Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Video from Tikaboo Peak of Groom Lake (Feb 2013)

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 12:27 AM
link   
I did a google search on Tikaboo Peak limited to the last month and this cropped up.
Video from Tikaboo Peak

Vimeo indicates the video was uploaded a week ago, but no actual date is indicated with the video. You can see snow on the ground. The ET Highway looks very reflective, so this video could be recent. Needless to say, Tikaboo in February would not be pleasant, but at least you wouldn't need to carry too much water. ;-)

Note that you are not going to see much with a camcorder or camera, even with teleconverter. You need to reach an equivalent focal length of around 2000mm to photograph the base. Then again, carrying a camcorder is way easier than carrying a telescope, tripod, heavy DSLR, etc.

Here is their webpage. Maybe next time they will bring a telescope. ;-)
Tikaboo trip feb 2013

I really wouldn't advise doing this trip in Feb or even March. You really need to camp out overnight to get decent shots of the base.


edit on 3-3-2013 by gariac because: added their website




posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Whoa, whats that antenna tower thing behind them @ 1:15 ? Looks like little Pelco cameras.. the kind you can pan/zoom from remote. Is that military spy gear to look on people at this peak? If so, is this peak kinda like the public Welcome Center for the base that doesn't exist?

Or should these guys be worried that Camo Dudes will be on the way soon since they're spotted on camera? And if that's the case... slow response time?

Confused. Seeing that radio/camera/tower thing made my brain hurt. It's late...
edit on 3-3-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliophant
Whoa, whats that antenna tower thing behind them @ 1:15 ? Looks like little Pelco cameras.. the kind you can pan/zoom from remote. Is that military spy gear to look on people at this peak? If so, is this peak kinda like the public Welcome Center for the base that doesn't exist?

Or should these guys be worried that Camo Dudes will be on the way soon since they're spotted on camera? And if that's the case... slow response time?

Confused. Seeing that radio/camera/tower thing made my brain hurt. It's late...
edit on 3-3-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)


Gariac started a thread about this camera not too long ago,

Check this out

Tikaboo peak weather station/spy cam thread


Should have all the info you need.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Another person who wants to be famous for a day.

Who need to pay for spy's when American citizens go to so much trouble to leak videos of their own secret tech R & D bases


edit on 3-3-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
I really wouldn't advise doing this trip in Feb or even March. You really need to camp out overnight to get decent shots of the base.


Maybe I am confused, but wouldn't it be better in winter making these shots? I thought the distortion from heat waves was the major problem shooting from Tikaboo. In winter you wouldn't have this problem?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by FosterVS
 


You would think cold weather would allow for better long distance photography, but I suspect the thermal distortion is due to temperature gradients rather than absolute temperature. Even in the winter you get "wiggles" in the imagery.

When the Tikaboo weather station first went on line, I spent some time charting the temperature at the peak versus the temperature at the Medlin ranch. What I noticed is the peak is warmer than the ranch at night. This seems totally counter intuitive and I should do the study again to make sure the new weather station wasn't putting out bad data. What you would find is around 8AM, the ground and mountain temperatures would be about equal. Then later in the day it was cooler on Tikaboo then on the ground. Obviously if I had temperature data for Groom Lake, it would use it instead of Medlin ranch.

When you camp out near Tikaboo, you can start the photography at stupid O clock. So I would do a few panoramas. But the panorama around 8AM was usually the best.

Winter photography from Tikaboo has a few drawbacks. The sun angle is low in the winter, so it takes longer to get the sunlight path to clear the mountains. That is, you have the sun at your back, but the base is still in the shadow. I think that makes greater thermal differences.

If you look at the DRI weather data, they plot the solar radiation. It looks like a flat spot (darkness) and then a curve with a peak at noon. But in the winter, due to an overall lower sun angle (elevation), it takes longer to get significant daylight. So by the time 8AM rolls around, you don't have significant light. In any season, the show is all over by 9AM. The thermals start to be significant, as well as the wind.

