Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Under Soviet Satellites, How Area 51 Hid (And Invented) Secret Craft

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the watchful-loving-eye-of-sauron dept.

The Military 155

An anonymous reader writes "No word yet on alien starships, but now that many Cold War-era Area 51 documents have been declassified, veterans of the secret US base are revealing some of the clever — and surprisingly low-tech — ways they hid futuristic prototypes from prying eyes."

cancel ×

155 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Let me guess... (5, Funny)

Semptimilius (917640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225134)

Roofs?

things are easy to hide underground (1)

nido (102070) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225536)

It's much easier to hide things in an underground cavern than in a building on the surface.

There are various levels of secret. Classify everything; declassify "low-grade" secrets first.

The base that didn't exist except in the minds of "conspiracy nuts" has been partially admitted to. I wonder what other "secrets" are out there, and where they're hidden. And when will they open Area 51 for tours?

Re:things are easy to hide underground (3, Informative)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225574)

Nobody besides the government denies the existence of Area 51. The base exists, and is well proven for decades.

What is denied is that there are aliens there, or really much of anything. Hell, the government even admitted its existence to the russians a couple of decades ago, and by treaty they were allowed to do flyovers of it. During a period of the 1980's to 1990's, it was all but abandoned. There was a lawsuit in the 1990's by workers who worked there about exposure to toxic fumes and chemicals.

So no, the base does exist and has publicly existed to far more than just "conspiracy nuts" for decades. It was just very secretive and few knew what went on there.

Are there other secret bases? (1)

nido (102070) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225602)

or is everything else officially accounted for?

Re:Are there other secret bases? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225660)

Are there other secret bases?

or is everything else officially accounted for?

Yes, in Saudi Arabia.

Re:Are there other secret bases? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225836)

What's up with the deserts?
Are alien UFO:s prone to rust or something?

Re:Are there other secret bases? (2)

dkf (304284) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225888)

What's up with the deserts?
Are alien UFO:s prone to rust or something?

It's hard to hide secret airbases in downtown Manhattan.

More seriously, deserts are great for hiding things precisely because there's very few people around otherwise. Mountains would work too, but they're not so great for airbases due to the terrain, and it's also easy for spies to get somewhere where they can overlook the base. Farmland tends to have too many people about. A nice big forest would be quite good though, but only if its empty enough; large chunks of northern Canada are fairly well suited except that they're under major flight routes and they're not in the US. (Mind you, if Canada had a secret alien research program, that's where it would be. The north is big and very empty away from the mines.)

Re:Are there other secret bases? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36226434)

Also, you can see people coming from a long way away.

Re:Are there other secret bases? (4, Funny)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226562)

It's hard to hide secret airbases in downtown Manhattan.

Not according to that documentary I saw several years ago. You know, the one with Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones.

Re:Are there other secret bases? (1)

warGod3 (198094) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226176)

Really? Define "secret" bases? Ones that someone on /. could claim to have worked at but cannot say anything?

Do some research and let the rest of us lazy folks know what you find...

Re:Are there other secret bases? (1)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226786)

What is accounted for is the billions upon billions of dollars wasted in, spy vs spy, cold war nonsense.

When cold war started to calm, information would purposefully leak about real or imaginary weapons in order to get things moving again, keep that money train rolling.

Like all those secret bases, pretending to be far more than they were in order to less far less of a waste of tax payer dollars than they were, they were mainly there to feed the profits of the military industrial complex and to keep the cold war going.

The most important secrecy function was of course to keep the public uninformed of the waste going on, of the profits being generated and of course at whom most of the misinformation was targeted.

Re:things are easy to hide underground (2)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226596)

Nobody besides the government denies the existence of Area 51.

That's a myth. It used to be true but hasn't been for a very long time now. Their comments these days are typically, "no comment." The simple fact is, the government has officially acknowledged and admitted area 51 exists. The fact is even part of official court records.

