Musings on the "F-117 Companion"

quellish said:
The "F-117 Companion" legend began with articles in the October 1, 1990 issue of Aviation Week. The articles described sightings of a quiet triangular craft flying with F-117s (the sightings occurred in 1989).

in 1991 another article was published describing the "TR-3" as a tactical recon aircraft that found targets and lased for the F-117. This seems to have been speculation based on the earlier sightings of something triangular flying with F-117s in 1989. The TR-3 article/concept itself has been covered in a separate thread here.

In the many years since 1990 I have not seen anything that suggests another aircraft "buddy lased" for F-117s, or that another aircraft worked with them in a role like what was suggested in the "TR-3" article.
Click to expand...
One was captured on video and shown on unsolved mysteries. Your wording is also very careful to state in a role like suggested. I think it was a real program and long since retired but never built in f117 quantities. Unfortunately for the public there are things that even though they're retired (were operational or semi operational at some point) will never be revealed.
 
rooster said:
One was captured on video and shown on unsolved mysteries.
Click to expand...

I believe you are referring to this:

It was not seen in the company of F-117s. It was hypothesized that it was a "TR-3" but it could have been something else.

rooster said:
Your wording is also very careful to state in a role like suggested. I think it was a real program and long since retired but never built in f117 quantities. Unfortunately for the public there are things that even though they're retired (were operational or semi operational at some point) will never be revealed.
Click to expand...

For an aircraft to be working *with* an F-117 it would have to pass information to it somehow. If it was finding targets or lasing for the F-117 it would need to communicate with the F-117.
F-117s were not equipped with LO radomes. All of the antennas, etc. were retractable. When flying missions the antennas were retracted and they could not communicate. They would be unable to communicate with a "companion" without compromising their stealth.

F-117s were used to hit fixed, high value targets. They had no need for external lasing, and as far as anyone has said so far never trained for it - not even ground-based lasing with SOF units.

If there was an operational "companion", who flew it? From where?
 
Relevant portions of the two October 1990 AWST articles describing the "F-117 companion" sightings.


Multiple Sightings of Secret Aircraft Hint at New Propulsion, Airframe Designs
OCTOBER 1 1990

Multiple reports from well-qualified observers lend substantial credence to the existence of numerous secret aircraft flying from remote bases in the southwestern U. S., regardless of the political, funding or technical arguments against that probability.

Over the past 13 months, large, triangular wing-shaped aircraft characterized by a relatively quiet propulsion system have been the object of at least 11 sightings near Edwards AFB, Calif., and one near Fresno, Calif. These are supported by additional reports of similar vehicles seen and heard around remote central Nevada communities near government ranges operated by the Energy Dept, and the Air Force.

Possibly prototypes or concept demonstrators of the Air Force B-2 or Navy A12, the fairly flat, triangular-shaped vehicles have a rounded nose, rounded wingtips and probably no vertical tail surfaces. The flying wings’ trailing edges may be slightly curved, but definitely are not sawtooth-shaped like those of the Air Force’s B-2 bomber, according to reports received so far. One observer in Nevada described the shape as “like a manta ray.” Key sightings include:

■ A daytime observation near the Tehachapi mountains (about 30 mi. northwest of Edwards AFB) in early May verified this craft’s triangular shape. Numerous earlier sightings had been at night, although several were under a nearfull moon that provided enough illumination to identify a large, triangular planform. The Tehachapi report noted that the aircraft was light-colored, but had a dark area near the center of the trailing edge, presumed to be the engine exhaust area.

■ On the night of May 3, 1990, a quiet aircraft matching the triangular description was reported by five different observers over a 4-hr. period. One or more of the aircraft made multiple passes over Tehachapi, Mojave, Lancaster and Palmdale, Calif., during this time.

■ A triangular aircraft also has been seen flying with multiple-ship Lockheed F117A flights. Typically, the stealth fighters fly alone, spaced about 8-10 min. apart—a general pattern that has characterized F-117 operations since they were first observed in California in mid-1989 (AW&ST May 1, 1989, p. 24).

