Pentagon Grounds Secret Spaceplane?

[Lazer-Hound]

From 'Aviation Leak and Space Mythology':

http://aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/030606p1.xml

[West Coast]

Just read the article in the magazine along with the accompanying articles. Damn I'd like a few free hours at Groom to snoop around. Arriving SFO from the SE, often times you can see the airport. The routing takes you just outside of the restricted areas. The frequencies for the place are listed, gonna have to listen in next time I'm in the area. If ever I had to have an immediate no **** land now emergency, I'd want to have it there. Sure they would love a planeful of tourists dropping in on them.

Any of you limeys ever go there in your advanced
X whatever?

[ORAC]

That´ll be the same period all the sightings of the "soap on a rope" contrails were being reported by flights off the west coast wayyyy above them.

[GengisKhant]

Witnessed the exact copy of the soap on a rope contrails over Barcelona in Oct lsat year. Recognised them as almost identical to the photos that were published in the US. Unfortunately did not see what was pushing out the contrail, as was sandwiched between some tall buildings at the time.... damn....:}

Still, as I had not seen any additional reports/comments since the earlier US output, put it down to atmospherics/cold air phenomenon....

[West Coast]

C'mon ORAC

You're so smart, I'm surprised you haven't reverse engineered the plane from the diagram and text of the article.

[ORAC]

I´d tell ya, but then I´d have to shoot ya.... :cool:

[Smoketoomuch]

Looks/sounds a bit similar to the UK HOTOL project. The UK government withdrew funding in the 80s and promptly slapped a big Official Secrets Act sticker on its revolutionary engine amidst rumors that the project/technology had been handed to the Americans.

Plus ca change? :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOTOL

[Onan the Clumsy]

so would that be 'a hotol' or 'an hotol' then?






.....sorry, I thought I was still on JetBlast :(

[Tim McLelland]

The Hotol project was something entirely different and (according to what I read) is still being developed as a potential future programme (without British backing of course!). The "soap on a rope" business was subsequently dismissed by most commentators as a simple contrail pictures in unsual atmospheric conditions, and having seen very similar contrails myself, they do seem to appear quite readily, which suggests that they're not as unusual as some people suggest.

West Coast; as far as I know, the only British aircraft to have visited Groom Lake was a RAF Phantom which diverted there with a problem, and received suitable nose artwork after the visit.

Hope the Aviation Week story contains some truth as it would be nice to know that the XB-70 "survived" in some form. However, I have to question whether a programme that significant could be around for so long without anyone getting so much as one photograph. Look at how the F-117 was caught near Groom Lake before it was revealed. This is an even bigger aircraft, but mysteriously nobody has ever seen it? I also note that Aviation Week quote various bases where an oribiter has supposedly landed - once again, you have to ask why (whe th even the most insignificant aircraft movement is photographed by an aircraft spotter) nobody has got so much as one picture.

Nice if it's true but you have to be a little er... doubtful!

[DaveW]

The F-117 photos that were published in AvLeak soon after (although possibly taken before?) the Nov '88 Pentagon still was released were taken on approach to Tonopah, not near Groom Lake. Tonopah was where the F-117 unit was operating from, of course.

Love to know what the "suitable art work" was on the RAF Phantom :ok:

As I commented to someone today, if (big if) the XB-70 connection is accurate, then perhaps the Tacit Blue (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/modern_flight/mf37a.htm) and Bird of Prey (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/ac/pg000331.htm) ex-black projects being displayed next to the the Valkyrie at the USAF Museum is a subtle joke on the visiting public... :8 (Or just maybe, like many people in discussions of this sort, I'm reading FAR too much into things :rolleyes: )

[Tim McLelland]

The F-117 photos I was thinking of were shot a good while before the first Pentagon photo was released - I thought they were taken near Groom Lake though, not Tonopah? This was long before the Groom Lake borders were extended of course.
Can't remember what the Phantom art work was now but it wasn't anything very exciting. I seem to recall that the wording was "Don't Ask" :)

