Pictures Of Mystery Plane Over Wichita

a reply to: coldcrush1984

Well done.

It does indeed look exactly like the B2 Stealth and this is an example of it doing exactly as it should, and being elusive in the sky.

Even the other picture looks like the B2 Stealth when it is analysed properly.

a reply to: Domo1
they say there's Russian spy plains in u.s.?

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

And he then went on to show that he used a different picture. So what's your point. Oh wait, I guess it's that you're right, and no one else knows anything, unless there's a link to a website about it.

Got it.

a reply to: robbon2004

No, there aren't. They're using the Open Skies treaty to fly a set number of flights over the US, using a transport type aircraft, with off the shelf camera gear.

a reply to: Zaphod58


Hi Zaphod,
Yes the second Image was certainly far less clear than the first one I did, namely because of the noise on the original color version,,,, I applied the same technique, and tried my best to see it, I drew a rough outline of where the edges seem to be however I am open to the possibility my mind is trying to draw in where I think it should be in the noise, so am in no way claiming this is the definitive shape of the the aircraft.... Its an interesting thread for sure!

a reply to: Zaphod58

The different picture is just MORE information therefore more to analyse.

As I said those guessing and stating their OPINION as fact based on little information often gets called out when MORE information comes to light.

Obviously this is something those of an egotistical nature cannot handle, but who cares, ATS isn't meant for serving the ego's of those who cannot admit when they aren't right.

Deny ignorance.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: gippers

*shrug* You can believe me or not, I really don't give a damn. My reputation on here speaks for itself.

I'm not sure if you can't prove anything or just simply won't. I am sorry I am a thorn in your side because I don't blindly follow your word.

a reply to: coldcrush1984

That's not a B-2 then. The back edge is all wrong if you're right about where the edges are, which would match up with some drawings of designs that I've seen floating around. It doesn't have enough of a sawtooth to the aft fuselage to be a B-2.

B-2 Aft Fuselage

nevermind

a reply to: gippers

I won't confirm it, because it would get people in trouble. I really don't care if you follow my word blindly or not. Like I said, it doesn't bother me in the least if you believe me or not. I'll keep telling what I can of what I know, and if you don't believe me, it doesn't matter to me.

originally posted by: Domo1

Link

I tried to make it clearer


Perhaps some kind of experimental drone, shuttle craft, experimental bomber, or alien ship masked as human craft

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

I admit when I'm wrong all the time. I really don't care if I'm wrong or not. But what do you have to say now about the enhancement that shows it's NOT a B-2? Or is that one going to get swept under the rug?

[url=http://theaviationist.com...]http://theaviationist.com/2014/04/17/new-image-triangular-mystery/[/url ]


^ code broke xP

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah I thought that also, the picture is so grainy it is very hard to make out, you could potentially see the sawtooth shape in the black and white version, but again, I do not want to try to make something fit. I think the obvious conclusion is that the rear of the aircraft in that picture, even when enhanced is very hard to make out, which neither proves or disproves it is a b2. The original one I did ''seems'' to look more like a B2.
I am completely sure there are manned and unmanned black projects flying around out there all the time. This is a great picture of something that could be one of those....

a reply to: coldcrush1984

From what I'm being told, it may be related to a project going Grey within the next year. Hopefully it'll be seen flying again and some better pictures will come of it.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: gippers

I won't confirm it, because it would get people in trouble. I really don't care if you follow my word blindly or not. Like I said, it doesn't bother me in the least if you believe me or not. I'll keep telling what I can of what I know, and if you don't believe me, it doesn't matter to me.

I know you don't care if I believe you because you know that there are plenty of people gullible enough to drag this out without ever providing some definitive proof.

a reply to: gippers

Like I said, my reputation on here stands for itself. When I can I back up what I say, and many times what I say that can't be backed up is borne out later. That's good enough for many people.

Here are some B2'S flying over Colorado, and it isn't always visible in the sky showing the serrated edge due to angles, light etc, a photo from the video easily shows this.

As for those claiming their ''ATS reputation'', as 'proof', like those other 'reputable' ATS posters who's minions are constantly heaping praise upon them, regardless of how right or wrong they are, to me and many others just makes them more suspicious and their 'reputation' more a fallacy than anything proving their worthiness of opinion.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The enhancement looks like it shows a similar shape to B2.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Similar doesn't mean same as. The aft fuselage is completely wrong for a B-2, but matches up with other designs.

Gee, it almost looks something like this.

Yeah, you figured me out. I'm only here to spread lies and disinformation, and keep people from finding the truth, all while making myself look better. I don't really know what I'm talking about at all, I just make it up as I go.

Oh, and in those pictures of the B-2s, you can still see something of the trailing edge. Enough to see there is something different about it than in the new aircraft.