Very "careful" language being used about this fatal crash 100 miles from Area 51

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ge-440990/

The pilot killed was previously noted working on the F-35, but the Air Force has so far named the deceased pilot but is only saying the aircraft type is "classified". Is this a previously unconfirmed or 'black' project aircraft?

Not sure if this means any program will be outed. The AF can continue to state "classified" for as long as they like.

It is known that there were multiple flying "test articles" produced for the B-21 project. This may have been one of them.

LightningZ71 wrote:

It is known that there were multiple flying "test articles" produced for the B-21 project. This may have been one of them.

Perhaps but given the pilot who died had all his hours in fighter aircraft it seems unlikely he would have been designated as a B-21 test pilot.

CX747 wrote:

Not sure if this means any program will be outed. The AF can continue to state "classified" for as long as they like.

Agree, this will die down shortly and we won't hear more about it.

He could have been assigned to the 53d TEG, Detachment 3 at Nellis AFB, which is known for conducting testing, evaluation, and adversarial training of foreign aircraft types.

It is obvious from the absolute lack of information about the aircraft type involved,that Lt. Col. Schultz was trusted with some of the most important and risky test missions. His background as a flight test engineer, a doctorate in aerospace engineering from CalTech, and being named as one of Ten Outstanding Young Americans in 2006 as a F-15 pilot says a lot about his skill and abilities.

It might be a MiG29 or Su27. Ah well, we will never know probably.

It could of course be that F-35 becomes classified as soon as it crashes...

CX747 wrote:

Not sure if this means any program will be outed. The AF can continue to state "classified" for as long as they like.

This.

My guess is that it's either a F-35 or B-21. Could easily be a MiG-29, SU-27, F-22, or some black project though. Probably never know. At least not any time soon.

Slug71 wrote:

CX747 wrote:

Not sure if this means any program will be outed. The AF can continue to state "classified" for as long as they like.

This.

My guess is that it's either a F-35 or B-21. Could easily be a MiG-29, SU-27, F-22, or some black project though. Probably never know. At least not any time soon.

There are no B-21's yet. There may be rest platforms for parts of it. But this guy was a fighter pilot so I doubt it.

They wouldn't get away with hiding an F-35 down. It wouldn't even be worth it to try. Aircraft crash in development. The F-35 is clean so far. Trying to hid it would be pointless.

I think a foreign aircraft or some sort of experimental plane makes the most sense given his background.

The MiG-29's are well known, the Moldavian ones I mean, so why hide those. The Su-27, where did the USAF got that one from?

bigjku wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

CX747 wrote:

Not sure if this means any program will be outed. The AF can continue to state "classified" for as long as they like.

This.

My guess is that it's either a F-35 or B-21. Could easily be a MiG-29, SU-27, F-22, or some black project though. Probably never know. At least not any time soon.

There are no B-21's yet. There may be rest platforms for parts of it. But this guy was a fighter pilot so I doubt it.

They wouldn't get away with hiding an F-35 down. It wouldn't even be worth it to try. Aircraft crash in development. The F-35 is clean so far. Trying to hid it would be pointless.

I think a foreign aircraft or some sort of experimental plane makes the most sense given his background.

Back in 2010 when I was at Redstone College in Colorado, me and another classmate went across the street to the airport to spot. During that time for some reason I looked up and saw an aircraft with a delta shape flying high as hell and leaving no contrail. It wasn't shaped like a B-2 and for all I know it was actually in space, but was not moving fast enough in my opinion to be in space. It wasn't something alien or anything crazy like that. The point i'm trying to make is, we don't know what the hell they have and by extension we don't know what they don't have.

In space? You can't see it, or it is so large that it would have been noticed by someone else

Did you take any pictures? It is a nice sighting though

I wonder how long that will stay on Flight Global.

