A TR3B topic on Military.com?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Gotcha, I will dig around and maybe go dark and see what I find.

That does seem a bit "off". Rockets make noise and lots of it, I used to send up model rockets and a SR-71 model and you can hear those things plain as day a few hundred feet up. If they used rockets you probably would have heard it and seen the exhaust plume.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Damn inconsiderate IL deer, of all the big annual airshows like Oshkosh this will be the show of shows, I really can not think of a better time to show off an unknown aircraft considering the location and NV`s anniversary. If I knew someone flying in I`d hitch a skyride, I don't think I`d make it there in 4 days in a project car. If you had gone hunting in TN I could`ve been able to help you out if there isn't serious damage, I'm an auto mechanic for fun.

If any ATS`er goes they need to start a thread for it and load it down with pics, some of the aircraft their wont be seen again outside their climate controlled hangars for awhile.

a reply to: StratosFear

The next couple of years are when things are going to get really interesting. There isn't anything really amazing that is going to be a Nellis this year, other than the F-35 and F-22 flight demonstrations. In a couple years though, there may be something really interesting there.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Had a half jokey discussion with someone who has a PHD in Astrophysics based on this paper and this paper as a sanity check of whether a vacuum craft, "offsetting gravity" by using buoyancy of the earths atmosphere, could be a possibility.

Seemed to agree the latest published materials principles could be combined to provide a craft (multi skinned) that not only floated but could generate "upthrust" that would be comparable in terms of speed to high performance conventional aircraft/rockets.

I daren't mention anything about low pressure corridors, or creating pressure differentials using boundary layer effects for none vertical thrust but I cant see a reason why you wouldnt approach a possible craft in this way and forget completely about "Anti Gravity" (ie trying to cancel an all pervasive effect) when you could just "float" in the gaseous layer.

Worth pointing out that any Vacuum craft would lose upthrust potential the higher it gets as the Atmosphere thins - loosing all potential completely when in space.

Multiple stories this morning on military fighter jets:

news.yahoo.com...
TOUCHDOWN! F-35 FIGHTER JET NAILS "LANDMARK" AIRCRAFT CARRIER LANDING
"A next-generation F-35C fighter jet successfully landed aboard an aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego Monday (Nov. 3), marking a key milestone for the U.S. Navy." (See other F-35 stories on right sidebar.)

www.fool.com...
DID LOCKHEED MARTIN JUST REINVENT THE LASER GUN?
"Two years after the final cancellation and mothballing of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency's groundbreaking "Airborne Laser" weapons system, Lockheed Martin is getting ready for another go-'round. And this time, Lockheed's laser guns could be better than ever.

"Working off of a contract from the secretive DARPA organization, Lockheed Martin was recently hired to develop an Aero-Adaptive/Aero-Optic Beam Control ("ABC" for short) for targeting an airborne laser. Lockheed's task is to develop, by September 15, 2015, a turret that can "counteract the effects of turbulence caused by the protrusion of a turret from an aircraft's fuselage.

~ Boeing has a 10 kilowatt laser small enough that it can be carried around on a small truck.
~ Raytheon is building a 25 kw high energy laser, small enough to mount on a Humvee...
~ Lockheed itself is working on a 60 kw high energy laser for the Army, with delivery of the prototype expected Dec. 27, 2016.

a reply to: MKMoniker

I noticed this as well.
Since July the message from elements within the US does seem to be:

We have Triangles ( uniform shape causes all sorts of confusion).
We have FU gen. stealth
We have DEW's.... lots of them
We have LENR..

What are you going to do about it?

Apparently the early Blackbird intel cost the Russians hundreds of millions in terms of adapting their defenses and strategy.

Today, even the Chinese aren't "rich" (*cough US debt) enough to offset the possibility of "Invisible Nuclear Doritos with Lasers".

a reply to: Jukiodone

Good post!

The TR-3Bs are real, and continue to be improved and updated. (You can read earlier posts in this thread for details.) They have gravity-cancelling (not total anti-grav), and can fly atmospheric OR in space. They are housed all over the world, and the media-blackout about them is crumbling as they continue to be seen and photographed everywhere.

I wouldn't worry about the Russians. According to FOIA docs in the Reading Room at DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), the Russians got to the Moon before we did, and our "Apollo astronauts confirmed what we'd already learned from the Russians about the Moon." And a few posts ago, I linked to a Jane's Defense Weekly article about super-secret research in anti-gravity, and a Russian scientist who is now the go-to expert for the actual physics. (Basically, the science has been worked out; getting anti-gravity into workable hardware is the stumbling block.)

So the Russians and us are probably neck-in-neck with Advanced Tech like anti-gravity. How much of this is retro-engineered Alien Tech, and/or updated Nazi technology is open to speculation. (After WWII, we got the rocket scientists in Operation Paperclip. Russia seemed to have gone after the Nazi engineers - who could make the science "work" - and raided the Nazi's advanced air-flight companies.)

en.wikipedia.org...
HORTEN HO 229

The other super-power, China, seems to be relying on unconventional weaponry, like lasers and possibly scalar weapons. (And, since both Russia and China had sky-spirals of identical "failed missile tests" a few years back, China may be pursuing vortex-technology instead of anti-gravity for atmospheric/spacecraft.)

news.yahoo.com...
WHY CHINA IS USING LASERS TO TAKE DOWN DRONES
"China has developed and successfully tested technology to shoot down drones with lasers, according to state media. The mechanism can also take down various other small aircraft within a two-kilometer radius within five seconds of locating its target, the China Academy of Engineering Physics, one of the system's co-developers, claimed in a statement Sunday."

One of the biggest critics of the cost overruns on the F-35 fighter jet program, has been Senator John McCain. As the 2014 Election neared, and indicated a GOP sweep, the people involved in the F-35 program probably realized that they had to do something FAST to keep the F-35 program alive. (Mainly since states have no money or interest in repairing/replacing always-glitchy voting machines which can be tinkered with to "lose" millions of votes. So 70% of the electorate finally had their real votes count this time, by states going back to paper ballots.) And with a GOP sweep of Congress, McCain seems destined to head the powerful Senate Defense Committee:

www.newsmax.com...
McCAIN COULD SHAKE UP U.S. DEFENSE IN POWERFUL NEW SENATE ROLE
"One of President Barack Obama's noisiest detractors, McCain is expected to take the helm of the powerful Armed Services Committee in the new Republican-controlled U.S. Senate when the U.S. Congress convenes in January.

"The Arizona senator, a critic of the $399 billion Lockheed Martin (Marine) Corp F-35 fighter jet program, is likely to push for tougher congressional scrutiny of costly U.S. weapons programs, defense analysts say.

"He has in the past launched investigations into waste in the U.S. defense industry and shaped legislation to end cost overruns on major arms programs as a senior member of the Senate committee.

(Pure speculation on my part, but I wonder if Lockheed Martin tinkered with the mysterious F-35B vertical/landing "fan" version. And before all is said and done,that "B"version will have some partial form of anti-gravity (borrowed from the TR-3B technology) to help "explain" the massive cost overruns, and why the F-35 program should continue.)

a reply to: MKMoniker

Jesus you are determined to come up with the most absurd, out there reasons for things that have simple explanations aren't you.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MKMoniker

Jesus you are determined to come up with the most absurd, out there reasons for things that have simple explanations aren't you.

a reply to: Zaphod58

"Jesus you are determined to come up with the most absurd, out there reasons for things that have simple explanations aren't you."

Absolutely nothing about the TR-3B has a "simple explanation", Zaph. Even before I could identify the TR-3B, similar triangle-UFOs were being seen all over the world. It was obvious that since we hadn't been forcibly "invaded" by ETs, the next most logical explanation was that a Superpower Military had built the things.

And since I know about the race to grab crashed ET-craft all over the world for back-engineering, I was "speculating" publicly that the triangles were possibly our first "bridge" craft being built, the first merger of Alien Tech and do-able Earth aero-technology.

Little did I know then that the Deep Black Ops TR-3Bs were built and continually being upgraded, and had been flying since the 1990s. (Several sources said that this was why NASA never got on-the-ball with a shuttle replacement, since all the money was diverted to the TR-3B program.)

