Current mystery aircraft / urban legends

What sort of amazes me is that the SR 75 model kit came out before the Brilliant Buzzard sightings started to happen. It just so happens that theres an giant white plane with canards in the sky that looks like a model kit! Of course, that's if the sightings/shenanigans are believable in the first place.

It's almost as if the "SR-75"/"Blackstar" legend was created *before* the "sightings"!
 
It's almost as if the "SR-75"/"Blackstar" legend was created *before* the "sightings"!
I forgot to add, I am in no way saying those sightings are real. Just saying what's in my mind. Also 9 times out of 10 sightings of weird aircraft are fake or misidentified planes
 
Also 9 times out of 10 sightings of weird aircraft are fake or misidentified planes

Sightings (and even photos) are generally not a good source of information. Even when there are multiple, consistent sightings from independent observers that have no relation to each other.

And recently we've seen photos that are poor sources of information, with obvious misidentifications etc.
It's like looking at clouds:

"That's a bunny!"

"No, that's a dragon!"

"No, that's the SR-99 Dark Black, powered by twin GE F404 ramjets. The mysterious clouds are from the shrouded in secrecy cryogenic farts that fuel it!"
 
When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras....let alone unicorn.

If twinjets are any measure of anything--I think future airframes just become more boring over time.

Wild flying machines, and sleek jets give way to R/C drone looking things.

Spacecraft can look like anything.
 
I have in front of me a different bio, from a different person. While with the flight test squadron at Groom Lake between 1999 and 2001 he worked on more than 70 classified prototypes.

70+. In 2 years.
Could it be that the 70+ "prototypes" may have included numerous subscale flight models? As in the kind one would drop from a Piper Comanche ( from its underwing)? Keep in mind that subscale models are still used to test features/characteristics. It began in WW2 (AFAIK) with the Nazi Germans building balsawood/tissue subscale glide models of their later advanced jet fighters (see "Jet Planes of the Third Reich" by J. Richard Smith and Eddie J. Creek, Monogram Publications, 1982). I have several books here that talk about Lockheed and others building subscale models in high fidelity and flying them to check flight behavior/characteristics for low cost (and to check out different ideas that are not the ordinary)....
 
Could it be that the 70+ "prototypes" may have included numerous subscale flight models?
Most likely subscale aircraft. The gestation period for a manned aircraft, even the most rudimentary design, takes at least a few months to several years (HAVE BLUE (three months), Bird of Prey (3-1/2 years), M2-F1 (four months), etc.). Over 70 prototypes in 2 years would be incredible. Even if each program was a prototype built every two months for two years that's 48 aircraft.

It would be interesting to see the bio. I imagine that this bio reflects a senior program manager's history who over saw multiple UAS programs at once while at Groom Lake or that his cumulative experience of 70+ aircraft, which includes some work done at Groom Lake.
 
Last edited:
The twin quiet VS/TOL prototypes I saw in outstate Minnesota 1989 also have not come to light. I have read two other individuals had sightings of these crafts (one near the PIne Barrens in New Jersey around the same approximate time) and one other I'd have to
look in my notes to see specifics. This is the craft(s) that Jim Goodsall said were being tested in the "Midwest and Michigan" and
that I was very fortunate to see them. Well, he was right about that since that was 34 years ago and were likely prototypes and I've
never seen anything like them since.
Your timeline corroborates talk of some requirements that came down in the flight simulator world that were for an aircraft with helicopter-like requirements thrown in.
 
Last edited:
What sort of amazes me is that the SR 75 model kit came out before the Brilliant Buzzard sightings started to happen. It just so happens that theres an giant white plane with canards in the sky that looks like a model kit! Of course, that's if the sightings/shenanigans are believable in the first place.
That is incorrect. The B-70 like sighting came well before the model. During that time frame, John Andrews (master mind at Testors for the SR-75) contacted me on an experimental project I was leading. We became friends to some degree, and at one point he told me about the SR-75. After I finished laughing, John showed me the information sent him from sightings he was using to design the SR-75. model(s). Probably about 1 year later, the model was released. FYI, John has sense passed away.
 
