Mystery aircraft photographed over Texas

[seruriermarshal]

well they have a lot of F-117s before declassify .

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

I know what it is! S.H.I.E.L.D., with the help of FRINGE Division and Northrop Grumman, thawed out the failed Hydra flying wing stopped by CAPT America over the Arctic in 1944!

 

[seruriermarshal]

More photos from Mr. Steve Douglass .

 

[quellish]

But if there were a classified NGB-demonstrator, would there then be 3 of them flying? And if some NGBs were ever brought in (pre-)production in the black world, then why not continue with those but start a new LRS-B program?

Even if you did have 3 demonstrators of something like this - which is very unlikely - you probably would not have them all flying at the same time. Most recent classified demonstrator programs have at most 2 airframes, with only 1 flying at any given time - and even then, confined to a test range.

 

[Mr London 24/7]

Sighting on the 10th, but Avweek first dangled a hook on the 12th....:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,11250.msg215164.html#msg215164

Maybe I *almost* want to believe it, BUT your Government friend phones you first? (and knows you were at the Airport - in an NSA sorta style - and knows a 3 ship flight including an <X> is minutes away)

And I have to say - sourcing that hokey old tale from DLR about the interception of a USAF Generals phone call from a 'Special Air Mission' Flight (but broadcast in the clear?) as a ref for Douglass...

Looks like a B-2. Still - enough traffic to crash the site for a third time:

1: SR-72
2: RQ-180
3: Mystery over Texas

(Still love you tho' Bill! - nothing personal!)

 

[sferrin]

It'd be interesting to see where all the traffic is coming from.

 

[Steve Pace]

Or to where it's going to. -SP

 

[quellish]

It'd be interesting to see where all the traffic is coming from.

If ATC "cleared a hole" for these aircraft, you would think it would be possible to figure out their source and destination if their route took them anywhere near commercial air traffic.

 

[John21]

I don't think they're B-2s judging from the images I've seen so far. Have 3 or more B-2s ever even flown in formation? Considering there's only 20 of them, who would want to risk a mid-air collision?

There have also been other, more concrete photographs of classified aircraft taken before they were declassified. The F-117 was photographed on a number of occasions before it was declassified. TACIT BLUE was captured on film at least once. Several still classified or sensitive aircraft can be found hidden in photographs of other aircraft.

where can these photos be found?

 

[Stargazer]

It'd be interesting to see where all the traffic is coming from.

Or to where it's going to. -SP

If ATC "cleared a hole" for these aircraft, you would think it would be possible to figure out their source and destination if their route took them anywhere near commercial air traffic.

I think there is a confusion as to what was meant by "traffic" here. The reference was about internet traffic, which made access impossible to the AvWeek website and might cause their site to crash. See initial quote below:

enough traffic to crash the site for a third time

 

[flateric]

three Beasts in formation? that's regular event
http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/avsfan/3152170580/

 

[Mr London 24/7]

Some of the 509th is doubtless on deployment across the world, so there may be a couple of reasons to call a few more local (Edwards/NTTR?) back east that week:

http://www.whiteman.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123403695

http://www.whiteman.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123403253

No good the head sheds touring an empty ramp...

 

[LowObservable]

One of them (not the one in the photo) might have been a B-2, but not all three. 509th said it wasn't one of theirs.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_03_31_2014_p30-675221.xml

Mr London - You might try reading the SAM 204 account before calling it "hokey". It was confirmed first-hand and on-the-record, by this guy:

http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/Biographies/Display/tabid/225/Article/106763/lieutenant-general-walter-s-hogle-jr.aspx

Hogle's only quibble was that rather than "talk to McMahan [http://mstaem.org/mcmahan/] and say it was an F-117", the words used were "talk to McMahan and see if it was an F-117".

Whatevs. Hogle and Rice both knew that there were no F-117s near the UK in 1989.

 

[sublight_]

If ATC "cleared a hole" for these aircraft, you would think it would be possible to figure out their source and destination if their route took them anywhere near commercial air traffic.

An air traffic controller in Albuquerque center said neither he nor anyone else in the center pushed traffic on the date and time in question.

 

[FighterJock]

If ATC "cleared a hole" for these aircraft, you would think it would be possible to figure out their source and destination if their route took them anywhere near commercial air traffic.

An air traffic controller in Albuquerque center said neither he nor anyone else in the center pushed traffic on the date and time in question.

So what were those things on the photos? UFOs?

 

[quellish]

three Beasts in formation? that's regular event
http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/avsfan/3152170580/

Flickr photo does not seem to be public. When RQ-170s are doing pattern work at Creech they have been flown in formation

 

[flateric]

Flickr photo does not seem to be public.

https://flic.kr/p/5NxGuC

 

[flateric]

B-2 contrails

 

[Dreamfighter]

One of them (not the one in the photo) might have been a B-2, but not all three. 509th said it wasn't one of theirs.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_03_31_2014_p30-675221.xml

I'm pretty sure the aircraft in that color-photo accompanying your article there is a... B-2.
The trailing edge looking rather straight could well be optical illusion.

 

[famvburg]

Well, they ARE Unidentified Flying Objects after all!

 

[GTX]

Well, they ARE Unidentified Flying Objects after all!

;D

 

[sublight_]

If ATC "cleared a hole" for these aircraft, you would think it would be possible to figure out their source and destination if their route took them anywhere near commercial air traffic.