Ahh looks like the cat's already out of the bag:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14202/usaf-reveals-mysterious-crash-occurred-just-days-before-two-a-10s-crashed-in-same-area

A-10 Warthogs crashed at around 8pm Wednesday evening while on a training mission over the expansive Nevada Test and Training Range in southern Nevada. Thankfully both pilots made it out alive from that incident but the exact circumstances surrounding it remain unknown. Now the USAF has noted that yet another previously undisclosed crash occurred on the range just a day before, at around 6pm on September 5th. This crash seems more mysterious outright as it took the life of an experienced test pilot and the type of aircraft involved in the mishap remains undisclosed. All we know is that it belonged to the Air Force Material Command.

Slug71 wrote:

bigjku wrote:

My guess is that it's either a F-35 or B-21

They wouldn't get away with hiding an F-35 down. It wouldn't even be worth it to try. Aircraft crash in development. The F-35 is clean so far. Trying to hid it would be pointless.

Eh, it would hardly the first time the USAF and JPO try to cover up or withhold bad news about the F-35.

Dutchy wrote:

The MiG-29's are well known, the Moldavian ones I mean, so why hide those. The Su-27, where did the USAF got that one from?

Ukraine, via a private import company. Officially brought into the US for resale to private owners, but I don't know if that was actually the plan, or just a cover story. BTW, this was long before the Ukrainian-Russian spat.

VSMUT wrote:

Slug71 wrote:

bigjku wrote:

My guess is that it's either a F-35 or B-21

They wouldn't get away with hiding an F-35 down. It wouldn't even be worth it to try. Aircraft crash in development. The F-35 is clean so far. Trying to hid it would be pointless.

Eh, it would hardly the first time the USAF and JPO try to cover up or withhold bad news about the F-35.

The last time there was a major Class A mishap with the F-35, it was immediately reported in the news as being a major mishap involving the F-35. Basically, every time the F-35 even farts, it gets reported in the news.

If it doesn't get reported in the news, Congress will hear about it anyways, and from there it gets into the news.

The Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. David L. Goldfein has even confirmed it was not a F-35 involved.

Basically, from his background, it has to be some sort of classified prototype or a foreign aircraft type. This is what was reported about Schultz's background:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... range.html

In an article on the website of The Capital Gazette in Annapolis, Maryland, Schultz was identified as a 1991 graduate of Annapolis High School and a former civilian test pilot who received multiple graduate degrees before joining the Air Force in 2001.

A YouCaring page to establish a memorial fund for Schultz's family states he received six degrees, including a doctorate in aerospace engineering from the California Institute of Technology and a master's of business administration from Penn State University.

Schultz was a U.S. Air Force combat veteran and test pilot with over 2,000 hours flying numerous aircraft, including the F-35 and CF-18, Canada's variant of the F/A-18 Hornet, and the F-15E, in which he flew more than 50 close air support missions in Afghanistan, according to the page.

He also held management positions, serving as director of operations and exchange officer at the Canadian Forces Flight Test Center, and performed systems engineering for the Airborne Laser program, the page states.

Prior to joining the military, Schultz was the senior scientist and business development manger at the Pratt & Whitney Seattle Aerosciences Center, and a rotary wing flight test engineer at the Naval Air Warfare Center, it states.

VSMUT wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The MiG-29's are well known, the Moldavian ones I mean, so why hide those. The Su-27, where did the USAF got that one from?

Ukraine, via a private import company. Officially brought into the US for resale to private owners, but I don't know if that was actually the plan, or just a cover story. BTW, this was long before the Ukrainian-Russian spat.

There was also some from Belarus, which arrived in the US in 1995.

DigitalSea wrote:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14202/usaf-reveals-mysterious-crash-occurred-just-days-before-two-a-10s-crashed-in-same-area

A-10 Warthogs crashed at around 8pm Wednesday evening while on a training mission over the expansive Nevada Test and Training Range in southern Nevada.

two A-10 in a single incident would indicate a collision?
Or GCFIT ( as in group controlled flight into terrain like: http://www.916-starfighter.de/Hot%2050%20years.htm ) ?

