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.

 

The Black Knight Satellite

page: 10
162
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Regarding a snatch and grab....


I think the rational as far as why someone didn't grab it yet is pretty obvious. Let's go with the presumption that perhaps it's property of a nation. Next, let's go with the likely possibility that the object would at least would have some toxic hydrazine fuel on board for maneuvering thrusters, and if your really lucky, perhaps it's also run by full-fledged nuclear reactor to power the satellite (like the Soviet RORSAT and the American SNAP-10A satellites).

Now, let's say that the satellite has a built in self destruct, or a remote command destruct, or even a anti-tamper destruct system if someone was to try and mess with it without knowing how to disarm it first. Now just for the sake of argument what if the snatched satellite goes "KERBOOM!" over a populated area in route to a secret military instillation on it's way back from orbit.....


If it's alien in origin, its a whole new kettle of problems.
It could contain (for the sake of argument):

A) All the knowledge of the universe and bring peace and hope to the galaxy.

or

B) A massive warhead designed to wipe out all life on earth that malfunctioned an insame amount of years ago . So if it's option B, having guys in space suits kick it a few times as it goes into a orbiter storage bay and then to go through a several G's ride back to earth to see if it detonates is not my idea of a good idea either.

I mean I think NASA Military Space Command knows what hydrazine looks like and probably have a great idea of what a nuclear reactor on a satellite should look like no matter who's country it came from. Now if it is alien, lol, good luck! I would have no idea if the recovery crew should cut a connector inside it to make it safe or cut that same connector and turn the safety off and watch it go critical.

So if your not sure what it is, my advice is to don’t try and lick it and defiantly don’t try to put in in your pocket either.....




posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by AckAckAttack34
 




So if your not sure what it is, my advice is to don’t try and lick it and defiantly don’t try to put in in your pocket either.....

Poke it with a stick?



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by MerkabaMeditation
 


I'll give credit where credit is due, thanks for updating the link. Everyone makes mistakes including me- thanks for taking the time to fix it!!!



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by dragonridr
 

They tried to capture it. It didn't work.

I hear tell.


We're listening . Please tell us more



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by AckAckAttack34
 




So if your not sure what it is, my advice is to don’t try and lick it and defiantly don’t try to put in in your pocket either.....

Poke it with a stick?


lol, I guess if it's a small enough of a stick.....my sense of curiosity says "SURE!"



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by signalfire
Well, we know it's not an F-117 because this predates it by decades and they don't do 'orbit'. It's black and from some angles it looks symmetrical (are all those photos of the same thing?) but it doesn't look like anything human-made from that era by a long stretch, even if it's something broken and charred by a fire or explosion.


Aren't you 'assuming' the conclusion that is supposed to be 'proved', that these 1998 photos have any connection to the 1950's stories? It would be helpful if such evidence for such a connection could be proven.

The 1960-era phantom satellite was reported in a polar orbit similar to that used by AF 'Discoverer' satellites, and the 1998 photos were of something moving along with the shuttle and ISS, at 52 degrees. Is there some explanation for this mismatch?


If the space shuttle has to boost itself every now and then to stay in orbit or it would fall out of the sky, why is this thing apparently still up there after many decades?


I had said 'space station', but no matter. What evidence is there that the object photographed in 1998 is still up there, \or had been from the 1950s or before?


For that matter, why hasn't the vast majority of space junk fallen down by now?

Why should it? The long-lived stuff follow higher orbits where you do agree [?], the air drag is much lower and decay rate much lower.


...., since there's reported to be thousands of objects from lost gloves to spanners ...

Anything dropped out of low-orbit manned spacecraft are in thick enough air to drag them down and burn them up within a few months, at most a year or two. This isn't just 'reported' anonymously, it's documented in tracking both by government agencies and private observing groups worldwide.



...to 'pissicles' that seem to not want to subliminate like they should..

Where do you get the authority to tell ice in space how fast it 'should' sublimate? The physics is basic -- ice stays frozen for a long time, one hunk on a shuttle door edge even survived entry and landing and was photographed by a ground crew. Are you proclaiming that was impossible based on your special knowledge?



.and instead show up on ultraviolet NASA cameras as pulsating Pakman objects..

Who says the cameras were UV?> The notorious dancing-dot youtube videos are almost all visible light exterior cameras, or interior hand-held cameras in the same spectral range.


There's no way NASA and the various telescopes on earth and spy satellites up in orbit don't have precise pictures of this thing, right down to and including a license plate number.


Way.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks Phage, however I did say "IF it is a large object". I know from what is available, that there is not enough info to get size. Saying that, I love the idea of playing "what if" with this thing.

Talk about playing What If... The black night object is irregular shaped, but shows some symmetry. I have always thought that the object seen by SkyLab 3, in 1973, had some resemblance. Not in visual texture or luminosity, but in it's strange shape. So.. I pieced together 4 images of Black Night, along with the Skylab3 image. I see geometric similarity from picture #3, and the Skylab object. I know it is out way on a limb, but it might make some people wonder....



Three Skylab astronauts saw this object in 1973


Not according to each of them, and I've worked with them over decades, and asked. They all agree they saw a bright DOT outside their wardroom window for several minutes, slowly pulsating like a tumbling piece of debris. Garriott took 4 photos, three showed a dot, the fourth the mystery squiggle. More likely they saw just another small piece of insulation flaking off the lab.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by mirageman
Maybe Mr. Oberg will be along to confirm what these photos show?


