Iran F14's vs Unusual UAV's?

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


That would still classify as UAV, Un-alien Aerial Vehicle.




posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


What I find interesting is that the stories came from the IRIAF which don't like to speak of anything that might make them loose face in the international community.
They didn't talk about how they got pwned by an F22 a while back, yet they speak about getting pwned by what they think are US operated UAV's.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


I have a question. Are all unmanned aircraft considered UAV's in today's military parlance?

Note that I'm not asking about the strict definition of the terms...



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
OP, very interesting story!!

Probably not related in any way but does anyone have a link to the story about the mach10 radar signal going over russia which caused some diplomatic turmoil a while back?



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Riffrafter
 


Short answer, yes, although UAV technically isn't correct either.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   

neformore
Every nation with a nuclear programme has had these experiences, and a lot of them are documented by their respective militaries.

Yep. Every single one.

Its not UAV's they are chasing.





I'm going with this also.

Nuclear facilities over the decades everywhere have reports of being buzzed by unidentifieds.

It's not just us that's keeping tabs on us.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Riffrafter
 


I think that any aircraft that doesn't have a human inside the aircraft piloting it is generally considered a UAV, although as Zaph pointed out, technically there is a pilot remotely "manning" many of them but they still earn the UAV acronym.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by tomra
 


Thanks.
I hadn't heard about that and would also like to read about that story. I'll see if I can dig it up.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   


To intercept UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), IRIAF F-4Es and F-14As, based to Bushehr to serve as QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) interceptors, were scrambled several times. But the American drones have astonishing flight characteristics: “Including an ability to fly outside the atmosphere, attain a maximum cruise speed of Mach 10, and a minimum speed of zero, with the ability to hover over the target” as explained by Taghavee. These performances along with their powerful ECM make the F-14s unable to operate their weapons.
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


But but but UFO'S are flown by the Greys lol. The U.S. can never be flying anything that good, although the outgoing man who built Lockheed skunk works says they have as he was on his death bed.

Or what we have is Iranian pilots admitting they suck or are two scared that U.S. Raptors are in the area and will blast them out of the sky if they mess with the U.S. drones lol.

Take your pick as both are reasonable.



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Riffrafter
 


Short answer, yes, although UAV technically isn't correct either.


Zaph - you're such a tease...

Can you provide a more technically correct term?

Related question - are all UAV's (or whatever term you prefer) also considered drones when discussed among those in the know?

Hypothetically speaking - would the SR-72 (or at least the unmanned version of it depicted in some publicly available material) be considered a UAV?

I'm not trying to say it was a SR-72 that spooked the Iranians, but I'm trying to figure out where the boundaries are and the correct terminology associated with those boundaries.

Thanks.

PS - in the article sourced by the OP, the pilots describe the object as "spherical". Hope that doesn't open up the Aurora can of worms again. So hard to get those slimy critters back in the can...



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Riffrafter
 


The entire system is known as a UAS, or Unmanned Aerial System, that consists of the ground station, uplink, and aircraft. The aircraft is known as an RPV or Remote(ly) Piloted Vehicle.

Yes, the SR-72 is known as a UAV. Anything unmanned falls into that category.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   
IF one searches for "Silver spheres/orbs" online you will certainly find some video and pictures about them. I first took notice of them when they kept showing up in pictures with 'chemtrails' in them...

EIther way i suspect one should try to find out more before chasing after or shooting at them as it is by no means clear to me who owns or operates them and what they are doing all over the world.

Cheers
Stellar



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I'd approach this topic from another angle. That for me would be 'How could a modern UAV shut down an aircrafts system and cause the pilot eye disturbances that would create a temporary loss of vision and cause visual artifacts?'

I would say, that such a UAV, if it exists, would be capable of both electronic microwave DEW and visual ie laser, defence. Lasers would work against visual and IR missiles as well as pilots, and the microwaves would fry the plane out the sky from under the pilot, albeit with differing levels of severity considering the threat faced.

That would be worth spreading all weird and wonderful stories about UFOs with dazzling abilities - as you simply don't want the outside world knowing that you are flying a very secret UAV into Iran and its practically untouchable.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


YouTube is filled with videos of UFO's hovering or flying around nuclear power plants all over the world (although oddly not too many over US plants). The problem is so much can be faked and made to look real that it's impossible without in depth video analysis to weed out the fake from just un-identified light in the sky.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


Now isn't that weird.



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
edit on 11/13/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge
 


Actually it was supposedly Ben RIch who made this claim, he wasn't that man that built skunkworks that was Kelly Johnson, Ben Rich took over it after him.

And he never said this on his death bed he said it in every presentation he made, it was a joke though, I'll find the exact quote and link it for you.



posted on Nov, 15 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Sammamishman
YouTube is filled with videos of UFO's hovering or flying around nuclear power plants all over the world (although oddly not too many over US plants).


I am not talking about youtube or every shape or size of UFO but about a very very specific subset/set that seems to be related to certain activities and not others. I am sorry if i did not make it clear and thus appear to validate something i did not intend too... As for nuclear power plants as i said these orbs are as far as i can tell normally associated with what i have come to believe to be the extensive weather engineering programs being carried out by whichever group it might be. Do you have specific 'photographic' evidence that these specific types of UFO's are often seen near restricted airspace or why they would do so?


The problem is so much can be faked and made to look real that it's impossible without in depth video analysis to weed out the fake from just un-identified light in the sky.


Well the thing what interest me is that most of these orbs were seen in video or photo's that were being taken of 'chemtrails' or other apparent weather engineering activities; they were not the focus of the photo but something that often showed up once the photo's or videos are inspected...

Thanks,

Stellar



posted on Nov, 15 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Astr0
I'd approach this topic from another angle. That for me would be 'How could a modern UAV shut down an aircrafts system and cause the pilot eye disturbances that would create a temporary loss of vision and cause visual artifacts?'


The technology for such has at least as far as lasers and such existed since the 70's and shutting down aircraft electronic systems could as far as i know be done with high powered radar/EW systems that are pretty widely used. If these UAV's are relatively stealthy it would only add to the effect as they could get close those making even their perhaps relatively low power systems quite capable against the vast majority of aircraft in use today.


I would say, that such a UAV, if it exists, would be capable of both electronic microwave DEW and visual ie laser, defence. Lasers would work against visual and IR missiles as well as pilots, and the microwaves would fry the plane out the sky from under the pilot, albeit with differing levels of severity considering the threat faced.


Essentially so and since most 4th/5th generation fighters are aerodynamically unstable loss of flight controls or impairment of on-board computers could as far as i know potentially be as effective as missile or gun fire... The power packs/generators required for actually destroying the aircraft by DEW's is not however currently available in general UAV type sizes...


That would be worth spreading all weird and wonderful stories about UFOs with dazzling abilities - as you simply don't want the outside world knowing that you are flying a very secret UAV into Iran and its practically untouchable.


Or that another state operates unmanned aircraft that far exceeds your own capabilities... The presumption is always made that UFO's must be alien or, failing that, American and i have always wondered why some others nations are so easily overlooked!

Stellar



posted on Nov, 16 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   

AliceBleachWhite

It sounds like something many UFO enthusiasts would love hear about, considering the flight characteristics mentioned seem to jive with the cliche flying saucer report.

Can maintain 0 mph hover, and accelerate to mach 10 very quickly? Mach 10 is around 7000 mph?
... and it can go leave the atmosphere



I don't believe that. I do believe that good ECM (which would be deployed on a UAV in a hostile environment), could make an opposing radar believe that happened.

I think the green glow is the plasma stealth/boundary layer modification tech. Or it's the pilot's eyeball flourescing.
edit on 16-11-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



new topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join