Dutchy wrote:

In space? You can't see it, or it is so large that it would have been noticed by someone else

Did you take any pictures? It is a nice sighting though

Had a crappy cell phone at the time (Pantech Persuit) so even if i thought to take a picture it wouldn't have been worth a damn. As for anyone else noticing, maybe they did but we were the only 2 standing there at the time.

I say it might have been in space only because it had no contrails but your right, that would have to be something huge if it was in space. At first i thought maybe it was the X-37 but that thing is tiny. So it was something ive never seen before and it wasn't black like the B-2. It was whitish and greyish.

Andre3K wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

In space? You can't see it, or it is so large that it would have been noticed by someone else

Did you take any pictures? It is a nice sighting though

Had a crappy cell phone at the time (Pantech Persuit) so even if i thought to take a picture it wouldn't have been worth a damn. As for anyone else noticing, maybe they did but we were the only 2 standing there at the time.

I say it might have been in space only because it had no contrails but your right, that would have to be something huge if it was in space. At first i thought maybe it was the X-37 but that thing is tiny. So it was something ive never seen before and it wasn't black like the B-2. It was whitish and greyish.

Maybe a B-1B with its wings back?

Slug71 wrote:

Andre3K wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

In space? You can't see it, or it is so large that it would have been noticed by someone else

Did you take any pictures? It is a nice sighting though

Had a crappy cell phone at the time (Pantech Persuit) so even if i thought to take a picture it wouldn't have been worth a damn. As for anyone else noticing, maybe they did but we were the only 2 standing there at the time.

I say it might have been in space only because it had no contrails but your right, that would have to be something huge if it was in space. At first i thought maybe it was the X-37 but that thing is tiny. So it was something ive never seen before and it wasn't black like the B-2. It was whitish and greyish.

Maybe a B-1B with its wings back?

A B-1B is also black. The B-1A was white, but that one hasn't flown in a long long time.



Still a beautiful bird though.

Could have been the fabled Aurora. Recent speculation has led people to believe that the technology needed for the project has caught up with Lockheed's ambitions.

Slug71 wrote:

Andre3K wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

In space? You can't see it, or it is so large that it would have been noticed by someone else

Did you take any pictures? It is a nice sighting though

Had a crappy cell phone at the time (Pantech Persuit) so even if i thought to take a picture it wouldn't have been worth a damn. As for anyone else noticing, maybe they did but we were the only 2 standing there at the time.

I say it might have been in space only because it had no contrails but your right, that would have to be something huge if it was in space. At first i thought maybe it was the X-37 but that thing is tiny. So it was something ive never seen before and it wasn't black like the B-2. It was whitish and greyish.

Maybe a B-1B with its wings back?

No the B-1 cannot fly as high as what I saw. This thing was unbelievably high. Plus even with the wings back a B-1 still looks like a B-1 and this was honestly shaped kinda like the A-12 Avenger, but had to be bigger because I could see it. Granted i was at 6080ish feet above sea level, but even from my vantage point it was higher than any commercial plane ive ever seen fly by.

Zachbt wrote:

Could have been the fabled Aurora. Recent speculation has led people to believe that the technology needed for the project has caught up with Lockheed's ambitions.

Nah, if it was, then it was flying slow as hell. This thing was going fast don't get me wrong, but it didn't create a sonic boom, nor did it appear to be moving at what mach 6 would look like from the ground.

I saw a video on youtube of a SR-71 flying at mach 3 over edwards at an airshow, and they had to release fuel for it to be seen because it was so high. so the object I saw had to be lowerthan SR-71 heights, but higher than business jet heights at the same time. No contrail's=too high, but it wasn't going at ridiculous speeds either.

Andre3K wrote:

Zachbt wrote:

Could have been the fabled Aurora. Recent speculation has led people to believe that the technology needed for the project has caught up with Lockheed's ambitions.

Nah, if it was, then it was flying slow as hell. This thing was going fast don't get me wrong, but it didn't create a sonic boom, nor did it appear to be moving at what mach 6 would look like from the ground.

I saw a video on youtube of a SR-71 flying at mach 3 over edwards at an airshow, and they had to release fuel for it to be seen because it was so high. so the object I saw had to be lowerthan SR-71 heights, but higher than business jet heights at the same time. No contrail's=too high, but it wasn't going at ridiculous speeds either.