The Nancy Certain and F-15 pilot sketches look very familiar. I saw several other sketches of the same subject. All were sort of similar. John Andrews firmly believed he had a major disclosure. I was not necessarily convinced,, but it was fun to hear the stories. If you care to discuss any of this off line, I would be happy to do so.
 
that's some kids doodle sketch of a Concorde ! ... 'this a delta wing' ! ... 'people' ! ... 'ridge' where the tail fins broken off !
Im calling this BS. (and that goes for 95% of the 13 page thread too !) ;)
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20231128_203258_Samsung Internet.jpg
    Screenshot_20231128_203258_Samsung Internet.jpg
    193.4 KB · Views: 61
Last edited:
that's some kids doodle sketch of a Concorde ! ... 'this a delta wing' ! ... 'people' ! ... 'ridge' where the tail fins broken off !
Im calling this BS. (and that goes for 95% of the 13 page thread too !) ;)
Joe, you pulled that off an UFO site. Would you expect anything different???
 
Joe, you pulled that off an UFO site. Would you expect anything different???

The author of the article has all of Andrews’ letters, notes, files. That sketch came from Andrews’ files.
 
If you care to discuss any of this off line, I would be happy to do so.

This subjects seems to come and go but one can glem there is still a kind of mystery to it.

Hello, just sent you PM on here. Check this out, please. Regards
 
The author of the article has all of Andrews’ letters, notes, files. That sketch came from Andrews’ files.
That does not surprise me, I thought it looked familar. As far a Schratt having Andrews stuff, I would have no knowledge. The only thing I know concerning Schratt is that he contacted me a few years ago when he found out that Skip Holm and I worked together, and are partners on several projects. Skip was a test pilot on the F-117 program, and think Schratt thought that was a conduit to the "secret world".
 
The author of the article has all of Andrews’ letters, notes, files. That sketch came from Andrews’ files.
Ive heard that John was an black aircraft enthusiast, but was he a good source? What else can you tell me about him?
 
Last edited:
While staying in Las Vegas last week I happened to observe unusual air traffic on Tuesday, November 21, around 3 PM local time. At the time I was in the outside area of the Town Square Las Vegas open-air mall that is located right across the southwestern corner of Harry Reid International Airport at the intersection of West Sunset Road and South Las Vegas Boulevard, directly under the airport approach path for runway 1L/19R. It was a sunny cloudless afternoon with good visibility, and while waiting for my family I was watching aircraft come in for landing from a spot near Town Square Park, when some cruise altitude traffic flying in a roughly northeasterly direction and producing three prominent contrails caught my attention, since the contrails, though parallel, came from two separate sources. The first source produced a single contrail, while the second source produced twin contrails and was following the first source in a distance of several hundred yards while flying only slightly offset on the starboard side in the same direction. Over several minutes I observed this formation come closer, during which time the second object slightly adjusted its course by just one or two degrees to port to slowly cross over the flight path of the first object and fly only slightly offset on the port side, until after a minute or two it changed its course by another 20 degrees or so towards the North, peeling off from the unchanged course of the first object. The flight characteristics of the first object, at least for the several minutes I was able to observe it, were unremarkable. At an estimated altitude of perhaps 20,000+ feet, it remained clearly firmly subsonic on a straight and level flight path, roughly towards the direction of Nellis AFB, that was easy to keep pace with by the second object, without performing any maneuvers, evasive or otherwise, at all.