If you look at the various Groom Lake panoramas, you will note that some have the old A-12 hangars in shadow, and others are illuminated. Using Google Earth to get the orientation of the hangars and the Navy astronomical data, I determined that there is a break point where the sun angle is such that the front of the hangars will be illuminated by 8AM. This occurs in May.

I have done Tikaboo between March and November. Actually I didn't make it to the top in March due to snow. I recall it was in the high 20s deg F when I started the hike. In April, there is much less snow, but you will find some patches. By May, the snow is gone. June is still tolerable regarding heat, but you are getting into lightning season. (One more reason not to sleep at the top of the peak.) In July, the water requirement is around 9 liters. I've done in with 6 liters in May. August is peak lightning season. September is fine. October is dicey, and I think the sun angle no longer lights the front of the A-12 hangars. I did November once after the Nellis expo. The temperature was a bit cold, but tolerable. However everything in the tent was covered with condensation. Probably from my own breath. The camera and telescope were dry because I left them in the backpack. I had to wipe off my scanners. Listening to the Groom VOR which also does ATIS, it went down to the negative single digits in degrees C. Maybe minus 5 or so. I have a sleeping bag good to 20 deg F, down jacket, gloves, balaclava and thermal hat. You need them on the peak.

If you want to watch the base at night, you don't want it too cold just for comfort sake. You can watch the base with binoculars. I use the Navy astronomical data to insure there is an hour at least between two hours after sunset and before the moon rises. That was there is enough darkness to do a test.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Removed double post.
edit on 3-3-2013 by gariac because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   
One more nice thing to have on Tikaboo is an Esbit stove, MSR teapot, and the stimulant of your choice. For me, instant coffee. I have a Coleman stove but they are messy for hiking. The Esbit tablets are solid. Supposedly they are used by NATO. You need a decent lighter to get the Esbit going. Those Turboflames out of the UK is what I use.

I suppose you could use a small isobutane stove. I don't like carrying the canisters around in the desert since they have temperature warnings. I wouldn't leave one locked up in the car. ;-) So I use the Coleman stove everywhere but on Tikaboo.



posted on Mar, 14 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac

You can watch the base with binoculars. I use the Navy astronomical data to insure there is an hour at least between two hours after sunset and before the moon rises. That was there is enough darkness to do a test.


Hey Gariac,

I'm curious about the fact if you've ever witnessed such a test or if you saw something that wasn't part of any publicly known craft?



posted on Mar, 14 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Dalbeck
 


I've seen one test. It should be written up somewhere on ATS. There is one of those stupid Area 51 TV specials where they managed to record a test. Basically they dim the base to reduce the general "glow" and turn on the blue runway lights. In the TV show, the blue lights went out, then the D-bags cut away to a meteor, claiming it was a test vehicle. In my case, the runway lights stayed on and something flew over the runway. It had a solid white light. No way to make out the shape of the plane. As the moon rose, the show was over. The TV show, other than the meteor shot, is exactly how planes are launched.

Also from Tikaboo, I saw a Maverick missile launched from an aircraft, the AC-130 shoot up a target, and some bombing exercises using illumination flares. Most of the time you see nothing from Tikaboo, other than the base.

They run those Dycom dishes at night often. You can see the warning lights easily from Tikaboo. That could indicate a test, but I've seen those radar test lights go on but no plane launched.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Wow, thanks a lot for you insight!



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Dalbeck
 




This is the video where these clowns, I mean investigation crew, video recorded an actual Groom Lake test. Sad that the show is full of all sorts of other nonsense. [Security is watching us. Hey, that is what they do!] The base goes dark and the runway lights go on. What they did see was most likely a meteor. You see them quite often in the desert because the area is so dark.