The real question here, is why you are so resistant to the obvious, Zaph?

a reply to: MKMoniker

Because I don't believe everything I read on the internet. I believe sources that KNOW what they're talking about instead. Not everything on the internet is true.

I'm just amazed at your mental gymnastics to get the F-35 into the TR3B.

a reply to: MKMoniker

I think the comment was in reference to your spurious connection between Anti-Gravity, the F35 and Sen McCain.

Although the topic is called TR3-B there is zero evidence or technological basis for any claims of anti gravity, Aliens, none relativistic mercury (or whatever), or even the designation "TR3-B".

To Zaphod58 and Jukiodone:

The TR-3B is the most obvious example of our gravity-cancelling technology, and has been seen and photographed all over the world. Anyone reading my past posts in this discussion can see I have thoroughly researched the TR-3B, and have corroborated most of the story from numerous, separate sources.

And the article on anti-gravity technology came from a highly respectable and rigorously vetted source - Jane's Defense Weekly.

And I labeled it "speculation" when I wondered if the F-35 enthusiasts might try and save/continue the F-35 program by borrowing some of the TR-3B's anti-gravity technology, to help explain their massive cost overruns to McCain. Speculation = Personal Opinion.

a reply to: MKMoniker

It came from Nick Cook, not Janes. That doesn't mean it comes from Janes itself, only someone that worked for them. He's a black project expert, that doesn't mean that he's infallible. There are plenty of explanations for triangle shaped aircraft photographed around the world, OTHER than the supposed TR3B. You're starting at TR3B, and fitting the evidence to it, instead of the other way around.

Even if it was from Jane's though, I STILL wouldn't believe it. I've actually TALKED to people that work in the industry, that KNOW about these projects, and I'll take their word over ANYONE on any internet website.

a reply to: MKMoniker

Don't feel bad MK.

Zaph still doesn't believe me when I tell him the alarming truth that the TR3B's internal cyclotronic particle accelerator plasma ring spins so fast because cuisinart got the contract to build them. Oster was pissed because they thought they would get the contract proclaiming that they "are the king of making things spin and zing" But the airforce wasn't going for their sales pitch.

But either way it's still better then using an old salad spinner to jump start the spinning process of the magnetic accelerator anti gravity ring like they used to. A bunch of pilots standing in a circle taking turns slapping the button on top getting it spinning.

Seriously Zaph I don't know why you don't believe me even though we've never met. And half the stuff I say makes no sense. Whatever man. Who you gunna believe?

originally posted by: MKMoniker
To Zaphod58 and Jukiodone:

The TR-3B is the most obvious example of our gravity-cancelling technology, and has been seen and photographed all over the world. Anyone reading my past posts in this discussion can see I have thoroughly researched the TR-3B, and have corroborated most of the story from numerous, separate sources.

And the article on anti-gravity technology came from a highly respectable and rigorously vetted source - Jane's Defense Weekly.

And I labeled it "speculation" when I wondered if the F-35 enthusiasts might try and save/continue the F-35 program by borrowing some of the TR-3B's anti-gravity technology, to help explain their massive cost overruns to McCain. Speculation = Personal Opinion.

Actually the black triangles were around before any mention of a TR3-b(bullhockey) Also they do not have anti gravity devices. they use devices that reduce the craft to almost weightless which in turn makes it as if gravity does not apply to it.

Has there ever been a no crap, authentic, detailed picture of a triangle aircraft thats not a known aircraft?

a reply to: boomer135

Not heard anything stated categorically as to what the 2 different types of Aircraft in the Wichita and Texas sightings were - however no evidence to suggest anything none conventional.

Best explanation I heard was Sneaky Pete variant/A12 Avenger spin off but not heard anything recently.

If the gossip around nanospheres and real time optical tinkering is even remotely correctly there should be- based on current technology- at least a few demonstrators that use optical camouflage as part of their bag of tricks.

Optical Stealth would be the obvious reason for no decent pics ( aside from them not existing of course).

Check out this artical , its about the futur of commerical airliners. If you scroll down to the bottow where various diffrent companies have there concepts NASA and boeing collablration looks very intresting. Its a triangle platform. I believe (especially these 2 particular companies) this shows that there at least toying with the concerpt, if thats not just the "civi" version.

www.iflscience.com...