Real Secret Triangels

Gazrok what is that? Looks photo-shopped to me.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Look at that picture its very streaky, Its not clear perhaps the camera was moving or shaking. So look at the lights on the tips they are not clear and centered the shape might also be a bit distorted because of this. And like someone said all 3D or drawings of the aircraft are speculation so they may be a bit off the real thing if it exists.

Original picture is good, but it was scanned from not very quality printed documentation. The FDL serie is real, however that picture should show only mockup, not real plane. That is the reason, why I was asking, if someone has more detailed documentation.

It looks like small testbed of old Lockheed manned reusable 1.5 stage spaceplane called Starclipper. More here


external image

Originally posted by veritas 7
MATEJ, You say that the british HALO project is "probably" unmanned.

Well my sources tell me that it is in fact "manned", and part of the RAF`s future operational aircraft project.

It should be part of FOA, because it was common designation of all new technologies development. However I still think, that HALO is unmanned. It is experimental aircraft aimed for development of technologies, so there is no reason to have pilot onboard.

Also the next project FOAS is studying manned and unmanned aircrafts, militarized civil aircrafts and cruise missiles to replace Tornado GR.4, but the final solution [if it will be manned or unmanned] was not done.

Picture posted by Gazrok looks very speculative to me. I also think it is photoshopped [or to have on mind my preferences Coreled :-) ].

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 6/11/2005 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

About 50 photographs of this exist. Infact Discovery Channel had made a 1hour documentry on the very incident that even showed REAL videos of it taken by one of Belgium's cops.

Where can I see the other photos?

I have two new things related to this topic. Firstly I found, what is probably behind AX-17 Mystery. It should be desinterpretation of Rockwell/Lockheed A/F-X proposal from early 90s. Look....

AX-17 art


Rockwell/Lockheed A/F-X model


And secondly, here is advanced picture recognition thread. Who of you guys [and also girls] is able to identify this [none of this picture is photoshoped]? I am giving you two weeks

I don't know what any of them are matej but I look forward to finding out

"Brilliant Buzzard "

Reported Specifications:


Primary Function: Strategic Reconnaissance Aircraft
Prime Contractor: Lockheed Skunkworks
Power Plant: Exotic Propulsion
Length: Approx. 90 ft.
Height:Unknown
Wingspan: Approx. 50 ft.
Speed: Mach 6-8
Ceiling: 150,000 ft.
Unit Cost: Unknown
Reports and sightings of a large, light colored aircraft, similar in appearance to the XB-70 "Valkyrie" bomber, have been numerous. Since 1990, a large, sleek aircraft has been seen in the skies of California, Georgia and elsewhere. Three large, white delta-winged aircraft were revealed in a LandSat photo of Groom Lake in late 1991. For years, reports of a black aircraft code named "Brilliant Buzzard" or "Blue Eyes" have circulated.

During the 1980's, Boeing reportedly built the secret aircraft as a high speed platform for launching a smaller, hypersonic aircraft. Other reports suggest that it was the platform for the Airborne Optical System, an integral part of the SDI missile defense plan. "Brilliant Buzzard" may be an unmanned craft, if it can be associated with Boeing's 1989 HSCT study for NASA. The study uses the term "unmanned flying wing" to describe the aircraft. Comments in the study hint that the plane was already flying.

Most reports, however, seem to indicate it is a manned aircraft. It has been described as having a clipped delta planform, a fighter-style canopy, a forward canard wing, dual rectangular engine exhausts, with extremely loud engines.


F-121
"Sentinel"

Reported Specifications:


Primary Function: Strategic Reconnaissance Aircraft
Prime Contractor: General Dynamics
Power Plant: Unknown
Length: Unknown
Height:Unknown
Wingspan: Unknown
Speed: Mach 3+
Ceiling: Unknown
Unit Cost: Unknown
This aircraft was built by General Dynamics (Fort Worth), now part of Lockheed Martin, and first flew in 1986. It is a single-seat Mach 3+ reconnaissance aircraft for NRO, and significantly more stealthy than the SR-71A. It is of almost perfect delta planform with 65° leading edge sweep, and its ventral air intake is highly blended into the fuselage. Four of these aircraft are currently operationally based at Groom Lake in hangars 20 through 23.
The unofficial F-121 designator was allocated after Lockheed Martin took over the GD Fort Worth assets, and the 121 is said to honor the Lockheed article number of the first A-12 Blackbird aircraft. The F prefix is widely used for bogus designations of secret aircraft, and is not meant to designate the Sentinel as a "Fighter". The code name "Centennial" was also mentioned for this aircraft.