However, on several occasions, the larger, triangular aircraft appeared on the same general flight path as the F-117As. It was seen after about three or four of the stealth fighters had passed, yet was ahead of another three or four. It has been spotted repeatedly over the northern end of the Antelope Valley, near Edwards AFB and Mojave, Calif., as well as in central Nevada.

This vehicle is quieter than the F117As—which already are substantially quieter than an F-15 or F-16—and definitely larger. It normally displays a lighting pattern similar to that of the F-l 17s— single amber lights under the wingtips and a red beacon near the nose—but can be distinguished by its characteristic hushed engine noise and larger planform.

All observer descriptions of the triangular aircraft correlated closely, and the observer who reported seeing the vehicle before sunset sketched a top view. That sketch matched descriptions of similar vehicles supposedly seen in Nevada-based government hangars several years ago and flying in military operating areas nearby.

Workers who were assigned to one or more of the classified Nevada locations in the past agreed the triangular shape of the reported aircraft “has been around a long time” and is a planform familiar to those associated with that community. Recent disclosure of an A-12 artist’s depiction, and reports over the last few years of “large, black flying wings” approximating the B-2’s shape, would support that assessment (AW&ST Aug. 20, p. 17).

One of the earliest accounts of such a vehicle was reported by Timothy B. Reynolds, a computer system manager in Houston, Tex., who saw a triangular shaped aircraft parked in an Ellington AFB hangar in the late 1960s. The aircraft had an estimated 30-40-ft. wingspan, no visible cockpit, no vertical tail and tricycle landing gear.

Two 4 X 12-in. rectangular openings in the wing leading edge, one on each side of the nose, appeared to be engine inlets, although no cowlings or engine pods were visible. The vehicle was relatively thin, measuring about 4-5 ft. thick at the center and tapering to each wingtip. Reynolds described the aircraft as “very rounded— with a molded look—and gray-colored.”

Initial sightings of flying wing-type vehicles in Nevada occurred as early as the mid-1980s, but these are believed to be different from the A-12-like triangular aircraft. At least one—described as large, black-colored and very quiet—was seen at close range in the daylight. Subsequent sightings in southern California were reported a few months before the Air Force/Northrop B-2 made its first flight, which fueled suspicions that a B-2 prototype or concept vehicle was being flown.

Subsequent to the bomber’s maiden flight, reports of a wing-shaped aircraft flying at night did not correlate with known B-2 flight tests. A number of positive sightings on moonlit nights occurred during B-2 downtimes, further discounting the possibility that the unknown vehicle was the new stealth bomber. Senior Air Force program officials have repeatedly denied the existence of any B-2 prototypes or concept demonstrators, although this may be a matter of semantics. Reports from people who worked with such vehicles and from numerous observers who have seen them suggest that there were, indeed, highly classified flying-wing vehicles being tested in Nevada and at White Sands, N. M., prior to the B-2’s rollout.
Click to expand...

Secret Advanced Vehicles Demonstrate Technologies For Future Military Use
OCTOBER 1 1990

NEW AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGIES

Advanced secret aircraft developed at highly classified government facilities in the Nevada desert over the last decade are demonstrating and validating new technologies for the U. S.’s future fighters, bombers and reconnaissance platforms.

Although facilities in remote areas of the Southwest have been home to classified vehicles for decades, the number and sophistication of new aircraft appear to have increased sharply over the last 10 years, when substantial funding was made available for “deep black” projects.

Vehicles now flying from these well guarded sites include both manned and unmanned hypersonic-capable aircraft designed to perform strategic reconnaissance and other, less conventionally defined missions. The classified fleet also comprises a number of large-winged concept demonstrators that evolved into the Air Force’s B-2 bomber and the Navy’s A-12 next-generation attack aircraft. Several vehicles, though, appear to incorporate technologies that outstrip those now employed by engineers charged with developing more traditional, current-generation aircraft.

A number of these aircraft have been seen and heard repeatedly by ground based and airborne observers in the western U. S. over the last few years. Based on about 45 reports provided by people who have seen, heard or had access to the advanced aircraft, there now appear to be at least two—but probably more—distinct types of vehicles:

■ A triangular-shaped, quiet aircraft seen with a flight of Lockheed F-117A stealth fighters several times since the summer of 1989. This may be a demonstrator or prototype of the General Dynamics/McDonnell Douglas A-12. Navy officials recently noted that full-size test models will soon be “exposed to public view” during testing, suggesting that predecessors of the A12 are already flying.
Click to expand...