Far too many confuse redaction policy with official status. Officially, area 51 exists. Policy, on the other hand, requires all references be redacted.

These aren't the roofs you're looking for... (5, Funny)

denzacar (181829) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225760)

IT'S A TARP!

Beware link... (0)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225136)

The link in TFA leads to some sort of bogus site - it automatically started downloading a zip file of some sort.

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225166)

The link in TFA leads to some sort of bogus site - it automatically started downloading a zip file of some sort.

Yea, natgeo....dodgy site there

Re:Beware link... (1)

zonky (1153039) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225192)

False feeling of safety!

Thanks to ad networks, there are no safe sites on the interwebs.

Re:Beware link... (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226330)

and thanks to adblock+ there are few ads on the intertubes.

Re:Beware link... (1)

Pikoro (844299) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225168)

I think you clicked that link wrong. Got nothing of the sort here.

Wait, that was too nice. uh, let me try again:

your mom's face leads to some sort of bogus site. stop cowering... feeb? :P

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225422)

I scratch my head when reading stuff like this and then realize, OH. I'm running Noscript so of course I don't see these drive by downloads.

Re:Beware link... (3, Interesting)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225576)

    Noscript, and Adblock Plus, and I saw nothing but a National Geographic story. Pretty boring stuff. If you've ever known anyone in military intelligence, they'll tell you the same kind of story. Fake vehicles (like cardboard cutouts), scrambling to move anything "interesting" inside, or cover it with a tarp. The idea was to make every base look like it was deserted, even if there was a full complement there.

    Area 51 still does a fine job of it. I check Google Maps there once in a while to see what's changed. Some of the underground bunkers, that had taxiways from the runways, which had an obvious opening, now look like they're just the side of a mountain. So you have an empty taxiway to nowhere? Yup, I'm falling for that.
I still have yet to see interesting aircraft, but of course they are the gov't, and can tell Google to remove any unpopular images before they're published. Most likely, they still do their privacy covers. What's the difference between a dirty colored tarp, and the side of a mountain? Absolutely nothing without very high resolution and/or infrared imaging.

    For reference, this [google.com] is one of those spots.

    If you browse around, they only have 4 aircraft. Two airliners, two helicopters, and one fighter jet. Hmmm, that doesn't seem quite right, now does it? :)

    This [google.com] is my favorite feature of the area.

    Oops, I rambled again, didn't I? Oh well.

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225654)

Not necessarily. Nice touch, considering what's nearby. Thanks to whoever was doing it for whatever it was that they - and their predecessors - were doing. But don't respond to this, just smile to yourselves :)

Re:Beware link... (1)

stjobe (78285) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225714)

This [google.com] is my favorite feature of the area.

Interesting... Panning a bit east on that map (to the other side of Mesa Rd) there's a lot of large (500ft+) craters... Is that a nuclear test site?

Re:Beware link... (1)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225802)

This [google.com] is my favorite feature of the area.

Interesting... Panning a bit east on that map (to the other side of Mesa Rd) there's a lot of large (500ft+) craters... Is that a nuclear test site?

Uhhhh...no. Those are just ... gophers. Gopher sinkholes. I mean sinkholes. From water erosion and stuff.

They do look interesting, but I really have no way of knowing if they are a natural or manmade phenomenon.

Re:Beware link... (1)

Dan Dankleton (1898312) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225848)

Duh... it's extra craters that they made to hide the real alien crash site!

Re:Beware link... (1)

fifedrum (611338) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227574)

what are the craters around the area from? nuke tests or conventional weapons tests or just holes they dug for some other reason?

Re:Beware link... (1)

Aerorae (1941752) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225172)

Well I found the site by browsing from the main NG site. (Didn't try the summary link) Here joo go: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/05/110520-area-51-secret-hid-craft-base-declassified-a-12-plane/ [nationalgeographic.com]

Re:Beware link... (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225220)

Thanks, but if the ad provider is compromised the link will not help prevent the attack.

