Into the Black - Black World - Black Projects - Black Budgets - Area 51, Etc.

[Mushroom]

Well, our secret plane is an aircraft, not a ship, so yeah, they might want to see what happens when they get near a fighter plane.

Visual is absolutely not irrelevant. Every bird we put in the sky is painted specifically to camouflage it. Some paints even help to hide the plane from RADAR. The one thing we constantly test are ways to hide planes from RADARs. We are often successful at it. When we first started using stealth planes, they werent picking us up on RADAR.

No reason to go over an ocean? Are you high? Every plane that leaves this country has to go over the ocean.

...and why isnt it a Naval aircraft? Virtually all future military planes will be launched from carriers at sea. They will be pilotless drones.

Wow, so much to go over here.

The first sentence makes no sense, they already know how fighters and ships see each other.

And notice I said that the F-22 would by flying over the ocean at 65,000 feet. It is not even going to be a speck in the sky at that range. That is almost double the altitude of a 747, and a fraction the size. At that altitude, visual spotting is a fantasy.

And yes, they were picking up our F-117 on RADAR. Stealth does not mean Invisible, our pilots are not Wonder Woman. Stealth has never really been about making an airplane invisible. It is about decreasing the distance at which it can be detected, and making it as hard as possible to get a RADAR lock on it for firing missiles at it. Saddam knew that they were inbound even before the first bombs landed on Baghdad. For goodness sakes, they shot one down over Serbia over 2 decades ago.

Why is it not a Naval Aircraft? Simple reason, it is too damned heavy. And secondly, the Navy really has no use for a dedicated air superiority jet. The last one they had was retired 16 years ago (and a decade after it was transitioned to a multi-role capability), and they have no intention to have one again.

And no, almost no military planes have ever been, nor will ever be launched from carriers. And the future is not drones. With the horrible performance of them over the last 2 decades, I have no idea why people still believe that nonsense.

 

[Godboy]

Wow, so much to go over here.

The first sentence makes no sense, they already know how fighters and ships see each other.

And notice I said that the F-22 would by flying over the ocean at 65,000 feet. It is not even going to be a speck in the sky at that range. That is almost double the altitude of a 747, and a fraction the size. At that altitude, visual spotting is a fantasy.

And yes, they were picking up our F-117 on RADAR. Stealth does not mean Invisible, our pilots are not Wonder Woman. Stealth has never really been about making an airplane invisible. It is about decreasing the distance at which it can be detected, and making it as hard as possible to get a RADAR lock on it for firing missiles at it. Saddam knew that they were inbound even before the first bombs landed on Baghdad. For goodness sakes, they shot one down over Serbia over 2 decades ago.

Why is it not a Naval Aircraft? Simple reason, it is too damned heavy. And secondly, the Navy really has no use for a dedicated air superiority jet. The last one they had was retired 16 years ago (and a decade after it was transitioned to a multi-role capability), and they have no intention to have one again.

And no, almost no military planes have ever been, nor will ever be launched from carriers. And the future is not drones. With the horrible performance of them over the last 2 decades, I have no idea why people still believe that nonsense.

True, you could never see a UFO over water since Raptors ONLY fly at 65,000 feet. They are NEVER at any other altitude and its IMPOSSIBLE to see a UFO at 65,000 feet.

Pilot Captures Footage of Suspected UFOs Over Pacific Ocean (UPDATE)

The video, reportedly filmed on Nov. 24, shows a three sets of light formations flying over the South China Sea. "That is some weird sh*t," the pilot says.

www.complex.com

No RADAR was picking up the U2 spy plane in its hay day. We have successfully made planes invisible in the past. This idea that its impossible to ever achieve that again is just silly.

Ok, now youre saying the Navy has no need for "dedicated" fighters on aircraft carriers? Who cares about that fact? We use dual purposes fighters in the Navy. Our F/A-18's are dual purpose fighters/bombers.

Only the most ignorant fool would think drones arent the future. Drones have been HIGHLY successful, despite your very strange claim that that arent.

The Navy wont put drones on carriers you say? Then how do you explain this article and a million others?

The U.S. Navy Is Finally Getting Carrier Drones. It Only Took 60 Years.

Naval observers were befuddled when, after years of exciting experimentation ending in 2014, the U.S. Navy seemed to give up on acquiring a high-performance, combat-capable drone for its carrier air wings. Now the service is coming back around to it.

www.forbes.com

Everything you say is wrong. Its like you needed an argument and you didnt care which side you took. Well, you picked the wrong side of the argument and now you are here, looking all stupid and shit.

 

[Mushroom]

No RADAR was picking up the U2 spy plane in its hay day. We have successfully made planes invisible in the past. This idea that its impossible to ever achieve that again is just silly.

Ok, now youre saying the Navy has no need for "dedicated" fighters on aircraft carriers?

The U2 was not secure for a long time because it was invisible. It flew at over 70,000 feet, far above the reach of missiles and other fighter aircraft at the time. The same with the SR-71. It flew higher and faster than Soviet aircraft and missiles could reach. Both are "stealthy", but not "stealth". And I am pretty sure you do not really know what "stealth" is anyways.

And who said a thing about "dedicated fighters"? Do you even know what you are saying? Because I do not. What exactly is a "dedicated fighter"? Because I have never heard of that. Unless that is what most call an air-superiority fighter.

Now if you mean Air Superiority Fighter, then the Navy has indeed moved beyond that. There was a time when the flight deck would typically have 4 or 5 different kinds of fighters on board. But as the capabilities of Naval Multi-Role Fighters improved, the need for so many different fighters decreased, and they were eliminated. Now almost everything is done with the F-18, eliminating the F-14, F-8, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, in addition to others like the E-2, C-1 and C-2. Navy carrier logistics at one time was a nightmare, because they would frequently have 3-5 different kinds of "fighters" on them. Today, almost all of those have been eliminated, with all roles being done by the F-18, and now we are returning to two fighters, with the F-18 and F-35.

The F-14 was dumped ages ago, and when trying to decide what to do with them, ultimately they were just dumped as they were no real improvement of the more modern F-18 variants that were coming out (and the F-35 was already in development). And as time went on, each of the aircraft I just mentioned was finally eliminated, all of the F and A roles being taken over by the F-18. And what aircraft are in development that are Naval air-superiority aircraft? Simple answer, none.

And the Air Force has no need to operate from carriers. F-15, F-16, A-10, F-111, F-117, F-35A, and now the F-22. I can just go on and on about how very few Air Force fighters have ever been carrier capable. Case in point, the F-111 was supposed to be adapted to work on carriers, but it was just too big and heavy. So instead they made a smaller version, known as the F-14.

And no, drones will never be a big thing. They are great against third world militaries, but against a major player (like Russia or the US), they are increasingly worthless. Feel free to look up how ineffective they were in Syria, because of Russian jamming. And they require more time for maintenance, and take up just as much room on a carrier flight deck than a traditional fighter.

Like recently, they tested a refueller drone. The same size as an F-18. Why? The thing can fuel, and has 2 hardpoints. Why in the hell would the Navy want to replace F-18s that can do the same thing, but also operate as full fighter aircraft if needed? That makes no sense. I know civilians love drones, but in reality they are only useful in select situations. Mostly in the last few decades because we have been operating in low-intensity environments with unsophisticated enemies.

 

[Godboy]

The U2 was not secure for a long time because it was invisible. It flew at over 70,000 feet, far above the reach of missiles and other fighter aircraft at the time. The same with the SR-71. It flew higher and faster than Soviet aircraft and missiles could reach. Both are "stealthy", but not "stealth". And I am pretty sure you do not really know what "stealth" is anyways.

And who said a thing about "dedicated fighters"? Do you even know what you are saying? Because I do not. What exactly is a "dedicated fighter"? Because I have never heard of that. Unless that is what most call an air-superiority fighter.

Now if you mean Air Superiority Fighter, then the Navy has indeed moved beyond that. There was a time when the flight deck would typically have 4 or 5 different kinds of fighters on board. But as the capabilities of Naval Multi-Role Fighters improved, the need for so many different fighters decreased, and they were eliminated. Now almost everything is done with the F-18, eliminating the F-14, F-8, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, in addition to others like the E-2, C-1 and C-2. Navy carrier logistics at one time was a nightmare, because they would frequently have 3-5 different kinds of "fighters" on them. Today, almost all of those have been eliminated, with all roles being done by the F-18, and now we are returning to two fighters, with the F-18 and F-35.

The F-14 was dumped ages ago, and when trying to decide what to do with them, ultimately they were just dumped as they were no real improvement of the more modern F-18 variants that were coming out (and the F-35 was already in development). And as time went on, each of the aircraft I just mentioned was finally eliminated, all of the F and A roles being taken over by the F-18. And what aircraft are in development that are Naval air-superiority aircraft? Simple answer, none.

And the Air Force has no need to operate from carriers. F-15, F-16, A-10, F-111, F-117, F-35A, and now the F-22. I can just go on and on about how very few Air Force fighters have ever been carrier capable. Case in point, the F-111 was supposed to be adapted to work on carriers, but it was just too big and heavy. So instead they made a smaller version, known as the F-14.

And no, drones will never be a big thing. They are great against third world militaries, but against a major player (like Russia or the US), they are increasingly worthless. Feel free to look up how ineffective they were in Syria, because of Russian jamming. And they require more time for maintenance, and take up just as much room on a carrier flight deck than a traditional fighter.

Like recently, they tested a refueller drone. The same size as an F-18. Why? The thing can fuel, and has 2 hardpoints. Why in the hell would the Navy want to replace F-18s that can do the same thing, but also operate as full fighter aircraft if needed? That makes no sense. I know civilians love drones, but in reality they are only useful in select situations. Mostly in the last few decades because we have been operating in low-intensity environments with unsophisticated enemies.

Everything you say is a waste of our time and untrue. The U2 was COMPLETELY invisible to RADAR in the begining and "dedicated" was YOUR word, not mine you fool. I merely quoted you.

"dedicated air superiority jet"

I am very well aware of military aircraft and what "stealth" means, seeing how i was a plane mechanic in the military.

You are an idiot. If you ever quote me again i will instantly put you on ignore.

 

[Mushroom]

"dedicated air superiority jet"

Yes, and notice I said "air superiority". Not "dedicated fighter". "Dedicated fighter" is a misnomer, it does not really exist. Probably the last one we had was the F-117, a misnomer in itself as it was dedicated ground attack only and should have been named the A-117. But "fighters" are sexy, so it got an F.

Even in quoting me, you try to say I said something I did not. For a mechanic, you seem to be unable to classify aircraft properly. Strange. Go back to working on your planes then.

Oh, and the U-2 was never invisible to RADAR. The Soviets knew they were flying over every time, and even shot one down in 1960, 4 years after they entered service. As I said, they flew over the maximum operating altitude of most Soviet aircraft and air defenses. Francis Powers was flying at over 70,000 feet, and was shot down by an SA-2. Which the US believed had a ceiling of 60,000 feet. But they were wrong, it was actually 75,000 feet.

You may be a mechanic, but this is actually in my area of expertise. And things like knowing there are different kinds of RADAR systems. Like the Soviets-Russians loved a form of RADAR that was not all that effective at targeting (especially at long range), but awesome in detection and acquisition. That was what they used with the SA-4 when they shot down one of our F-117s in former Yugoslavia.

Oh, and just an aircraft being within the altitude window does not mean you can actually hit it. A U-2 at Mach .7-.8 at 70,000 feet is at the absolute edge of the bubble in which a missile can engage it. This can really be seen with the SR-71 which had a lot of missiles and jets try to intercept it, but they never could. You have to allow for flight time, and that it has to fly almost directly overhead to hope to catch it. That is why when working with MANPAD, we train to only fire when a jet is approaching us, never when it is even or pulling away from us. It will run out of fuel before it catches a jet.

 

[Godboy]

Yes, and notice I said "air superiority". Not "dedicated fighter". "Dedicated fighter" is a misnomer, it does not really exist. Probably the last one we had was the F-117, a misnomer in itself as it was dedicated ground attack only and should have been named the A-117. But "fighters" are sexy, so it got an F.

Even in quoting me, you try to say I said something I did not. For a mechanic, you seem to be unable to classify aircraft properly. Strange. Go back to working on your planes then.

Oh, and the U-2 was never invisible to RADAR. The Soviets knew they were flying over every time, and even shot one down in 1960, 4 years after they entered service. As I said, they flew over the maximum operating altitude of most Soviet aircraft and air defenses. Francis Powers was flying at over 70,000 feet, and was shot down by an SA-2. Which the US believed had a ceiling of 60,000 feet. But they were wrong, it was actually 75,000 feet.