Two sightings of wing-shaped aircraft occurred during daylight hours, while the remainder occurred only at night. Descriptions and a sketch from one of the daytime observations closely match the A-12 planform (AW&ST Aug. 20, p. 17).
Click to expand...

So it was an unidentified aircraft, sometimes seen on the same occasion as F-117s, headed in the same general direction.
 
quellish said:
rooster said:
One was captured on video and shown on unsolved mysteries.
Click to expand...

I believe you are referring to this:

It was not seen in the company of F-117s. It was hypothesized that it was a "TR-3" but it could have been something else.

rooster said:
Your wording is also very careful to state in a role like suggested. I think it was a real program and long since retired but never built in f117 quantities. Unfortunately for the public there are things that even though they're retired (were operational or semi operational at some point) will never be revealed.
Click to expand...

For an aircraft to be working *with* an F-117 it would have to pass information to it somehow. If it was finding targets or lasing for the F-117 it would need to communicate with the F-117.
F-117s were not equipped with LO radomes. All of the antennas, etc. were retractable. When flying missions the antennas were retracted and they could not communicate. They would be unable to communicate with a "companion" without compromising their stealth.

F-117s were used to hit fixed, high value targets. They had no need for external lasing, and as far as anyone has said so far never trained for it - not even ground-based lasing with SOF units.

If there was an operational "companion", who flew it? From where?
Click to expand...
Denny Jarvi said they hid a data link in Tacit Blue and “hid everything outside of seeing it with your eyes”
Id assume the same could be done with an F-117
 
Hansblix said:
Denny Jarvi said they hid a data link in Tacit Blue and “hid everything outside of seeing it with your eyes”
Id assume the same could be done with an F-117
Click to expand...

TACIT BLUE was designed from the beginning to have low observable antennas and radomes, the F-117 was not. They tried to put a radar on the F-117 several times and were not able to make it work. They did not move to low observable antennas for many of the same reasons. The only LO antenna the F-117 (eventually) got was the GPS antenna.

From John Cashen interview by Peter Westwick, 25 April 2014.

CASHEN: I'll get to that in a minute. There are a lot of stories about flight test. A partial list of the firsts: the unstable airplane, the butterfly tails, the flush topside inlet, the stealthy radar. Help me, Maggy. There were some other aviation firsts. Well, certainly wing-body-tail stealth. We had a full stealthy avionics suite. We didn't just have a radar; we also were designing—though we never flew it—an ESM suite, electronic support measures. I think you probably know what that is. SIGINT, that kind of thing. We did all our own stealthy antennas, every one of them, about six didfferent designs. No popouts. I wouldn't allow popout antennas, which they had on Have Blue.

WESTWICK: What do you mean, popout?

CASHEN: Well, you know, a blade antenna can be extended out to use, but it's not stealthy. So I didn't want anything that could go wrong, or have it time sensitive or anything else. So the antennas were all flush. If you paint the airplane gray, you wouldn't know the antennas were on the airplane. They were all conformal flush antennas. We designed and manufactured all of them.

WESTWICK: So the antenna face is actually flush with the skin.

CASHEN: With the surface of the airplane.
Click to expand...

The data link antenna was essentially a smaller version of the radar antenna, and was on the opposite site of TACIT BLUE from the radar. It was smaller, but not small.
 
Last edited:
You are barking up the wrong tree. That thing was not about lasing for anyone, it just turned out to be a decent enough, albeit mute companion in certain environments. Allegedly ofc.
 
What type of aircraft was supposed to provide targeting for F-117s using laser-guided bombs ?
 
I agree and appreciate the sources but we see 5% of the reality. We’re talking blank checks though Regan-era innovations.

We’re sitting here and saying that x,y,z was wasn’t in a budget or on record and therefore doesn’t exist and 40 years after though an interview, they also say there are several aircraft that they can’t discuss and were built in that same timeframe but in the same wheelhouse.