[West Coast]

Tim
I wondered the same. The only answer I could come up with is volume. The 117 was built in numbers and thus had a greater chance of being seen. If the article is to be believed, two of the XB70 look alike were built, one of which may have crashed. In addition, the mission profile of the 117 would lend itself to detection prior to one that spends its time on the edge of and in space. Who knows. The sighting that makes me wonder is the day time sighting in Pennsylvania, down low. I can't believe they would put themselves in a position such as that to be seen. An emergency of course might explain it, but otherwise it doesn't make much sense.
What type of greeting did the Brit F4 crew receive? Wonder how many threats of horrible things they received if they talked about the episode?

[maccer82]

The story i heard was the crew were immediately met by a large security force and thouroughly debriefed about what they saw then sent straight back to blighty, as was the offending a/c, in bits. Not sure if its totally true, as the story was of a Bucc not a Phantom. But anyway, never let the truth get in the way of a good story. And if the story was from a phantom jock, you KNOW it would have been thouroughly exaggerated!:ok:

[ORAC]

I also note that Aviation Week quote various bases where an oribiter has supposedly landed - once again, you have to ask why

It will be a glider on re-entry, same as the shuttle and original dyna-soar. Different landing fields will because of weather and different re-entry paths from different orbits - oblique, polar etc.

[Tim McLelland]

The aircraft in question was a Phantom I believe, as I did see a photo of the artwork (and I'm pretty sure it was on a Barley Grey nose) but I honestly can't remember what it looked like - it wasn't anything very exciting.
I don't know what reception they would have received but judging from my experience with the USAF security people, it was probably one of "Dr Strangelove-esque" hysteria. I've had guns waved at me by USAF guards before and they really are quite comical, as they never quite get the grasp of how ludicrous they look waving a gun at you, knowing full well that they've no opportunity to use it. The Phantom crew probably received the same reception and doubtless rolled their eyes skywards and just sighed, in typical British style.
Orac, I think you missed my point - I was pondering on how the orbiter could have supposedly landed at so many bases and yet (inexplicably) have never been photographed by anyone. Frankly I just don't see how that would happen, as virtually every aircraft movement is seen and photographed, and I fail to see how something so significant could go by unnoticed. Okay, it might be possible to fly in and out of Groom Lake without oo much attention (although I still think it strange that approaches or departures aren't photographed at long range), but the other bases? Nah, someone would have got a photo by now. Likewise, what about these fat-cheeked C-5's - how come we haven't seen so much as one photo?

One suspects that if there's any truth in the whole story, then it must have been a rather less ambitious programme which has remained firmly within the confines of Groom Lake, or within the confines of whatever turly-secret base the US Government really uses for such programmes, whilst using Groom Lake as their public facade of supposed secrecy...

[ORAC]

Comment on the story and the C-5s here (http://rjlippincott.livejournal.com/), Some of this meshes with my own personal experience around the time all of this was going on. Some of it is pretty clearly disinformation. But it is interesting none the less. I will say that if these airplanes are the ones I'm thinking they are, I busted some knuckles and skinned some knees climbing around them while the mods were going on. The airplanes I'm thinking of were two rebuilt C-5As that were designated C-5C after the work was complete. Here´s a view
http://pics.livejournal.com/rjlippincott/pic/00047aq8/s320x240
C-5C (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-5C.htm) "Spacecraft, such as the space station node, are transported in a special canister, call the Space Container Transportation System (SCTS), which was built to fit into a military airplane, specifically a specially modified C-5C. The C-5C is the only aircraft that this canister will fit into, and it takes almost the entire cargo space. If a mechanical problem arises with the plane making it unusable, there is only one additional specially modified C-5C to use. The C-5C carrying the SCTS frequently arrives late at night, with offload immediately after arrival." 68-0216 (http://www.myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=00343746)

[West Coast]

"just sighed, in typical British style"

How very pompous of you.