You may be a mechanic, but this is actually in my area of expertise. And things like knowing there are different kinds of RADAR systems. Like the Soviets-Russians loved a form of RADAR that was not all that effective at targeting (especially at long range), but awesome in detection and acquisition. That was what they used with the SA-4 when they shot down one of our F-117s in former Yugoslavia.

Oh, and just an aircraft being within the altitude window does not mean you can actually hit it. A U-2 at Mach .7-.8 at 70,000 feet is at the absolute edge of the bubble in which a missile can engage it. This can really be seen with the SR-71 which had a lot of missiles and jets try to intercept it, but they never could. You have to allow for flight time, and that it has to fly almost directly overhead to hope to catch it. That is why when working with MANPAD, we train to only fire when a jet is approaching us, never when it is even or pulling away from us. It will run out of fuel before it catches a jet.

Didnt read. What would be the point? I already know its just another horseshit post.

You are officially ignored.

 

[Mushroom]

You are officially ignored.

 

[Stryder50]

Since my opening posts are taken from an interview of author Nick Cook about his then (2002) recent book, seems some links for that will help.

Though this article/review is from Salon, and takes a rather negative stance, it is worth the read, partly to get some gauge on what Cook's book was about.
....

"The Hunt for Zero Point" by Nick Cook​

An editor for the esteemed Jane's Defense Weekly says the U.S. government has been working on Nazi anti-gravity technology in secret for 50 years.

By Kurt Kleiner​

Published August 5, 2002 10:26PM (EDT)​

....
The U.S. government confiscated secret Nazi anti-gravity technology at the end of World War II, and later may have tested it in aircraft that account for the rash of post-War UFO sightings. Some of that technology has probably made its way into the B2 stealth bomber. Some of it is probably so dangerous that it's buried away in secret government vaults.

In the post-X-Files age, this sort of conspiracy theory won't raise any eyebrows. What makes the allegations interesting is that they appear in "The Hunt for Zero Point," which is written by Nick Cook, for 10 years the aviation editor at Jane's Defense Weekly. Jane's is the bible of the defense establishment, known for its no-nonsense, nuts-and-bolts reporting. A former Jane's editor tackling this topic is enough to make you take a second look.

Although anti-gravity research ranks right up there with perpetual motion on the crank-o-meter, the idea of anti-gravity can't be completely dismissed. As recently as 1996 a Finnish scientist announced he could partially "shield" objects from gravity using spinning superconductors. Although most scientists are skeptical, NASA is interested enough that it's trying to replicate the results.

And certainly Nazi Germany was working on a lot of advanced technology by the end of the war, including rockets, jet fighters and nuclear power. The U.S. recruited some German scientists to continue their work in the U.S., most notably Wernher von Braun, the V-2 rocket scientist who later helped make the moon landings possible.

It's also clear that the U.S. military works on secret technology all the time -- about $11 billion worth every year in "deep black" programs that aren't even acknowledged to exist. The stealth fighter and B2 bomber were black programs for years.

So even if Nazi flying saucers sound nutty on the face of it, there's nothing crazy about Cook asking the questions he does. You might even call it courageous. It's the conclusions he reaches that are the problem.
...

"The Hunt for Zero Point" by Nick Cook

An editor for the esteemed Jane's Defense Weekly says the U.S. government has been working on Nazi anti-gravity technology in secret for 50 years.

www.salon.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the 318 page pdf of Cook's book;

https://plain2.tripod.com/huntforzeropoint.pdf

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For those wanting a hard copy, the amazon review and page;
...
This riveting work of investigative reporting and history exposes classified government projects to build gravity-defying aircraft--which have an uncanny resemblance to flying saucers.

The atomic bomb was not the only project to occupy government scientists in the 1940s. Antigravity technology, originally spearheaded by scientists in Nazi Germany, was another high priority, one that still may be in effect today. Now for the first time, a reporter with an unprecedented access to key sources in the intelligence and military communities reveals suppressed evidence that tells the story of a quest for a discovery that could prove as powerful as the A-bomb.