A few things to bear in mind...

Contrails can be eliminated in various ways, they aren't a given that any aircraft is flying at any particular height - one aircraft may be generating a strong contrail while another one at the same altitude in the same area may be generating no contrail at all. Even slight changes in altitude can eliminate contrail formation, even when aircraft both above and below the target aircraft are generating them. The B-2 injects chemicals into its engine exhausts to prevent contrail formation.

Height and distance can be incredibly hard to judge without tools to help, even for professionals, so just bear that in mind.

For a prime example of how distance etc can be misjudged, take this case of a "missile launch" seen over California in 2010 - it made the news across the world, the USAF denied any launches etc



Turns out to be a contrail, formed by an aircraft coming toward the photographer, with the contrail disappearing over the horizon at the bottom. But it fooled tens of thousands of people into believing there had been a missile launch, with the base being closer and the tip being further away.

Maybe something like this:



Would look the size of a 757 in cruise. ( length 1600m in LEO @300km
same viewing angle as 55m in 10km height.)

https://www.facebook.com/aerospaceanaly ... 9154591245

Unknown ‘classified’ aircraft type lost at or near Area 51
The fact that an aircraft accident has occurred is usually released immediately. Unusually it was three days before the USAF admitted that it had lost a still unidentified aircraft at “around 6:00 PM’ on Tuesday 5 September, during a training mission on the Nevada Test and Training Range.
Details of the accident remain sketchy, and Major Christina Sukach, chief of public affairs for the 99 Air Base Wing at Nellis, said that: “Information about the type of aircraft involved is classified and not releasable,” though it was admitted that the aircraft was assigned to Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC). This would make it likely to have been a test aircraft of some kind – perhaps simply an F-16 or F-35 assigned to test duties, or possibly a classified prototype or a foreign aircraft type under evaluation, or in use for adversary training.
It would seem unlikely that the Air Force would want to hide the identity of the aircraft involved if it was simply an F-16, or even an F-35. In any case, the latter type seems to have been ruled out.
"I can definitely say it was not an F-35," General Dave Goldfein, US Air Force Chief of Staff of the Air Force, reportedly told ‪Military dot com.‬‬
Historically, the US has flown a succession of ‘black world’ test aircraft and prototypes in complete secrecy, before their existence became known, and often from Groom Lake. Such aircraft included the Lockheed Have Blue, the F-117, the Northrop Tacit Blue, and the Boeing Bird of Prey, while the rumoured YF-24 has never been officially acknowledged. The crash has raised questions as to the potential existence of a new classified aircraft type.
The 53rd TEG’s Detachment 3 is understood to be the operator of the Su-27s and MiG-29s used by the USAF for foreign material exploitation and associated training, and, according to the USAF, “maintains an active involvement with AFMC.” Though the 53rd TEG it is not formally assigned to Air Force Materiel Command, the Russian aircraft used by Detachment 3 may be owned by AFMC. Det 3 is the successor to the 4477th TES or Red Eagles squadron that operated the USAF’s secret fleet of MiG-17s, MiG-21s and MiG-23s.
Guy Norris, writing in Aviation Week said that: “Sources indicate Schultz was the Red Hats squadron commander at the time of his death. The Red Hats became an unnumbered unit within the Detachment 3, AFTC test wing after the 413th flight test squadron (formerly 6513th test squadron) was deactivated in 2004. Over recent years the unit has operated a variety of Russian-developed combat types, including the MiG-29 and several Sukhoi-developed models such as the Su-27P, one of which was recently observed flying in the vicinity.”
But other well-placed sources dismissed the claim that Schultz was a Red Hat or Red Eagle, and have stated that the aircraft involved in the accident was categorically not a MiG or Sukhoi operated by the 53rd TEG. Others have commented that the pilot’s career trajectory was perhaps atypical of a ‘Red Eagle’, but more representative of someone who might test a ‘Black World’ prototype.
Nellis Air Force Base said that the cause was under investigation and that additional information about the accident would be released at a later date.