"Bird of Prey"

Specifications:


Primary Function: Technology Demonstrator
Prime Contractor: Boeing Phantom Works
Power Plant: Pratt & Whitney JT15D-5C turbofan engine
Length: 47 ft.
Height:Unknown
Wingspan: Approx. 23 ft.
Speed: Subsonic
Ceiling: 20,000 ft.
Unit Cost: $67 million In October 2002, Boeing unveiled the once-secret stealth aircraft called "Bird of Prey" that was used to test radar evading technologies and designs. A subsonic, single-seat technology demonstrator, the aircraft completed 38 test flights as part of its flight-demonstration program. Its first flight took place in fall 1996.

The "Bird of Prey" pioneered breakthrough low-observable technologies and revolutionized aircraft design, development and production. The once highly classified project ran from 1992 through 1999, and was revealed because the technologies and capabilities developed have become industry standards, and it is no longer necessary to conceal the aircraft's existence.

Innovations included the use of large, single piece composite structure; low cost, disposable tooling; and three-dimensional virtual reality design and assembly processes. Technologies it pioneered live on in the X-45A Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle, or UCAV, being developed by Boeing.

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Originally posted by waynos
And yet nobody seems to have noticed that the 'object' in the photograph above is a completely different shape to the impression that stealth spy likes posting a lot.

Both look trinagular and 95% identical to my eyes.

What's completely different in the real picture and the impression.

BTW : Belgium scrambled a few F-16's after this sighting and was visible on its radar too. But the F-16's could'nt get a lock on to this because of its unearthly accelration.

Belgium's chief of air staff has publically spoken about the incident and so have the F-16 pilots and the ground raar operator.

About 50 photographs of this exist. Infact Discovery Channel had made a 1hour documentry on the very incident that even showed REAL videos of it taken by one of Belgium's cops.

Stealth Spy, Do you happen to know the name of the show on discovery and if it is currently airing? Do you know where I might find the video clip take by the cops? Thanks

Originally posted by Gazrok
Here's one...

This image was an artist's rendering of what the ATB (Advanced Technology Bomber) now known as the B-2 might look like.
The picture graced the cover of the February 1986 Discover magazine.

It is not a secret unknown aircraft.

Originally posted by Nventual

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

About 50 photographs of this exist. Infact Discovery Channel had made a 1hour documentry on the very incident that even showed REAL videos of it taken by one of Belgium's cops.

Where can I see the other photos?

www.areadownload.com...

When I superimpose the artwork onto the poster picture I noticed that I could not get them to match perfectly. It is almost as if the angle of the two images are slightly off. Anyone care to try and make a better superimotion and prove me wrong? I was thinking that perhaps a real image leaked and they made an artist to make a fake painting to debunk the leaked picture, and the artist didnt get it 100% correct or made the painting from a different cell of many pictures taken that day. The corners of the craft also seem pointier and the two people just behind the fuselage seem to have moved closer.



[edit on 6-11-2005 by anorwegianguy1972]

I reckon it's just the sepia tone. When you superimposed the images, it appears as if the one in sepia tone has a longer nose, although it doesn't. It's just the darker shadow made darker by the sepia tone, which makes it hard to pick out details.

If you look at the shadows on the sides, you can see they get darker in the sepia version, which would make the two people near the nose on the right appear to be closer in, or the plane appear to be larger or at a different angle. Just the poor quality of sepia tone, in my opinion.

Edit: The angle of both images are slightly skewed, which would distort our perception of it.

[edit on 6/11/05 by Xar Ke Zeth]

anorwegianguy1972 - heh, you actually took the time to superimpose the two images. , why? Its obvious why their different. because someone took a picture of a picture tacked up on a wall...and if they wern't exactly in front of the image when they snapped the photo, then the super imposed aliengment wouldn't add up.

Originally posted by anorwegianguy1972
When I superimpose the artwork onto the poster picture I noticed that I could not get them to match perfectly. It is almost as if the angle of the two images are slightly off. Anyone care to try and make a better superimotion and prove me wrong?

The angle at which the photo was taken is causing a "keystone" effect. Had the sepia tone image been shot straight on then the 2 images would match better.
However, I suppose anyone could pick apart the two pictures and come up with a multitude of reasons to believe whatever they want to believe.

I am not saying triangular craft aren't flying our skies - heck I've seen similar things myself, but this picture is nothing but an image created for Discovery Magazine which found its way to several other magazines in Europe and the US.

Jezza, might want to post the link for the website where you got your information(That looks as if it was simply copied and pasted off of the X-planes website, as I have visited and viewed so frequently).

As for the TR-3B, now, I do believe in the existence of the TR-3B for different reasons, but I do not believe that the TR-3B and the Belgium sighting are the same, which for me, they are different. And I do not believe that the TR-3B is stolen Nazis tech, nor anti-grav, it is reversed Alien engineered tech. If the existence of the TR-3B were to ever be aknowledged by the Governments of the world, that would only prove that the we have come in contact with E.T. technology.

The Bird of Prey and Bae HALO to me, are very different aircraft that don't even resemble one another.

As for the triangles that are real, I think they've all been covered, even the ones that aren't real.

I think someone forgot to mention the X-44 MANTA, TR-3A Black Manta, and all that other fun stuff.

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
It was physically seen and photographed over Belgium.



Its technology is copied from Nazi developments in the field of anti-gravity

This actual picture is not a man made thing, Everybody who saw it claimed it to be a UFO...

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

BTW : Belgium scrambled a few F-16's after this sighting and was visible on its radar too. But the F-16's could'nt get a lock on to this because of its unearthly accelration.

Belgium's chief of air staff has publically spoken about the incident and so have the F-16 pilots and the ground raar operator.

About 50 photographs of this exist. Infact Discovery Channel had made a 1hour documentry on the very incident that even showed REAL videos of it taken by one of Belgium's cops.

Yes this case was very well documented. Now let me start by saying im not convinced this was 'aliens' flying this, but they documented the aircraft going up to speeds of Mach40!. Wouldn't that just completely vaporize a human?

Originally posted by noslenwerd

Yes this case was very well documented. Now let me start by saying im not convinced this was 'aliens' flying this, but they documented the aircraft going up to speeds of Mach40!. Wouldn't that just completely vaporize a human?

It would if the human was strapped to the outside of the aircraft!

But if he/she were inside, and the a/c built for such speeds, then it shouldn't be a problem. Sure what speeds do space capsules come in at on re-entry, its above Mach 20 for sure.

Originally posted by noslenwerd

Yes this case was very well documented. Now let me start by saying im not convinced this was 'aliens' flying this, but they documented the aircraft going up to speeds of Mach40!. Wouldn't that just completely vaporize a human?

IF the vehicle manipulated gravity in order to achieve it's flight characteristics then it would be safe to say that gravity could also be manipulated within the vehicle, thus preventing turning any human passenger into goo....

Originally posted by intelgurl

Originally posted by noslenwerd

Yes this case was very well documented. Now let me start by saying im not convinced this was 'aliens' flying this, but they documented the aircraft going up to speeds of Mach40!. Wouldn't that just completely vaporize a human?

IF the vehicle manipulated gravity in order to achieve it's flight characteristics then it would be safe to say that gravity could also be manipulated within the vehicle, thus preventing turning any human passenger into goo....

exactly. i think people run into a lot of problems trying to get their heads around the possibility of this technology because they're thinking in terms of existing, PUBLICLY KNOWN technology...lets start thinking about what existing technology is out there being used that we are not aware of.

Originally posted by intelgurl
IF the vehicle manipulated gravity in order to achieve it's flight characteristics then it would be safe to say that gravity could also be manipulated within the vehicle, thus preventing turning any human passenger into goo....

This is true. I just find it hard to believe that anyone could have technology right now that can take an aircraft from normal speeds to mach40, all without making a sound.

I also need to try and find the telescope pictures that were taken of a UFO, they look almost identical to one of these illustrations

[edit on 7-11-2005 by noslenwerd]