• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Pretty damn clear triangle photos. (But no reference points :()


Gareth

Nothin' to see here
Three Clear Photographs Taken of Triangular UFO over South Carolina-UFO Casebook Files

sc031609small.jpg


(theres more at the site)

What do you guys think? as the thread title suggests, the lack of any reference point at all renders these images pretty useless.

Interesting though.
 
hmmm, if the images are not faked then I think it looks like a redesigned Stealth fighter, for any aerodynamic experts out there, is there anything distinctly advantageous with a triangular / Delta shape , e.g. does that build "sit" well in the air ?
 
hmmm, if the images are not faked then I think it looks like a redesigned Stealth fighter, for any aerodynamic experts out there, is there anything distinctly advantageous with a triangular / Delta shape , e.g. does that build "sit" well in the air ?

Not that I'm an aerodynamics expert, but the Delta shape allows for a lifting body rather than just a wing. This also allows for higher airspeeds within this atmosphere.


@OP: That image is useless IMO, without any references or multiple eyewitnesses it becomes just another sighting.
 
Taking this strictly at face value and acknowledging the problems mentioned above....

The second and third images offer more detail, including what appear to be deployed control surfaces on top of the object. That would indicate aerodynamic characteristics because a control surface acts to 'push the air' in a way that affects flight, e.g. Flaps change the shape of the wing to slow you down. Also, the pics shot at an angle appear to show a body that has more shape to it than just a flat triangle, also indicating some aerodynamic possibilities in the fuselage/wing combination.

The reason this is important is because it indicates a power source that may be dependent on lift and thrust. The shape of a wing creates lift through forcing the air to travel further over the top of the wing than the bottom. The craft is 'sucked up' by the vacuum thus created, but in all cases this requires movement through the air, or, more correctly, over the wing (so kites will fly because of wind, not thrust.) However, with a shape like this there is no way the sucker would fly without computers, as we know from the stealth aircraft we do know about. Generally speaking, stubby wings need to be compensated with more thrust and power.

With an anti-gravity power source, all this goes away because you are not dependent on aerodynamics to lift the craft. You still need stability, of course, and who knows how that is handled if, indeed, such power sources exist?

So...this looks like a conventionally powered craft or at least one that uses conventional aerodynamics as part of its composition. Note: I'm not an aeronautical engineer, but I am a licensed pilot.

The images take a long time to come up. In the first page they never came up for me at all. I had to click on the blank image to bring up the larger 1600 pixel image, then zoom in on that.
 
It looks like computer generated image (CGI) to me = hoax.

I also remember "photos" of something very similar (with the same air control surfaces or "vents" or whatever is visible on its upper section) surfacing in 2008.

Schuyler is right that if one has an "antigravity" technology, the craft shape can be virtually anything, because -as Hill suggested- one can control airflow.
 
Back
Top