1955 Flying Saucer shot down by RED WING pilots over The Bull of the Woods central Oregon

A look at …imo..a plastic 1/35 figure



I’m still sticking with a diorama

👽🍹

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: pianopraze
Now I'm no expert and freely admit I'm only speculating here so please correct me if I'm wrong, but.....a 1955 fighter jet would struggle to shoot down a modern day fighter jet. So do we really think its plausible they'd be able to shoot down a craft that's capable who knows what type of travel and with technology far in advance of ours, even today?

Without guided aiming, I think you have a better chance with a slingshot.
That aircraft is at least 15 meters wide but no one has ever seen these fights or crashed UFOs.
Men in black erased the memories of witnesses ...

Looking at the saucer they must have been very small. Much Smaller then army men

This kind of hoaxes exclude AI image tampering or generation or other AI fakery. Computer data tempering is excluded. It is a scale that matters here. Hubcaps hanging off the tether, to summarize. These are very convinsing.

That's why diorama to me occurs as most reliable kind of fakery, imo.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: pianopraze

Now I'm no expert and freely admit I'm only speculating here so please correct me if I'm wrong, but.....a 1955 fighter jet would struggle to shoot down a modern day fighter jet. So do we really think its plausible they'd be able to shoot down a craft that's capable who knows what type of travel and with technology far in advance of ours, even today?

I have no idea, we have no understanding of censor systems, thinking of occupants, etc.

If they were enjoying the scenery, not monitoring other things in the sky, and got attacked unaware…. Maybe.

Logic would suggest anyone with this level tech should be able to outfly 1955 jet. If by no other way than by quickly going straight up and out of the atmosphere as the jet could not follow and attack such a maneuver.

If this is real (big if at this point) it’s possible it was human craft of some sort and unable to sense the plane or maneuver out of the way.

Could this be a candidate: Wired magazine

The National Archives has recently published never-before-seen schematics and details of a 1950s military venture, called Project 1794, which aimed to build a supersonic flying saucer.

Edit to add, Don’t think this was the failed Avro car either as they said this about the prototype:

The document also hints that the product development seemed to be going better than planned; "the present design will provide a much superior performance to that estimated at the start of contract negotiations."

Think this thing went black. Avro car paraded as a failure to hide the successes they did have. Typical bait and switch.

a reply to: pianopraze

The Project 1794 files have been available for sometime….

This project could have went to a black hole deep black project….with untold amounts of need to know additional files.

Here are the files anyone can download as PDFs

Project 1794 Records


👽🍺

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: pianopraze

Lets introduce some ground debris such as sand or dirt into that scenario.
Supersonic air intakes?

The reason these things never went any further (IMO) is that the general design of rotorcraft allows you to operate over none prepared surfaces...which are where wars are typically fought.

ETA: Dunno if anyone saw it recently but Anuma Aerospace got some additional funding for their granted patent relating to their LTA Partial Vacuum Lift design.

Now that would be useful for a VLO low and slow mission.

originally posted by: Jukiodone
a reply to: pianopraze

Lets introduce some ground debris such as sand or dirt into that scenario.
Supersonic air intakes?

The reason these things never went any further (IMO) is that the general design of rotorcraft allows you to operate over none prepared surfaces...which are where wars are typically fought.

I was curious to see if there was any kind of aircraft that was VTOL with any Supersonic Engines …from long ago.

Here’s this…interesting indeed.

Yakovlev Yak-141

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Yep they've already tried EVERYTHING in terms of jet engines and VTOL.
Look at the multi decade effort that went into the Special Operations Force Aircraft/SOFTA.

The F35 still cant take off/land on Sand.

If you had something with "solar powered vacuum lift" ( as per the Anuma patent) - it would tick all the boxes.
Low support infrastructure- global VTOL coverage over any surface (including the sea) and most importantly- the ability to capitalise on the massive thrust to weight ratio saving over conventional aircraft so you can load it full of sensors/ECM's/Armaments/Personnel.

originally posted by: Jukiodone
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Yep they've already tried EVERYTHING in terms of jet engines and VTOL.
Look at the multi decade effort that went into the Special Operations Force Aircraft/SOFTA.

The F35 still cant take off/land on Sand.

If you had something with "solar powered vacuum lift" ( as per the Anuma patent) - it would tick all the boxes.
Low support infrastructure- global VTOL coverage over any surface (including the sea) and most importantly- the ability to capitalise on the massive thrust to weight ratio saving over conventional aircraft so you can load it full of sensors/ECM's/Armaments/Personnel.

Admittedly I’ve only scanned the abstract…..but on the surface….I see a teeny weeny problem since it’s ….SOLAR……no Sun no POWER.

If batteries were to be used for overnight flight…..now your talking a huge heavy battery bank for nighttime power and use. Weight and Balance will affect CG (Center of Gravity).

imo

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

The solar powered bit is the "energy harvesting " element (a la Darpa's Manta Ray) obviously it doesn't just run on solar power.

A typical EV battery weighs anywhere between 450 and 950 KGs .
I cant find the power requirements for evacuating the proposed geodesic lifting cell (as there seems to be some sort of geometric mechanical advantage) however the conventional "create a vacuum with a pump" power req. calc. I could find said ~

" 1m cubed vacuum evacuated at 100kPA (sea level) uses circa 100kj of electricity".

Average EV battery capacity = 40Kwh so that's enough power (144,000 kj's) to evacuate 1440 conventional 1m cubed vacuums from one full charge cycle.


I have my doubts relating to availability of materials being light AND strong enough to maintain a partial vacuum but if they could crack that one issue - all other highlighted concerns become fairly mundane aerospace engineering challenges.


More info if anyone is interested:

lynceans.org...