Exposed Stealth Helo?

[EskimoJoe]

How do we know it's new?

Isn't that the point of these aircraft and these teams, to go into high risk situations?  You also don't want to lose a highly skilled and highly trained member of a SEAL team, so why didn't they send in mall security guards in VW vans?

Seal teams are highly experienced and trained in these types of conditions.
If it were a new design, it would be unproven in a situation like this.

All I'm saying is I wouldn't trust some newfangled untested design for such a high importance mission.

[F22RaptorDude]

Seal teams are highly experienced and trained in these types of conditions.
If it were a new design, it would be unproven in a situation like this.

All I'm saying is I wouldn't trust some newfangled untested design for such a high importance mission.

Maybe the expected him to not actually be There? Since he was a tricky bastard to find in the first place.

[Jayhawk]

No the date is not part of my "theory"

as for the other part we've had at least 2 times to get him that I know of but we best leave that alone before Skuzzy gets us.

But generally you hear of prototype a/c long before they every get out to do a mission. why is this one different? There is just something wrong with it.

Your normal SOP for this type of thing would have dealt with the problem. hell had airframes that couldn't be recovered shot with hellfires from Apaches (extreme case) but I'm sayin if they saw that piece they would have got it too.
Just seems like a whole lot of thing that dont add up. and untested airframe on a high profile mission only a piece of it left what were they ina hurry for? to bury the body (wouldn't be running from the Pakistanis).

You hear about prototypes that you hear about, just because you hear about one doesn't mean you hear about them all.  You don't hear about prototypes that they don't want you to hear about.  You can't assume that if you didn't hear about, it doesn't exist.

Also, how can you talk about SOP in a situation like this.  This was far from a standard operation by a standard team.

How do you know this is an untested airframe?  You're still making assumptions based on very little real information.

Seal teams are highly experienced and trained in these types of conditions.
If it were a new design, it would be unproven in a situation like this.

All I'm saying is I wouldn't trust some newfangled untested design for such a high importance mission.

Again, how do you know this is a "newfangled untested design"?

[Sonicblu]

Its all part of the show boys all part of the show.

Pull your heads out of the posterior portion of your anatomy.

Ya they had enough explosives to completely destroy everything but the tail rotor section.

My BS meter is Pegged. The guy died of renal failure and they had him under surveillance, he croaks in the middles of the night and they say hey how can we use this to our advantage. Plus the timing is all wrong. Why now if the have had him under surveillance for eight months.

We need a BS animation.  

[EskimoJoe]

Again, how do you know this is a "newfangled untested design"?

Considering a Nightstalker crashed it on landing... 

[Jayhawk]

Actually, I think we have an adequate emoticon for this thread.


 

[Vudu15]

Regardless there are just too many things goin on here for this to be anywhere near normal. SOPs apply to everything even those situations that why they're in place for when stuff happens like this.

[TheDudeDVant]

Every weapon system was new on the battlefield at some point and not tested.

[Reaper90]

But generally you hear of prototype a/c long before they every get out to do a mission.

Kinda like with the F-117, eh?

[4deck]

My BS meter is Pegged. The guy died of renal failure and they had him under surveillance, he croaks in the middles of the night and they say hey how can we use this to our advantage. Plus the timing is all wrong. Why now if the have had him under surveillance for eight months.

We need a BS animation.  

Yeah know, that too me sounds very plausable. Ofcourse I believe in alot of conspiracies too. But do think you may be on to something there.

As far as animations go though, Most of mine would get me skuzzified if I posted them here. There out there though.

[Reschke]

Whatever it doesn't matter now does it...perhaps its just disinformation and nothing really happened to the 2nd helo. They brought in a crashed and burnt up portions of a Blackhawk on the Chinook just to stir the pot.

[Raptor]

another thing is you believe SF guys dont know how to hide their tracks, wouldn't be any thing left of the airframe. and if it was made of the same material as regular helos it would have burned to nothin pretty quickly.
Plus the tail rotors on the wrong side and from the pic there are no steps to get to the tail to check for maintenance or preflight. and one more thing our blades spin counter clock wise this suspect airframes blades are goin clockwise.

Look at the actual pictures and not the artist rendition. Also if they were trying to make it a bit more stealthy, don't you think they would remove surfaces like steps to get to the tail? From the looks of it, it crashed and the tail hit the wall, breaking it off. The fact that the tail rotor has more blades than normal can be explained by the large plate you see. There is less surface area of the blades being exposed, so they needed more blades.
The rest of your argument about something "feeling" off doesn't hold merit in a logical discussion. From my perspective it looks like a helicopter was heavily modified to be, though not entirely, more stealthy.

[EskimoJoe]

An article from my local news station, notice the 'ding' in the wall to the
right of the two men.

http://www.ktuu.com/la-fg-bin-laden-intel-20110505,0,4844757.story

*edit
My mistake, at second glance it looks like it may just be a branch and an
optical illusion 

[Westy]

"They brought in a crashed and burnt up portions of a Blackhawk on the Chinook just to stir the pot."

lol. You know of the mah_roons in this topic will not only believe
that they'll spread it as 'fact'

[Vudu15]

Look at the actual pictures and not the artist rendition. Also if they were trying to make it a bit more stealthy, don't you think they would remove surfaces like steps to get to the tail? From the looks of it, it crashed and the tail hit the wall, breaking it off. The fact that the tail rotor has more blades than normal can be explained by the large plate you see. There is less surface area of the blades being exposed, so they needed more blades.
The rest of your argument about something "feeling" off doesn't hold merit in a logical discussion. From my perspective it looks like a helicopter was heavily modified to be, though not entirely, more stealthy.

You need the steps to check that tail be fore and after flight and they retract into the tail pylon so how do they check that? they would need a stand. On the second part the tail hittin the wall. That's what I was thinking but I don't think those drive shafts would still be together after a hit like that. Now the burnt part of the wreck does look like a Hawk you can see 3 spindles 1 engine what looks to be one accessory gear box.

Now from my "feelings" I'm just a normal everyday crewchief on Hawks these guys are so high above me it ain't funny, but why would they try to land in that small compound? diameter on the main rotor alone is 53' 8" that place ain't big enough. plus you can be guaranteed they had satellite images of the landing places yet they still "crashed" there. again call me crazy but it seems real strange to me. The amount of experience and they wreck an a/c fail to completely destroy it. Then they just leave...