Captured UFOs? Reverse Engineering? Disclosure? REALLY?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Yeah, I agree, the triangles are military, they could be using alien tech, although it is not certain by any means. They could also be using secret government tech. Some people think that Tesla had ideas about anti-gravity, too.

So you just created a thread to say that disclosure isn't coming? Lol.

What world do you live in?

a reply to: Lathroper

Whats comical with all the bluster and claims of captured tech & being 50 years ahead yes that old chestnut how come the USA had no supersonic passenger plane, they didn't show the first pratical jet engine and they had no safe pratical VTOL aircraft and that's why they had the Harrier Jump Jet for so long.

Not one piece of conclusive evidence for a ufo never mind a captured one or alien tech.

originally posted by: SkeptiSchism
Our aircraft all work off of aerodynamic lift, using propulsion to achieve a velocity high enough to use air resistance to overcome the weight of the aircraft and lift it off the ground.

Wrong the air over the wing is accelerated that reduces the pressure as the pressure on the lower surface is greater that produces the lift.

How a wing works

a reply to: darkbake

To begin with, I have seen flying triangles in person. There were a few of them, and they had the capability to fly across the sky quite fast or even slowly fly over an area low to the ground, around the same speed as a slow-moving car. They had no wings and the one that hovered over my house was certainly going too slowly to provide any lift.

Slow moving and hovering Triangle Craft. Yet you don't have a single photograph.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: Lathroper

Whats comical with all the bluster and claims of captured tech & being 50 years ahead yes that old chestnut how come the USA had no supersonic passenger plane, they didn't show the first pratical jet engine and they had no safe pratical VTOL aircraft and that's why they had the Harrier Jump Jet for so long.

Not one piece of conclusive evidence for a ufo never mind a captured one or alien tech.

That about sums it up.

To many people live on fantasy.

a reply to: Lathroper

Saucers aren't the greatest aerodynamic shapes. Anybody who has ever played Frisbee Golf knows that saucers only fly sort-of well if you put a lot of spin on them, and even then they have a tendency to flip over due to unbalanced lift. You can compensate for it, but that's just more engineering when it's easier just to use a lifting body design.

a reply to: Lathroper
Nice post. I didn't see any mention of project 1794 though, which looks way cooler than the Avrocar:

Declassified at Last: Air Force’s Supersonic Flying Saucer Schematics

An artistic impression of what the finished USAF Project 1794 flying saucer might have looked like.

a reply to: Lathroper

Probably like a contained plasma reaction that produces a magnetic field, that is then attached structurally to the craft. By moving the field 3 dimensionally (rotating it in 3d dimensions) you could produced force vectors which would repel off the earth's magnetic field.

ntrs.nasa.gov...

arc.aiaa.org...

arc.aiaa.org...

lol a number of those vehicles you shown are fictional

a reply to: humanoidlord

At one point or another just about all of them were at least in the design or concept stage.

originally posted by: vinifalou
So you just created a thread to say that disclosure isn't coming? Lol.

What world do you live in?

Your limited reply makes me wonder about how brains develop, missing the big picture and concentrating on the smaller aspects. My thread title is: "Captured UFOs? Reverse Engineering? Disclosure? REALLY?" You didn't say anything about Captured UFOs or Reverse Engineering. I didn't create a thread to discuss disclosure only. The 2 other topics is what everyone wants disclosure to contain. You selected Disclosure and didn't add a worthy reply. I'm happy in the world I live in which you are not aware of.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: Lathroper

Whats comical with all the bluster and claims of captured tech & being 50 years ahead yes that old chestnut how come the USA had no supersonic passenger plane, they didn't show the first pratical jet engine and they had no safe pratical VTOL aircraft and that's why they had the Harrier Jump Jet for so long.

Not one piece of conclusive evidence for a ufo never mind a captured one or alien tech.

Exactly! And then we have Col. Corso trying to convince us that alien tech exists or existed in his time but like the Roswell "crash" it all got lost in time, only now to be desired as true. If it's not one thing, it's another.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Lathroper

I saw this video last night as part of "Viral Videos: Real, Fake, or Unknown". Before they showed this video declared real, they showed a previous one that was viewed and analyzed by experts and some said it was real and the CGI/Special Effects experts found flaws and declared it Fake. But that video was followed by your video which was corroborated as legit because it was shot at a public event with a sizable audience.

But I don't understand your reason for including the video as a reply. What am I supposed to extract from it?

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Saucers aren't the greatest aerodynamic shapes. Anybody who has ever played Frisbee Golf knows that saucers only fly sort-of well if you put a lot of spin on them, and even then they have a tendency to flip over due to unbalanced lift. You can compensate for it, but that's just more engineering when it's easier just to use a lifting body design.

I'm not a flight engineer and I even have trouble understanding wing lift. But I did fly a lot of Frisbees in the park sometimes throwing it to an open end garbage always quite a distance away and after getting the hang of it I was successful a large percentage of throw. And I'm only 5'8", 135 pounds so I wasn't able to generate a lot of force. To me a good flight depended on the first bite of the throw.

However, replying to this just now I got an idea for a Frisbee-type throwing flyer that would have a solid, flat bottom to more accurately resemble a wing's characteristics. Maybe not a flat bottom but with a gentle edge-to-edge curvature.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Lathroper
Nice post. I didn't see any mention of project 1794 though, which looks way cooler than the Avrocar:

Declassified at Last: Air Force’s Supersonic Flying Saucer Schematics
snip

I couldn't include all of the projects I saw images for. I did go to several sites that featured a multitude of images including a Canadian craft similar to all the rest. Almost all of them featured cockpits which you know would interfere with aerodynamics IF they wanted the craft to spin offering performance closer to the spinning UFOs they were trying to emulate. The marriage between a saucer shape and conventional engines just could never achieve the purpose. UFOs 1, humans 0.

originally posted by: SkeptiSchism
a reply to: Lathroper

Probably like a contained plasma reaction that produces a magnetic field, that is then attached structurally to the craft. By moving the field 3 dimensionally (rotating it in 3d dimensions) you could produced force vectors which would repel off the earth's magnetic field.

ntrs.nasa.gov...

arc.aiaa.org...

arc.aiaa.org...

I respect your vision, but it's way too difficult for my little brain. Back in the '60s I used to go to many UFO lectures and in one, the speaker gave a very detailed explanation of how saucers flew and at the end of his talk when he finished with "And that's how saucers fly" the audience erupted, stood up and loudly applauded. We had all been taken on a mental trip with a convincing explanation. I don't remember anything of that or all of the other lectures but I definitely don't remember plasma as being a factor. One never knows, it could work as you describe. It's beyond my ken.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
lol a number of those vehicles you shown are fictional

I spelled it out!

NASA - This might be a fake photo as I found a website with a number of similar photos marked fake.

a reply to: Lathroper

The photos are, the designs aren't.