My personal view is that according to here. The F-117 was built and everyone is saying it was the end all, be all, pinnacle of technology. Yet there are a lot of dots to connect that not one but many other aircrafts or tech was developed through interviews posted above. The logic doesn’t make a ton of sense.

It doesn’t seem that outlandish that non-publicly, innovations were made (even on a small scale) on what is being said here as the peak of aircraft meets technology. If innovations are being made. Then by the logic here. They would almost certainly be outfitted on an F-117 or B-2 as there are no other aircraft that either exist or are as advanced.

Tacit Blue wasn’t operational. The F-117 is as supposedly good as it gets. Modern data links were in their infancy. I guess my question is. What aircraft’s were advanced enough or could be fully utilized to innovate data links, that we have within that era, if the F-117 wasn’t capable? It seems more insane to not be utilizing that tech.

The F-117 is what we know about. Publicly. Were retroactively outfitting F-117s right at this moment with a new generation of RAM/Stealth/Something optical that exists also on an F-22, that more than likely is fully integrated into NGAD, that we still don’t fully understand.

We’re talking about an aircraft, still flying, that had its first flight FOURTY ONE YEARS AGO. 41.

25 years “operationally” is a few generations of technology. It’s a landline dialup modem to fiber optic internet and wireless internet with cellphones in everyone’s pockets.

In that. I don’t think the “companion” has anything to due with laser designation. It’s a red herring in a story that continually gets obfuscated with conversations like this. It was a specific aircraft for a specific role.
 
Last edited:
F.L. said:
What type of aircraft was supposed to provide targeting for F-117s using laser-guided bombs ?
Click to expand...

Check out the subsection titled "Nighthawk Engagement Profile" at the bottom. It's been public knowledge that the F-117 has had a laser designator for as long as I can remember.

s-l1600.jpg
 
I still have a couple of those F-117 cards left over from my childhood!

Yep, even Chris Chant in 1990 (published before Desert Storm) was saying that the F-117 had a laser designator (though he stated the top ball turret had the laser designator, not the bottom sensor). For his part Mike Badrocke in his cutaway drawing of the mid-90s hedges his bets and calls both sensors IR and doesn't commit to a laser designator.
The only sticking point I suppose is what angles of offset the laser tracker had to avoid overflying the target.
 
“One of the developmental F-117s, tail #794 according to Have Blue and the F-117A: Evolution of the "Stealth Fighter," received the radar in 1984 at the Skunk Works' Burbank plant and began flight testing out of Groom Lake after the modifications were complete. The installation was unique, with a specially built selective frequency 'evanescent' radome covering the PESA antenna that allowed for the radar to work while also maintaining a high degree of low-observability. This radome technology was absolutely cutting-edge at the time and eventually found itself utilized on the F-22 Raptor.”

I believe there was a lot more that was modified on to an F-117 than led on.
 
The best argument regarding a possible "companion" is the fact that both the RF-4 and the EF-111 were retired in the 90's without an obvious replacement capability for either. The next best argument would be the hunter-killer concept of operations that the USAF was drawn to at the time (Quartz or Tier III and BASX, for example) which bore no fruit publicly.

It's existence wouldn't shock me, but the evidence is well shy of convincing.
 
Hansblix said:
“One of the developmental F-117s, tail #794 according to Have Blue and the F-117A: Evolution of the "Stealth Fighter,"[/I] received the radar in 1984 at the Skunk Works' Burbank plant and began flight testing out of Groom Lake after the modifications were complete. The installation was unique, with a specially built selective frequency 'evanescent' radome covering the PESA antenna that allowed for the radar to work while also maintaining a high degree of low-observability. This radome technology was absolutely cutting-edge at the time and eventually found itself utilized on the F-22 Raptor.”

I believe there was a lot more that was modified on to an F-117 than led on.
Click to expand...