At one point both objects were directly overhead of my position, and I was able to clearly make out their planforms. The first object can best be described as having the outline of a Mercedes Benz star logo without the ring, with one point facing forward in flight direction and the other two points jutting out and backwards on either side. The contrail emanated at the conjunction of the two rear points on the centerline. Apart from the basic shape, there was no discernible deviation from the six straight lines forming the outline, and no other observable features or markings were visible on the whole underside, which was white. The second object was a small to mid-size passenger twinjet of the general A220/A320/B737 type class and configuration, which appeared to have a grey underside. The point span of the first object was roughly between 80 to 90 percent of the airliner wingspan. The closest theoretical design I’m aware of that would at least be somewhat comparable in configuration and appearance would be the 1950s Vickers Swallow concept designed by Barnes Wallis.

Unfortunately I don’t have any video or stills of the sighting, since my wife and daughter, who are the videographers/photographers in our family, were in a store at the time, but perhaps somebody has some ideas on how to at least corroborate the behavior of the airliner, the flight crew of which clearly showed interest in the object that they pursued for a while. It strikes me that whoever operated the craft was deliberately willing to have it fly during a major holiday week with high air travel volume under near ideal sighting conditions right above an international tourist destination. I have to assume that this craft was fully intended to be seen, as it evidently also was by at least one civilian flight crew, and I hope others may have made and come forward with similar observations from that day.
 
Last edited:
What does FME mean? Foreign Material E...?

FME stands for Foreign Materiel Exploitation. The projects with Soviet and other Eastern Bloc fighter aircraft involved both technical and tactical exploitation. It's basically just what it sounds like. Technical exploitation efforts focused on studying everything from materials and construction methods to aircraft performance. Tactical exploitation involved studying the combat capabilities (strengths and vulnerabilities) and tactical utility of the aircraft. There have been numerous FME projects, some involving complete systems (aircraft, missiles, radar) and others for studying individual components or subsystems.
 
Foreign Military Equipment.

How the DOD sorts the fun toys "acquired" from various places, under any number of overt to covert methods.
FME stands for Foreign Materiel Exploitation. The projects with Soviet and other Eastern Bloc fighter aircraft involved both technical and tactical exploitation. It's basically just what it sounds like. Technical exploitation efforts focused on studying everything from materials and construction methods to aircraft performance. Tactical exploitation involved studying the combat capabilities (strengths and vulnerabilities) and tactical utility of the aircraft. There have been numerous FME projects, some involving complete systems (aircraft, missiles, radar) and others for studying individual components or subsystems.

I was just thinking, could you guys imagine if the US somehow acquires an SU-57, man are the guys at Groom Lake gonna have fun...Though for many reasons, this is very unlikely to happen, just a hypothetical scenario.
 
That is incorrect. The B-70 like sighting came well before the model. During that time frame, John Andrews (master mind at Testors for the SR-75) contacted me on an experimental project I was leading. We became friends to some degree, and at one point he told me about the SR-75. After I finished laughing, John showed me the information sent him from sightings he was using to design the SR-75. model(s). Probably about 1 year later, the model was released. FYI, John has sense passed away.
The striking thing is that the witnesses call it a super Valkyrie, when for me the supposed descriptions and Testor's model look more like a blackbird with steroids than a Valkyrie.
 
that's some kids doodle sketch of a Concorde ! ... 'this a delta wing' ! ... 'people' ! ... 'ridge' where the tail fins broken off !
Im calling this BS. (and that goes for 95% of the 13 page thread too !) ;)

The 2006 Aviation Week "Blackstar" article has an account of this sighting:

DETAILED FEATURES of the aircraft were provided by Nancy Weitzman, who was then a Ph.D. candidate living in Doylestown, Pa., and saw the SR-3 overfly her home in 1993. The aircraft was at an altitude of roughly 2,500 ft. and only a half-mile from Weitzman. She said it was close enough to see one pilot’s helmet. Initially, the vehicle was maneuvering at slow speed and banking, offering excellent views of its top, bottom and tail sections. It then accelerated and climbed at a steep angle with all engines in afterburner, creating an incredibly loud noise.

