Is the TR-3B BS?

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Have you seen any proof that there is an actual man-made aircraft called a TR-3B, or any other TR?

I have not. So if you have proof please point me too it. Because...
I could draw those drawings you see, and I could write up a fake description of how it flies and who makes it.

It would be the perfect way to draw attention away from a real alien craft because a top secret craft is a perfect cover-up ~ it comes with a built-in excuse ~ they do not have to show it to you.

The Belgium triangle wave lasted for 6 months, starting in 1989, the year before we are being told that the TR's first flew. Even if they flew before that, why would the US be testing their secret aircraft over another country ~ a small highly populated country at that ~ and in plain view of their residents?

The Belgian UFO wave contains:

Multiple witnesses: the UFOs were sighted by an around 13,500 people;

Multiple official statements: around 2,600 people filed official written statements with detailed descriptions of what they had seen;

Multiple official reports: countless reports were filed by both Police and Gendarmerie;

Multiple locations: consistent reports were given by witnesses from Eupen, Liege, Plombieres, Kittenis, Baelin, Verviers, Jalhan, St. Vith, Andrimont, Lontzen, Voeren, Herbesthal, eastern Belgium, and even from some areas of Holland, Luxembourg, and Germany.

Official report by Air Force: the Belgian Air Force released a report detailing the events of one night;

Multiple and matching radar tracking’s: the Belgian Air Force at Eupen, Semmerkaze, Bierset and Glons had detected the object on radar: the radar tracks, once compared, turned out to be identical.

UFO chase: an AWACS aircraft was dispatched from Gelsenkirchen. Because of the large number of reports, Colonel Wilfried De Brouwer of the Belgian Air Force decided to scramble two F-16 interceptors from Bevokom. The F-16s were vectored in by Glons radar, and they soon detected a positive oval-shaped object on their on-board radar at 3,000 meters. They could see nothing visually, though.

Unique features: whatever crossed the Belgian skies that night, their features were inconsistent with any known aircraft / natural phenomena;



The US had over 40 years of alien technology to develop something like it by that time, so it is not impossible that they could have finally done it, but there is no proof that I know of that they have.

Without proof there is reason to think it may be just another in a long line of cover-ups.




posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   
I think the TR-3B is just made up. I haven't seen any documents that would confirm it was a real project. Sure lots of people report seeing 3 lights in the sky from time to time. But is there really an aircraft that has the name TR-3B? Im sure triangle crafts might have been experimented with in the past..but is there really a craft called the TR-3B?

Its one of those ideas that just sounds so plausible that people think it must be real and so myths grow up around it.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by spiritualarchitect
Have you seen any proof that there is an actual man-made aircraft called a TR-3B, or any other TR?

No.



I have not. So if you have proof please point me too it. Because...
I could draw those drawings you see, and I could write up a fake description of how it flies and who makes it.

Great. So you don't believe in it either.



It would be the perfect way to draw attention away from a real alien craft because a top secret craft is a perfect cover-up ~ it comes with a built-in excuse ~ they do not have to show it to you.

But it's not a cover-up. No one's claiming that such a thing has been built, not even you.



The Belgium triangle wave lasted for 6 months, starting in 1989, the year before we are being told that the TR's first flew. Even if they flew before that, why would the US be testing their secret aircraft over another country ~ a small highly populated country at that ~ and in plain view of their residents?

They haven't been testing the TR-3B just like you pointed out yourself before. No proof what so ever.



The Belgian UFO wave contains:
,,,
,,,,

UFO events are observed by people, otherwise it wouldn't be an UFO event.



...The F-16s were vectored in by Glons radar, and they soon detected a positive oval-shaped object on their on-board radar at 3,000 meters. They could see nothing visually, though.

And yet you relate this "nothing" to the TR-3B that you know doesn't exist?



Unique features: whatever crossed the Belgian skies that night, their features were inconsistent with any known aircraft / natural phenomena;

Hence the UFO-ness of the observation.



The US had over 40 years of alien technology to develop something like it by that time

No they haven't.



so it is not impossible that they could have finally done it, but there is no proof that I know of that they have.

Yes it is impossible.



Without proof there is reason to think it may be just another in a long line of cover-ups.

Again, it's not a cover-up if there is nothing to cover-up.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I have often wondered about that myself. I was already in Belgium when this 'UFO wave' happened. There were big stories on it in the popular magazines. The only possible explanation for them (other than ufos) would be secret military craft. And if they WERE secret military craft, then we have some amazing technology...

This was the story that made me start paying attention to ufo claims.

soulwaxer



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Does the TR3B exist....?? The Multi Trillion Dollar question....

I would like it to exist, I'm sure i heard a Guy from Northrop Grumman say...Anything you can Imagine, we have built it..Pretty bold statement to make as i and i'm sure many others have pretty wild imaginations...


anyway...
www.urbanghostsmedia.com...
edit on 22-1-2013 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   
I have seen no direct evidence that it specifically exists.

However I am open to that possibility if and when some form of evidence arises.

Same goes with Aurora or whatever else.
edit on 22-1-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
There is no doubt in the fact that UAV's are real is there a TR3B? we will not know till one crashes or is retired or see in combat, if at all. Osme, Operational, scientific, military, experimental air craft remain top secret but there are clues as to whom might build, test or even fly such a plane as seen here www.irconnect.com...
edit on 22-1-2013 by bekod because: line edit



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I believe it exists, but I just don't know who it belongs to. It is either the US governments or it is some alien craft.