Re:Beware link... (2)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225224)

I got it on the third attempt. Digging further, I was redirected to 178.162.157.0. Actual site is 184.84.222.83 as I pinged it. First is in germany, second is Akamai and gives the real site.

Re:Beware link... (1)

qubezz (520511) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225864)

The article is a puff 'news' piece regurgitating a new NatGeo documentary Area 51 Declassified [nationalgeographic.com] that premiered on May 22. Check your local listings or favourite video sharing site. [youtube.com]

Same thing here, malware alert from link (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225194)

I didn't get a zip file but I did get a malware alert from Safari. Possibly NG or an ad provider hacked?

Re:Same thing here, malware alert from link (1)

malignant_minded (884324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226164)

Chrome Blocks with
news.nationalgeographic.com contains content from fgcserving.com, a site known to distribute malware.

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225230)

What flavor of crack are you smoking? Link points to nationalgeographicDOTcom and I didn't get any downloads with Firefox or Chrome.

Obviously you're a disinfo agent intent on keeping the world from knowing the truth about Area 51.

Re:Beware link... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225282)

Poisoned rotating ads, Lester, chill. Not everyone will get hit. Turn on the NoScript and AdBlock and you're all set.

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225360)

AC you replied to here.

That must be it. I have NoScript & AdBlock. Jumped the gun.

Re:Beware link... (1)

crafty.munchkin (1220528) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225490)

checked for malware lately?

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225722)

The link in TFA leads to some sort of bogus site - it automatically started downloading a zip file of some sort.

The link I see is:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/05/110520-area-51-secret-hid-craft-base-declassified-a-12-plane/

Which takes me to the normal National Geographic web site, which does not attempt a drive-by download.

You've probably got a DNS hijack exploit going on with your system. You should probably call the Mac Geniuses to get that fixed for you.

Re:Beware link... (1)

weave (48069) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225972)

Happened to me too. In Safari in a Mac. It immediately started a fake scanning in a browser window. I closed it right away and the Mac installer started and asked me to install Mac Protector, so I quit the installer and all is well. I did some reading and a lot of people apparently go ahead and install a program they know nothing about including entering in their admin credentials to allow it to install with root privs. Sigh... So seems like Nat Geo's ad farm or service is infected....

Re:Beware link... (1)

JohnG (93975) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226056)

My roommate, my neighbor, and a friend of mine have all been hit by rogue anti-virus programs on Windows in the past 3 weeks or so. I've had the same thing that happened to you happen to me twice today. I guess someone has decided to bring the rogue anti-virus scam to Macs. Thankfully, it isn't so easy to get administrator access to a UNIX machine and the scammers have to actually ask permission to install their virus. Fixing my roommate's computers was a pain in the ass, and my neighbor had to go to work before I could figure out how to fix his.

Re:Beware link... (1)

avgjoe62 (558860) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226762)

I've seen those same rogue anti-virus scams on my Linux Boxes. Always amuses me when it shows my C: drive and tells me my Windows Registry is infected...

Re:Beware link... (1)

mindbooger (650932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227080)

> I closed it right away and the Mac installer started and asked me to install Mac Protector, so I quit the installer and all is well

No, not _all_ is well. You need to turn off the Safari pref 'Open "safe" files after downloading', which should not even _exist_. :-(

Re:Beware link... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36226014)

Same, Chome on Mac - seems to be the ad provider as a second visit didn't get blocked

Re:Beware link... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226452)

How apt. A malware payload in an article about A51.

The conspiracy crackpots will have a blast with that one.

Why 51? (2)

JaydenT (2012002) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225140)

Why was it called Area 51?

Re:Why 51? (4, Funny)

plover (150551) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225150)

Why was it called Area 51?

Because calling it "CIA Secret Aircraft Research Area" might have given the wrong idea to the Soviets?

Re:Why 51? (1)

fph il quozientatore (971015) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225680)

Is the pun on "Csar" intended? If so, my kudos.