The Hunt for Zero Point explores the scientific speculation that a "zero point" of gravity exists in the universe and can be replicated here on Earth. The pressure to be the first nation to harness gravity is immense, as it means having the ability to build military planes of unlimited speed and range, along with the most deadly weaponry the world has ever seen. The ideal shape for a gravity-defying vehicle happens to be a perfect disk, making antigravity tests a possible explanation for the numerous UFO sightings of the past 50 years.

Chronicling the origins of antigravity research in the world's most advanced research facility, which was operated by the Third Reich during World War II, The Hunt for Zero Point traces U.S. involvement in the project, beginning with the recruitment of former Nazi scientists after the war. Drawn from interviews with those involved with the research and who visited labs in Europe and the United States, The Hunt for Zero Point journeys to the heart of the twentieth century's most puzzling unexplained phenomena.
...
Amazon product
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nick Cook's website page;

Nick Cook - Author | Hunt for Zero Point | Published by Arrow Books

Nick Cook, author of Hunt for Zero Point – investigating avaition's greatest mystery – is the writer of 20 fiction and non-fiction titles.

www.nickcook.works

~~~~~~~~~~~~
And Good Reads page;

The Hunt for Zero Point

The atomic bomb was not the only project to occupy government scientists during the 1940s. Antigravity technology, originally spearheaded...

www.goodreads.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And another interview of Nick Cook which I'll delve into later when I finish the one I'm excerpting from with the start of this thread.

 

[Stryder50]

Another item of interest in Cook's book was the mention of SS General Has Kammler. Someone whom seems to be in the back corner of WWII history but a rather significant player.
...
Hans Kammler (26 August 1901 – 1945 [assumed]Hans Kammler - Wikipedia) was an SS-Obergruppenführer responsible for Nazi civil engineering projects and its top secret weapons programmes. He oversaw the construction of various Nazi concentration camps before being put in charge of the V-2 rocket and jet programmes towards the end of World War II. Kammler disappeared in May 1945, during the final days of the war. There has been much conjecture regarding his fate.
...

Hans Kammler - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kammler was a part of the "Paper Clip" project, but just as important it seems;
...
The Nazi War Criminal the U.S. Kept Hidden

A review of “The Hidden Nazi: The Untold Story of America’s Deal with the Devil.”
...
The Hidden Nazi uncovers a previously uncovered war criminal, Waffen-SS General Hans Kammler, who was never brought to justice even though clearly guilty of war crimes. Though his crimes were well known to the Allies during and after the World War II, historians haven’t written much about him. That may be because Kammler was reported to have died as the war ended. Even so, he appears in American hands after that rumored death. Where Kammler ended up, the authors’ research and the documents don’t say, although they suggest he might have reached Argentina.

As World War II in Europe drew to a close, the Allies and the Soviet Union scrambled to defeat the German armed forces, round up Nazis, and locate documents, weaponry, and treasure. In particular, they tried to find the scientists and documents related to the Nazi rocketry programs, like the V-1 and V-2, jet engines, nuclear weaponry research, and other cutting-edge military technologies. The Soviet Union got some, the Allies got some, and other people, documents, and treasure weren’t found.
....

The Nazi War Criminal the U.S. Kept Hidden - The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics

The Hidden Nazi: The Untold Story of America’s Deal with the Devil By Dean Reuter, Colm Lowery & Keith Chester (Regnery History, 396 pages, $29.99) The Hidden Nazi uncovers a previously uncov... No hoodwinking or hornswoggling here. Support independent journalism and...

spectator.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Another interesting and recent article on Kammler;

CWIHP Working Paper #91​

Hans Kammler, Hitler’s Last Hope, in American Hands

Frank Döbert and Rainer Karlsch
August 2019​

Hans Kammler, Hitlerâs Last Hope, in American Hands

In CWIHP Working Paper #91, authors Frank Döbert and Rainer Karlsch examine new evidence suggesting that Hans Kammler, SS Obergruppenfuehrer and head of the Office of Unit C of the Economic Administration Main Office of the SS, fell into American custody in the closing days of the war.

www.wilsoncenter.org

...........
Part of the conjecture involves an unusual aircraft, the Junkers Ju-390

JunkersJu390​

Ju-390 Fates - JunkersJu390

Portrait of the development and wartime career of the amazing Junkers Ju-390 aircraft

sites.google.com

....

hans kammler ju 390 found at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

Junkers Ju 390 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Stryder50]

Cook also presents on the Allied scramble in closing months of the war to get their hands on Nazi technology and scientists, etc.
EXCERPT:
...
In one sense, this is a history of the invention of technical intelligence. During the war the importance of studying foreign weapons and equipment became apparent, and procedures were developed for collecting materiel and evaluating it and for disseminating processed intelligence.

The bulk of this section is the account of Ordnance-CIOS cooperation. Because of their technical expertise, Ordnance Department personnel – military and civilian – were to provide much assistance in the CIOS effort to exploit German science and technology. This history describes in detail the organization of the CIOS effort and the sorts of weapons and equipment, industries, and sites that were targeted. It explains the contributions Ordnance personnel made in each area. In July 1945, the CIOS effort was terminated and the American effort continued under the Foreign Intelligence Agency (Technical) (FIAT) with Ordnance assistance. FIAT facilitated travel and accommodated technical experts visiting from the US. Apparently, the history was composed by participants while their work was fresh in their minds.
...
Glossary

Some useful terms to know are:

Army Service Forces (ASF) was a short-lived military command which included all of the technical services and some other activities. The ASF was headed by a general who reported to the Chief of Staff. It was set up early in the war to limit the number of officials reporting directly to the army Chief of Staff. The ASF was analogous to the Army Air Forces (AAF) and the Army Ground Forces (AGF). In this history, the Ordnance Department is sometimes referred to as the “Ordnance Department, ASF,…”

BIOS stands of the British Intelligence Objectives subcommittee, a successor to CIOS.

CIOS stands for the Combined Intelligence Objectives subcommittee, a joint British-American effort to exploit German science and technology.

FIAT stands for Foreign Intelligence Agency (Technical), a successor to CIOS.

TI stands for technical intelligence.
...

History of Ordnance Technical Intelligence in World War II, Part 3: Tab 1- History of Ordnance-CIOS [Cooperation]; Tab 2 – Draft of Speech for Ord TI Teams (WWII); Tab 3 – Speech on metallurgy of foreign auto materials; [and] Tab 4 – Article on mater

During World War II, the Ordnance Department was one of the army technical services. There were a number of technical services including the Chemical Warfare Service, the Army Medical Department, the Corps of Engineers, the Quartermaster Corps, the Signal Corps, and the Transportation Corps. The...

digitalcommons.unl.edu

 

[Stryder50]

The USA had;

Combined Intelligence Objectives Sub Committee - AbeBooks​

And the UK;

British Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee​

https://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n86802339/

Archive records and reports for both;

Combined Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee (CIOS) and ...​

 

[Stryder50]

Just stumbled upon this and it appears a bit "new" to check out further, so FWIW:

Mysterious Aircraft Discovered at Area 51 Site Via Satellite Image​

One moment, please...

 

[Stryder50]

Here Is How The Pentagon Comes Up With Code Words And Secret Project Nicknames​

Venturing into the dark, fascinating, and often misunderstood world of the Defense Department’s code word and nickname generating processes.
...

Here Is How The Pentagon Comes Up With Code Words And Secret Project Nicknames

Venturing into the dark, fascinating, and often misunderstood world of the Defense Department’s code word and nickname generating processes.

getpocket.com

 

[Stryder50]

Another click bait slide show of about 30 clicks worth, yet relates to the topic here;

The most sinister declassified CIA operations​

MSN

 

[Stryder50]

Though I put this in another thread, it might have more weight and interest here;
....
Musk is an interesting operator ...

Elon Musk and SpaceX thwarted a Russian electromagnetic attack on Ukraine​

...
SpaceX — a company founded and owned by Elon Musk with the express intention of colonizing Mars — successfully stopped a Russian electromagnetic attack in Ukraine.

In March, Musk’s company worked at a breakneck pace to shut down Russian efforts to disconnect Ukrainians from the internet by jamming the country’s access to its Starlink satellite constellation.

Starlink is operated by SpaceX and provides internet coverage to 32 countries. The constellation consists of more than 2,000 mass-produced small satellites that reside in low orbit and communicate with designated transceivers on the Earth’s surface.