[BEagle]

:rolleyes:







.

[DaveW]

The F-117 photos I was thinking of were shot a good while before the first Pentagon photo was released
Ah, we must be talking about different photos, then. I was under the strong impression that no images had published prior to the Pentagon release, which is why it was such a shock and why even then people weren't clear about the actual shape of the thing - that first photo (http://www.f-117a.com/images/Timeline/F117_6.GIF) suggested it to be far stubbier than it actually is. Incidentally, interesting and fairly comprehensive F117 timeline here (http://www.f-117a.com/Timeline1.html).

Back to Blackstar, though - or rather the C-5C element of the tale. I have my doubts about that part of the story, at least.
This C-5C article (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-5c.htm) describes a far less drastic conversion than the AW&ST article:
AvLeak
Three of the oversized aircraft were modified with 8-ft.-wide "chipmunk cheek" extensions on each side of the cargo compartment aft of the nose hinge point; an extra six-wheel set of landing gear that partially retracts up against the aft fuselage, forward of the ramp; a shortened upper deck, and two internal harness/cradle supports.
GlobalSecurity.org
With the troop compartment removed and modification to their rear loading doors, it has a larger cargo area than other C-5s. .
This is a picture of one of the C-5Cs (http://photos.airliners.net/photos/middle/6/8/7/0702786.jpg) (68-0213). No sign of partially retracting six-wheel u/c set there - pic is from 1994, mind.
This is identified as the other C-5C (http://photos.airliners.net/photos/middle/4/0/4/0593404.jpg) (68-0216) in 2004, whereas this is a C-5B (http://photos.airliners.net/photos/middle/2/7/7/0733772.jpg). No apparent 8ft wide "chipmunk cheeks" when comparing the two images. If they were there, they'd be obvious, would they not?

[Tim McLelland]

Interesting ain't it DaveW - you get the impression that Aviation Week is referring to very distinct alterations to the C-5 which surely someone would have seen and photographed, and yet there doesn't seem to be so much as a snapshot. On the other hand, you'd think that a publication such as Aviation Week would be pretty sure of its facts before going to press, but I really can't see how a heavily-modified aircraft the size of a C-5 wouldn't have been caught on camera by now...

Westcoast, the British do "pompous" very well, especially when they're given so many opportunities to practice the skill ;)

[DaveW]

Space Daily gives the story critical consideration (http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Blackstar_A_False_Messiah_From_Groom_Lake.html). They're not impressed.

[AA717driver]

On the whole Groom Lake issue, a few years ago a TWA MD80 en route to SFO experienced an engine failure near that facility. They declared an emergency, told the controller they were landing on that big runway down there that ATC would never acknowlege and proceeded to land.

They were met by security and some AF officer, taken in busses to an empty hangar (the contents were probably whisked away to the underground lair by huge hydraullic elevators that... Oops, guess I've been watching too much Austin Powers lately. ;) ) and briefed that no pictures were to be taken and they would be bussed to Reno shortly.

The plane was repaired by TWA mechanics (ex-military I would imagine) and flown out later.

I believe this was a while after Area 51/Groom Lake had become pretty public knowlege. I'm guessing the new "secret" base is north of Nellis and Indian Springs. It showed up on our Jeppesen database as KNXT I believe and had the name "Homey". No navaids on the field and a 12,000' runway. It is well within the restricted complex north of Nellis.

I don't know if it's been removed from the database but I'm sure it will. Or maybe I'm mistaken... :D TC

[aviate1138]

I was filming cloudplates for a Lucas Film epic using a LearJet with cameras fitted with periscope lenses that were fitted on the centreline, above and below in the cabin through the pressurised fuselage. Each one could rotate through 360º. Using 35 mm film we were floating about the California/New Mexico area, waiting for big CB's. As their development was slow and weak I decided to return to base and wait 24 hours - Van Nuys it was - anyway, as we taxied in a special mission came up suddenly. Out of the blue but very precise instructions were given. As I was a Brit, I had to remain on the ground while my crew, all American, high tailed it to Tonopah. They came back 4 hours later grinning from ear to ear but wouldn't say what they had been doing. This was 12th June 1979. They had been filming a big number on the F -117A but I seem to recall it had a different ID in those days. We were in a Lear 24 N264CL. Clay Lacy was the pilot, one of my heros. Finally saw one at Bentwaters - I was staying in Aldeburgh when one flew across the face of the moon. This was about 3 years after the Tonopah episode, flying in formation with two noisy LearJets I think - all with lights ablaze and only the moon transit showed the planform - dramatic at the time! Then I knew why my crew grinned from ear to ear, returning from Tonopah!

Aviate1138

[galaxy flyer]

FWIW.....

Yes, there were two C-5A's modified to "C" standard--basically new aft door complex and not Troop compartment. Made for much greater cargo height loading capability coming up the aft ramp for the space program. Based at Travis, after a couple of years with the Reserves at Kelly AFB, TX. While two C-130s were supposedly built during Vietnam for the CIA, I sincerely doubt three "black" C-5s could be built. Not impossible, but really, really doubtful. C-5s were and are a very small program with many vendors and no "loose" components laying about ready to be assembled. Hard to hide. Remember the last C-5A was delivered in 1973, long before the requirement was known.Those tail nrs. are just after the last C-5A numbers, FY70 contract date.

Why would the government build three special C-5s for a requirement that was not known yet? In any case, the dimensions given could have been loaded in any C-5, certainly "C"s without any cheeks. Close, but within limits.

The whole story is interesting, but hard to believe something that big could be kept this secret this long........ good for conspiracy fanatics when they have given up on JFK murder theories, who killed MLK Jr. and denying moon landings.

GF

[DaveW]

If anyone is still following this, The Space Review (http://www.thespacereview.com/article/576/1) has three pages of thoughtful consideration.

Not supportive.

[SASless]

Discovery Channel or one of the other channels of that ilk had a Sat photo taken from a weathre satellite that showed a contrail that departed Nellis Area and tracked across the USA, across the Atlantic, across the UK and Europe and over parts of the old Soviet Bloc.

The narration suggested the track was moving at approximately 8000 mph as it went East.

First I ever heard of that kind of evidence. Dunno if I believe the photo either.

[LowObservable]

Discovery Channel or one of the other channels of that ilk had a Sat photo taken from a weathre satellite that showed a contrail that departed Nellis Area and tracked across the USA, across the Atlantic, across the UK and Europe and over parts of the old Soviet Bloc.

Now you've done it. Look out for a couple of guys in black.

[brickhistory]

The Sopranos?

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Could this really be the outcome of XB-70 AV3 20208. Which was
a lot changed from AV1 & AV2? Didn't large pieces of this unfinished
airframe go "missing" from Palmdale, I read somewhere that many of the YJ-93 engines were unaccounted for as many as half the 30+ completed.
Are these alleged craft launched from beneath the mother ship because
of lessons learnt from the D-21 problems?
I have serious difficulty with the C-5 aspects of the article,
unless the cheek pods were removeable like the old speed-pak on a
constellation. As for a CIA C-5 coded CL I'm sure someone somewhere
would have noticed it, however wasn't CL a lockheed design prefix of
years ago?
Given the airlift commitments facing USAF at the moment and over
recent years I'm sure you would have to have a gold plated high value
reason take over a major asset like a C-5. I know about the C-5Cs the
actual USAF C-5C (Space Cargo Modified) aircraft are 80213 and 80216,
but they have never been true airlift assets have they? Have they ever
been noted on regular air force duties? Do they ever leave ConUS
except to collect damaged TR-3/RF-23 airframes from Boscombe Down?
Be lucky
David Truman