794 did have an experimental radar fitted at one point. This was not the first time a radar was developed for the F-117. In fact, when the F-117 was first being defined (when it was the A3 and ATA) it was to have a full Low Probability of Intercept Radar fire control system (ARPA Order 3237, 1976). Hughes, with Northrop, began developing the LPI radar but the technology of both the radar and radome was not mature enough for the ATA/F-117, which is why the F-117 ended up with the FLIR/DLIR. This radar program led to BSAX/TACIT BLUE.

Over the years there were several more projects to add radar to the F-117 but none of them worked out due to issue with radome, physical space, power requirements, and RCS requirements. The radar experiment flown on 794 was again not mature enough to provide benefit that justified the modification. The radar was removed once the flight tests were completed. It had no air-to-air modes.
 
quellish said:
794 did have an experimental radar fitted at one point. This was not the first time a radar was developed for the F-117. In fact, when the F-117 was first being defined (when it was the A3 and ATA) it was to have a full Low Probability of Intercept Radar fire control system (ARPA Order 3237, 1976). Hughes, with Northrop, began developing the LPI radar but the technology of both the radar and radome was not mature enough for the ATA/F-117, which is why the F-117 ended up with the FLIR/DLIR. This radar program led to BSAX/TACIT BLUE.

Over the years there were several more projects to add radar to the F-117 but none of them worked out due to issue with radome, physical space, power requirements, and RCS requirements. The radar experiment flown on 794 was again not mature enough to provide benefit that justified the modification. The radar was removed once the flight tests were completed. It had no air-to-air modes.
Click to expand...

Was there ever a discussion on a larger variant for the F-117 that could accommodate a larger ordnance payload or equipment in support of its role?
 
Foo Fighter said:
Hansblix said:
The U-2 never flew with a companion until we found out it did. Decades later. That’s still unclear.
Click to expand...
Not something I have come across, care to elaborate?
Click to expand...
You want to look into the "Air Force Special Platform".

_Del_ said:
The best argument regarding a possible "companion" is the fact that both the RF-4 and the EF-111 were retired in the 90's without an obvious replacement capability for either. The next best argument would be the hunter-killer concept of operations that the USAF was drawn to at the time (Quartz or Tier III and BASX, for example) which bore no fruit publicly.

It's existence wouldn't shock me, but the evidence is well shy of convincing.
Click to expand...
It's supposed to predate Quartz.
 
Last edited:
Not impossible, but the argument is pretty unconvincing IMO. The term disappearing from budget documentation after a couple of years is not evidence for the AFSP being some sort of U-2 variant. Maybe they moved it to a classified line item after it started raising eyebrows in the press or decided to move the program from grey deeper into the black altogether. Wouldn't have been the first time.

There were also others of arguable less repute, who held adifferent viewpoint:
 
someguy said:
Not impossible, but the argument is pretty unconvincing IMO. The term disappearing from budget documentation after a couple of years is not evidence for the AFSP being some sort of U-2 variant. Maybe they moved it to a classified line item after it started raising eyebrows in the press or decided to move the program from grey deeper into the black altogether. Wouldn't have been the first time.
Click to expand...
Tendering towards "Conspiracy Theory" territory there.
 
someguy said:
Not impossible, but the argument is pretty unconvincing IMO. The term disappearing from budget documentation after a couple of years is not evidence for the AFSP being some sort of U-2 variant. Maybe they moved it to a classified line item after it started raising eyebrows in the press or decided to move the program from grey deeper into the black altogether. Wouldn't have been the first time.

There were also others of arguable less repute, who held adifferent viewpoint:
Click to expand...

This is the original 1998 "U-2 companion" article from Janes:

The status of the program is unknown, but the context implies that it is at least under development, if not already in service. The vehicle can carry the same sensors as the U-2, including the Raytheon ASARS (Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar System) and SYERS (Senior Year Electro-optical Reconnaissance System), and it will also be able to carry the Joint SlGlNT Avionics Family (USAF) sensor suite.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Carried all the same sensors as the U-2.
At this time the airborne reconnaissance programs were under DARO. DARO was funding integration of the JSAF suite into the various platforms. JSAF had a high band and a low band component. Only the Air Force Special Platform was to get both high and low band components. In 1999-2000 these programs shifted back to USAF. In the 2000 AF budget there was this line, similar to the DARO budget previously:

Producible JSAF components will be provided for the airborne fleet (manned and unmanned) for integration on the Air Force's RC-135V/W (Rivet Joint), an unspecified Army platform, the Air Force's AF Special, and the Navy's EP-3E.
Click to expand...