While not “an airplane person,” in her words, Weitzman is a longtime bird-watcher, and was a medical student then, making her an excellent, detail oriented observer. Her engineer husband enhanced her sighting report by providing the correct aeronautical terminology for certain features.

The Schratt "That's Classified" article also has an account:

However, there appears to be a discrepancy regarding precisely what type of propulsion system was used to power the mothership. Those within the vicinity of SR-3 flight operations described hearing a VERY LOUD PULSING ROARING noise during take-off roll and climb out. This was confirmed by witness Nancy Certain Ph.D., from Doylestown PA, who saw the massive carrier aircraft during the day from a half-mile distance at an altitude of approximately 2,500 feet in 1993. Others stated that as the aircraft accelerated and gained altitude, the frequency and intensity of the pulsing noise increased. This may indicate the use of a combined cycle scramjet engine which can operate at both low and high speeds. Either way, it’s clear that this aircraft utilizes some form of “multi-cycle” engine.

I have some issues with this "sighting".
At the time of the supposed sighting I was living in the general area of Doylestown and was undergoing private pilot instruction. Doylestown is relatively close to Philadelphia, Trenton, and Princeton. The area had a great deal of private aviation traffic at the time.

If a B-1 or F-16 (or Concorde) had transited the area during the day time it would have been seen by a dozen pilots and within a day every other pilot would know about it. Not to mention all of the people on the ground who would have seen or heard it. And if an unusual, loud aircraft had been in the area hundreds of people would have seen or heard it - including myself.

The drawing certainly seems to depict something like a Concorde, and there are certainly angles a Concorde could be seen from that would fool the viewer into seeing something like the drawing. But I am not aware of any Concordes in the Philadelphia area in the early 1990s.
 
I have some issues with this "sighting".
At the time of the supposed sighting I was living in the general area of Doylestown and was undergoing private pilot instruction. Doylestown is relatively close to Philadelphia, Trenton, and Princeton. The area had a great deal of private aviation traffic at the time.

If a B-1 or F-16 (or Concorde) had transited the area during the day time it would have been seen by a dozen pilots and within a day every other pilot would know about it. Not to mention all of the people on the ground who would have seen or heard it. And if an unusual, loud aircraft had been in the area hundreds of people would have seen or heard it - including myself.

The drawing certainly seems to depict something like a Concorde, and there are certainly angles a Concorde could be seen from that would fool the viewer into seeing something like the drawing. But I am not aware of any Concordes in the Philadelphia area in the early 1990s.
there is no sense that such a highly classified aircraft would fly in broad daylight and at such a low altitude (I don't know if there are contractors in the Philadelphia area), and there are no news reports about it. Internet about this sighting. From the space magazine to aviation week only the counterresponse emerges.
and on the concorde there is a landing in phl in the mid 80s
 
While staying in Las Vegas last week I happened to observe unusual air traffic on Tuesday, November 21, around 3 PM local time. At the time I was in the outside area of the Town Square Las Vegas open-air mall that is located right across the southwestern corner of Harry Reid International Airport at the intersection of West Sunset Road and South Las Vegas Boulevard, directly under the airport approach path for runway 1L/19R. It was a sunny cloudless afternoon with good visibility, and while waiting for my family I was watching aircraft come in for landing from a spot near Town Square Park, when some cruise altitude traffic flying in a roughly northeasterly direction and producing three prominent contrails caught my attention, since the contrails, though parallel, came from two separate sources. The first source produced a single contrail, while the second source produced twin contrails and was following the first source in a distance of several hundred yards while flying only slightly offset on the starboard side in the same direction. Over the several minutes I observed this formation come closer, during which time the second object slightly adjusted its course by just one or two degrees to port to slowly cross over the flight path of the first object and fly only slightly offset on the port side, until after a minute or two it changed its course by another 20 degrees or so towards the North, peeling off from the unchanged course of the first object. The flight characteristics of the first object, at least for the several minutes I was able to observe it, were unremarkable. At an estimated altitude of perhaps 20,000+ feet, it remained clearly firmly subsonic on a straight and level flight path, roughly towards the direction of Nellis AFB, that was easy to keep pace with by the second object, without performing any maneuvers, evasive or otherwise, at all.