An air traffic controller in Albuquerque center said neither he nor anyone else in the center pushed traffic on the date and time in question.

So what were those things on the photos? UFOs?

If Steve would make at least 5 minutes of the Air Traffic controller recordings available, they could give it a listen and get a better idea of what was going on at the time of the mystery sighting. One of them is very adamant that none of the traffic was pushed out of the way or held back as Steve theorizes.

 

[Orionblamblam]

With the obvious (and important) exception of the aft centerbody, the Mystery Aircraft looks not unlike this Northrop design from two years ago:
http://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/blog/?p=336

 

[sublight_]

With the obvious (and important) exception of the aft centerbody, the Mystery Aircraft looks not unlike this Northrop design from two years ago:
http://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/blog/?p=336

I replied to this yesterday and it disappeared? Any idea what happened?

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2308.0.html

Look at the picture in OBB original post the black white photo of the mystery aircraft has a similar outline to some of the BWB designs??

 

[flateric]

[quote author=sublight is back]
I replied to this yesterday and it disappeared? Any idea what happened?
[/quote]

answer was irrelevant to subject. we have separate NASA ERA research topic to discuss NG design pro&contra there

 

[J.A.W.]

So what if - it was indeed - a bit of not quite so subtle 'sabre-rattling' by the USAAF in doing a formation fly-by
'reveal' of their latest gen bombers?

 

[Stargazer]

And what if... it was not a combat type? ???

 

[J.A.W.]

Non combat stealth-type aircraft (?) - flying in formation - as a tease/ruse?

 

[Stargazer]

Reconnaissance platform? Stealth transport?

 

[Dreamfighter]

So what if - it was indeed - a bit of not quite so subtle 'sabre-rattling' by the USAAF in doing a formation fly-by'reveal' of their latest gen bombers?

Concerning a "show of force to Russia" with a "fly-by" of classified bombers, ISR aricraft, BWB-airlifters or whatever;
Unless the satellites were looking in the right direction at the right time, the US Air Force had a lot of luck Mr. Douglass & Co. were at the right place at the right time to take some obscure photographs.Ouch, I forgot the Air Force had planned to warn Mr. Douglass seconds in advance through his government-contact. The AF must be dissapointed now with the results, unless there are better photos laying around on someone's desk.

 

[Magoodotcom]

While interesting, the pics are not of a high enough quality and thus cannot lead one to conclude it is a new unrevealed type.

I'm 50:50 as to whether the colour pic is a B-2 or not regardless of what the Whiteman PAO says, but the B&W pic is much clearer and appears to be something else.

I wonder if there are other pics the 'spotters' aren't releasing yet...?

 

[Black Dog]

Just a couple of thoughts...

1. Could this be anything to do with what is hinted at in the end of this Northrop Grumman ad? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCM4y6gOQdM

2. Maybe the colour photograph is a B-2 even if a stretch to make out. The black and white photo clearly seems to be something different so maybe it was a B-2 flying with the (2?) competitors for the LRS-B program for whatever reason. I believe the competition starts later this year so maybe they are already being flight tested.

 

[Sundog]

I wonder if this might be the aircraft China was trying to get info on when they accidentally came across the F-35 documents? For those who don't know, when China was able to hack in and get documents on the F-35, they were reportedly trying to get info on another "classified" aircraft program, but nobody has said what the program was that they were trying to get the info on.

 

[Mat Parry]

For the sake of argument... If we take these pictures at face value

Assumptions

• The aircraft / aircrafts are secret partly due to their low observable design
• There was more than 1 of this unknown type flying in the formation

resulting speculation

Design
The organic looking curved trailing edge does not fit with current known low observable design principles, from this we could infer either:

• this is a new design language that has replaced planform edge alignment, hence it's (previously) sight sensitive nature?
• This organic looking (dare I say manta ray-like) trailing edge may represent an older outdated approach to stealth shaping

Numbers
more than 1 aircraft would obviously imply this is not a one off prototype

• if we combine speculation on "old fashioned" stealth design and up to 3 aircraft of the same type being captured on camera, it could be argued that this fits with the hypothesis of an older strike / designator type.

For what It's worth, my feeling is that the curved trailing edge is an atmospheric/photographic aberration, I am open minded on the debate of B-2 vs. a new type

 

[Orionblamblam]

Is there any reason to believe that the Mystery Aircraft can't be an X-45C "Phantom Ray?"

 

[Dreamfighter]

Is there any reason to believe that the Mystery Aircraft can't be an X-45C "Phantom Ray?"

The contrails, suggesting a twin-engined (or more) type of aircraft?

 

[Orionblamblam]

OK, let me rephrase:
Any reason to believe that this can't be an enlarged version of the Phantom Ray?

 

[flateric]

AFAIR Phantom Ray /X-45C was considered even by its creators as rather unsuccessful design metrics choice by Phantom Works as with given planform, driven by LE angle it has less internal volume and much worse Take-Off/Landing characteristics than readily scalable cranked kite design by NG. Scaling it up for multi-engined craft would make things even worse.

 

[quellish]

The organic looking curved trailing edge does not fit with current known low observable design principles

How so? A curved trailing edge has a lot of advantages for reducing RCS. This is well known.
The curved edges you see in one photo, however, are more likely not actually there.