In the 2001 USAF budget request for airborne reconnaissance it was specific about integrating BOTH the high and low band components of JSAF on the U-2 - the only platform that was getting both. The line quoted above was also changed to:

Producible JSAF components will be provided for the airborne fleet (manned and unmanned) for integration on the Air Force's RC-135V/W (Rivet Joint), the Army's Aerial Common Sensor (ACS) platform, the Air Force's U-2, and the Navy's EP-3E.
Click to expand...

In late 1999 there was a DOD IG investigation that included Big Safari and the Senior Year program offices. Senior Year managed the U-2 program. It was found that Senior Year was over-classifying things without good reason (see ADA373012). As a result, reforms were instituted. After those security changes took effect the "Air Force Special Platform" became the U-2 in the above budget documents and elsewhere.

There is much more evidence that the "Air Force Special Platform" is the U-2, but now, 20+ years later it is not within reach. I have most of it somewhere.

The 1998 budget and DARO documents mentioned the "Air Force Special Platform". The Janes article made a big leap from that to "manned LO U-2 companion". The more mundane explanation - that the "Air Force Special Platform" was the U-2, over-classified, is far more plausible.
 
quellish said:
someguy said:
Foo Fighter said:
Hansblix said:
The U-2 never flew with a companion until we found out it did. Decades later. That’s still unclear.
Click to expand...
Not something I have come across, care to elaborate?
Click to expand...
You want to look into the "Air Force Special Platform".
Click to expand...

The Air Force Special Platform IS the U-2, not a separate or companion aircraft.

Click to expand...
IMG_1934.jpeg
I don’t know!!! Rumor has it, 40 years later, it took off one day and never came back, still circling the skies. If you look hard enough on a crisp autumn dawn, you can see it, majestically gliding though the air.
 
Hansblix said:
View attachment 701224
I don’t know!!! Rumor has it, 40 years later, it took off one day and never came back, still circling the skies. If you look hard enough on a crisp autumn dawn, you can see it, majestically gliding though the air.
Click to expand...

1. AQUILINE was not nuclear powered. It was powered by a chainsaw engine. CIA was looking at developing an RTG+electric power plant eventually to give it "unlimited" range, but these plans were very, very long wishful thinking. With the RTG it *could* have the range stated in your image, but the control problem would have to be solved (see 2 below)

2. AQUILINE was to use an aircraft as a communications relay initially. It would then use a satellite link for control. The aircraft to be used as a relay was a DC-6. CIA looked at using a U-2 as a relay but it was considered impractical. As it turns out using an aircraft as a relay for a drone is not easy. They tried it again in the 1980s with EAGLE, then in the 1990s with LOFTY VIEW. It was only with LOFTY VIEW that after much effort they got it to work.

3. AQUILINE did not disappear. One of the remaining aircraft is hanging upside down in a museum. mislabeled. This was discovered by members of this forum https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mcdonnell-douglas-mark-ii-batwing.40148/#post-553995

AQUILINE was never a "companion" for the U-2. At one point it was proposed - and discarded - to use the U-2 as a radio relay to extend the range of AQUILINE. Instead a DC-6 was to be used as the relay.
 
Whisperstream said:
martinbayer said:
Hansblix said:
martinbayer said:
Whisperstream said:
Hansblix said:
That time we didn't have the opportunity to remove cubic tons of earth then fill it back in with A-7 parts scattered about in case someone went looking.
Click to expand...

Ah, ha, ha, ha, ha! That's hilarious. You know, back in 1986 they didn't remove cubic tons of earth and fill it back in, nor did they scatter A-7 parts about either. That little story was pure disinformation, easily disproven.