Re:Why 51? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225184)

It wasn't called area 51, I forgot what the base is called but the reason why people called it area 51 is because of a quad number that it was seen from (area 51). I didn't read TFA but from a lot of testimonies from former employees it seems that it was a secret base intended to develop high-tech stuff against the reds. Whether or not there's alien technology may or may not be true, but I don't think it would be in area 51 if it were held somewhere. It was mostly an airbase that grew bigger over time, and nothing too fancy as far as a major underground complex like one would hope to find (at least what's been disclosed and accounted for). Some claim there are 2 or 3 other types of Area 51 and even an underground base in the grand canyon simply because over 100 miles of it hasn't ever been recorded and it would be the most ideal place to have a hiding spot.

Beyond that, it's all speculation. I do enjoy hearing about alien theories but there's not enough solid evidence to prove their existence, at least in cooperation or against the government. If you want to know why Area 51 came to be something more than just an airbase, look up Bob Lazar or however you spell his name. He had an interview like 20 years ago where he explained everything that he's seen and heard about the place. There's no telling whether or not he was telling the truth but that's pretty much how it really got press (outside of the Roswell incident).

Don't worry, I don't wear a tinfoil hat and think that the government is up to no good, and causing trouble in the neighborhood. If anything, I trust they know how to handle national security more than they know how to handle money. But if this whole economy gets worse, I'll go live with my auntie and uncle in bel air.

Re:Why 51? (1)

shadowfaxcrx (1736978) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225340)

Paradise Ranch, Dreamland, and Groom Lake are the most common other-names for A51.

Re:Why 51? (1)

multipartmixed (163409) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227118)

Yeah - in Stargate SG-1, the second gate was hidden in "The Groom Lake Facility"

Re:Why 51? (1)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225186)

Why was it called Area 51?

If I remember correctly from one of the shows on it, the terrain there is so desolate that the military maps just denoted different "Areas." The base happened to be situated in "Area 51." It was on TV, and I vaguely remember it that way, so I am totally sure its true.

Re:Why 51? (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225188)

Maybe it was commissioned in 1951... or so *they* want you to think!

Re:Why 51? (1)

socceroos (1374367) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225196)

I'm pretty sure the States is divided up into a number of areas for operational control. It so happens that this one has been assigned the number '51'.

Re:Why 51? (4, Informative)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225214)

Its part of the Nevada Test Range, the NTS area next to it is 15, the block commonly called Area 51 is more properly known as Groom Lake (for the dry lakebed there) and on some maps, CIA documents and in corporate literature that block is Area 51.

The Presidential Determination that keeps Federal Courts from touching operations there refers to it as "The Air Force's Operating Location Near Groom Lake, Nevada:.

Re:Why 51? (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225518)

Ding ding ding! You are winner! Close enough for gubmint work, anyway.

At least that's what our tour guide said during an NTS tour. Although Area 15 isn't adjacent. There's a gap. Area 15 is the northeasternmost "area" on most publicly available maps and you can see Groom Lake Road heading northeast from Area 15 in the direction of Area 51. 15.8 miles from the Sedan crater viewing point according to Google Maps.

Re:Why 51? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36227656)

Did they give you any protective gear? I don't think I want to even get close to it, given the dirty bomb tests which scattered plutonium all over hell. (Re: Plumbbob, pascal-a [wikipedia.org] )

BTW, did you hear the Fresh Air broadcast [npr.org] about it last week? Recommended.

Re:Why 51? (1)

MachineShedFred (621896) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227936)

Because that's how the US Government labels stuff per site. For example, the Hanford Site in Washington where plutonium was made for nuclear weapons has a "100 Area", "200 Area", and "300 Area" which designate where the reactors are (100), chemical separation complexes (200) and the various support facilities (300).

Area 51 is part of the Nevada Test Site. That "area" designation is usually pointing towards a specific function - in this case, spy plane R&D, and hiding aliens.