At one point both objects were directly overhead of my position, and I was able to clearly make out their planforms. The first object can best be described as having the outline of a Mercedes Benz star logo without the ring, with one point facing forward in flight direction and the other two points jutting out and backwards on either side. The contrail emanated at the conjunction of the two rear points on the centerline. Apart from the basic shape, there was no discernible deviation from the six straight lines forming the outline, and no other observable features or markings were visible on the whole underside, which was white. The second object was a small to mid-size passenger twinjet of the general A220/A320/B737 type class and configuration, which appeared to have a grey underside. The point span of the first object was roughly between 80 to 90 percent of the airliner wingspan. The closest theoretical design I’m aware of that would at least be somewhat comparable in configuration and appearance would be the 1950s Vickers Swallow concept designed by Barnes Wallis.

Unfortunately I don’t have any video or stills of the sighting, since my wife and daughter, who are the videographers/photographers in our family, were in a store at the time, but perhaps somebody has some ideas on how to at least corroborate the behavior of the airliner, the flight crew of which clearly showed interest in the object that they pursued for a while. It strikes me that whoever operated the craft was deliberately willing to have it fly during a major holiday week with high air travel volume under near ideal sighting conditions right above an international tourist destination. I have to assume that this craft was fully intended to be seen, as it evidently also was by at least one civilian flight crew, and I hope others may have made and come forward with similar observations from that day.

I don't really have much to add other than the mention of the mercedes star logo shape reminded me of the aircraft(s) photographed in amarillo in 2014

Mystery-plane-Musket.png
 
I don't really have much to add other than the mention of the mercedes star logo shape reminded me of the aircraft(s) photographed in amarillo in 2014

Mystery-plane-Musket.png
Thanks, Black Dog - it could certainly be an evolution of that design, although the craft I saw had a more slender silhouette.
 
Foreign Military Equipment.

How the DOD sorts the fun toys "acquired" from various places, under any number of overt to covert methods.

Foreign Materiel Exploitation.

"Exploitation" meaning specifically that the hardware is examined, disassembled, and tested for vulnerabilities.

 
Foreign Materiel Exploitation.

"Exploitation" meaning specifically that the hardware is examined, disassembled, and tested for vulnerabilities.

I stand corrected! Fixing.
 
I was just thinking, could you guys imagine if the US somehow acquires an SU-57, man are the guys at Groom Lake gonna have fun...Though for many reasons, this is very unlikely to happen, just a hypothetical scenario.
I dunno, I think the US has managed to acquire just about one of every foreign aircraft at some point in time...

MiG-25 from a defector, that came to the US and was later returned to the Soviets. In pieces.
 
I dunno, I think the US has managed to acquire just about one of every foreign aircraft at some point in time...

MiG-25 from a defector, that came to the US and was later returned to the Soviets. In pieces.

The MiG-25 landed in Japan, where it was subject to exploitation by specialists from the US (including members of the Red Hats). Engines and avionics were tested on the ground only. There was no flight testing. Technicians disassembled the aircraft and studied it in detail before the parts were returned to the Soviets.
 
Thanks, Black Dog - it could certainly be an evolution of that design, although the craft I saw had a more slender silhouette.
Not an aerodynamicist by any means, but could trailing knife-blade like blades be rotated in ball-joints to either side of an engine?

A flying pelvis :)
 
What purpose would a single engine manned wing serve? Surely something that small would be an unmanned drone?
 

Attachments

  • n1xdpSY (1).jpg
    n1xdpSY (1).jpg
    140.2 KB · Views: 142

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom