Comments on: What Does the Government Know? (conclusion)

By: Whisperstream

Whisperstream — Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:51:32 +0000

Actually, I’m not so much looking for search terms as I am seeking a search area. It’s not exactly conveninet for me to visit northern New Mexico, but I would do it if I could narrow my search area to a manageable size. Admittedly, that doesn’t always help. Even having geographic coordinates from an accident report often leaves much to be desired. The desert seems a lot bigger when you are standing in the middle of it.

This incident must not have generated much, if any, public interest at the time. Was there any media coverage. The F-117A crash at Bakersfield was a media circus. On the other hand, some incidents were quashed with cover stories (A-12 at Wendover) or simply never made it into the papers (D-21B in central Nevada). Finding the crash site could answer a lot of questions, such as the identity of the aircraft manufacturer, etc.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:22:56 +0000

That’s as accurate as I can be right now. I’ll have to look into some files to pinpoint the date and location. I gather that these things don’t happen very often, so if there was a crash of anything that was classified anywhere near the area in the timeframe specified, it shouldn’t be hard to locate. I think what you are suggeesting is that specific search terms are required for database searches.

What I have been able to gather is that there may have been testing of UAVs out of Fort Collins or Kirtland AFB at the time.

Thanks for your info and interest.

By: Whisperstream

Whisperstream — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 18:49:10 +0000

Thanks for the quick response, Greg. Narrowing down the date is somewhat helpful. It would be interesting to examine the crash site, but “near Dulce, NM, just south of the Colorado border” doesn’t narrow the search area down quite enough. Did the civilian observer get any approximate coordinates?

There were a number of classified manned and unmanned projects under develoment during that timeframe, but information about specific configurations is somewhat limited. Articles undergoing developmental testing were generally confined to the ranges. Those that made it into production went off-range for operational test and evaluation. Unmanned vehicles have, from time to time, wandered off-range on their own when controllers lost contact with them.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 05:41:12 +0000

Thanks for the info. The crash I was interested in happened in late October or early November of 1988 near Dulce, NM, just south of the Colorado border. Since the F-117A crashes are accounted for, it may have been a UAV on a test flight. The AFOSI were very interested in keeping this incident under wraps. I am trying to find out what crashed and why it would be kept a secret. See the illustration section of my book “Project Beta” for a rough drawing of the aircraft as seen from the air by a civilian observer. I also have reason to believe that the CIA and/or NSA were involved with Lockheed on this project.

By: Whisperstream

Whisperstream — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 03:08:38 +0000

Development of the XST stealth technology demonstrator began in 1975.
The project was renamed HAVE BLUE in April 1976 and placed under Air
Force management as a special access program. In July 1976, Aerospace
Daily ran a lengthy article headlined “Lockheed’s Kelly Johnson
Building ‘Stealth’ Aircraft.” Through mid-1977, Aviation Week & Space
Technology (AW&ST) magazine ran a series of short, but reasonably
accurate stories about the stealth demonstrator project. Descriptions
of a larger, fighter-sized, stealth aircraft started appearing in the
1978-1979 edition of Jane’s All The World’s Aircraft.

Criticism of leaks about the stealth program led William J. Perry
(undersecretary of defense for research and engineering) to comment:
“I told the secretary that with good luck we could conceal program’s
existence for two years. In fact, we have kept its very existence
secret for more than three years.” [The last sentence doesn't seem very accurate in view of the Aerospace Daily and AW&ST articles.]

In late 1981, AW&ST reported that the “Lockheed Stealth fighter,
approximately the size of the Navy/Northrop/McDonnell Douglas F-18,
will fly this year.” It had in fact already flown in June, but much
of the information contained in the article was fairly accurate.

Crashes of stealth aircraft brought the project back into the news.
Both HAVE BLUE demonstrators crashed, one in 1978 and the other in
1979. The first production F-117A (Article 785) crashed at Area 51 in
April 1982. The crash of Article 792 near Bakersfield, California, in
July 1986 generated a media frenzy when the Air Force decided not to
use their ready-made A-7 cover story. Article 815 crashed on the
Nellis Air Force Range in October 1987.

The Defense Department publicly unveiled the F-117A, by way of a
grainy photo, in November 1988 and acknowledged the crashes.
Subsequently, a number of clear photos and video footage were
released in 1990. Several of the airplanes made a public appearance
at Nellis AFB, Nevada, in April and public fly-bys took place at
Burbank and Palmdale, California, in July during the rollout of the
final production airframe (Article 843).

Article 801 crashed in a suburb of Alamogordo, New Mexico, in August
1992. Article 822 crashed near Zuni, New Mexico, in May 1995. Article
793 was lost during an air show near Baltimore, Maryland, in
September 1997. Article 806 was shot down over Budjanovci,
Yugoslavia, in March 1999.

No other F-117A aircraft have been lost. If you have a mystery crash in New Mexico, it’s not an F-117A, but I would be interested in learning more about it. An exact date and precise crash location would be helpful.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 06:44:08 +0000

Whisperstream,

You got me. Actually, I meant the F-117A, developed starting in 1976, and finally unveiled to the public in 1990 (although announced in 1988.) I am still trying to figure out if one of them crashed in northwestern NM in the fall of 1985. Two others crashed in NM in 1992 and 1995.

By: Whisperstream

Whisperstream — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 04:12:49 +0000

Greg, I assume you actually meant the A-12, first of the Lockheed Blackbirds, that first flew at Area 51 in April 1962. The Blackbirds were only “in the black” for a little less than two years. The Blackbird made its public debut in February 1964 when president Lyndon Johnson announced the existence of the YF-12A. The SR-71 made its first flight in full view of the public in December 1964. Both the YF-12A and SR-71 efectively served as a cover for the A-12 until its retirement in June 1968. Any sightings of the A-12 by unauthorized persons would be attributed to the YF-12A or SR-71. The existence of the A-12 variant was finally acknowledged in 1981. It was nearly unveiled in 1976, but plans to place the remaining A-12 airframes in outdoor storage were delayed several years.

By: Greg Bishop

Greg Bishop — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 09:05:32 +0000

Well, Bill, thanks for the heads-up, if only to confirm your bona-fides!

Also, you only need to look at how well and how long the SR-71 was kept secret (about 15 years) to see that not ALL government employees and contractors have trouble finding their rear ends in a confined space.

By: Bill Hancock

Bill Hancock — Wed, 27 Dec 2006 08:01:46 +0000

In many ways I find myself in agreement with Dingodog99’s assessment of government agencies. The government, that great amorphous entity of supposedly diabolical cleverness and relentless malfeasance…generally can’t find it’s butt with both hands in a phone booth. That’s why most of these fabulous conspiracy theories leave ME convulsing with laughter as much as it seems to with some of the other posters here.

By: Bill Hancock

Bill Hancock — Wed, 27 Dec 2006 07:50:00 +0000

Greg…

Re : Maybell (OHR)

This one wasn’t Maybell. I think there were three or four of these things running as research at about the same time. This one, should you ever encounter it…and of course I can neither confirm or deny…blah, blah, blah…would SOUND “French” to your ears, and READ somewhat “French” to your eyes…and might make you think of Medieval days and, perhaps, the Society of Creative Anachronism. That’s as far as I can go with it, Bubba. You’re on your own from here.

This one, like the Maybell project you mentioned, was highly classified, too. Being highly classified, though, doesn’t mean it will eventually pan out as something really hubba-hubba.This one certainly didn’t. It turned basically obsolescent before it was a year old. C’est l’guerre!!