Re: Just have to ask this.

Message posted by JoeinTX on May 29, 2008 at 21:49:24 PST:

"The evidence that they exist is overwhelming when you lump it all together.
Yet...people seem to be content with stories about UFOs and other myths...instead of looking skyward for the skinny on what I believe is really going on.
That is...exciting and wild new designs, albeit one of a kind etc., made of new materials etc...with even more impressive performance envelopes.
With all of today's replacement for the SR-71?
You gotta be kidding me.
Of course there is...
Trust me folks...I'm not a conspiercy theorist, just an airplane fanatic that wants to see the new toys...."

Hey, no, I'm right there with you in many ways.

There is sizeable indirect evidence that "something" or "some things" are in various stages of development, testing, and operation. First, we know they do these kinds of things from past history. Second, we see changes and expansion of the Groom facility which point to more and more going on. Expanded/redone runways and taxi ways.....large new hangers.....extra munitions fuel tanks....etc. An analytical look at the base would indicate that all signs point to "yes."

UFOs? Lazaar? S-4? Ugh.

There is zero, nada, zip, zilch, no material evidence of this type of thing at Groom. And, I too hate it when lazy types fall on these decades old anecdotes from questionables and questionable images are brought up.

Not that it means a darn thing, but I've wavered on the idea of an SR-71 replacement over the years. When conceived and first flown, the -71 was the strategic reconnaisance "satellite" of its day. It was designed to be fast as much to evade Soviet defenses as it was to provide timely information. With the number of military satellites in orbit today, combined with the tactical recon assets available (anything from podded F-16s to Global Hawks,) where does the dedicated hypersonic, high altitude platform fit in? I for one am not sure. Patterned satellites hitting you in increasing number and likliehood and pinning down your ops combined with the possibility of a tactical airplane or UAV watching you in between is pretty good coverage of your operations. Why launch an expensive and sensitive SR-72 to grab a peek between satellite passes when you can have a Predator or podded Super Hornet or Global Hawk preplanned to cover the gap? The only realm left for the Mach 5 super snooper to cover is something like the depths of Russia or interior China that can't be seen by satellite or side-looking sensors from outside a large country's airspace.

I too am a serious aircraft enthusiast. I am also a severe realist and pragmatist when it comes to this. There are logistical, operational, and practical limits to the things so many want/report/wish to exist.

In Reply to: Re: Just have to ask this. posted by Roadeye on May 29, 2008 at 13:28:53 PST:


[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]