Lockheed Exec Refuses To Comment On Video Exposing Mystery Aviation Technology

This video is making the rounds online and I am not even close to any kind of expert, I hope some of you can shed light on what this actually is. Sorry cant embed the video.

dailycaller.com...

The general manager of Lockheed’s most secretive arm, known as “Skunk Works”, refused to comment Tuesday on a mysterious aviation technology spotted recently at a Lockheed testing facility in the Mojave Desert outside of Palmdale, California.


A video began making the rounds on Twitter Sept. 22 exposing an oddly shaped, sleek aircraft being loaded onto a flatbed trailer.

The video was re-posted by Ruben Hofs, an aviation enthusiast, who he says stumbled across it on TikTok.

Defense One’s Global Business Editor Marcus Weisgerber hosted a conversation with Jeff Babione, Lockheed Martin’s vice president and general manager of Skunk Works on Tuesday.

Weisgerber asked Babione about the video of the alleged Skunk Works’ aircraft technology.

“Alright, Jeff, we’ve gotten a number of questions about this, and it was about a video last week that surfaced on Twitter of an AFA [Aerial Rocket Artillery]” at “allegedly a Lockheed facility in some shape if you will on the back of a flatbed truck,” Weisgerber said. He then asked, “Are you able to tell us anything about what we saw?”

Babione smiled and replied, “I can’t.”

“Ok,” Weisgerber laughed, “Has your security posture changed?”

Babione chuckled, took a deep breath, and responded, “Uh, we’re, we’re in good shape.”

If someone could post this video from the link or twitter it would be great. Thank You!

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

What other comments could he make?

originally posted by: ColoradoTemplar
This video is making the rounds online and I am not even close to any kind of expert, I hope some of you can shed light on what this actually is. Sorry cant embed the video.

dailycaller.com...

The general manager of Lockheed’s most secretive arm, known as “Skunk Works”, refused to comment Tuesday on a mysterious aviation technology spotted recently at a Lockheed testing facility in the Mojave Desert outside of Palmdale, California.


A video began making the rounds on Twitter Sept. 22 exposing an oddly shaped, sleek aircraft being loaded onto a flatbed trailer.

The video was re-posted by Ruben Hofs, an aviation enthusiast, who he says stumbled across it on TikTok.

Defense One’s Global Business Editor Marcus Weisgerber hosted a conversation with Jeff Babione, Lockheed Martin’s vice president and general manager of Skunk Works on Tuesday.

Weisgerber asked Babione about the video of the alleged Skunk Works’ aircraft technology.

“Alright, Jeff, we’ve gotten a number of questions about this, and it was about a video last week that surfaced on Twitter of an AFA [Aerial Rocket Artillery]” at “allegedly a Lockheed facility in some shape if you will on the back of a flatbed truck,” Weisgerber said. He then asked, “Are you able to tell us anything about what we saw?”

Babione smiled and replied, “I can’t.”

“Ok,” Weisgerber laughed, “Has your security posture changed?”

Babione chuckled, took a deep breath, and responded, “Uh, we’re, we’re in good shape.”

If someone could post this video from the link or twitter it would be great. Thank You!

I watched part of the video showing the platform...
It is cool but I would expect him to never answer anything regarding it before the official US military does.

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

I'm no expert by any means, so you need to get Zaphod in on this, but it doesn't look big enough to be a manned craft. It could possibly be a new generation drone or a scaled down version of a future aircraft to be tested in a wind tunnel.

a reply to: DAVID64

RCS models aren't always full airframes. They build parts of aircraft to test specific signatures of certain parts that may have a higher signature than the rest of the airframe.

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: DAVID64

RCS models aren't always full airframes. They build parts of aircraft to test specific signatures of certain parts that may have a higher signature than the rest of the airframe.

So you think this is just a model for testing?

Don't they put a shell around new technology when they are transporting it in the open air?