There have been so many sightings of this shape its almost as popular as the flying saucer shape.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I have seen one up close and personal.

What is supposedly this TR-3B that is, I didn't see a make or model # on the thing.
It's a black triangular craft that moves at speeds of 1000s of mph, there are 3 alternating colored lights in each corner, and a ball lightning plasma type of center light, mostly blueish.

I posted a description and a crappy photo I got of one that buzzed over me on here several times, here's one: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Like I have said before... take my picture to a lab, dissect it, prove my claim wrong if you can. These craft are 100% real, man made vs alien is something I don't know for sure, I believe it's a military vehicle.

This is the closest video to what I saw that I've found online, this is what they look like...
Start at about 4:22 and mute the volume, it's unnecessary.

edit on 22-1-2013 by JibbyJedi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


Hmmm, that is intriguing. Sucks you couldn't get a better pic.

I have seen various UFOs in my day, most notably the classic saucer shape.
So I am open to your claims. It is totally feasible considering.

Thanks for posting because I view you as honest for the most part considering your history and past interactions with me.

I believe you believe what you say.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Thank you, I take that as a major compliment coming from you.




Sucks you couldn't get a better pic.


I had a crappy 1 megapixel cell phone camera at that time, and I so regret not using video mode that day. I originally thought it was a plane about to crash land on the highway, so I got my phone camera out to get some shots of it.

At the last minute, it pulled up just over the trees on the side of the highway... I got a pic of that, then it stopped on a dime right over my car... got a 2nd pic of that. My 1st picture is on 2 broken hard drives, a blurry shot of lights over the trees, then a pic of 1 of the corner lights as it was over my car was the 2nd pic.

Now I carry a 12 megapixel camera with me every time I get in my car & go anywhere. If I would have had that type of camera when that happened, I'd probably be famous for getting it on camera, or I'd be dead by now for exposing it clearly. My picture sucks, so I'm no threat to whoever runs these secret craft.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
luna cognita has vid on this
:up
n utube



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
there are pics of what looks like the TR-3B out in the wild, but they are so blurry that it could easily be a model....see this post from almost 5 years ago:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 1-22-2013 by el cid because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:11 PM
link   
There is a little bit on "TR" planes for ya.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
I've always been amazed at how the government can keep such amazing secrets (like how they pulled off 9/11), but let every single detail out about a super secret SAP program. The supposed "TR-3B" has so many details out there about it, but at the same time, less classified aircraft have almost no details about them on the net. How is that?

The answer is because a lot of this is made up based on what people want to believe. I know for a fact that there are black projects flying around out there that we won't know about for a really long time, and there are some out there that we'll know about probably in the next few years. But we won't know anything like what we supposedly know about the "TR-3B".

I'm sure that there is something out there, that may even be shaped like the "TR-3B", but I'm willing to bet everything I have that that's not its designation, and never will be. Someone saw the TR-1 (which is another designation for the U-2), and said "Well, we have the TR-1, and the U-2, so it must be the TR-3", and somehow went from the TR-3A, to the TR-3B, which was a completely different aircraft, but was only an upgraded version of the A. That's just one of many things that doesn't make any sense about this aircraft.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


what are these details about the TR-3B you speak of?



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


i completely agree with this...i think the whole "TR-3B" is a lot of disinformation mixed in with some truth. IMO, the Belgium wave of 1989 proved (to me, anyway) that there is an exotic triangular craft flying in Earth's airspace, but I'm not willing to make the jump with regards to its origin or designation as TR-3B...



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by RandyBragg
There is a little bit on "TR" planes for ya.
en.wikipedia.org...


There are a couple of parts that I love.


That the TR-3 code is a continuation of the TR-1/ER-2 series is also not proven, since all TR-1s and U-2s were renamed U-2R in 1992.


The ER-2 is a NASA only designation, and would have absolutely nothing to do with any Air Force designation. The ER-2 started life as a U-2C, with modifications for weather sampling. So the ER-2 wouldn't make it the "TR-3".


Whether one of these designs is related to the above mentioned TR-3A is not positively identified, but it is a coincidence that TR also stands for Teledyne Ryan. Teledyne Ryan was procured by Northrop Grumman in 1999.


Why on earth would the U-2 (built by Lockheed Martin) be the TR-1, but this be the TR-3 because it was built by Teledyne Ryan? The company name has absolutely nothing to do with the designations. There is a rhyme and reason to the designations of aircraft in the military that makes a lot of sense, and it has nothing to do with the name of who made them.

Very simple breakdown of designations:

A- Attack
B- Bomber
C- Cargo
E- Electronic
F- Fighter
K- Tanker
U- Utility
S- Strategic
R- Reconnaissance

So in the case of the U-2, it's technically a Utility aircraft. Or when it was the TR-1, it was used for Tactical Reconnaissance (hence the TR designation). A tanker is a KC, an electronic warfare aircraft (tactical ones) are either EA or EF, depending on their secondary mission, etc. So the TR designation has nothing whatsoever to do with Teledyne Ryan, and is no clue at all as to who may have manufactured the supposed aircraft.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 


Oh, everything from it's antigravity, to it can fly into orbit, to just about everything in between. Including what the skin is made of, what the engines are like,

www.darkgovernment.com...

Just read the details there, but apparently we know everything there is to know about the "TR-3B" and then some, despite it being a SAP project.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


lol , i see what you mean. It crazy when people just make stuff up like that , next thing you know its quoted elsewhere as fact and the legend is born.





top topics
 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join