I don't know about a FLIR (which the "team" had), but you can see the ionization trail from a meteor on night vision. It doesn't last long, maybe 10 seconds.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Ok for the meteor Gariac but I watch the show, and what is interesting, is the light on, on the runway and after few seconds there is a blackout of the base, do you think they observe a test or something taking off or landing this night? If not why a total black out of the base? We presume they do the test in night in Area51 but in the show there is a very quick time between the lights on and off, very few time to land or take off what do you think?



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by darksidius
 


I used a youtube "grabber" to try to get better video. Unfortunately, what was uploaded wasn't particularly good. Be that as it may, here are my comments after watching it again. First, when the person on the peak saw headlights of a vehicle suddenly go out, they did not turn off their headlights. Rather the terrain around the front gate has many hills. The vehicle went behind a hill. Note all people tend to look like hell if camped out in the desert for any period of time, while the investigators looked kind of Hollywood. ;-) When the woman says she was alone and out of radio contract, I guess the cameraman doesn't count.

I have three time exposure night shots on my website. The first two were done with film, and the last was digital with stacked images.





Film exposure has color dependent reciprocity errors, which in English means long exposure images will have a color cast. I have no other explanation why no blue runway lights show up. Digital is prone to hot spots (something like a bad pixel), so long exposures are done by stacking shorter images. The slight gaps in the aircraft trail are between exposures. The first two images were done with no moonlight. I recall the third image was done with a 100mm lens. I don't recall what I used for the first two images. [That was 10 years ago.]

For a landing, the runways lights and all the base lights are on. The very bright orange lights are by the passenger terminal. You wouldn't want a base worker to step on a snake and trip. Then again, lawsuits against the base don't seem to go anywhere.

For a test aircraft flight, the base is dark. I can't say every light is off since I have no imagery of a test, only my recollection. Upon reviewing this video again, it doesn't seem like the base lights are dimmed or reduced. Or the quality is so bad I can't tell. So maybe this was not a test but just a departure.

Just a FYI, don't put too much credence in lights to you in these images since there is always lens flare. Now the two lights on Papoose Mountain are real. There is a small facility up there. The red lights towards the right side of the base are by the radar site. The additional two red lights a bit off the base to the right are from a radar site on a berm. That is, those lights are real.

For those that can't spare the time to be on TIkaboo during the week, you can a landing or two on Sunday night. Usually it will be the Beech B190 rather than a Janet. Still, if you are going to do all the work to climb Tikaboo and camp out, you might as well get your money's worth and do it during the week.



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Interesting, for the show they take a little thing and make it great for making sensational but the very intersting in the film is the total black out after the runway light on, I don't think they black out the base for a Beech B-190 or a Janet flight, the cammo dude know they are here for the show and may be a night test going on and I think more for a landing of a special craft. You turn on the light for pilot to see the runway and after you turn off the light for nobody can see a thing or the shape of the craft, its my opinion, but may be its another thing we don't know.



posted on Mar, 16 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by darksidius
 


Well except all we have for evidence the base was totally black is the "testimony" of the er um well "investigation" cast. ;-)

The runway lights have three intensity levels. I haven't seen this, but someone else who has done a few Tikaboos told me at times the runway lights are left on dim all the time rather than full bright. I'm not sure what the use if for dim versus bright lights. Note also the pilot can turn the lights on by clicking the push to talk button in various sequences. I haven't heard this done at Groom, but the TTR has this feature in their documentation.



posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
I used a youtube "grabber" to try to get better video. Unfortunately, what was uploaded wasn't particularly good. Be that as it may, here are my comments after watching it again. First, when the person on the peak saw headlights of a vehicle suddenly go out, they did not turn off their headlights. Rather the terrain around the front gate has many hills. The vehicle went behind a hill. Note all people tend to look like hell if camped out in the desert for any period of time, while the investigators looked kind of Hollywood. ;-) When the woman says she was alone and out of radio contract, I guess the cameraman doesn't count.


I have this episode, not in HD though. I think the "runway lights going out" was faked. Just a feeling I got watching it frame by frame, all the lights in-frame just simultaneously fade to black.

Here are some frames I grabbed from it:

Link to full image:
www.topsecretbases.com...

