Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785699760021672124
External Quote:
The two shapes look rather different, but that might be lighting or exposure.
Diamond Shaped Object Over Eglin
- Thread starter Mick West
- Start date
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785699760021672124
The two shapes look rather different, but that might be lighting or exposure.
On reddit they are saying it's a bi-directional flying wing that can rotate to transition between subsonic and super sonic configurations.
https://www.nasa.gov/general/silent-and-efficient-supersonic-bi-directional-flying-wing/
It does look similar but if the proof of concept paper was made in 2012-2013 then I don't know if that would be enough time for the actual plane to be made and operational.
https://www.nasa.gov/general/silent-and-efficient-supersonic-bi-directional-flying-wing/
It does look similar but if the proof of concept paper was made in 2012-2013 then I don't know if that would be enough time for the actual plane to be made and operational.
Tezcatlipoca
Senior Member.
SOF week is also coming up and this is exactly where everyone would be pre-testing their fancy toys to show off. Definitely some possibilities leaning that way.
deirdre
Senior Member.
yandex shows these
add a really low quality phone and filters..i could see getting that shape
in the video sometimes you see the guns and sometimes not, after burner and they have a cockpit/canopy
add a really low quality phone and filters..i could see getting that shape
in the video sometimes you see the guns and sometimes not, after burner and they have a cockpit/canopy
JMartJr
Senior Member.
No, but they do often have visible tails. And particularly the first image in the Twitter post (second image further down in Mick's post) looks a lot like a delta kite of some sort. Not conclusively, but if the story matched kite behavior better I'd find that a credible answer. Something like this, but with less tail -- deltas don't usually NEED tails to fly, but can be attached for aesthetics...External Quote:
There are a zillion different deltas out there, store-bought and home-made
Of course, if it really flew out to sea with a C-130, that rules out a kite without even considering afterburners/tails. So provisionally I'll say this is not one of mine, but will toss this into the thread in case the story of flying along with a C-130 or otherwise doing stuff kites can't do comes into question.
Duke
Senior Member.
Looks somewhat like the PRC's FL-17 drone.
External Quote:
https://defense-update.com/20181109_new-drones-dominate-chinas-zhuhai-airshow.html#google_vignette
John J.
Senior Member.
(Mick West quoting Twitter / "X" user Anthro Aerospace).
Maybe the photographer got to see more than the pictures suggest (if our pictures are of the underside of an aircraft), if they got an impression of the colour on the topside.
I wonder if "[the wings] were slanted inwards" is actually meant to be a reference to tailplanes, not wings?
We (well, I) can't see any obvious tailplane surfaces in the 2 OP photos, though.
The SR-71 Blackbird's tailplanes are canted inwards.
Images are from You Tube user Valeriu Morar's video titled "Mflex - The Light", uploaded c. 2019
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prJ4odfplNk
The Delta-wing fighters in the video (and deirdre's captures) are Dassault Mirage 2000 jets, I think.
Used by France (where they're from), India, UAE, Taiwan, Greece and others.
In service since 1984.
(French, Greek Mirages).
Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_2000
To be honest, I'd be surprised if these are the shapes in the OP photos.
The delta-wings in the video certainly aren't F-5 Tiger IIs, an earlier American aircraft which was widely exported.External Quote:
Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
presumably they mean a KC-130 tanker? Do we have a date/time maybe we can track the tanker on ADSB Exchange.
Given the story sounds a bit embellished and the shape is slightly different.
Original images. exact location and date and time are probably going to be needed.
Given the story sounds a bit embellished and the shape is slightly different.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785824583548887253/photo/1
Another single photo with no context, people calling it fake (and i lean this direction) refusal to show metadata, saw it again and no video and no other photos. No photos from anyone else.
This one is a hoax as far as I can tell.
Last edited:
He has posted metadata, although the comments suggest the screenshot may be edited.
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785864228001210877/photo/1
The image is an Apple live photo according to the metadata, so there should be a short video available, at least.
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785864228001210877/photo/1
The image is an Apple live photo according to the metadata, so there should be a short video available, at least.
11:03am is 15:03 GMT. There was a lot of military traffic over Eglin and the surrounding area, but I don't see any C130s. There was a KC-135 out to see, and two F-5s (the purple ones).
The only one that doesn't have a type designation on ADSB Exchange seems to be this one, TUNDRA2:
According to this list of callsigns, TUNDRA is associated with "T-6 559th FTS RANDOLPH AFB TX", i.e. the 559th Flying Training Squadron. They use T-6 Texan IIs which are rather boring looking turboprops, so it's not that!
Neither is it the Hawk nearby, reg 167098:
The only one that doesn't have a type designation on ADSB Exchange seems to be this one, TUNDRA2:
According to this list of callsigns, TUNDRA is associated with "T-6 559th FTS RANDOLPH AFB TX", i.e. the 559th Flying Training Squadron. They use T-6 Texan IIs which are rather boring looking turboprops, so it's not that!
Neither is it the Hawk nearby, reg 167098:
Going through the twitter replies of Anthro Aerospace which seems to be the source for all these, it looks like this is either an inside joke that got out of hand (that turned into a trolling session) or just a hoax from the start.
At the end she claims the photos are real, so maybe we'll get an update on what they are (or maybe it's just more trolling and the photos are not real).
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785928870450925964
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785912023097758143
At the end she claims the photos are real, so maybe we'll get an update on what they are (or maybe it's just more trolling and the photos are not real).
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785928870450925964
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1785912023097758143
JMartJr
Senior Member.
So that seems to toss the story of flying out to sea into the trash, or at least into doubt. Maybe this IS one of mine after all! OK, I'll see if I can find a best match...
deirdre
Senior Member.
Duke
Senior Member.
You said "at the end, she claims the photos real." It looks like X post she made about people getting mad because they thought it was real at first was made today at 3:06 am, while the post about the photos being real, just won't be what anyone's expecting was made at 1:59 am today. Doesn't that mean the former was posted after the latter? If so, doesn't that mean at the end, she admitted it was fake?
Edit--Corrected time to 1:59 above.
Last edited:
You are right, it's not at the end that she claims that the pictures are real (since she made more comments about the situation after it), my bad.
She claimed that the photos were real after saying it was just a troll/inside joke and that she enjoyed seeing people pretend they know what it is when they don't, so while it could be that she was still trolling when she said it, I'd say that she holds that the photos are real (they aren't fabricated or from a game), she is just saying that the event itself is fabricated (these aren't photos of some mysterious flying object that she wanted someone to identify).
She claimed that the photos were real after saying it was just a troll/inside joke and that she enjoyed seeing people pretend they know what it is when they don't, so while it could be that she was still trolling when she said it, I'd say that she holds that the photos are real (they aren't fabricated or from a game), she is just saying that the event itself is fabricated (these aren't photos of some mysterious flying object that she wanted someone to identify).
Scrolling the original poster's timeline, I'm wondering how anyone thought she was beyond pranking.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
In addition to a delta kite (suggested HERE), I wonder if it might be one of these Magnus Effect kites that get their lift by spinning in the wind. There are commercial versions, but a homemade kite like these might be the best match. It spins on a lateral axis, which might explain the shift in the shape between the two images, one rotated to a different extent than the next.
IF (not ready to make that claim yet but it seems possible...) it were one of these, the "afterburner" would probably not be a tail, but might be a glimpse of the flying string catching the light. The fact that they are often called "UFO Kites" might have suggested something to the mind of a potential hoaxster...
IF (not ready to make that claim yet but it seems possible...) it were one of these, the "afterburner" would probably not be a tail, but might be a glimpse of the flying string catching the light. The fact that they are often called "UFO Kites" might have suggested something to the mind of a potential hoaxster...
deirdre
Senior Member.
i think he photoshopped those in (using photoshopped here in the sense of any filter/manipulation)
Don Kielty
New Member
I think both Deirdre's garbage bag and JMartJr's Magnus Effect kites are both good candidates.Viewing the original photos again though, I think they could be homemade or shop bought stickers on a window.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Possibly, accidentally catching a bit of the string just seemed simpler -- the Lazyology Principle holds that usually the process that might create a hoax image which requires the least effort is probably the one used!
Don't want to get too far out over my skis though, still possible it is not so much a hoax as a "this fooled me will it fool the rest of you" thing...
Source: https://twitter.com/anthroaerospace/status/1786159587101388941
I don't know enough about Cheez-Its to know what shapes they come in, and this answer could still be a troll, but "Cheezit painted black" is what she said. Maybe someone wants to buy a some and see if they find a match while eating the ones that don't match.
deirdre
Senior Member.
it's not a cheez-it unless quite a bit of photoshopping was done. (which is possible)
more likely it's a moldy ravioli. they are more pliable.
John J.
Senior Member.
Never heard of Cheez-Its. To my surprise, my spell-checker has, so I guess they're well-known.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheez-It
Each "cracker" is approx. 24 x 26 mm (just under 1'' by just over 1'').
Hard to see how one Cheez-It by itself could account for the second photo (I'm guessing they're quite brittle and crumbly, so difficult to shape),
...and of course I'm concerned that Cheez-Its might be leaving contrails; something should be done.
I guess it's clear that this is a not-very-complex hoax (and perhaps not intended to be taken seriously for any length of time).
Not particularly interested in what Anthro Aerospace used anymore; I'm guessing many members here could do better with little effort.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheez-It
Each "cracker" is approx. 24 x 26 mm (just under 1'' by just over 1'').
