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.

 

Test of hypersonic aircraft fails over Pacific Ocean

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 08:07 PM
link   
s really wondering if anyone knew exactly what it is.....or ideas of any kind.

edit on 15-8-2011 by lalawillis because: because I was kinda rude but did not mean to be. to reply the wrong way

edit on 15-8-2011 by lalawillis because: i was kinda rude and did not mean to be--took reply the wrong way =((




posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by lalawillis
 


and no I thought I made it a point to un check the " request friends to log in". did not know that I could put them on an album here on ATS. right on it...



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


sorry, i understand...I have had a stressful day and apologize. I figured out how to post pictures and they are in my gallery. Like I said- I am no professional photographer.... I just thought they were very interesting and peculiar...and that this site was perfect for getting opinions on what it could be. Thanks for replying.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


media.abovetopsecret.com...&action=list_photos&album_id=25346

is this how I share my pictures with you?



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by lalawillis
reply to post by Frira
 


media.abovetopsecret.com...&action=list_photos&album_id=25346

is this how I share my pictures with you?


Yeah, my first pre-edit did sound snarky, didn't it?!

The link takes me to my own account, and when I add the account number following the hyperlink, it says "no pictures in this album."

I gather you have uploaded the picture to your ats album. So...
1) Go to that album and click on that picture
2) on that new page, scroll down below and copy the text listed as "embedded on ats"
3) reply to this thread and paste that embed code into your next post. The picture should show.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 





posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


its so big you can't see the whole thing..there are two separate ones but this one is more interesting. I was not able to upload more pics for a while but now I can-so maybe now you can access my album? here is one that I down sized, and one that was before I edited to brighten it up...


edit on 15-8-2011 by lalawillis because: link to picture was not working-guess i can only post one link in a reply?



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by lalawillis
 





posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by StratosFear
 


here are a couple of pictures of what I saw-sounds very similar to what you described--at about the same time and day...tell me what you think. there were two different one that I had show up in my pictures --but this one is much more interesting....
before i edited:


after:



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by StratosFear
 


Sounds like aurora craft. Maybe explains some of the freaky noises in the news?



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by lalawillis
 


Good Lord!

I'm baffled. I have never seen anything like that. I have seen a lot of amateur astrophotography, and many with a few surprises (e.g. "Great Boeing Nebula" a.k.a. "NGC 727")

Most unusual is the apparent but dim semicircle-- very steady arc.

* Erratic, so not a plane or anything with a trajectory.
* No navigation lights (no flashing red), so can't be a helicopter.
* Constant brightness so not a lightning bug.
* No wash-out, so not shining down like an LED light -- at least on film it would wash, my experience does not include digital formats).
* Lots of saturation, so brighter than any stars.

Except for the dim semi-circular arc, I would think something reflecting ground light slowly floating past. So with the semi-circle, some flying insect being lit from behind and to the right? I like conventional answers, so am going with that one.

Otherwise:
* a flying saucer with an inebriated pilot
* a flying saucer with inertial dampener problems
* ectoplasma
and my least favorite... photoshop.

I would start a thread and ask. Give exposure length (can't be more than a few seconds unless equatorial mount, right?), and any other useful data.

Kind of cool. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


hahaha! that made me laugh. I am happy to hear your reply because I was thinking maybe I was getting excited about nothing. I have the original unedited photos and edited ones--just zoomed in and brightened up to see detail. I had the camera mounted on a tripod---this was my first time taking pictures of the stars, so I was very suprised to see this in my pictures-but was not sure that it was exactly unusual. It almost goes into a know in one spot. What is intriguing to me is how it just appears in the shot...does its loop de loops and then just vanishes out of the picture. Were you able to access the album...there is another, but not as interesting shot of something similar but smaller....Thanks for your reply =)



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


The SR-71 only hits mach 3 and the stresses that endures are unimaginable as it is. 1000 degree F temps from friction. What's it going to be at mach 20?



My thoughts go to practical application for this new craft. If we have to launch a missile to launch the craft - WTF is the point? Fly 6000 miles to snap a few pics somewhere around the world? With prep time, cost, risk, etc. you'd think they'd just wait for some satellites to come around.

I can't see a reason other than "hey, look what we can do, neener neener!
".



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angry Danish
reply to post by Maxmars
 


The SR-71 only hits mach 3 and the stresses that endures are unimaginable as it is. 1000 degree F temps from friction. What's it going to be at mach 20?



My thoughts go to practical application for this new craft. If we have to launch a missile to launch the craft - WTF is the point? Fly 6000 miles to snap a few pics somewhere around the world? With prep time, cost, risk, etc. you'd think they'd just wait for some satellites to come around.

I can't see a reason other than "hey, look what we can do, neener neener!
".


Good question.

This test is about the airframe, and carries no on-board engines-- but since the airframe is made of an ablative material (heat shield which burns off in very thin layers), they used a rocket to get it to altitude and speed so that could be tested as well as maneuvering ability.

If the project continues, the vehicle will have turbo jets and ram jets to achieve altitude and speed (perhaps on-board rockets as well-- but I haven't read anything about that).

The Air Force has always been working to find the technology for an airplane-type craft able to achieve orbit. The X-15 was the 1960s state-of-the-art for that, but funding was largely side-tracked by the need (real or perceived) to get man (and weapons, for that matter) into space, and into orbit, with existing technology. That is what gave us NASA and ICBM's.

Mach 20 is near the re-entry speed of a craft returning from orbit, suggesting that the temperatures involve plasma. So, while the published intent is to have a delivery system (of weapons) to any place on the globe in a very short time using powered airplane-type design; the technology to do so is hoped to be applicable to achieve orbit and revolutionize both space travel and long-distance terrestrial travel.

In short: The Falcon is not designed as a glider-- only the test models currently involved in the two tests have been without on-board engines. That is because the engines will be the most expensive part and too valuable to risk until they know they have the ability to not only survive such speeds and altitudes, but maneuver.

I have not studied the telemetry and am not even sure there is enough made available to really study, but my guess is that the craft is approaching the Max-Q point at signal loss-- the maximum dynamic pressure which is a function of speed and altitude and represents the greatest forces endured by the craft.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by lalawillis
 


What i saw was just a contrail with obvious looking explosions spaced in equal distances but it was only looking as though whatever made them had turned it on for a second and turned them back off. By the time i found my camera the sun had come up enough and i couldn`t get a good picture. I have no idea what you saw, very interesting.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
DARPA Reveals Fate of Hypersonic Mach 20 Plane

A superfast unmanned military plane traveled at 20 times the speed of sound and managed to control itself for three minutes before crashing into the Pacific Ocean in a recent test, military officials said.


www.foxnews.com...

That sucks. And, I don't think they are lying on this one.... unless it was intended to go into the water.... Hmmm



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
another crap american weapon system fails ... like the high maintainance boeings and F-22 craptors worth 400 million$



posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Video: HTV-2 in Mach-20 Flight, Just Minutes Before Autonomously Aborting its Mission

popsci video



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join