1 and/or Yucca. This is the one I like because I suspect a county supervisor got the facility named after her.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
This facility just popped up on Google Earth. No environmental reports until way after it was built. Clearly a few civilians knew it was being built. Except for Groom Lake, all construction needs some environmental review.

This airport is mighty tough to observe from the "free world." It shows you how a real spook planner can site a project versus some clown like Lazar. However, it might also be that the other side of Yucca dry lake is used for the chemical spill facility, and perhaps they wanted some distance from it.

When you tour the NTS, you cannot bring binocs. This facility can be seen, but just barely. You can't bring a camera either, though some moron took a shot of Gate 700, probably from a cell phone camera. Crap like that can cause the tours to be eliminated.




Agreed, saw the same photo you're talking about. the "Falcon hangar" came from the environmental report you posted. Like I said, just a fun thought. I'm guessing the diagrams they showed can't be requested? Since I'm a flight sim developer, that caught my attention right away.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


Those documents have left the DOE website. I thought I archived the AOF documents, but mine shows 0 bytes. Maybe someone else saved them.

Under normal circumstances, you could get the prints for the structure. I pull such stuff off the fbo,gov website all the time. That is, the construction goes out to bid, and you can't bid without plans. In the case of the AOF, the government didn't build the facility, so getting the documents isn't quite as easy. [That is, Lockheed did the bid requests.]

In theory, there are plans on file with the county. However, given the shady nature of how this facility was built, I wouldn't bet on getting them without doing some arm twisting. If this were in Lincoln county, I wouldn't even bother trying to get the plans. Nye county is far less corrupt than Lincoln. They probably exist in electronic form. You would have to do a public records request.
www.nyecounty.net...



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


Those documents have left the DOE website. I thought I archived the AOF documents, but mine shows 0 bytes. Maybe someone else saved them.

Under normal circumstances, you could get the prints for the structure. I pull such stuff off the fbo,gov website all the time. That is, the construction goes out to bid, and you can't bid without plans. In the case of the AOF, the government didn't build the facility, so getting the documents isn't quite as easy. [That is, Lockheed did the bid requests.]

In theory, there are plans on file with the county. However, given the shady nature of how this facility was built, I wouldn't bet on getting them without doing some arm twisting. If this were in Lincoln county, I wouldn't even bother trying to get the plans. Nye county is far less corrupt than Lincoln. They probably exist in electronic form. You would have to do a public records request.
www.nyecounty.net...



I did save them. I'll haffta dig them up.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


www.lazygranch.com...

I found one document. But I think there was one more specific to the hangars. Have you looked for your files?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


www.lazygranch.com...

I found one document. But I think there was one more specific to the hangars. Have you looked for your files?



All I have. thebox.mongoworks.com...



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Hey gariac,
I was kind of curious about this report and its mention of the "Lost Link Aerial Operations Facility" from 2001.
thebox.mongoworks.com...

Page 19
"Table 2. Summary of biological surveys conducted on the NTS during FY2001"
"01-11 Construction of runway and pad for Lost Link Aerial Operations Facility"

Could this be an early name of the Yucca AOF? I tried to find more on this Lost Link AOF and came up with nothing. Figured maybe you could or already have.
edit on 4/24/2012 by DesertWatchdog because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


I'm not sure either way. "Lost Link" probably refers to the problem of what to do with a UAV when you lose communications. [Buzz phrase is lost link mission planning.] There is a hand off between ground control and satellite control. Ground control is line of sight. Satellite is everywhere, but lock is an issue. I suppose they could set up a runway in some spot where if the hand-off didn't work, they could recover the UAV with another ground station down stream. But that Lost Link site wouldn't necessarily have to be at Yucca Dry Lake.

From a current FBO request:
www.fbo.gov...



3. Lost Link Performance - In the event of loss of data link, the aircraft must execute a preplanned, user-programmable mission profile to facilitate restoration of the data link and minimize collateral damage if the link cannot be reestablished. Describe the lost link profile capability of the VTOL UA for (1.) automatic landing, (2.) zeroization of cryptographic variables, (3.) cooperative traffic avoidance, (4.) uncooperative traffic avoidance, (5.) obstacle avoidance, (6.) reporting on traffic and obstacles if link is reestablished


There is a Predator crash near Creech where control was lost so the UAV went into orbit mode. It orbited into a mountain. ;-) I have the FOIA someplace. The press report was written so poorly that it sounded like the UAV crashed in free territory, but when I got the crash report, it was clear that it crashed on the range.

I've never seen this first hand, but they fly Predators from Creech to Ft. Irwin. It must be tough on air traffic control since radar coverage is not so great over route 95. But it wouldn't surprise me if there are way to recover the UAVs en route.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by DesertWatchdog
 


I'm not sure either way. "Lost Link" probably refers to the problem of what to do with a UAV when you lose communications. [Buzz phrase is lost link mission planning.] There is a hand off between ground control and satellite control. Ground control is line of sight. Satellite is everywhere, but lock is an issue. I suppose they could set up a runway in some spot where if the hand-off didn't work, they could recover the UAV with another ground station down stream. But that Lost Link site wouldn't necessarily have to be at Yucca Dry Lake.

From a current FBO request:
www.fbo.gov...



3. Lost Link Performance - In the event of loss of data link, the aircraft must execute a preplanned, user-programmable mission profile to facilitate restoration of the data link and minimize collateral damage if the link cannot be reestablished. Describe the lost link profile capability of the VTOL UA for (1.) automatic landing, (2.) zeroization of cryptographic variables, (3.) cooperative traffic avoidance, (4.) uncooperative traffic avoidance, (5.) obstacle avoidance, (6.) reporting on traffic and obstacles if link is reestablished


There is a Predator crash near Creech where control was lost so the UAV went into orbit mode. It orbited into a mountain. ;-) I have the FOIA someplace. The press report was written so poorly that it sounded like the UAV crashed in free territory, but when I got the crash report, it was clear that it crashed on the range.

I've never seen this first hand, but they fly Predators from Creech to Ft. Irwin. It must be tough on air traffic control since radar coverage is not so great over route 95. But it wouldn't surprise me if there are way to recover the UAVs en route.


Hmm I see.

The reason I'm quick to connect this to the Yucca facility is the date, the use of the construction of runway, and the mention of a pad, given it was once a heliport of some type, based on old sat pics and its NVH1 designation. Not to mention I haven't noticed any new runways other than Yucca pop up in images (have you?).

But I do see what you are saying. It would be nice to find that report they are referencing and see if they give a location like they do. Can those be requested some way?





new topics
top topics
 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join