Hard to see how one Cheez-It by itself could account for the second photo (I'm guessing they're quite brittle and crumbly, so difficult to shape),
I guess it's clear that this is a not-very-complex hoax (and perhaps not intended to be taken seriously for any length of time).
Not particularly interested in what Anthro Aerospace used anymore; I'm guessing many members here could do better with little effort.
Last edited:
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
Doesn't look like the classic Cheez-It, but they have a few different varieties. Like this one kinda looks it could be a closer match.
But perhaps just as likely that the twitter OP is still trolling and hoping that someone spray paints a Cheez-It black to prove them wrong.
But perhaps just as likely that the twitter OP is still trolling and hoping that someone spray paints a Cheez-It black to prove them wrong.
She just set her twitter to private, I imagine to let things cool down a bit since people were getting very worked up about it. I assume eventually she'll set it back to public and the twitter links will be back up.
Either way, the whole thing went something like this
Either way, the whole thing went something like this
- Twitter user posts the two pictures (shown at the start of the thread) and asks if someone can ID the plane
- This gets picked up by someone and spread around
- People start asking questions to the OP and OP just gives vague answers and denies many guesses (she also posted one more image as if the craft had popped up again the next day)
- Eventually OP starts making it more and more clear that it was just an inside joke and she just went with it and trolled for a while (these can be seen in post #15 as I took screenshots)
-
- She then said a couple of times that it's absurd people were getting so worked up about a "cheezit painted black", implying that what we are seeing are just images of a cheezit painted black
- I'm not sure if there was a specific event that made her go private, but as far as I saw she was getting harassed by some people that didn't like getting tricked so it's probably just to lay low for a while and let the whole thing blow over.
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
It just doesn't look like a Cheezit painted black, which sounds like a silly thing to even think of. With just the quick reading of her quotes when they were up, I'd suggest the "Cheezit" comment is yet another vague "I'm not saying what I mean, but you know what I mean" type of thing. Her wording is full of slang, inside references and allusions to whatever it is she actually means.
So, I read "people getting worked up about a Cheezit painted black" as "people getting worked up by whatever nonsensical thing that kinda looks like a cheezit if someone had painted one black". She doesn't seem the type of person that would come right out and say "this was a kite".
Of course, her comment completely overlooks the fact that she posted this as an actual aircraft with a backstory about it flying off the coast of Florida with a C130 or KC135 and asked people to help identify it. And then said it flew over again. Then seems to have gotten upset when people took her seriously and then they got upset when she hinted it was a hoax, but still didn't explain herself.
She baited the trap, people took the bait and she more or less called them fools for taking the bait. Then couldn't understand why the people she made look foolish got upset? I'd be curious to see if she makes snarky or nasty comments on other people's X posts.
deirdre
Senior Member.
what makes you think it was his coworkers?
which story? the coworkers story? the cheezit story? the "it accidentally went viral" story?
If she trolls people then she probably has the correct mentality of just disengaging with an online troll when they see one, so it's not that she was surprised that people were getting upset, but more so baffled that so many people were still going on about it even when it was clear she was just trolling. Not engaging or arguing with trolls is like internet 101. Also worth point out I'm pretty sure she's just a teenager, like 15 years old.
Last I saw, she was still trolling the people that were still engaging with her by responding with some copypasta, so it's possible that the cheezit comments were also just more trolling or a way to say it's just a nonsense blob that might as well be a cheezit painted black.
But doing some more digging, she seems to have a friend (also 15) that also talked about it just being a cheezit.
Source: https://twitter.com/Aquav_cotton/status/1786049482418700405
Source: https://twitter.com/Aquav_cotton/status/1786079372622921887
Aquav has called Anthro by her real name and is following Anthro's new account (in which she hasn't posted much about the event), so she's not just a random user but someone that has contact with Anthro.
So personally, I'm inclined to believe this is indeed a cheezits painted black (maybe with some extra props for the afterburner and whatnot), even if I'm not sure how the pictures were taken for that to be a cheezit.
I don't feel too comfortable stalking more random 15-year-old girl's twitters so I'm just going to stop my twitter digging there for now.
Last edited:
deirdre
Senior Member.
how do you know AquaV isnt Anthro? you know these kids have a ton of sockpuppet accounts.
Anthro is not really a girl..its a Furry account ie cos play.
but still super creepy [add:to stalk people], so yea i'd avoid this group altogether.
Last edited:
John J.
Senior Member.
Agreed. This might be a rabbit hole we don't want to go down.
No pun intended.
Leekster
Member
THAT'S WHY I USED QUESTION MARKS.
I was hoping someone could summerize this story for the slow ones like me.
Thank you Calter!! Beautifully explained.
