fitzbew88 said:
I am most interested in the sightings of "large" triangles...I believe these were the focus of the NIDS study. I can't recall whether they included "small" triangles in their study..
The size of the triangles have been relatively consistent during this modern 25 year flap, and I do not believe that the 1000 plus triangle reports, which NIDS studied, included smaller prospective craft. We're talking 1 to 2 football fields across.
There may be smaller triangles, but that's not what I think of with regard to this phenomenon. AEREON did in fact develop a prototype alongside the Dynairship II called the
WASP, which is a smaller version, most likely having to do with surveillence missions. No mystery here though. We've been using smaller unmanned aircraft for quite some time, even if the WASP might use a more unconventional airship design. So, the triangle mystery is categorically a large triangle phenomenon.
fitzbew88 said:
Regarding the military/gov't theory:
1) If secrecy is so important regarding these vehicles, why are they being "deployed" out in the open with lights? And yet not otherwise being discussed?.
Yes. I have no idea. That's part of the reason why NIDS changed their findings in 2004. It's a very, very good question, and it does not appear to conform to a typical DOD "coming out" party on their black-ops technology.
That said, I don't feel the same way that NIDS does, that this bolsters the argument that it is NOT a stealth blimp. For me, and I know many might disagree, but for me, it's two separate issues.
The first issue is the ship itself, the physical and other data compiled, which in my opinion, conforms to the nature and history of airships. That is what the original 2002 NIDS report focused on, and I think that report is very compelling.
The second issue, is the deployment strategy...the open deployment of (potentially) a currently classified aircraft. It is frankly, a second, very compelling mystery.
Some have speculated that the answer could be a type of psychological experiment, if you will, on a large population center. I'm not sure I can say that the evidence supports this speculation, but it certainly is an unsolved question. Again, I don't know what the purpose of the strategy of deployment is, but I don't think it should discount the other evidence which supports the possibility that these could be stealth blimps, LTA, or hybrid airships.
fitzbew88 said:
2) What military purpose would a stealth blimp serve, that is not already better served by our other known stealth assets?
Cargo and heavy-lifting.
Imagine the military benefits to being able to transport: "1-2 million pounds half-way around the world in a week...", as quoted in DefenseIndustryDaily.Com. So the benefits of LTA (lighter than aircraft) blimps, or Airships, are not uncommon discussion-points amongst those in the Defense Industry. These are real ships, with real defense contracts.
fitzbew88 said:
3) Where are they being kept? There aren't that many hangars in the world that can hold a football-field sized blimp.
It's a good question. I haven't investigated that aspect of this mystery quite yet. I'd say that someone probably has, so there might be information floating around. I'll defer to someone else to explore possible hiding places for a football sized blimp.
fitzbew88 said:
4) If these vehicles were deployed (even as prototypes) in 1980, shouldn't we know something publicly about them by now? It's been almost thirty years. I'm skeptical of our government's ability to keep a secret like this.
I respect your skepticism, but I'm not sure I'd agree that it is unusual to entertain the notion that the US military can hide a black-ops classified aircraft from public knowledge for more than 30 years. Call me naive, but this issue, in and of itself, does not create skepticism for me personally. Can the US hide a large aircraft from public knowledge for over 30 years? Oh yeah. You bet!
fitzbew88 said:
If these are really military/gov't, why do they act like they don't care if they are being seen?
Similar to your prior point above. My short answer: I don't know, but that doesn't mean that they are not military aircraft.
fitzbew88 said:
And then there are the "old" triangle sightings from the 60s and earlier...it's hard for me to believe the gov't was flying stealth blimps around in the 60's while simultaneously struggling with U2s.
I kind of doubt that they were also.
The older sightings could be anything...Blimps, ET's, ET-craft from which we reverse-engineered, reverse-engineered craft which came from ET's, Airplanes, weather baloons, atmospheric conditions. Who knows...
You see, I see this as 2 different phenomenon.
The older sightings are not as well documented as the modern sightings between 1980 and 2004, nor were they considered as a part of the NIDS study.
So, I can sink my teeth into the NIDS study, photographs, videos, radar evidence, thousands of reported sightings and testimony, Belgium, Arizona, Illinois, et al. I can look at all that evidence, and come to a reasonable conclusion on at least SOME questions of this mystery. That conclusion is simply that based on everything we know, Airships seems to be the most logical answer, even though there are questions that still remain.
fitzbew88 said:
If this is a military/gov't project, wouldn't it likely have been used in either Persian Gulf War? I am not aware of any such assertion.
Although I long favored the military/gov't theory in regards to the large triangles, I am growing more and more hesitant about it.
I'm not a military expert, not a black-ops expert, so I couldn't give you any insight into what reasons there might have been for not using these craft, assuming that they are classified LTA. One common-sense possibility might be that they aren't yet ready for full, military deployment.