Big Black Delta Mystery Solved?

jonerik writes "According to this article from Space.com, hundreds of sightings of enormous arrowhead-shaped aircraft that have been logged since the 1980s just might have been solved. According to a new report by the National Institute for Discovery Science, the craft (referred to as Big Black Deltas, or BBDs) are massive black airships on the order of 600 feet long, 300 feet wide, and 40 feet tall, weighing on the order of 100 tons and capable of carrying huge loads over long distances. Since a 2001 NIDS study correlated sightings of large triangular or delta-shaped objects with Air Force Materiel Command and Air Mobility Command bases throughout the United States, it's assumed that the BBDs are DoD transport airships. Dr. L. Scott Miller, professor of Aerospace Engineering at Wichita State University, agrees with much of the NIDS report. 'I do think that a large airship, with a heavy lift and other mission objectives, has been built,' says Dr. Miller. 'Lockheed has shown a great deal of interest in airships for many years. The real question is whether the Department of Defense has committed to buy and use such machines.'"

Why be so secretive?

[yali]

Among a range of NIDS observations, the group believes the BBDs are powered by electrokinetic/field drives, or airborne nuclear power units.

Oh, that's why. The DoD probably doesn't want to deal with the fallout (ha ha) from announcing to the public that they're putting nuclear material in airborne vessels.

Fancy that...

[boowax]

And here I spent so many years believing they were weather balloons!

Re:Why would they classify airships?

[captain_craptacular]

All of the "wars" america has handled in the last little bit were total one sided slaughters. It's not like if Iraq of Afganistan had an extra 2 weeks to prepare they would have "won"...

This is ridiculous.

[Debillitatus]

The editors came up real short on this one. After reading the /. blurb, it sounded like an actual piece of journalism that was reporting on this. Ok, fine.

Then I went to the website that this came from. Let me give those of you who bought this a clue: Any website which has "Consciousness Studies" on the front page is not anything close to reputable when it comes to speculating about objects flying in the air.

Perhaps I'm being a bit thick-headed and missed the sarcasm, but it sure seemed like this was honestly submitted, and this is nothing but a load of crap.

Re:Bullshit. I saw one.

[Elwood P Dowd]

Yeah, but a stealth blimp would need to be angular. That way it doesn't reflect radar back in every direction. And being thin like you describe would be advantageous too, in that regard. However, it would still have to be big enough that it could have sufficient lift. How big was the object you saw? If your UFO was full of helium, think it could lift a few tanks?

The orientation of a blimp could change. It's lift is not defined by the direction it's facing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't necesarily believe your story *or* the one on space.com, but I don't see what your argument is. Your description sounds like it could easily be a... um... stealth blimp. How else is it going to remain airborne silently?

Re:Why would they classify airships?

[Wyatt Earp]

In Somalia no one "won".

The United States did pull out it's forces, but the United Nations Mission (Pakistan, Qatar, Italy) remained.

The United States Embassy remained.

By the Day of the Rangers, the United States was already starting a draw-down in the region.

The Somalia people lost, the Clans lost, the United Nations lost, the United States lost soldiers, the Canadians broke up it's Para Regiment.

There were no winners in that conflict.

Re:Why would they classify airships?

[Anonymous Coward]

why would they classify airships? they wouldn't.

keeping stuff classified is pretty difficult; lots of paperwork, and lots of lazy officers. and nobody wants to get in trouble for leaking classified info, so the less of it, the better. furthermore, it's taking about a year and a half to get a top secret clearance right now, so having a complete military/civilian maintenance staff with the appropriate clearances would be tough.

there are lots of people on air force bases. maybe in the deserts of nevada you could keep a plane secret, but if a plane landed on the runway outside my office window, i'd see it. and i have no clearance, so i'm under no obligation to keep it silent.

and i agree with the other posters: if the enemy knew that we could land large numbers of troops and equipment with just a few planes, they wouldn't be able to stop us... we land this stuff on our own bases, not in the middle of the field. if anything, they'd have to respect our awesome power to drop hundreds of tanks on them in a heartbeat, and then chicken out.

so basically, imagine having a fleet of large objects flying above highly populated areas that only a few thousand people in the world are allowed to see, and the enemy doesn't really want to see... you wanna be in charge of this? didn't think so. neither does the gov't.

-name withheld, just in case-, A1C, USAF

Re:You know what is really interesting is

[xevioso]

Look, it doesnt matter how light the ship is...why the heck would you make it that big unless...you wanted to carry a lot of stuff. Ie, tanks. Artillery. Supplies. That sort of technology, if feasible, would be perfect for transporting an army anywhere in the world in less than a day. So that technology would assist in keeping the plane afloat, as well as the fact that it is incredibly boyant. Now, something else interesting is looking at the debate in congress recently over the crreation of the Crusader artillery piece. The main argument against it in congress was because a: the opponents believed we didn't need it, and b: it is so heavy that it would be inneffective in a real situation because it would take so long to get there. But with a plane like this, it makes it a much more useful weapon. A very good use for this plane would be an attack on China. China is known for it's slow responses to crisis events. Once they get going, look out. But they are slow. So imagine they attack Taiwan. For whatever reason. We decide to assist, and God forbid, go to war. We take a bunch of these blimps, load em with tanks, artilelry, you name it, and land it RIGHT SMACK in Tienanment square and occupy the People's Party Congress in less than a day. China wouldn't even know what had hit em. No invasion, no land war, no collateral damage...just boom, instant government change. It could happen.

