Author Topic: XB-70 follow on? (Read 1052 times)

Wolfala · « **on:** April 06, 2006, 04:30:56 AM »

If you guys can identify this aircraft, please be my guest. I havn't seen anything resembling something close to the XB-70 except in books, but this looks like precisely that from the AWST thing about the cancelled Blackstar program which was a 2 stage to orbit program mentioned here.

http://www.aviationweek.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/030606p1.xml

The full 24 meg version of the photo

http://www.park-ethereal.net/images/DSC_3522.png

I did some enhancement - if its a fake, its a very good fake b/c I can find absolutely no artifacts down to the individual pixles.

XB-70 back in the 60s.

Furball · « **Reply #1 on:** April 06, 2006, 04:42:31 AM »

looks like an airliner with the sun glinting off of it.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #2 on:** April 06, 2006, 06:09:09 AM »

You're probably right Furball, but those two glints sure happen to be in the right place.

Too bad the con... chemtrail isn't a donut on a rope... makes for a much better thread.

moose · « **Reply #3 on:** April 06, 2006, 06:12:07 AM »

the aspect doesnt seem right to be a twin tail like the -70... looks more like a standard airliner to me

at that aspect for it to be a -70 i think the 'glints' shouldnt be as offcentered as they are.. they dont look much like sun reflections either so who knows

Gunslinger · « **Reply #4 on:** April 06, 2006, 06:21:24 AM »

looks like an F15 or F22 at full AB to me.

eagl · « **Reply #5 on:** April 06, 2006, 06:32:49 AM »

Looks like an airliner with some odd glints to me. The perspective just isn't right for it to be a twin tail aircraft heading at that angle away from the camera, but the perspective gets lost in the zoomed-in crop.

Hawklore · « **Reply #6 on:** April 06, 2006, 07:10:31 AM »

I have a feeling those are placed sunflare/glints..

The software now days molds it into the image.

I don't think engines would look like that during broad daylight at such a high alt.

Reschke · « **Reply #7 on:** April 06, 2006, 07:35:56 AM »

I'm certainly not an expert in photograph analysis or even military/civilian aircraft but that original that Wolfala linked does not look like any civilian airliner that I have seen. The tails appear to be extremely wide but more vertical than what I have seen of an F-22 and I have seen a few of them flying around down at Tyndall AFB in Panama City, FL. I would think that a zoomed in view of an F-22 would reveal the angles of the tail planes pretty easily. Also the only other aircraft I have seen with tails that wide would be an SR-71 but this one looks larger than what I have seen on a SR-71 sitting still. These also look more defined rather than the rounded shape of an SR-71 tail section.

Dinger · « **Reply #8 on:** April 06, 2006, 08:02:00 AM »

It's a civilian airliner all right. What you guys want to see as a second tail is the right wing. Time of photograph is dawn/dusk, as you can tell by the contrast coming off the contrail -- bright contrail, dark sky means that the sun at an angle and behind the photographer. That's also idea conditions for a glint. No need for fancy software.
Besides, afterburners aren't that bright -- you wouldn't see that much blooming in A/Bs at "broad daylight"

nirvana · « **Reply #9 on:** April 06, 2006, 08:08:12 AM »

The 2 glints are on the side of the plane if i'm not mistaken. The first "vertical stab" is actually a wing. Yeah?

Dux · « **Reply #10 on:** April 06, 2006, 11:31:55 AM »

Sure does look like the Valkyrie, but...

The 2 bright spots, which look like jet/rocket exhaust, line up perfectly parallel with the velocity vector of the aircraft. However, there is quite a bit of of (horizontal or vertical?) separation between the contrails, suggesting that the bright spots are not the source of propulsion. Contrails coming from those bright spots would be one in front of the other, looking like a single one from this viewpoint.

You could argue that the aircraft has suddenly rolled in the time between when the photo was snapped and when the contrails formed, but I seriously doubt it... not an aircraft that large and that fast.

Apart from that, I have no idea. Certainly, never believe everything that AW&ST tells you.

Dowding · « **Reply #11 on:** April 06, 2006, 12:21:30 PM »

First impression was an airliner, at an attitude like that shown in furball's pic. Had to really look for a twin-finned aircracft, and when I do see it, it looks all wrong, aspect wise.

indy007 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 06, 2006, 12:59:54 PM »

The aspect and dimensions look wrong. What I think some people are assuming the right tail is... just doesn't look wide enough to me to be a tail. Looks alot more like a wing imho.

ChickenHawk · « **Reply #13 on:** April 06, 2006, 01:27:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dinger
It's a civilian airliner all right. What you guys want to see as a second tail is the right wing. Time of photograph is dawn/dusk, as you can tell by the contrast coming off the contrail -- bright contrail, dark sky means that the sun at an angle and behind the photographer. That's also idea conditions for a glint. No need for fancy software.
Besides, afterburners aren't that bright -- you wouldn't see that much blooming in A/Bs at "broad daylight"

You guys had me going for a while there but I think Dinger is right. It's nothing more than an airliner doing a slow bank to the left. The contrails do not match up for the two "vertical" points to be twin tails. It does match up for a airliner in a left bank. The bright points are just the afternoon/morning sun glinting off the aluminum lower right quarter and are blocking the camera from picking up the left wing.

mora · « **Reply #14 on:** April 06, 2006, 02:07:48 PM »

Yep, the contrails definately suggest a banking airliner. The "vertical stabilizers" look too dissimilar too.