Even at more recent sites where the government paid to have upwards of 12,500 cubic yards of earth removed and replaced with clean fill, restore the original landscape contours, and re-plant native vegetation (poorly!), they still left thousands of bits of debris.
Click to expand...
Would you care to elaborate a little bit more without perhaps using some arcane puerile boy scout code? Now I fully understand the risk of you or some other sinister USG agent showing up in front of my rapacious sprawling beachfront villa down in SoCal, but until that fateful day arrives, I'd really like to ask you to spill the beans on whatever landscaping measures you allude to have to do with any F-117 companion, if you please?
Click to expand...
A good garden rake and some top soil usually makes it go away.
Click to expand...
I see. All hat and no cattle then.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with the mythical "companion." In an earlier post, Hansblix was obliquely referencing the 1986 crash of an F-117A near Bakersfield, California, where the government supposedly sanitized the site and salted it with parts of another wreck (the actual disinformation story said it was an F-101). Complete bollocks!

My comment about the government spending God only knows how much to cleanse and restore another crash site was merely illustrative of how difficult it is to remove every trace. Shades of Roswell!
Click to expand...
He is confusing a 1960s Blackbird crash and cleanup with the 1986 F-117 crash.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Whisperstream said:
martinbayer said:
Hansblix said:
martinbayer said:
Whisperstream said:
Hansblix said:
That time we didn't have the opportunity to remove cubic tons of earth then fill it back in with A-7 parts scattered about in case someone went looking.
Click to expand...

Ah, ha, ha, ha, ha! That's hilarious. You know, back in 1986 they didn't remove cubic tons of earth and fill it back in, nor did they scatter A-7 parts about either. That little story was pure disinformation, easily disproven.

Even at more recent sites where the government paid to have upwards of 12,500 cubic yards of earth removed and replaced with clean fill, restore the original landscape contours, and re-plant native vegetation (poorly!), they still left thousands of bits of debris.
Click to expand...
Would you care to elaborate a little bit more without perhaps using some arcane puerile boy scout code? Now I fully understand the risk of you or some other sinister USG agent showing up in front of my rapacious sprawling beachfront villa down in SoCal, but until that fateful day arrives, I'd really like to ask you to spill the beans on whatever landscaping measures you allude to have to do with any F-117 companion, if you please?
Click to expand...
A good garden rake and some top soil usually makes it go away.
Click to expand...
I see. All hat and no cattle then.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with the mythical "companion." In an earlier post, Hansblix was obliquely referencing the 1986 crash of an F-117A near Bakersfield, California, where the government supposedly sanitized the site and salted it with parts of another wreck (the actual disinformation story said it was an F-101). Complete bollocks!

My comment about the government spending God only knows how much to cleanse and restore another crash site was merely illustrative of how difficult it is to remove every trace. Shades of Roswell!
Click to expand...
He is confusing a 1960s Blackbird crash and cleanup with the 1986 F-117 crash.
Click to expand...
While my comment was in jest, there was quite alot of commotion in regards to that crash in particular, which was an F-19 as the F-117 was unknown and site security that was passed down in folklore until this very moment.
 
Last edited:
martinbayer said:
Thanks for the much needed clarification and disentanglement
Click to expand...

Hansblix made a tongue-in-cheek reference to the infamous "F-19" crash at Bakersfield, in the aftermath of which the news media displayed a number of pieces of recovered debris that had been found after the three-week cleanup activities ceased. Some unspecified amount of time later, various people within the F-117A program (which had by that time been declassified) told a fanciful tale of how the Bakersfield site had been completely sanitized and then salted with debris from a different aircraft. Versions of this blatant attempt at disinformation varied in the amount of detail and the origin of the "fake"debris but the basic narrative remained intact. In any event, the bogus story was published by such noted aviation authors as Bill Sweetman and Jim Goodall (as they were no doubt intended to do) and it became part of the accepted lore of the F-117A.
 
Whisperstream said:
martinbayer said:
Thanks for the much needed clarification and disentanglement
Click to expand...

