UFOs - Military style?

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by tanka418
 


Do you have any evidence to back up that very 'creative' video?

Now if there were any 0.2 C capable drives, I could see that the
'USS Obama' might make sense.. given nuclear reactors on board..
I've worked on reactors of that power output.

But the small craft.. to go 0.2 C on 'batteries' seems absurd
to me. And don't say Nuclear Batteries.. I've never seen one
of those that had crapola for power output.

Now since you can see something of the International Space
Station with even binoculars (I believe); I can't but imagine
that every amateur astronomer in the world with anything
for a backyard telescope would see the "USS Obama". Even
if you could cloak that thing with active adaptive optics..
the big gap in the stars would stick out like a sore thumb.

KPB

edit on 29-11-2013 by KellyPrettyBear because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear
 


You didn't look at the science? That kind of a drive is quite east to construct, and one that only drives to 0.2c is small.

in any case, no the batteries aren't nuclear. more probably a combination of fuel cells and / or Lithium cells. The "battery pack" only has to last a few hours, and constant operation is not required.

Do you really think an amateur astronomer would know if he saw something like this? The space station is only 200 miles away, these machines more like several 10s of thousands, to millions of miles, and only 4 times the size of an aircraft carrier. And, there are techniques to reduce observational probabilities.

As for evidence; nothing collected, significant discontinuous / fragmented data, but so far just stories and science.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by tanka418
 





You didn't look at the science? That kind of a drive is quite east to construct, and one that only drives to 0.2c is small.


Well the problem is the power source. If you could get a sustained
constant acceleration, you could get 0.2c without a problem. But
that's the problem. You run out of fuel really rapidly with any
known technologies. And the more fuel you take with you, the more
mass you have to accelerate and it becomes ridiculous rather quickly.
Even talking about a novel drive technology is nearly useless, without
first addressing the power & fuel issue. Glossing over the power &
fuel issue with 'magic' doesn't impress anyone.

But I don't want to argue with you about this.. it's all the same to
me whether it's true or not true.. as it's pointless either way.. the
problem we experience as humans has nothing to do with technology,
and in fact technology has exacerbated our problems just as much
as solved problems.

KPB



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear
 


What fuel?!?

This is an electrical device. Fission reactors can power this thing for 20 years or more. And, that is with current technologies.

In the smaller craft the batteries/fuel cells will power the system for several hours.

Acceleration of the craft is due to gravity, so mass / size doesn't matter. The drive system creates an artificial gravity and "projects" it along the "course" One wishes to follow. The need for additional energy, fuel, etc. is very significantly altered; most of the issues usually associated with propulsion are gone, and replaced with this device's own set of issues. But, thinking that it requires more energy to accelerate a larger mass, or go beyond the speed of light is incorrect in this instance.

Thus the issue of being able to exceed the speed of light is gone, and replaced with; "Can we mitigate the issues created by velocities greater than light?" By the way; it is these issues that are the greatest bar to interstellar travel with current Terran technologies.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by tanka418
 


Seems entirely smoke and mirrors to me, and I was
certified to startup/shutdown/operate/do maintenance
on nuclear reactors.

I won't be responding to this thread further.

KPB



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ch1n1t0
 


I just watched part one of an interview with this guy that's an expert on U.S. Black projects. He has photos and documents detailing different Black Project Aircraft. Worth looking into to see if any of the aircraft he has in his binder are what you saw.

Here is the link: 2012thebigpicture.wordpress.com...

The most stereotypical, flying saucer looking one is near the end, but he also has many different of the triangular shaped ones.

It was most likely U.S. aircraft. Although, there are the theories that we are merely reverse engineering alien technology.





new topics

top topics
 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join