Re:Why would they classify airships?

[Fred Ferrigno]

I think surprise could be very important to the outcome in the (probably) upcoming war against Iraq.

Think about what you just said. If it occurs to you that a war against Iraq is probable, maybe the same thought occurs to the Iraqis? Kinda ruins the whole surprise aspect when the Washington Post publishes your battle plans. Congress is already holding hearings about how to set up our puppet government in Baghdad once we've done away with Saddam.

They know we're coming. We just don't know it yet.

Re:Bullshit. I saw one.

[brsmith4]

Even the military has to follow FAA regulations when flying, especially near the vicinity of an airport. Could you imaging the debacle if a passenger jet had struck that invisible triangle in the sky?

Counterpoints: Reasons to Fly and Classify

[reallocate]

1. The existence of "big airships" would be classified if knowledge of them exposed classified technologies and/or methodologies used to build, fly and maintain them.

2. "Keeping stuff" classified is not that difficult. No one is going to avoid any promising new technology simply because it will be classified. Clearances do take a long time, but plenty of cleared personnel are already available.

3. The U-2, the stealth prototypes, and the SR-71 all flew for years before being publicly acknowledged by confining flight operations and support to a small number of secure facilties.

4. Lack of a clearance does not absolve you of responsibility for exposing classified information. If someone decides to land a secret aircraft within view of your office window, one of two things is likely to happen: (1) You won't be allowed to be there when it lands; (2) you get a security briefing, you sign some papers, and you get a new clearance.

5. A large, stealthy transport that can hover or make use of a very short runway and fly missions of global dimensions would be a tremendous boon to any country's military. Such an aircraft would greatly reduce dependence on prepositioning troops and materials and on the willingess of other nations to allow use of their facilities and airspace.

6. If such an aircraft exists, why assume it is a cargo or troop transport? Why not a weapons platform? The U.S. uses the B-2 as a weapons platform on flights originating within the U.S. Think what weaponry a stealth aircraft the size of a football field could carry.

Re:It's about the upstream...

[timeOday]

Very general knowledge such as "the US may attack us within the next couple of years" is useless. Just like when Al-Qaeda spreads rumors that there might be an attack somewhere in the northeast US, "soon."

I think the congressional hearings are great. Support for overthrowing Saddam is already shaky. We either need to not do it, or to do it with the moral backing of the democratic process.

Attacking with surprise can save lives. On the other hand, staying out of Vietnam would have saved a whole lot of lives, too.

Two words:

[SaDan]

Airborne Laser.

http://www.af.mil/lib/afissues/1997/app_b_14.htm l

http://www.airbornelaser.com/

http://www.phys.ksu.edu/perg/vqm/laserweb/Ch-9/C 9s 3t3p4.htm

A nuclear powered airship that can hover on the edge space with a massive laser to blast the piss out of missles.

Several Points about This

[evilviper]

Yes, yes, crap. Thanks, let's move on.

Anyhow, when the next secret aircraft is uncovered, and tied to a number of unsolved sightings, it would be nearly as significant as proof that it was aliens.

How secure would you feel knowing that there were military aircraft overhead, that no radar station was able to confirm? How would you feel knowing that the paranoid kook that you discounted was actually right? All the reports that have been discounted will no doubt give great insight, and reveal tell-tale signs of what the government does when attempting to cover-up a legit sighting.

And I'd like to end with some advice for you kooks that often photograph blury black blotches flying in the sky. Get the following:

1. An industrial stregenth spot-light.
2. A very hi-definition video camera, with good optical zoom
3. A laser range-finder

With that, you should be able to:

1. Light-up the craft.
OR
2. Instantly determine what is causing the optical illusion.
3. Get very detailed moving photos of the craft.
4. Get a definitive distance measurement, that will help when reviewing the tape(s).
5. Get credibility

You might discover classified military craft-in which case you can rub the video in the face of all the radar operators.
Hell, even if you discover that you aren't seeing craft, you just might end up with the most detailed film of some particular natural phenomenon. That's not such a bad runner-up prize.

#5 is most important. It was crappy photos that convinced the public of the lock-ness monster. The same such photos aren't going to convince anyone with half a brain.

In the worst case, with that setup, you WILL difinitively discover the real source of those sightings, and put your own mind at ease.

Heh, Aliens that can travel much faster than the speed of light, can instantly accelerate, and can stay hidden for a century, but they can't stay 'cloaked' at night, or in areas where there is not adaqute equipment to get a good record of them.