Hansblix made a tongue-in-cheek reference to the infamous "F-19" crash at Bakersfield, in the aftermath of which the news media displayed a number of pieces of recovered debris that had been found after the three-week cleanup activities ceased. Some unspecified amount of time later, various people within the F-117A program (which had by that time been declassified) told a fanciful tale of how the Bakersfield site had been completely sanitized and then salted with debris from a different aircraft. Versions of this blatant attempt at disinformation varied in the amount of detail and the origin of the "fake"debris but the basic narrative remained intact. In any event, the bogus story was published by such noted aviation authors as Bill Sweetman and Jim Goodall (as they were no doubt intended to do) and it became part of the accepted lore of the F-117A.
Click to expand...
Again, the Blackbird crash did have such a salting take place.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Again, the Blackbird crash did have such a salting take place.
Click to expand...

Well, no. That never happened either. I have found no instance in which a Blackbird crash site was salted with debris from another airplane.

Perhaps you are conflating the 1963 incident in which an A-12 (then an unacknowledged special access program) crashed on public land near Wendover, Nevada, and the CIA had the Air Force put out a story that an F-105 had crashed. It was a pretty weak cover story, but it satisfied the news media at the time. The pilot, Ken Collins, dined out on this tale for years once the A-12 was declassified. Consequently, it has seen a lot of play in books, magazine articles, and on the internet with varying degrees of embellishment and error. Some accounts erroneously state the "the accident is still listed in official records as an F-105." This is not true. It was never listed as such in official records; it was merely a statement to the press in the immediate aftermath of the crash. Interestingly, an official memo from the on-scene commander to CIA Headquarters claimed that "all traces of [the aircraft had been] removed from the scene." I don't believe this was meant as deliberate disinformation because it was strictly an internal memorandum that was unlikely to ever be see by the public (as this predated the Freedom of Information Act). It was however, a false statement. Today, you can visit the coast site and find identifiable A-12 parts with Lockheed Skunk Works inspection stamps and A-12 part numbers, bits of the radar absorbent materials, and other recognizable items. You certainly will not find parts of any other aircraft, nor do any declassified official documents claim that such material was placed there, and no one from the program has ever made such a claim as far as i know.
 
Ravinoff said:
Okay, noticed the TR-3 thread was bumped again, and I was gonna make this a post there, but as it concerns a bit of a broader spectrum than just the (probably fictional) TR-3, I may as well make a thread out of it. I've been doing some thinking on the whole concept of the F-117 Companion and its supposed role of lasing targets for Paveways, and something sort of occurred to me.

What's a role that a stealth aircraft is inherently suited for, where a noticeable capability gap has existed since the early stealth era, but has never been even considered in open literature (that I know of, at least)? Suppression of enemy air defenses. Yeah, the F-4G was around until '96, and the AGM-69 SRAM and AGM-86 ALCM cover similar territory, but think for a moment about the advantages a "Sneaky Weasel" would bring to the table, from the perspective of a Cold War Air Force planner. Sure, those new Rockwell B-1Bs are neat and have a slightly reduced RCS, and the rumor going around is that somebody is working on a real stealth bomber, but the SAC workhorse is still the good old B-52. But the Soviets are getting damn good at building SAMs, and it's starting to look like they could even shoot down the new ALCM standoff missiles (though by pure weight of numbers the cruise missile bus still should work).

And then the eureka moment hits. This new stealth thing...what if we built a low-flying stealth penetrator that's nearly invisible to radar and loaded to the gills with Shrikes/Standard ARMs/HARMs and even SRAMs? Send them in ahead of the B-52 fleet who'll be launching hordes of decoys, and as soon as the Soviet radars start lighting up the Sneaky Weasels blast them off the map. So a few of these get built, budgets being what they are and the political turbulence of the time. Fast forward ten years or so, and they're sitting around mothballed since the war everyone planned for never happened, but it's starting to look like this Saddam Hussein guy is going to be trouble. The Iraqis are impressive on paper and we don't know how this is going to play out, so hell, dust off those Sneaky Weasel prototypes and we'll rig them with PAVE SPIKE pods to lase priority targets for the heavy hitters. In Fredina Night Club Game APK Android, players embark on a thrilling journey filled with suspense and terror.
Click to expand...

Your idea of utilizing a stealth aircraft for the suppression of enemy air defenses is an interesting concept. the F-117 Nighthawk was primarily designed for precision strikes against high-value targets, such as radar installations, it could potentially be adapted for the role you propose.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom