Could a person fly a modified RC plane over Area 51 with cameras mounted

reply to post by earthdude


most military bases are censored upon request of the relevant government or i'd imagine they arrange a date/time to fly over and the only thing of note will be how well swept every last inch of the place is

code.google.com...

But I'm sure the military already thought of someone might trying this, you can be sure there is electronic jamming.

What's with the Area 51 thread madness lately? Obviously it comes from the fact that this is the most known base in the world. So let's continue in logical sequence - it is the most famouse, therefore do you think they would hide anything but airplanes of tpe stealth, fighters, raptors all you saw on another thread? There is nothing but boring military airplanes with improved appearance and weapons...

Start with a paper airplane first. See how that works out for you.
Baby steps.

It would be jammed, and fall from the sky...
end of story. They could probably backtrack the signal as well. (i.e. don't try it)

reply to post by LacunA

That vid made me clap at the end. Yes, a spacey looking aircraft would go unnoticed.

Well I figured I'd let this thread run it's course before chiming in. First of all, can the base detect your radio transmissions? Of course. I have photos of the sniffer truck used at Edwards Air Force base here:
www.lazygranch.com...
A helix is a wideband antenna that is also directional. Great for sniffing. I would assume Groom has similar gear and probably some permanent ELINT/SIGINT gear on the hilltops.

I have to laugh at the idea of a wireless internet link to the model plane. There is no cellular service near the base. The spy cam the base, oops I mean the Desert Research Institute, put on Tikaboo uses a yagi pointing to I assume a CMDA tower near the Nevada Test Site. [This needs further investigation.] The antenna looks L band to me, though it doesn't have to be cellular. But if it is cellular, then CDMA for sure since CDMA works over a wider distance than GSM. [On Tikaboo, you can pick up GSM signals, but can't use the service due to timing issues related to the distance from the tower. CDMA phones occasionally work on Tikaboo.]

If anyone were to get a snooping device on base, I would bet on a ground based approach. First of all, it would be hard to detect. The road sensors are a joke. They are tuned to catch cars and trucks driving on the road. So your goal is not to drive on the road at all. Now the base has to detect for a foreign object over a vast desert landscape. Moving slow would be good. If they have ground surveillance radar, it probably has a velocity filter. [BTW, it appears that Base Camp may be installing ground surveillance radar.] So I am proposing something more like the Mars Rover than a UAV. It could charge during the day and travel at night. When it gets close to the base, it could snap the photos, then return to it's master for downloading.

Nellis has a GPS jamming group, so depending on GPS is problematic. But the good news is the base is the only thing lit at night out there, so it would be hard to miss.

now send it to mythbusters hahaha

reply to post by Glassbender777

Knowing the asshats in this country I would imagine on them slipping up and not monitoring for those frequencies. Really we need to find a modified government bugs in a bug, somehow mod it for automatic control so it slips in and out. with a actual recording, vs transmission.

I wouldn't do it and tell what info I got. I respect the government. An RC plane has no chance. You don't know the high tech weapons that can detect and shoot it down. They are there and they are always ready to detect and shoot.

First of all there is a 100,000 feet restriction to flying over that area which means it would get shot down and then they would probably trace down the owner and harrass them with jail time.

To make matters worse this approach would be a complete waste of time as anything remotely interesting is stored in closed hangars or many levels beneath the surface.

If you are going to risk jail time, at least make sure it is worth it. The same thing can be said about William Patterson AFB in ohio. Basically it is a conspiracy, within a conspiracy, within another conspiracy. The lie is different at each level!

Let's think this through.

Military bases with testing of undisclosed technology are intended to be resistant to espionage techniques and technologies available to rival/hostile national intelligence agencies.

Are *you* better than the Russians or Chinese?

The real problem with an overflight is you have no loiter time, even if you weren't detected. That is why an approach from the ground is better. The optimal solution is a motorized cow. ;-)

reply to post by Glassbender777


I think the cameras would be blocked and equipment fried and tracked before any real data would be shown. Now if you use a insect like camera/transmitter you may have luck but still it may fall victim to their existing protection devices. I think the more interesting parts of that facility are below ground anyway, to add deep underground... You would need a dust mite to go there for you lol if there was serious interest.

In my opinion google earth shows enough anyway and i don't think the surveillance equipment would go over to well with the "Camo dudes" LOL

I do not know what the big deal is. Every enemy of America has detailed maps and satelite pictures of Groom Lake and knows what goes on. The only people that don't know are the people that don't matter that know.

reply to post by brice


Satellite photos just show buildings, not assets. To see an asset, loitering would be required. Look at it this way...the base can be seen from Tikaboo and a few other spots, but to date, nobody has produced a photograph of any unknown aircraft. Even at the TTR, where observation is quite a bit easier than Groom Lake, no photograph of a test article has been produced. The bases know when they are being watched and work around the sightseers.

Incidentally, no real (as opposed to claimed) base worker says there is anything underground at Groom Lake. There is no need for underground facilities. When you are that remote, a building provides plenty of cover. Even the scoot and hide shelters the base uses aren't much of a shelter. But good enough to prevent a satellite from seeing anything.

reply to post by gariac

The optimal solution is a motorized cow. ;-)

Clearly you are mistaken:



Then when that didn't work:

“Um, look, if we built this large, wooden badger...”

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by brice

 

Satellite photos just show buildings, not assets. To see an asset, loitering would be required. Look at it this way...the base can be seen from Tikaboo and a few other spots, but to date, nobody has produced a photograph of any unknown aircraft. Even at the TTR, where observation is quite a bit easier than Groom Lake, no photograph of a test article has been produced. The bases know when they are being watched and work around the sightseers.

Incidentally, no real (as opposed to claimed) base worker says there is anything underground at Groom Lake. There is no need for underground facilities. When you are that remote, a building provides plenty of cover. Even the scoot and hide shelters the base uses aren't much of a shelter. But good enough to prevent a satellite from seeing anything.

Don't forget they have to test fly somewhere and they are not doing that indoors!
Star for you for the reply.

reply to post by jadedANDcynical


Love Monty Python makes me laugh all the time.Thanks for the levity!