Pictures Of Mystery Plane Over Wichita

a reply to: Zaphod58

I don't really remember that far back, but when the first grainy pictures of the F-117s came out did the USAF say anything about it or just deny until they declassified it?

a reply to: Stealthbomber

They half heartedly denied what it was until they released.

I believe this is a B2 Stealth Bomber. Some of the claims, such as that it made 180 degree turns, that it was silent, I say prove it. Pictures don't prove these things. Video would (maybe),but video can be faked. McConnell AFB is close by, so I believe it was one of theirs. You can't expect them to admit it was. Probably were testing something.

Really, think about it and use some common sense.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'd go down there right now, if it wasn't a 1000 mile journey.

a reply to: ChiefD

McConnell doesn't have B-2s. The only B-2 base is Whiteman.

a reply to: Sammamishman

Yeah, I know. If we weren't broken down I'd tell them to get me a load out that way. I've been right by Edwards a few times coming out of Cali. Nothing to see though.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: smurfy

There are conflicting reports on the LRS-B specifications. The B-2 is strictly subsonic though. The LRS-B will take advantage of several leaps in technology in systems, as well as big advantages in new stealth capabilities that can't be retrofitted to the B-2.

As for the B-2s, they're all based at Whiteman AFB in Missouri, but they forward deploy anywhere from 2-3 for several months at a time.

"As for the B-2s, they're all based at Whiteman AFB in Missouri, but they forward deploy anywhere from 2-3 for several months at a time."
That's more like it, that means they are not, (1) all at Whiteman AFB, (2) will have a heap of their armament with them, like the 'bunker busters' ..nay, the enhanced 'bunker busters' currently in Diego Garcia along with B2's. Scary pants for the Iranians don't you think?
There are other peripheral things not mentioned in the OP, direction of travel, approximated speed, weather and all that stuff. Those could be important if there was a supersonic stealth out there that didn't go bang.

a reply to: smurfy

The weapons, with the exception of specialty weapons like MOP, will come from the bases they're deployed to.

As for the other, there are tests ongoing for a quiet boom aircraft. I'm not sure if it's reached flying stages yet though.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: darksidius

Both the same mission. There's a reason that they both look similar.

Hmm, one's a dorito (pure triangle) and the other has a bit of bendy in the leading edge. But the same mission?

F-117 retired. F-111 retired. A-10 retired. F-15SE not too stealthy. No B-2's being built. I filled in the gap.

Two craft for the same mission?

strike aircraft, plus ECM + target designator/illuminator accompaniment (i.e. aardvark) Which one is which? Why the different craft> why not the same airframe with different payloads?

a reply to: mbkennel

Slightly different specialties.

originally posted by: ChiefD
Some of the claims, such as that it made 180 degree turns, that it was silent, I say prove it.

Again I am not an aviator, an aviation expert or a buff, and I base all my statements on repeated observation. But with that being said, I can tell you for certain a B2 bomber isn't silent in flight.

For example

a reply to: TDawgRex

Hiding in plane sight? (oh yeah, see what I did there).

Who's going to question just another aircraft flying overhead when there are numerous airbases dotted about the area?

a reply to: OatDelphi

The B2 does have systems on it to make it quiet.

a reply to: Stealthbomber

I was always surprised at how quiet they were at 500 feet when they wanted to be.

I live in amarillo, the only thing here is the V-22.

a reply to: V22tech

The sighting that was in Amarillo was passing overhead to another location.

the flying wing design isnt that new of a concept, here another thing it could have been thefutureofthings.com...

or these, i love weird looking planes, its why i work a Bell on the V22 www.dailymail.co.uk...

a reply to: Stealthbomber

Agreed. And from my experience, you don't really hear it until it is above you or gone past. And stories from the Gulf War seem to parallel that sentiment. So reduced sound yes, but silent no.


I think a lot of people tend to think stealth implies sound like a ninja, instead of minimal radar cross section.

a reply to: V22tech

I wonder if the cops will give that X-47 a ticket for parking in the handicap space?

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: darksidius

Both the same mission. There's a reason that they both look similar.

Hmm, one's a dorito (pure triangle) and the other has a bit of bendy in the leading edge. But the same mission?

F-117 retired. F-111 retired. A-10 retired. F-15SE not too stealthy. No B-2's being built. I filled in the gap.

Two craft for the same mission?

strike aircraft, plus ECM + target designator/illuminator accompaniment (i.e. aardvark) Which one is which? Why the different craft> why not the same airframe with different payloads?

Some sympathy with that just more confusion, a bit like the, "enhanced bunker busters" even they are not much use if the enemy... the profiled targets, could be so far underground as to be out of reach conventionally.
The thing to remember here is that a singular B2 was resurrected after an engine fire, and that took a dedicated project over four years to achieve on an aircraft that had already cost $2+billion to build in production. Upshot of that is that there ain't anybody going to tell me that particular plane was restored as pristine as the other 19.