Nah, I've had my say on this subject, you're on your own. [grin]


Hi Jim:

As Zorgon might say, will the real Jim Oberg please step up?

And what about that still burning question Zorgon left you with?

Enquiring minds want to know.


[color=magenta]Peace Love Light
tfw
[color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:13 AM
link   
was about to post drunk again sorry
Phage is the man though listen for once



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Vicktor Shauberger reportedly lost one of his early saucer prototypes when he inadvertently energized it and it blew through the ceiling of the lab.
They never got that one back either.....
freakin Nazis anyways
heres the new face of the Black Knight.....getting better all the time....

www.youtube.com...
edit on 2-6-2013 by stirling because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Hey Phage, do you have any idea whatsoever about what size this so-called Black Knight Satellite is? I know that you might have some connections that might answer this question for us all? What is the size of it in regards to the science world my friend?

I think if we can determine the size of this object, it might help narrow down the road to the truth concerning this subject? I don't know what it is, it very well may be just a piece of space junk. Just wondering your opinion bro? ~$heopleNation



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by SheopleNation
 


Hey Phage, do you have any idea whatsoever about what size this so-called Black Knight Satellite is?
No. I don't.
In fact, I don't think there is a Black Knight satellite.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:48 AM
link   
First Thing – This is why I joined ATS – Great post hopefully the first of many I can get involved in!
Am going to think outside the box on this one just read the whole 10 pages and a few points have came up which got me thinking. Interesting views but AckAckAttack34 is on my wave length allow me to explain.

My first reaction – How, Why, When, Were, How? - It looks like an advanced satellite, I have never heard of the DKS until now but upon further judgement of people’s answers and other information/links I now think that it is an advanced form of vehicle/object, somebody stated our satellites are mainly white due to the friction of the sun, dark objects heat up quickly this means a bigger risk although not a risk in the darkness of space? Therefore what material is this object made of? A few people said DKS also travels a different course from our normal satellites? Maybe were avoiding it? People are saying why didn’t/don’t we go up and retrieve it? Were the people ready back then for the government to say yes Roswell just happened we have a few live aliens and space craft and now we have found a satellite of unknown origin, we didn’t put it there we have no idea what this thing is transmitting or were it is transmitting too but stay karm there is nothing to worry about!? Comments of it weighing so much makes me think how big would the vehicle be that we need to move this thing? Also how would we move this thing? How did it get there in the first place? As stated the first report of this object was 1953 and there’s not a chance the Nazi scientists could be that far advanced or had the kind of technology required, the time frame, dynamics and the probability of the project is beyond logic, they were good but this was FAR beyond even Von Braun’s reach.

Links - Tesla was a genius and I do think the link is interesting. It was suggested the DKS may have/need a propulsion system to stay up there so long otherwise it would have come down long ago? Two words... anti gravity? People who know Tesla’s background will know he was associated with this art. Make of that what you will but I think even he would be astounded to find an object on the brink of our atmosphere was “communicating with him”.

Overall -

Although there are suggestions that a transmission was once decoded which implied to link the object with a star system I do think there are realms of impossibility made possible by advanced beings which are yet to be explored/explained (After all it could be the cube from the transformers ha!)



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
No. I don't.
In fact, I don't think there is a Black Knight satellite.


Yeah, I understand and respect why you would think that.

My position is that I personally am not 100% convinced that The Black Knight Satellite exists. However, I am not ready to write it off as of yet.
~$heopleNation



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by BeReasonable
reply to post by Wolfenz
 


It took the best German rocket scientist and years of almost unlimited funding to advance the U.S program years after the Germans were defeated. The V2 was the most advanced rocket Germany had functioning and it was an oversize candle at best. it laid the groundwork for space launch vehicles but it was a toy compared to what was required to insert a sizeable
payload into orbit. You dreaming mate.




Two prototypes were flown; a manned version was planned. The A4b had an empty mass 1350 kg greater than the basic V-2, with wings of 52 degree sweep. Another variation was conceived and under construction at the end of the war - a boosted version. This would use a ring of 10 solid propellant rockets to achieve Mach 6 cruise at 20,000 m altitude, extending the range by a further 400 km.


Encyclopedia Astronautica
A4b
www.astronautix.com...








edit on 2-6-2013 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 01:43 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by CautionHotTV
 

Looks like a kite with LEDs on it.

It's not the Black Knight.

You're welcome for the youtube hit.
edit on 6/2/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Wolfenz
 


The A4 was never meant to go into orbit. They were looking at ways to extend the range, and improve the accuracy. One of the ideas was to put a pilot in it on a suicide mission. They would use two stages, and reach a maximum height of 210 miles (at least on the drawing board, which is far from operational), at which point it would start to descend back to the target, being flown by the pilot. While they were getting into space, it wasn't fast enough, or powerful enough to stay in orbit. It would have been a manned ICBM. It would have been similar to Spaceship 1, where it reached space, and almost immediately came back down.
edit on 6/2/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by mirageman
 


that looks like an SR-71 flying at high altitude usin..g its afterburners.... strange that we only see one firing though



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 02:47 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



new topics

top topics



 
162
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join