A Nellis spokesperson implied that the delay in reporting the accident reflected the focus that had rightly been placed on search and recovery efforts and on notifying next-of-kin.
The location was given as being “about 100 miles northwest of Nellis AFB” – which, perhaps not entirely coincidentally, is also a good description of the location of the top secret Groom Lake test airfield – popularly known as Area 51.
It was reported that the pilot involved, Lieutenant Colonel Eric ‘Doc’ Schultz, 44, had died as a result of injuries sustained in the accident, though Major Sukach said that it was “unclear as to whether Schultz had died at the crash site.”
Another Nellis spokesperson, Tech. Sgt. Siuta Ika confirmed that Lt. Col. Eric Schultz had been piloting the aircraft when it crashed, but said that it was unknown whether other people were on board at the time of the crash. Other sources suggest that Colonel Schultz was the only occupant.
Though Colonel Schultz’s unit assignment has not been released, some details of his stellar career have been revealed.
As a young boy Eric Schultz dreamed of becoming an Astronaut, but poor eyesight led to three rejections from the US military (five according to one press source) after he graduated from Annapolis High School in 1991, although he earned his private pilot’s license at the age of 19.
As a freshman at Pennsylvania State University, he was turned away from the Reserve Officer Training Program but was denied due to poor eyesight. While still at University, Schultz took a civilian job with the Navy as a rotary wing flight test engineer.
Schultz subsequently worked as a business development director for an aerospace company (at Pratt & Whitney’s Seattle Aerosciences Center) and took multiple college degrees (six according to one report), graduating with a master’s degree in aeronautics in 1997 (possibly sponsored by the Department of Defense) from the University of Washington, and gaining a master’s degree in business administration from Penn State University before receiving a doctorate in aerospace engineering from the California Institute of Technology in 2000.
His master’s work included research on a ram accelerator, a gun-like device designed to launch payloads into exo-atmospheric orbital flight.
In 2001, after the Air Force began accepting pilots who had undergone corrective laser eye surgery, Schultz was able to join the USAF as a pilot, initially serving as a flying instructor.
In 2006, while flying F-15E Strike Eagles with the 391st Fighter Squadron (“Bold Tigers”) at Mountain Home Air Force Base he was listed as one of the year’s Ten Outstanding Young Americans – an honour previously meted out to Presidents John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton. As an F-15E pilot he more than 50 close air support missions in Afghanistan.
At that time, Schultz still aspired to becoming an astronaut, saying that while he loved flying jets, his goal remained to be in space, though he also said that: “As long as I'm enjoying what I'm doing, and I'm contributing positively, that's all that counts."
In pursuit of his ultimate goal of becoming an astronaut he attended the USAF Test Pilot’s School (Class 08A in 2008) as soon as he was able - earning his place in four and a half years, when it would normally take about eight years.
Schultz served as the Director of Operations for the Canadian Forces Flight Test Center while on an exchange tour and undertook systems engineering work for the Airborne Laser program, before joining the F-35A test and evaluation effort.
On 15 September 2011, then-Captain Schultz became the 28th pilot to qualify to fly the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter and was responsible for the first airborne weapons release from the Joint Strike Fighter. He reportedly amassed more than 2,000 flying hours and flew more than 210 missions flight testing the F-35 and CF-188.

It was an Su-35. Book it. Done.

Don't ask.

Just kidding. Have no idea what it was, but I'm pretty sure it was a foreign aircraft. If was an American project, I doubt we'd have this much info about the crash in the first place.

neutronstar73 wrote:

It was an Su-35. Book it. Done.

Don't ask.

Just kidding. Have no idea what it was, but I'm pretty sure it was a foreign aircraft. If was an American project, I doubt we'd have this much info about the crash in the first place.

It's not out of the question that somebody, somewhere, was thinking like Viktor Bolenko.

I could also conceive of an aircraft being borrowed from a nation like India, which the owner might not want the country of origin openly knowing about.