Link to full image:
www.topsecretbases.com...
Hmmm, contrail/vapor trail.

Link to full image:
www.topsecretbases.com...

Link to full image:
www.topsecretbases.com...





Here is video clip of "important" parts, including runway lights:
Important Parts
edit on 18-3-2013 by FosterVS because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-3-2013 by FosterVS because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
hey gariac,

love following your posts on here. I'm curious on your thoughts of the UFO Hunter's episode of Area 51. If I recall in one segment, they established fixed-cameras pointed in the direction of the base. They were set to record over an extended period of time (X # of nights). I believe they were FLIR or NV cameras. In one segment they were able to record an object (I believe) descending downward into the base. Now, I tend not to agree with much of what UFOH puts out there. However, this one was A51 segment where it did make me wonder. The object seemed to descend quicker than perhaps a helicopter. It also didn't seem to be on any sort of glideslope or instrument approach.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by mlever1
 


I watched it again. Well the German version is on youtube. The video you mention is at the end. The deal is you see this stuff with your naked eye or binocs if you hang around the range. The moon reflects off of the aircraft, or afterburners, or just a solid light for another pilot to spot. Remember for the most part, you are outside the edge of the battle if you are by the ET highway. The Red Flag or Nellis planes are in theory not likely to encounter the aggressors, so they don't act as stealthy. They are however over the fake SAM sites, so you will see them pop flares to the east of the ET Highway. [Groom doesn't fly when the moon is out.]

I made similar videos just using a Watec low light camera, a frame grabber, PC, and a fast lens. I don't recall which lens I used to make this video, but I have some F1.3 Ernitec lens I got off of ebay. [Like $13 back in the day before the micro 4/3rd made C-mount lenses valuable.] I don't have an automatic capture scheme, but you can just sit there and eventually some Nellis plane will come in view, then you start recording.

My video looks similar to what you see on that UFO Hunter's show.
low light camera video
You will probably need VLC (videolan) to play it. If it doesn't work, you are missing a codec.

Hey, it is a range designed for flying. Planes fly around. There are all sorts of lights in the sky. They are not all related to Groom Lake. You can also see lights from planes along the busy air traffic corridor by route 95, even though it is a hundred miles away. In the daytime, you can spot the contrails over 95.

In fact, had they consulted me on how to set up the cameras, I would have been by route 95 rather than the ET Highway. That way you can tell what is a passenger plane, which are close enough to identify, versus the light of a plane over the range. You can also see the airspace over Groom Lake.

I have watched a lot of landings at Groom Lake from Tikaboo. The vast majority of landings are on 32. If they need to land on 14, they don't fly in directly. [Look at the terrain!] Rather they do an approach to 32, but then loop around and land on 14. If you study the Groom Lake navigation gear, only 32 has a localizer. [The glide slope is harder to spot, though I think I know where it is.] There is nothing for an instrument landing on 14.

To date, nobody has found the frequencies of the localizer at Groom Lake. It may not be on all time, or it may be so directional that it can't be heard from Tikaboo. The VOR is always left on.

If you are really hardcore, there are peaks in the Sheep Range, such as Hayford, that wouldn't see the traffic along route 95, though I suspect the air traffic along route 6 would show up on NV or the low light camera.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Gariac-

Makes sense. I always wondered if it was advanced VTOL that they caught.

I also wonder, what would the reason for keeping the glideslope hidden? Makes sense to ride the ILS and then circle to land 14. Kinda like SFO ILS 28L/R circle to land 1L/R (look that approach up sometime!). Or DCA ILS1 circle to land 33!! It would make me think they have to have a glide on 32. Would love to see any pics you got which you think you found it. Or vids of that approach.

Mn I bet the pilots LOVE flying in and out of there!!! I wonder if JaNEt pilots ever go out there and just bankangle the Crap out if those 737s.

Also the SR71 was equip for ILS approaches. Wouldn't it make sense to have it setup from back in the day?





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join