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.

 

Lockheed Exec Refuses To Comment On Video Exposing Mystery Aviation Technology

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

You should check the other thread out.

The model is presumed to be upside down on the trailer.
Also, not mentioned yet, AFAIK, there is a pylon mounted on the model that I guess would be where the model is attached to the pylon for testing. It is able to be seen in several of the photos.

The pylon is the same color as the model. It is aerodynamically designed, so maybe it was for wind tunnel testing?
edit on b000000312021-10-01T13:56:06-05:0001America/ChicagoFri, 01 Oct 2021 13:56:06 -0500100000021 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Also it could be a smaller than full just for radar tests. They also did this for F-117 they made a smaller first version.



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 02:55 PM
link   
as I already said on the other thread I think its a conformable fuel tank.



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: dandandat2

It was going from the pole to the warehouse. Both are maybe a couple miles apart within the same facility.


Still open air, susceptible to espionage. So if this is clarified technology it would be a bad way to transport with out cover.



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: dandandat2

Open air, on a restricted facility, going maybe a mile or two, if that. By the time they got it covered, moved, uncovered and mounted, they just wasted a day of testing.
edit on 10/1/2021 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: dandandat2

Open air, on a restricted facility, going maybe a mile or two, if that. By the time they got it covered, moved, uncovered and mounted, they just wasted a day of testing.


But they would keep classified classified.



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: dandandat2

Yes, but what exactly can we tell about this? People can't even agree if it's a full aircraft, part of an aircraft, or a pole cap. If it is an aircraft, they can't even agree if it's manned or unmanned. Radar testing frequently takes place during the day. You don't want to lose an entire day of testing going through all those steps to move something within a facility if you don't have to. This was a fluke, with a construction contractor being on site. They've tested all kinds of platforms there over the years, and this is the only one I can remember ever having even a portion of it seen in all that time.



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: 1947boomer

You should check the other thread out.

The model is presumed to be upside down on the trailer.
Also, not mentioned yet, AFAIK, there is a pylon mounted on the model that I guess would be where the model is attached to the pylon for testing. It is able to be seen in several of the photos.

The pylon is the same color as the model. It is aerodynamically designed, so maybe it was for wind tunnel testing?


OK, thanks. That’s making more sense.

With regard to the pylon; I saw it and commented on it, but assumed it was on the bottom of the airframe instead of the top. If the airframe is upside down on the trailer then that fixture would be positioned so as to present the unbroken bottom of the airframe to the radar for RCS testing, which would make more sense. Usually an aircraft in a wind tunnel test is held from the rear (often where the jet exhaust is) on a large cantilevered beam (called a sting). That’s because the air loads in a tunnel test can get quite large. I don’t think that pylon fixture is strong enough to take the air loads of a tunnel test.

Also, if it was upside down, the bulge behind the nose currently facing downward would actually be about where a cockpit should be.

Also if it was upside down, the place where the tail surfaces would attach would be hidden in this view and may simply not be attached yet.

All in all, a much more conventional sounding vehicle.

My comment about this not being a subsonic design still seems to make sense, because of the chine that goes around the perimeter of the airframe.

I looked for another thread and couldn’t find it. Can you point to it?



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Looks like a fancy drone to me.

As already mentioned, probably testing for hypersonic capabilities.



posted on Oct, 1 2021 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: 1947boomer

You should check the other thread out.

The model is presumed to be upside down on the trailer.
Also, not mentioned yet, AFAIK, there is a pylon mounted on the model that I guess would be where the model is attached to the pylon for testing. It is able to be seen in several of the photos.

The pylon is the same color as the model. It is aerodynamically designed, so maybe it was for wind tunnel testing?


OK, thanks. That’s making more sense.

With regard to the pylon; I saw it and commented on it, but assumed it was on the bottom of the airframe instead of the top. If the airframe is upside down on the trailer then that fixture would be positioned so as to present the unbroken bottom of the airframe to the radar for RCS testing, which would make more sense. Usually an aircraft in a wind tunnel test is held from the rear (often where the jet exhaust is) on a large cantilevered beam (called a sting). That’s because the air loads in a tunnel test can get quite large. I don’t think that pylon fixture is strong enough to take the air loads of a tunnel test.

Also, if it was upside down, the bulge behind the nose currently facing downward would actually be about where a cockpit should be.

Also if it was upside down, the place where the tail surfaces would attach would be hidden in this view and may simply not be attached yet.

All in all, a much more conventional sounding vehicle.

My comment about this not being a subsonic design still seems to make sense, because of the chine that goes around the perimeter of the airframe.

I looked for another thread and couldn’t find it. Can you point to it?


Linky

That's the other thread Boomer



posted on Oct, 3 2021 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Its either a top or bottom fuselage skin for RCS testing..



posted on Oct, 4 2021 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Playing around with the image. Looks interesting. Wonder if it will be one of those aircraft that the control surfaces morph to control the aircraft.




posted on Oct, 4 2021 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 1947boomer

Three points in a triangle is also the best way to support the structure for transport. So they might just be for putting the supports for the truck while they move it.


it is more than likly connected to the wing spars and the front supports.


someone good with photo shot just flip it upside down.



posted on Oct, 5 2021 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I agree on the polecap theory, looks just like a fuselage only assembly of a chubby YF-22 with an X-32/F-16 like intake. I know they tested all sorts of different wing and tail configs on the Raptor over the year so maybe RCSing a ground attack or penetrator type?



posted on Oct, 6 2021 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580
I have an idea is it possible to be a reduce of the B-21 shape without the slender wings ? Th B-21 will be public released next year, Lockheed made test to X-47b shape in Helendale in the past ?

edit on 6-10-2021 by darksidius because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2021 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2021 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

theoretically you could make the wings out of some composite with zero metal in it(almost impossible) or use meta materials on the wing edge or some other tech to wrap the radar waves around the winds and not bounce back


the wings are the the only thing lifting a body like the B2 or B21

the entire body creates lift.

I'm sure they make them as thin as possible



posted on Oct, 7 2021 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3
Don't you think the Helendale craft could be little mock up of B-21 without the wings ?



posted on Oct, 7 2021 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

I don’t think Northrop would use a Lockheed facility, especially when they also have their own RCS facility in California



posted on Oct, 7 2021 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Ghoul

I agree that Northrop Grumman would not use Lockheed Martin's Helendale RCS facility because doing so could compromise proprietary information. That said, it should be noted that the Northrop Grumman's Tejon Ranch RCS range has been closed for about a decade.



posted on Oct, 7 2021 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

I think it could be a something very interesting, well part of it at least.


if you flip it over it almost looks like a high speed air intake.




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join