7 ms·
One of the pilots in this incident was on Rogan saying how they used to fly silently without lights above remote campsites, then once they saw a campfire blast
by awb 7y ago
One of the pilots in this incident was on Rogan saying how they used to fly silently without lights above remote campsites, then once they saw a campfire blast the lights and go straight up. They'd laugh as the UFO reports flowed in.
Similarly, the stealth fighter was in operation for 20 years before the public knew about it.
It's not unrealistic to consider top secret tech as a possible explanation.
One counter point is usually: If we had tech this amazing, we'd be putting it to use commercially. However this tech might be autonomous and might need to be considering the G forces supposedly at play.
- criddell 7y agoI don't think they would operate in areas where training is taking place without notifying the pilots in the area that they are also operating there. The risk of collision is too high (and there apparently was at least one very close call).
- dingaling 7y ago> Similarly, the stealth fighter was in operation for 20 years before the public knew about it First flew 1981, first official photo released 1988. And plenty of speculation in betwee..
- nickhalfasleep 7y agoI was camping with my father above Tuolumne Meadows near Yosemite in 1986. We just had sleeping bags, no tent. As we bed down for the night, four tiny black diamonds silently flew overhead to the west. Absolutely creepy to see things so abstract and quiet. Didn't make sense until the reveal in 1988, but it was four nighthawks heading from Nevada to the Pacific Ocean.
- CalChris 7y agoNo, the stealth fighter was not in operation for 20 years before the public knew about it. The F-117 was delivered in 1982 and operational in 1983. It was 'declassified' in 1988 and displayed in 1990. And it wasn't even a fighter. It was for ground attack. https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-117.htm https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-117.htm
- djsumdog 7y agoI thought maybe the poster was talking about the SR-71, but it too didn't stay classified for very long.
- gpderetta 7y agoA-12 did stay classified for a while.
- CalChris 7y agoThere were actually two A-12s. The Lockheed A12 was introduced in 1967 and retired in 1968. The McDonnell Douglass A12 was never built and finally cancelled in 1991. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_A-12 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_A-12 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_A-12_Avenger_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_A-12_Avenger... The SR71 succeeded the Lockheed A12. It was hard to keep secret. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_SR-71_Blackbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_SR-71_Blackbird https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/keeping-the-sr-71-blackbird-the-worlds-first-stealth-plane-17936 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/keeping-the-sr-71...
- baybal2 7y ago> There were actually two A-12s. The Lockheed A12 I bet this was made on purpose. USA has learned some tricks from Soviets with their "fake patterns" F-117 wasn't a fighter, and A-12 was not a CAS aircraft. Pretty much like Kirov was not really an "auxiliary craft," and Tu-22 M-1-2-3 were all nearly completely different aircraft
- toomanybeersies 7y agoThe F117 is also the USAF designation for an aircraft engine (Pratt & Whitney PW2000), used on the C-17. Someone suggested to me a few years ago that might be the reason why the F-117 was designated that way.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- golergka 7y ago> Similarly, the stealth fighter was in operation for 20 years before the public knew about it. Wouldn't it look just like an unusual plane to a naked eye observer?
- catalogia 7y agoProbably to most people, but some people have wild imaginations.
- akmarinov 7y agoWhy put it commercially if keeping it secret gives you a huge advantage over foreign powers? Case in point the satellite photo Trump leaked - leading civilian experts were dumbfounded that such a clear image from a satellite was even possible, let alone already deployed and in use. Commercial applications for that would be huge, yet it’s staying secret.
- dylan604 7y agoI've heard tales of the wink and a nod method of releasing capabilities without broadcasting that's what they were doing. Back in the early days of satellite with ground penetrating radar, there were detailed images released of river deltas. It was supposed to be a boon for geology, but it was also meant as a shot across the bow to the Russians that we could see their underground bunkers and what not. Sometimes the clandestine games were cool. I miss the spy novels/stories of the 80s.
- nradov 7y agoNo one was dumbfounded. Image clarity was consistent with expectations based on the known size of the KH-11 series. This is basic physics.
- akmarinov 7y ago“The resolution is amazingly high,” Ankit Panda from the Federation of American Scientists told NPR, adding it was “much higher than anything I’ve ever seen.” Tell it to Ankit Panda. Melissa Hanham, deputy director of the Open Nuclear Network at the One Earth Foundation, believes that the resolution is so high, it may be beyond the physical limits at which satellites can operate. And this lady.
- nradov 7y agoYou have misunderstood. Ankit Panda was simply stating that the image resolution was higher than anything that had been publicly released so far. It wasn't anything unexpected. Melissa Hanham is a policy specialist, not a physicist or optics engineer. She has no particular expertise in this area. If you don't believe me then do the math yourself. It's easy enough to figure out the maximum diameter of a KH-11 based on the size of the available launch vehicles. And from that you can calculate the maximum resolving power. They can play some tricks with adaptive optics and digital image processing but that doesn't add much.
- humaniania 7y agoYeah he admits how he is a prankster but then fully expects people to believe his explanation of a 60 second video clip without any other context than his interpretation?
- bufferoverflow 7y agoIt's one thing to confuse a civilian, it's not that hard. But your narrative doesn't explain actual fighter pilots observing objects flying orders of magnitude faster and making incredible maneuvers.
- chemmail 7y agoHonestly how many people have seen jet fighters do crazy movies at night. Not very many, they don't know what they are seeing. It is like a car accident. Happens every minute, how many people actually witness it? The aftermath maybe, but very few of the actual event.