Malicious Site (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225176)

According to Symantec, this site will attempt to install Blackhole Toolkit Website 5 from caraves.co.be.

If companies the size of National Geographic can't operate without letting hackers in through their adnetworks, they should go out of business.

Re:Malicious Site (3, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225276)

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense that you would get a black hole from reading too much about Area51.

Those alien defense systems are pretty good.

Re:Malicious Site (4, Funny)

Hamsterdan (815291) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225406)

Perhaps hiring Sony's IT dept wasn't such a good idea after all...

Re:Malicious Site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225656)

No malicious link here. I suspect it was an advertisement that was compromised. Since I run AdBlock, I wouldn't know.

Re:Malicious Site (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225970)

Haha! Look at the parent, he tried to RTFA! And see what it got him!

Some methods still classified (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225218)

One successful method was to hire bald fat scifi geeks to run around naked. The resulting hysterical blindness worked better than a Romulan claoking device.

Re:Some methods still classified (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225258)

Thank you for offending 80% of slashdot.

Re:Some methods still classified (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225668)

One successful method was to hire bald fat scifi geeks to run around naked. The resulting hysterical blindness worked better than a Romulan claoking[sic] device.

Thank you for offending 80% of slashdot.

Make that 90%, the Romulans aren't happy about the disparagement of the cloaking device.

Re:Some methods still classified (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36227326)

Thank you for offending 80% of slashdot.

Make that 90%, the Romulans aren't happy about the disparagement of the cloaking device.

Slashdot is 10% Romulan??

I, for one, welcome our pointy-eared overlords.

Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1, Informative)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225228)

This is a Harold Clamping parallel, how loons fool themselves. Area 51 could only have been credible alien ship junkyard to a poorly educated lot. Most modern people believe in repeatable, falsifiable observations. Those who don't live with a world view that is arcane, oblivious, and ignorant. As such, why give them the media attention? Do you also laugh at people with Down's syndrome or any other serious challenges? These dudes are parts the modern freak show.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

stms (1132653) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225274)

Area 51 may not have been an alien hide out or anything of the sort but the U.S. Government did do some really cool stuff there (well nerds think its cool). It's one thing to randomly try to predict the apocalypse it's human nature to want to know the unknown especially when your paying for that unknown thing by way of taxes.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225288)

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
"...and/or can be attributable to Satanic Cults/the New World Order/neo-Nazi supermen/aliens." -Me

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

Myria (562655) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225410)

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke

I disagree. Magic doesn't follow the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In any unknown advanced technology, we could identify the heat reservoir.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

bryan1945 (301828) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225460)

Unless it is sufficiently advanced to dump it into a parallel universe.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225558)

If you do that, you tend to end up with two Rodneys, and we get stuck with the neurotic one.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

dkf (304284) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225928)

Magic doesn't follow the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In any unknown advanced technology, we could identify the heat reservoir.

That's besides the point. If magic worked, we'd be able to use systematic study with it and it would become technology. It'd just be driven by fairy tears or tiny imps or something instead of electrons.

And overall the Second Law would still hold. Things get really really screwy when you don't have that. You just might not see where the heat sink and source were located.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36226334)

there are tiny imps?

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36226746)

I thought electrons were fairy tears!

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

creat3d (1489345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225516)

What about satanic spider-men from Germany?

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225954)

"Gehm's Corollary to Clarke's Third Law: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced." -- Barry Gehm.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (5, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225844)

People who believe in UFOs are only loons because they are a small minority. Lots of people believe in God, despite there being no compelling evidence in the same way that there isn't for extra-terrestrials, but because that is a commonly held delusion it is considered normal. Sanity is defined as the norm, not what is rational.

Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel (1)

darkstar949 (697933) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226618)

What do you mean by "believe in UFOs"? The term, in and of itself is commonly used in aviation (i.e. if see something go by and can't identify it, even if it appears man-made, it's an unidentified flying object) and doesn't really have anything attached to it that would require belief.