But regardless of whether it was US or foreign built, a service member died, and an aircraft being classified does not automatically mean that whatever he was flying was so secret they can't even admit they have a secret under such unfortunate circumstances.

Jackonicko wrote:

Det 3 is the successor to the 4477th TES or Red Eagles squadron that operated the USAF’s secret fleet of MiG-17s, MiG-21s and MiG-23s.
Guy Norris, writing in Aviation Week said that: “Sources indicate Schultz was the Red Hats squadron commander at the time of his death.

Just a quick point of note:

The Red Eagles and the Red Hats were different units. The 6513th Red Hats were an AFSC (later AFMC) unit based at Groom Lake and were tasked with the technical exploitation of foreign aircraft (i.e. finding out about their technical and flight characteristics). The 4477th TES Red Eagles were a TAC unit based at Tonopah who flew MiG-17/21/23 in the Aggressor role, in other words they were flying the tactical exploitation.

There's very strong evidence the 4477th continued to operate in one form or another after it was officially disbanded in 1988. Perhaps both technical and tactical exploitation are carried out by the same unit now?

Av Week is reporting that Schultz's death involved a foreign aircraft type:

http://aviationweek.com/afa-national-co ... craft-type

ThePointblank wrote:

Av Week is reporting that Schultz's death involved a foreign aircraft type:

http://aviationweek.com/afa-national-co ... craft-type

Other sources are contradicting this. Far too much secrecy for just an SU-27.

cpd wrote:

Other sources are contradicting this. Far too much secrecy for just an SU-27.

How about providing some of those sources?

There's always chatter with the fringe types pointing at supposed black projects. What we do know (from the director of SkunkWorks himself) is that Lockheed Martin and the USAF in general is always decades ahead in development work from what is known about today. Look at the B-2 Spirit. That's early 1980s design work from when Carter was President.

The latest buzz is about an alleged piece of futuristic test kit called the TR-3B Astra. Maybe, maybe not. The truth is somewhere between the denials and the stories, so just what crashed could well make the F-35 look like a Spitfire.

Who knows?

Channex757 wrote:

The latest buzz is about an alleged piece of futuristic test kit called the TR-3B Astra. Maybe, maybe not. The truth is somewhere between the denials and the stories, so just what crashed could well make the F-35 look like a Spitfire.

Who knows?

Latest buzz? The TR-3B has been the holy grail of the conspiracy theorist since the 1980s, it's nothing new on that scene.

moo wrote:

Latest buzz? The TR-3B has been the holy grail of the conspiracy theorist since the 1980s, it's nothing new on that scene.

The buzz of late is that it's about to be made public officially, like the F-117 was. Watching the tin foil hat brigades is interesting. Alex Jones used to be a fringe character on that side of things until he went bat shit crazy, and there are several almost credible websites and YouTube channels on the subject.

It wouldn't surprise me if something like that exists as enough black budget money gets into dark corners.

Channex757 wrote:

moo wrote:

Latest buzz? The TR-3B has been the holy grail of the conspiracy theorist since the 1980s, it's nothing new on that scene.

The buzz of late is that it's about to be made public officially, like the F-117 was. Watching the tin foil hat brigades is interesting. Alex Jones used to be a fringe character on that side of things until he went bat shit crazy, and there are several almost credible websites and YouTube channels on the subject.

It wouldn't surprise me if something like that exists as enough black budget money gets into dark corners.

Again, that "buzz of late" has been around for decades.

The TR-3B is nothing more than a conspiracy theorists wet dream.

moo wrote:

Channex757 wrote:

moo wrote:

Latest buzz? The TR-3B has been the holy grail of the conspiracy theorist since the 1980s, it's nothing new on that scene.

The buzz of late is that it's about to be made public officially, like the F-117 was. Watching the tin foil hat brigades is interesting. Alex Jones used to be a fringe character on that side of things until he went bat shit crazy, and there are several almost credible websites and YouTube channels on the subject.

It wouldn't surprise me if something like that exists as enough black budget money gets into dark corners.