A member of the dreamland resort forum pointed that a similar shape was spotted at this same facility in 2003... So if it's the same thing, the probability of a polecap or something similar is close to 100% lol



For the comment of the Lockheed manager, he said he didn't see the picture/video so obviously he can't comment about it if he didn't see it lol.

Lockheed refusing to comment should not say much, standard practice I think. Because if they only say they refused to comment when someone spotted a X-craft it would be easy to pinpoint a secret project. So for all we know it could be container filled with salmon, a fancy desktop or a alien craft.

a reply to: dandandat2

It was going from the pole to the warehouse. Both are maybe a couple miles apart within the same facility.

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Probably. I think they were testing a specific part of the airframe and didn't need all of it.

It would be covered if it was anything ultra sensitive

IIRC, there was a thread about the RCS testing of this model within the past month on ATS.

Here it is... Cool looking bird posted by Violater1.
In that thread, member cmdrkeenkid believes it is a Lockheed bird.

a reply to: visitedbythem

Not necessarily. They're stored and tested on the site where the video was shot. It would take longer to wrap and unwrap them than it would to run the test.

originally posted by: butcherguy
IIRC, there was a thread about the RCS testing of this model within the past month on ATS.

Here it is... Cool looking bird posted by Violater1.
In that thread, member cmdrkeenkid believes it is a Lockheed bird.

Oh sorry about that! Might as well just delete or ignore this post then.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Probably. I think they were testing a specific part of the airframe and didn't need all of it.

Maybe, but here is an alternative view. Let’s start with the basics:

1. The vehicle seems to be pointed nose forward on the truck. We know this because in the video, you can see three struts supporting the vehicle in the triangular arrangement that would correspond to the location of tricycle landing gear.
2. We can also see a small fitting attached to the underside of the vehicle at what looks like the center of mass. I assume that this is the fitting that connects to the pylon on the Radar Cross Section range.
3. The fact that the vehicle has both an RCS pylon fitting AND structural hard points for landing gear would seem to imply that this is actually a prototype flight unit, and not just an RCS model. An RCS model would not need landing gear.
4. The fact that the vehicle has provision for load-bearing, tricycle landing gear in a location consistent with the apparent weight and balance of the vehicle implies that it is designed for a roll-on landing on a runway. In other words, it is a vehicle intended for aerodynamic, forward flight.
5. The fact that it has landing gear also implies that it is resuable and not expendable.
6. Given that it is an aerodynamic flight vehicle, it does not seem to be optimized for subsonic flight. One indication of this is the large downward facing bulge at the nose, which would generate significant negative lift in subsonic flight. Another indication is that the upper and lower halves of the body seem to be joined with a relatively sharp-edged chine that runs around the entire perimeter of the body. The fact that the chine is continuous around the perimeter suggests that the vehicle is actually a wave-rider, intended to get compression lift at supersonic speeds.
7. There are no obvious provisions for large optical apertures on the vehicle and the large downward facing bulge at the nose suggests that it may contain a side-and-down looking RF antenna of some sort. This would suggest that the primary role of the vehicle might be to collect RF signals passively, since active RF signals would tend to defeat the stealth characteristics.
8. There appear to be no intakes or exhaust ports, implying that it is a glider.
9. There is no cockpit, implying that it is a UAV.
10. There appear to be no tail control surfaces (presumably to enhance stealth) implying that it uses an active control system of some sort to maintain stability from supersonic flight down to landing speed.

Summary: a reusable, low observable, unmanned, high supersonic/low hypersonic glider presumably intended to overfly contested airspace and collect SIGINT.

Or maybe this is just a fever dream and I have too much time on my hands........

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Obviously a weather kite.

Or a deflated weather baloon!

/s

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

The shape of the thing would seem to suggest its designed to go superfast, probably hypersonic.

Hard pushed to fit a man in there all the same, im thinking next gen surveillance drone, possibly even cruise missile.

a reply to: 1947boomer

Three points in a triangle is also the best way to support the structure for transport. So they might just be for putting the supports for the truck while they move it.