Weird California sighting

What's the saying again? The loser gets patented while the winner goes black? If nothing else it could be a clue as to what their designers were thinking back in the early 1990s.

Maybe it's an outgrowth of Tacit Blue (which flew from 1982-1985). At least on the systems side anyways.

a reply to: Northernhollow

This is a total WAG on my part, but it MAY have been part of a classified program in the early 90s that was canceled.

a reply to: Zaphod58

what aircraft are we even talking about in the last few posts/pages. i ducked out of the thread for two days come back n im lost.

the companion? the crash at boscombe? the green machine?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

All of the above.

a reply to: Zaphod58

ok the post of yours just above nmy last post.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

The patent design a page or so back.

a reply to: Zaphod58

right on.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And you MAY be quite right about that The patent is most certainly not the "companion"...

Im not big into patents but why bother, I mean china and russia basically copy everything anyway and a pencil drawing, can you hold it up to scrutiny, yeah it looks similar, but is isnt, its a foot longer or 2 degrees pointier..

Its like patenting the law of physics. A wing is a wing, if i decide to build one of a similar shape, how can you say it was copied, its design is driven by the performance you want to get out of it?

How does it work??

Confused.

originally posted by: BigTrain
a reply to: Zaphod58
So, whose ready to admit this is the real deal?

Not me!

Change it by 10% and its your own design

a reply to: EBJet

I'm guessing ATA.

There's a companion thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I posted this

space-man.de...

Look at pages 11 and 12 in the pdf...




look at the date on this patent.

Aircraft of low observability




.

a reply to: grey580

That looks exactly like what was seen in kansas and TX last year

a reply to: BigTrain

ehh. it resembles what was seen over Kansas last year. I don't think THAP was what that was though. also got issues with the patent having only one exhaust nozzle where as Kansas had two. then there's the size issue.

as for texas. totally different trailing edge.


Wait scratch that, just found out big trains right.

of course Texas and Kansas were the same thing and obviously THAP. now that you've figured it out. I invite you to sit back, not post for a while, and see how the forum manages. you know to see if the rest of the members can figure it out. give em a good long month to try. maybe more!! you've already probably got heat on you for figuring it out so another good reason to lay low.

Active military aircraft, especially classified ones tend to not have publicly available patent drawings available.

a reply to: Zaphod58

well one can dream

a reply to: grey580

It's fun to see the ones that are out there, and sometimes you find a gem, like the one a couple pages ago. Just don't think you're going to find the LRS-B, or companion in there.

I'd mentioned previously that I swear I saw something similar to a YF-23 take off at Edwards just a couple years ago. It was with a couple of F-16s. All took off on a very steep climb, and veered off into the distance.
That was an "early 90s cancelled project...."
Is it a variation on that theme, Zaphod? (He asks knowing full well that Zaphod isn't going to tell him anyway...)

a reply to: Badgered1

Could you possible describe the sighting in a little more detail? Time of day, where in relationship you were to Edwards, size of the unknown aircraft compared to the F-16's, paint scheme, ect.?