Steve DaviesI’m rereading the book. I’m starting to pick up more detail but Mr. Davies, if you’re reading this…I like your book.
Many thanks. I appreciate the feedback.
Steve DaviesInk
What is interesting to one person may not be so to another. Until I settled on the conclusion that it was a sea plane, it certainly interested me.
Steve DaviesIt looks like a bird, do not look like a UFO at all.
A UFO is, by definition, something that is unidentified – it could be a bird, a balloon, an aeroplane, or anything else that flies.
This therefore qualifies as a UFO – the fact that you think it is a bird, whereas I think it is a sea plane, proves the point.
Steve DaviesI would be highly skeptical on this one. Looks like the photographer has simply caught an out of focus crow and is attempting to pass it off as an aircraft. Looks like the autofocus is focused on the trees as the bird passes the camera.
TJ
Nice retort, TJ.
In this instance, I think that the ‘bird’ really is an aeroplane… that explains why the photographer says he heard a hushed jet noise as it went past:
Steve DaviesHAVE PAD report scan
I thought that this scan would interest the sane among us.
In December 2007 I filed a FOIA for HAVE PAD (MiG-23MS Flogger E exploitation at Groom in 1977/78). Having waited patiently since then, two large reports finally landed on my doorstep this morning.
This particular scan proves that the Flogger E’s Tumansky R29-300 motor was exploited to produce non-cooperative target recognition data for the F-4 (TRISAT was the Spectrum Analysis Processor used in the F-4 at the time) and E-3A. As stated in a previous post, the process was later repeated for the benefit of the F-15’s AGP-63.
Cheers
Steve
Steve DaviesIm not sure if this has been posted before, but this is a video of the Gulfstream/Mig-29/F-15 over Groom.
Nice find. Thanks.
The watermark on the video makes it pretty difficult to positively ID either type, in my view, although my impression of the first is that is is almost certainly a Su-27.
The video of the a/c in formation with the Gulfstream, and from which the still frame on this forum is taken, is still inconclusive, although it remains my view that it is most likely a MiG-29.
Steve DaviesI don’t know…..Until atleast a clear photo is available…..(assuming it is not doctored)
Agreed. This is all healthy debate, and until a clearer image is available, there are always going to be differences in opinion.
What about “Black Versions”, very heavily modified versions F-15/16/18 and so on rather than Su-27/MiG-29? Above image could indeed be a “Black” US plane and not something that came outside of the US. A modified F-15?
Again, highly unlikely in my view. That’s just my opinion. 🙂
Steve DaviesWhy test at Groom? One answer would be because the airliner isn’t measuring the signature of the F-15, but rather of what the F-15 was carrying…
I would say that’s highly unlikely; there’s plenty of classified weapons and sensor testing that goes on at Edwards, Edwards North Base, Pax River and Eglin, away from the public eye. And even if that was the case, you wouldn’t need to schedule the sortie between Red Flag sessions.
Steve DaviesDecided to add some special F-15 variants…
Left -> Right
* F-15 S/TMD (From top)
* F-15 ACTIVE
* F-15B Research Testbed
F-15 S/MTD became the F-15 ACTIVE, and both pre-date the 2003 photo by some margin (S/MTD became ACTIVE in 1997, IIRC). In addition, ACTIVE was a NASA programme that sought to develop advanced control methods for aircraft with damaged flight control surfaces – there would be absolutely no reason to conduct an IR/EO test at Groom Lake since ACTIVE’s external appearance and modifications were never classified.
The F-15B test bed (again, owned by NASA) was painted white and blue in 2003 (the time of the photo in question), so that can automatically be struck off the list. Even if it had been grey, the question would still remain, why do a test at Groom?
Steve DaviesI have seen photos of a Gulfstream N105TB flying around the area so might be that.
Zoot
Good catch. It does indeed appear to be a Gulfstream.
Steve DaviesBreaking my own self imposed ‘no more posts in this thread’ rule…
One of the biggest indicators to the identity of the jet in the bottom photo is, to my mind, the likely purpose of the sortie.
The Sabrliner is used to test IR and EO signatures, and does so at Groom specifically within the context of programmes that are black. The accompanying text explained that an F-16 was flying ahead of the subject a/c and releasing flares, so one can assume that the Sabreliner was either measuring the IR signature of the subject a/c’s motors against a background of flares, or calibrating the subject aircraft’s own susceptibility to flares. If you assume that this is probably a reasonable ball park for what they were doing, then the question becomes this: if it was an F-15, why do it at Groom?
Unless the subject aircraft was one that you did not want people to see, then even of the test had involved sensitive modifications to an existing a/c type, there would have been many other places in the US where these tests could have been conducted discretely and within a context of airspace located away from the public gaze – Eglin and Edwards being the most obvious test centre candidates.
Asides from the fact that the planform of the subject aircraft in the photo seems to me to be that of a Fulcrum (the engines are too widely spaced for an F-15; and the photo shows the a/c to have LERXs with intakes mounted underneath them – definitely not an F-15, therefore), I think that the real question is that if it was an F-15, why go to such great lengths to fly the sortie at a specific time (in between Red Flag sessions) and in cosmic classified airspace?
Edit: I should add that I have spoken to two pilots who claim to have seen MiG-29s during US-only Red Flag exercises. This might sound unlikely, but history suggests that it does happen: during the 1980s there were also instances when F-15 pilots not aware of CONSTANT PEG saw MiG-23s on the ranges. One I spoke to even tried to chase the Flogger down. The next year when he returned to Red Flag he was finally read-in on the programme and all became clear!
Steve Davies1MAN
I think it’s OK to ask for proof (and I agree that the West has at certain times exaggerated), but when someone shows you that proof it’s a good idea to come back and acknowledge it.
As for Venik, people didn’t like him because he was just like Martinez – he had such a huge chip on his shoulder that you could show him a compelling argument and he was just so intransigent that he could never accept that he might be wrong. At least Venik actually did some research, though. Of course, there was also the fact that he’d post photos of drop tanks and claim that they were proof of a kill!
I don’t really understand what you are trying to say about nations with poor equipment getting their arses whipped. But since this really is my last post on this thread, I’m not going to be able to answer it anyway.
Steve DaviesHey Mr. freelance aviation journalist, when someone demands a single proof for your claims, you go ahead and accuses anybody with an opinion different from yours and calling us lazy, ignorant, stupid or even conspiracy theorists. It;s obvious you do not posses a single proof for your beliefs
Martinez
You are lazy. And you are the worst kind of lazy, to boot – you’re the lazy person who wants people to think that he’s not lazy.
Take your silly comments on EID as an example. You heartedly laugh at it, but then you go on to ask how useful has it been! Well, I asked myself the same question a while back when I was writing a book on F-15 kills (one of those ‘researches’ that you say you feel sorry for those who have spent their money on!). To cut a long story short, I filed a number of FOIAs with the US DoD and had a bunch of source material declassified – afer action reports from the 1991 Gulf War, intel reports from the same period, and cockpit tapes and taped interviews recorded by intel immediately after landing. Lots and lots of excellent source material. The entire package of microcasettes, videos and documents was shipped to me in a large box and took days to get through. I also tracked down and interviewed 16 of the US Air Force’s MiG killers…
So, that was my basis for concluding that EID is very useful and has been instrumental over the years. Of course, for lazy Martinez, it’s easier to simply rubbish something and hope that someone who knows better isn’t around to contradict him… and that was also why I had such a good laugh when you started questioning the wisdom of developing EID systems and then started telling me I didn’t know what I was talking about.
Oh, and did I mention that in the course of about 7 hours in the backseat of the F-15 I have seen firsthand just how useful EID can be? That enough research for your liking?
It’s not a bad thing to question someone’s logic and sources – on that we both agree – but when you’re a complete ignoramus like you, it seems like a waste of time to respond.
Take, for example, your silly question about COMBAT TREE and whether it helped shoot down any MiGs. It was pretty apparent from your phrasing that you did not believe it was of any use, yet you seem to have not done any research on it to actually support that view. Hell, even that idiot Venik acknowledged that the FRY MiG-29s turned off their IFF because they knew it had been compromised. Now, you can say what you like about me, but I actually go out there and talk to people, read books, file FOIAs and surround myself wealth of information before I form a view. You clearly haven’t done that – you’ve just decided to tell people that it can’t be true if you don’t believe it. Have you read ‘Clashes’, by Marshall Michel III? No, because if you had, you wouldn’t have to ask an inane question about whether it worked. Have you researched the story behind why COMBAT TREE came to be declassified in the first place? No, because if you had, you’d know exactly how useful it was. So, that leads me to conclude (once again) that you are simply lazy.
As for FME, you have no idea who I have interviewed or what source materials I have, but let me elucidate briefly: I spent the last 18 months talking to men who have spent their whole lives in FME, and some of them continue to work in that field. I interviewed 32 US pilots who have flown FME assets, participated in still-classified FME programmes, intelligence gathering missions, and other black world programmes related to FME. I interviewed 5 former FME squadron commanders, one former maintenance officer for an FME squadron, several maintainers, a key Air Force FME analyst, and accumulated 85 hours of taped interviews. I spoke to current members of Det 3, the FME team that operates out of Groom Lake. I also spoke with Historian Peter Merlin about the AFMC side of FME. Now, you are correct that I don’t have any single item of proof that the US is still flying MiGs and Sukhois, but I have a very strong instinct – as well as many little pieces of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence – that makes me absolutely certain that they are. So, you can tell me that I don’t know anything, but I would argue that’s still 100 per cent more than Martinez, the lazy ignoramus who has the gaul to tell me that I don’t know what I am talking about. That, amigo, is the pot calling the kettle black!
For the record, this is my last response to this thread. I am done wasting my time with you. Enjoy the last word.
Oh, and you are correct, I do indeed have a lot of time for Tom Cooper.
Steve Davies1MAN
What your posts have in common with Martinez’ is that you’ve both done a good job of making people think that you are intransigent conspiracy theorists.
Martinez is too lazy to do his own research, so like a child he simply asks stupid questions – ‘How good was EID?’, ‘Tell me how many MiGs COMBAT TREE helped shoot down’, ‘Where have all the MiGs gone?’, etc. You are a bit like that, too (‘Show me some sources!’, ‘I want to see photos!’).
You reckon that for America to get any advantage out of flying a MiG-29 or a Su-27, it would have to be the latest model since a great deal has changed. That’s a totally flawed argument that, like Martinez, exposes you as someone who does not know the first thing about US FME – either its scope or its purpose.
And, as with Martinez, just because someone stops responding to your stupid, ignorant questions and opinions, it doesn’t mean that they have conceded that you are correct. Frankly, the other thing that you and he have done a good job of is reminding me why I stopped posting to forums and newsgroups such as this many, many years ago, and why I won’t be doing so again the future!
Maybe you and Martinez can find a guy on the internet called Venik? You’d all get along well with him!
Steve DaviesMartinez,
Watching you post is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Are you and 1MAN related? No doubt it will all be a conspiracy to you when the U.S. declassifies the info in the future!
TJ
TJ
Having already benefited from his supreme wisdom (I count myself very lucky), and with him exasperated at having to endure the incoherent, baseless ramblings of not only plane spotters, but journalists also (does his patience know no limits?), I feel it incumbent upon me to demand that you show some photos of the aforementioned train wreck.
Sign In
