Believe It or Not...

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesD/Bruno121.jpg

This 1962 UFO actually bears a strong resemblence to a Horten proposal
done postwar for the US Govt!
I know you guys think that's funny but what are the chances again?
Most post-WW2 UFO configurations match Vril, Haunebu, Lippisch, and
Horten designs almost perfectly.

Rob

p.s. Regardless, the photo is one strane craft and might be of some
interest to those who never saw it. It is Project Bluebook Case 16,
supposedly unsolved.

oh well NOW that you've shown us proof , I'm a true believer. sigh this,
sadly is the sort of "proof" the "Master Race" relies on to soothe thier
meglomaniacle egos.

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
http://www.rense.com/1.imagesD/Bruno121.jpg

This 1962 UFO actually bears a strong resemblence to a Horten proposal
done postwar for the US Govt!
I know you guys think that's funny but what are the chances again?
Most post-WW2 UFO configurations match Vril, Haunebu, Lippisch, and
Horten designs almost perfectly.

Rob

p.s. Regardless, the photo is one strane craft and might be of some
interest to those who never saw it. It is Project Bluebook Case 16,
supposedly unsolved.

"Boomer" wrote in message ...
oh well NOW that you've shown us proof , I'm a true believer. sigh this,
sadly is the sort of "proof" the "Master Race" relies on to soothe thier
meglomaniacle egos.

No need to go into all that. The photo isn't proof of anything except
that in this one instance we have a more conventional looking craft
with wings and some form of propulsion system at the rear like a jet.
Take a look at the Lockheed proposed L-133:
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/His...133/L133_1.jpg
Now compare the L-133 to this thing. Some similarities up front and in
basic design. If you erase the L-133 cockpit, add two nose fins, sweep
the wings back into a Horten-Lippisch delta, split the tail in two and
cant them outwards and replace the jets with some other propulsion
system it would look like that UFO.
The Horten's design work in the US was on flying wings and some disc
wings. Their wings were more Lippisch inspired at the end of the war,
more delta configured by the look of the Ho X and XIIIB. In the US
they explored a variety of exotic shapes and propulsion systems.
Lippisch too explored aerodynes and proposed a massive aerodyne
airliner that would have looked like a flying squid!
The UFO in the photo was taken off a coastline. It may have even been
launched from underwater. It definately looks unmanned, but not alien-
just weird. It certainly doesn't look like it flew thousands of light
years to get here either.
I am still trying to find the reference sheet on the Hortens' design
that resembles it. It had a US nickname, "Blackfang" IIRC.
Anyone let me know if they find the design first and post it.

Rob

Uzytkownik "robert arndt" napisal w wiadomosci
om...
[snip...]

Take a look at the Lockheed proposed L-133:
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/His...133/L133_1.jpg
Now compare the L-133 to this thing. Some similarities up front and in
basic design. If you erase the L-133 cockpit, add two nose fins, sweep
the wings back into a Horten-Lippisch delta, split the tail in two and
cant them outwards and replace the jets with some other propulsion
system it would look like that UFO.

In other words: IF YOU DESIGN COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AIRCRAFT it would
maybe resemble some Horten/Lippisch project.

Rob, if you think that doing these changes you mentioned above is piece
of cake and L-133 in a picture you pointed generally is a
'Horten-Lippisch delta', this is the best proof that you have nothing
common with any kind of aviation (not only military aviation).

[snip...]

Rob

JasiekS
Warsaw, Poland

"JasiekS" wrote in message ...
Uzytkownik "robert arndt" napisal w wiadomosci
om...
[snip...]

Take a look at the Lockheed proposed L-133:
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/His...133/L133_1.jpg
Now compare the L-133 to this thing. Some similarities up front and in
basic design. If you erase the L-133 cockpit, add two nose fins, sweep
the wings back into a Horten-Lippisch delta, split the tail in two and
cant them outwards and replace the jets with some other propulsion
system it would look like that UFO.

In other words: IF YOU DESIGN COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AIRCRAFT it would
maybe resemble some Horten/Lippisch project.