Again, that "buzz of late" has been around for decades.

The TR-3B is nothing more than a conspiracy theorists wet dream.

I doubt it is that either. More likely it is one of the technology demonstrator aircraft that has been flying around for a while or heaven forbid, the B-21 if there is a demonstrator for it, which there most likely is.

I mean if it was just an SU-27, who cares? It's a known aircraft type and everyone knows they have them already.

THe comments above are right that the companies are way ahead in technology from what they are showing us. SR-72 is a design from a very long time ago. It isn't new, only just that they are making it more public now, aside from a chance appearance many years ago in a documentary where it was undergoing wind-tunnel testing.

cpd wrote:

moo wrote:

Channex757 wrote:

The buzz of late is that it's about to be made public officially, like the F-117 was. Watching the tin foil hat brigades is interesting. Alex Jones used to be a fringe character on that side of things until he went bat shit crazy, and there are several almost credible websites and YouTube channels on the subject.

It wouldn't surprise me if something like that exists as enough black budget money gets into dark corners.

Again, that "buzz of late" has been around for decades.

The TR-3B is nothing more than a conspiracy theorists wet dream.

I doubt it is that either. More likely it is one of the technology demonstrator aircraft that has been flying around for a while or heaven forbid, the B-21 if there is a demonstrator for it, which there most likely is.

I mean if it was just an SU-27, who cares? It's a known aircraft type and everyone knows they have them already.

THe comments above are right that the companies are way ahead in technology from what they are showing us. SR-72 is a design from a very long time ago. It isn't new, only just that they are making it more public now, aside from a chance appearance many years ago in a documentary where it was undergoing wind-tunnel testing.

I'm not disputing there are classified types, but the TR-3B isn't something anyone should seriously suggest as a possibility... it's been part of conspiracy folklore for so long, it's grown weeds around its base.

cpd wrote:

I doubt it is that either. More likely it is one of the technology demonstrator aircraft that has been flying around for a while or heaven forbid, the B-21 if there is a demonstrator for it, which there most likely is.

I mean if it was just an SU-27, who cares? It's a known aircraft type and everyone knows they have them already.

THe comments above are right that the companies are way ahead in technology from what they are showing us. SR-72 is a design from a very long time ago. It isn't new, only just that they are making it more public now, aside from a chance appearance many years ago in a documentary where it was undergoing wind-tunnel testing.

There are usually tech demonstrators around that are deep black and very occasionally get seen in public places, crashes being the most obvious as these can be hard to keep under cover. There were weird shape stealth designs that eventually morped into the B-2 and F-117.

Stealth is understood technology now so I expect the latest projects are indeed going to be propulsion. Some kind of system that negates inertia would be the Holy Grail and I could see that swallowing a big chunk of black project money. If the theoretical physicists say "maybe" about anything, you can bet somewhere there is a lab chasing after that dream.

I'm not going to speculate on what is or isn't out there. If you wanted to track things down, I'm sure you could - it'd take persistence and knowing where to look and doing so from public locations where you won't get into trouble. I wouldn't bother doing that as it just doesn't interest me.

A report has emerged from Radio Moscow that claims that a famous Russian test pilot was not only in contact with Schultz shortly before the crash, but that he warned him of executing certain maneuvers while flying Russian hardware:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14 ... ar-area-51

The report says the Schultz and Tolboyev were in contact as recently as a month before Schultz's death. Tolboyev is quoted as stating (Google translation):

"I talked with him, I told him a month ago: do not do what we do. I showed him dead loops, but said: do not do this. It's only our plane, dear, we know what to do with it. First you need to know what you're on. The Cossack is only a Cossack on his horse.

I just warned them: you can not do this. The difference is 1 degree, exactly one degree. He was a good guy, he flew well, his fate is as follows. He was experienced, no questions asked. We must pay tribute: American pilots and English - great pilots, we appreciate them and never badly do not speak of them as professionals.

But there are some subtleties very deep, only we, the test pilots know them. I told him: "you'll perish, you can not do what I do." This is the line."