At the outset of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, when it became clear that the Russian government was going to target the Ukrainian people’s ability to communicate, Ukrainian officials pleaded with Musk to intervene and provide them with relief.
...
Dave Tremper, director of electronic warfare for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, lauded SpaceX’s ability to turn on a dime and swiftly stymie Russia’s efforts to jam the Starlink satellite’s ability to provide broadband.

Defense News reported that Tremper said, “The next day [after reports about the Russian jamming effort hit the media], Starlink had slung a line of code and fixed it, and suddenly that [Russian jamming attack] was not effective anymore. From [the] EW technologist’s perspective, that is fantastic … and how they did that was eye-watering to me.”

Tremper noted that it would have taken the American government considerably longer to counteract the Russian electromagnetic attack than it did Musk’s company.

Tremper said, “We need to be able to have that agility. We need to be able to change our electromagnetic posture to be able to change, very dynamically, what we’re trying to do without losing capability along the way.”

Noting that electromagnetic warfare requires very finely tuned machinery and highly skilled operators, Tremper said the Russian invasion of Ukraine indicated how important it was to make sure that American personnel were properly trained in electromagnetic warfare operations.
...

Elon Musk and SpaceX thwarted a Russian electromagnetic attack on Ukraine | Blaze Media

SpaceX — a company founded and owned by Elon Musk with the express intention of colonizing Mars — successfully stopped a Russian electromagnetic attack in Ukraine. In March, Musk’s company worked at a breakneck pace to shut down Russian efforts to disconnect Ukrainians from the internet by...

www.theblaze.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
See also;

SpaceX shut down a Russian electromagnetic warfare attack in Ukraine last month — and the Pentagon is taking notes​

...

SpaceX shut down a Russian electromagnetic warfare attack in Ukraine last month â and the Pentagon is taking notes

“The next day, Starlink had slung a line of code and fixed it," said Pentagon electronic warfare director Dave Tremper. "And how they did that was eye-watering to me."

www.defensenews.com

 

[Stryder50]

Hypersonic jet in new Top Gun movie could be REAL top secret aircraft​

...
The hypersonic jet featured in the new Top Gun movie was developed by legendary US aircraft manufacturers and may depict a top secret stealth jet.

Lockheed Martin Corporation CEO James Taiclet confirmed that Skunk Works, the company's secretive development arm, worked with the producers of the upcoming Top Gun: Maverick movie starring Tom Cruise, TheDrive.com reported.

The manufacturers helped create the design for the fictional Darkstar hypersonic jet which looks to be based off of renderings of the highly anticipated SR-72 hypersonic jet.

© Provided by Daily Mail The SR-72 is currently being developed by Lockheed Martin in California, and according to the company's website the jet could be operational by 2030 (rendering pictured)

In a LinkedIn post, Taiclet said members of the Skunk Works team 'partnered with Top Gun's producers to bring cutting-edge, future forward technology to the big screen' and referenced 'critical work in hypersonic flight'

And in an April tweet, Lockheed Martin executive John Neilson posted that the Darkstar jet could provide a 'sneaky peak at what might be the Lockheed Martin SR-72.'

The SR-72 is currently being developed by Lockheed Martin in California, and according to the company's website they say the plane could be operational as early as 2030.

It is the successor of the SR-71 which broke speed records when it flew from New York to London in less than two hours in 1976.
...

Hypersonic jet in new Top Gun movie could be REAL top secret aircraft

 

[Stryder50]

When Secret Mystery Planes Landed At The Air Bases Where I Was Stationed​

It may sound like fiction, but on rare occasions, ordinary air bases have extraordinary mystery visitors. It happened to me, twice.​

...

When Secret Mystery Planes Landed At The Air Bases Where I Was Stationed

It may sound like fiction, but on rare occasions, ordinary air bases have extraordinary mystery visitors. It happened to me, twice.

getpocket.com

 

[Stryder50]

Stealth and low radar cross section have been part of "The Black", so this would fit here;

These Images Of An F-22 Raptor’s Crumbling Radar Absorbent Skin Are Fascinating​

The photos are a reminder of just how much work goes into keeping the F-22’s skin ready for combat and the amazing science behind its stealthy design.
...

These Images Of An F-22 Raptor’s Crumbling Radar Absorbent Skin Are Fascinating

The photos are a reminder of just how much work goes into keeping the F-22’s skin ready for combat and the amazing science behind its stealthy design.

getpocket.com