Not at all, I'm only making a slight comparison to an aircraft design
that bears some resemblence to the thing. The L-133 comparison, BTW,
is from the same site as the photo. If that would be the case then I
only speculated on how the Lockheed L-133 COULD have been reconfigured
to match this thing.

Rob, if you think that doing these changes you mentioned above is piece
of cake and L-133 in a picture you pointed generally is a
'Horten-Lippisch delta', this is the best proof that you have nothing
common with any kind of aviation (not only military aviation).

[snip...]

Rob

JasiekS
Warsaw, Poland

I NEVER claimed any proof of anything just that the '62 thing LOOKED
like an Horten design investigated postwar in the US. You are aware
that the Hortens were taken immediately from the British and sent to
the US to work on flying wing AND disc designs in late '45. Question
is WHY??? If the US was so superior and had both the B-29 and their
own flying wing genesis with Northrop, why consult the defeated
Germans on future aircraft?
The Hortens late designs were flying wings but more inspired by
Lippisch. Their XIIIB is a prime example, being more akin to the
DM-1/LP P.13A than all their other Nurflugels combined. In the US
their work resulted in deltas, pure flying wings, discs, and others.
If you had read about the Roswell case and Kenneth Arnold sighting you
would know that neither of those claimed alien craft were discs.
Arnold drew for the USAF a picture of a crescent-shaped flying wing
while the Roswell craft was a delta with an almost conventional
fuselage. Both match Horten designs. The Arnold crescents match the
HO-IX and the Roswell craft the HO-X.
This not proof of anything but many investigators now armed with
recently declassified documentation suspect a US-Horten link in
debunking the ET UFO myth(s). That subject is still being debated. I
don't necessarily support that belief but I would like to see all the
US files and photos on WHAT the Hortens research for the US Govt.
The mentioned "Blackfang"? design approximates the '62 thing. It
probably has nothing to do with the Lockheed L-133, but if it did and
the Hortens redesigned that aircraft the result would be about the
same.
I just need a design link to the Blackfang- still hunting for it on
Google. That design is extremely rare and I don't see anyone else in
the NG that has a clue.
In the entire time I've been at RAM (6 years)I've posted a lot of
photos and designs of extremely rare aircraft. I'm willing to bet that
many of the regulars here don't like that because it ruins their
beliefs that the US invented everything in aviation. It must really
bug them when the US Govt. has to steal, pressure, borrow, or buy
foreign tech to maintain the cutting edge (which it doesn't possess in
all areas).

Rob

From: (robert arndt)
Date: 2/23/2004 7:59 AM Central Standard Time


In the entire time I've been at RAM (6 years)I've posted a lot of
photos and designs of extremely rare aircraft.

So have many others, so?

I'm willing to bet that
many of the regulars here don't like that because it ruins their
beliefs that the US invented everything in aviation. It must really
bug them when the US Govt. has to steal, pressure, borrow, or buy
foreign tech to maintain the cutting edge (which it doesn't possess in
all areas).

Rob

There are a few problems with your theory:

1) no one here has ever claimed all things aviation were invented by the U.S.
On the other hand you have said many times all advancements in aviation are
based on Nazi designs and technology. If that stretch were try then all
helicopters are based on D Vinci's designs and all winged aircraft are based on
a model bird found in an ancient Egyptian tomb that could actually fly.

2) The vast majority of the photographs and drawings were of aircraft that
never flew. You didn't have the technology during WW2 to make them work even if
you had the time and money. Example, you guys built a forward swept wing
bomber. Until materials and flight computers came along forward swept were not
successful in any degree.

3) Your incessent bragging about your disc aircraft being Nazi inventions is
an out and out lie. You have been proved wrong many times.

4) When pressed for proof of many of your claims you tell us the U.S. seized
everything and is still keeping it secret or you provide links to UFO rags.

5)) More claims as above where you claim you Germans invented/thought
up/designed/created or otherwise initiated all things aviation.

I know you feel bad about losing that war and feel you need to salvage
something from that regime, but give up already. You Germans DID invent and
design many aviation advances, do did the U.S., Italians, U.K., French,
U.S.S.R., Japan etc. Get over yourself.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired