|
Originally Posted by SATCOS WHIPPING BOY
(Post 10300591)
I was there, it didn't happen.
There was over a period of many months lots of little routine incidents of no concern but add these together and saying they happened all on one day led to quite a story. I personally asked the local police to close the main road from Amesbury to Salisbury so that an aircraft with a snag could make a safe approach without risk to the public. I remember reading the guff in the Telegraph and sticking it into the LH page of the ATC log for posterity. If the log has not been binned it will still be in there. One minor incident that didn't help matters was where a member of the public crashed his car just off base out of hours and the Fire Section crew went to assist. The vehicle was a a black Opel Manta. The Opel bit was taken out by the conspiracy theorists and lo-and-behold we have a Black Manta crash at Boscombe. Got to go, a black sedan has just pulled up outside and men in dark suits are coming my way. Cheery-bye. However was there a C-5B turned up on site and is it true it was of two specifically assigned to Plant 42 at Palmdale not regular Travis or Dover ? Now apparently according to the story it was diverted to BD as it was en route to Ramstein.. cheers |
I, too, was working there at the time. The C-5 visit was a standard variant (IIRC), and was pre-planned. It had brought back 2x Sea King HAS Mk6 from sonar and sonics trials at AUTEC. I'm fairly sure that even then this was publicly available info.
The 'black aircraft crash' story is nonsense on stilts. |
Waddo tailess Vulcan?
Originally Posted by Ewan Whosearmy
(Post 10299184)
Two things stick in my mind on this topic:
1. When the MoD declassified its 'UFO Guide' some years ago, it included a number of aircraft types that might explain the actual identity of a reported UFO. In the US section, it included obvious candidates such as the F-117 and B-2. But one aircraft type had been redacted in its entirety. 2. I'll need to dig out his name, but I read the autobiography of an RAF fast jet pilot a few years back, in which he stated he had seen something flying into RAF Mildenhall very late one Sunday night. It was triangular in shape (but not the B-2). I don't recall the details, but I think he was at that time on a ground tour, and had some kind of liaison responsibility between the RAF and USAF. He phoned Mildenhall the next day to enquire what the aircraft type was. They responded that there had been no aircraft movements that Sunday. He fairly rapidly then gets a call from someone in MoD telling him that he didn't see anything and to stop asking questions. Unless someone with the likes of Beags would like to comment if there have been any Vulcan accidents involving loss of tail? Cheers |
Originally Posted by BossEyed
(Post 10301243)
I, too, was working there at the time. The C-5 visit was a standard variant (IIRC), and was pre-planned. It had brought back 2x Sea King HAS Mk6 from sonar and sonics trials at AUTEC. I'm fairly sure that even then this was publicly available info.
The 'black aircraft crash' story is nonsense on stilts. cheers |
The P & J have hardly got a credible reputation for accurate or responsible aviation reporting. Indeed quite the opposite, there are few worse.
But Aberdeen local misnformation aside does an SR71 replacement exist? In the era of satellites? When orbital assets can do far better? Get real! Why? |
Because, at the time, a satellite launch cost a phenomenal amount, took about a year to plan and launch, and gave you (at best) one pass a day which stood a good chance of being obscured by weather, and didn’t have brilliant resolution compared to an aircraft.. And why the sky sky is now crowded with 24/48 hour endurance recce drones such as the RQ-4 Global Hawk and RQ-170 sentinel rather than depending on LEO satellites. |
You can precalculate where satellites will be. There is a whole science about how to evade satellite monitoring. This is why you need less predictable "winged assets" as well.
And if some major war should happen it boils down to classic reconnaissance with good old picture taking and bringing them back to your command. |
Originally Posted by Less Hair
(Post 10302978)
You can precalculate where satellites will be. There is a whole science about how to evade satellite monitoring. This is why you need less predictable "winged assets" as well.
And if some major war should happen it boils down to classic reconnaissance with good old picture taking and bringing them back to your command. Of course, none of these involve strapping in a pilot and doing Mach 3+, but unless the operational requirements include being "sexy" it's hard to see a justification for spending huge amounts of money solving that problem again. No harm in keeping the rumour mill going though; like UFOs in the '50s and '60s its a good distraction from the less glamorous stuff that's really happening... |
So why is the manned U-2 still flying? It must have some use apart from the drones?
|
Originally Posted by Less Hair
(Post 10303353)
So why is the manned U-2 still flying? It must have some use apart from the drones?
The SR-71's USP was that it could go wherever it wanted, and no-one could shoot it down. That's actually a pretty antagonistic thing to do ("Hey, look, you can't catch me!"). Much more elegant to capture the information without getting caught; if you can avoid being spotted, there's no need to blat around the sky while you're doing it. |
The USAF has tried to retire the U-2 fleet and replace it with drones a couple of times. Each time a combination of senatorial support, the drone cost/loss rate and the payload versatility of the U-2 has led to the efforts being rebuffed. |
Very hard to believe details wouldn't have leaked out in the last 25 - 30 years TBH
|
Originally Posted by pasta
(Post 10303028)
Yep, which is why, as ORAC said, there's a bunch of pilotless aircraft available, to say nothing of the venerable U-2. I should imagine there are a few surveillance drones we don't know about, probably with an emphasis on low observability. Then there's the X-37B, which seems like an interesting platform; I'd be surprised if there isn't a capability to launch one at fairly short notice if things get "interesting".
Of course, none of these involve strapping in a pilot and doing Mach 3+, but unless the operational requirements include being "sexy" it's hard to see a justification for spending huge amounts of money solving that problem again. No harm in keeping the rumour mill going though; like UFOs in the '50s and '60s its a good distraction from the less glamorous stuff that's really happening... Serious question how long would the heat soak take to cool down sufficiently to avoid IR detection? thanks for your time and trouble. Be lucky David |
Very hard to believe details wouldn't have leaked out in the last 25 - 30 years TBH
ISINGLASS was a major program - granted it never flew, but advanced and expensive propulsion hardware was built and it was well into the billions in today's money - and >30 years after its termination it was still sensitive. The first time I ever heard the codename, with two read-in participants present, the one who hadn't used the word turned grey and said "You used that word. I didn't." |
For the curious.
The Super Hustler and the Kingfish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Isinglass High and fast - but eventually not judged high and fast enough! |
And then there was the Project Eclipse
Project Eclipse The F106 was considered rugged enough to be used in a sub orbital environment. There is video of the towing trials |
The history of US black projects shows they tend to remain pretty secret until revealed (Boeing's Bird of Prey, Tacit Blue, Have Blue)
|
One of U2's roles these days is mobile comms relay (Same reason they re-activated the WB57)
|
The history of US black projects shows they tend to remain pretty secret until revealed (Boeing's Bird of Prey, Tacit Blue, Have Blue) Vice President John Hoynes: "Toby, the total tonnage of what I know that you don't could stun a team of oxen in its tracks" Toby - White House Communications Director. |
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:17. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.