Now if you are implying that people who hold the belief that all UFOs are piloted by extraterrestrials, then that might require a leap of faith that could be subject to question, but someone just merely stating that they saw an unknown craft in the sky should not make them subject to ridicule.

the hoi-polloi don't reading comprehension (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227202)

I saw something, it seemed to be in the sky, therefore it was an Unidentified Flying Oject. It was probably a weather balloon. Or a pelican. It could have been some secret CIA spy plane.
I hallucinated an disc-shaped spacecraft full of aliens who flew the 186,000,000,000,000,000 miles from Sirius to give me a prostate exam, they were in a flying saucer.
I was molested by a flying bar hade. No, I'm not crazee.

Re:the hoi-polloi don't reading comprehension (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227380)

I may not be crazee, but I sometimes click submit before checking my post. Here's the bar hade [google.com] reference for ya.

Oh good grief, /. won't let me post AC, this is ridiculous.

Zoidberg! (0)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225310)

What I want to know is what they did with all the spare organs they removed from Dr. Zoidberg. Come on, open the files!

Re:Zoidberg! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225344)

What I want to know is what they did with all the spare organs they removed from Dr. Zoidberg. Come on, open the files!

Oh sure, like you need all your blood.

Re:Zoidberg! (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225396)

What I want to know is what they did with all the spare organs they removed from Dr. Zoidberg. Come on, open the files!

I'm sure whatever it was, it was delicious! The pictures would probably be of a Christmas BBQ.

That picture.... (1)

sqldr (838964) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225320)

Am I the only one with a desperate urge to push it over?

Re:That picture.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225464)

No ;-)

Re:That picture.... (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225500)

Look at it again. Down by the base, there is a little man. That plane isn't something you're just going to push over.

Similar to Operation Fortitude (1)

jools33 (252092) | more than 3 years ago | (#36225520)

This sounds a little like what the Allies were doing with operation fortitude [wikipedia.org] - before the dday landings. They build inflatable rubber tanks and artillery - and placed them in locations that made it look like the invasion would be aimed at Calais. Of course then they weren't trying to confuse satellites - but German spotter planes.

Re:Similar to Operation Fortitude (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226370)

Worth noting that soviets were absolute geniuses of this warfare, far eclipsing West. When USSR fell, the real size of their army proved to be approximately 40% smaller then most conservative estimates before that.

Reason? Large inflatable pseudo-armies, that actually had proper radar cross-section and IR signature that fooled all the massive reconnaissance conducted on USSR from air. It made the listed area51 tricks look like child play.

Re:Similar to Operation Fortitude (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36226508)

They were also helped by a Military-Industrial Complex in the west bent on exaggerating the Soviet threat to sell more weapons.

US Paranoia writ large (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225658)

They're out to get you. Every one of them. Duck and Cover - but not under the bed 'cos that where the Commies are. Everyone hates you for your freedoms.

really... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36225794)

This government has lied to people since their first contact with the "heathen savages" the Native American indiginous peoples and they are still lying to them, even today.
What makes you think that this government isn't doing the same to us?
Conspiracy theorist or not, I wouldn't trust them as far as I could spit. Considering their actions, above and beyond their words, I don't understand why these people are not being investigated or why they do not have to take drug and alcohol tests. These people leave office as millionaires and nobody asks why. Considering that we, the voters, have little or no say in their decisions that take money out of our pockets and give it to our so called "friends" who end up stabbing us in the back while our own people are given inadequate health care, overly expensive education, crime in the streets while safety services are bartered against high taxes, corporatations steal us blind all the while these career criminal politicians tell us there is nothing they can do.
If you want America to be "FIRST", then the American people should come first.
These bastards are so eager to spill the blood of our youth, it is not far-fetched that they will cut your throat as well.

Re:really... (1)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227542)

Righteous anger has it's place but do you actually have any answers? Any suggestions on how to make it better? Unfortunately, as ugly as it is, we currently have the best system of government the world has ever seen. The People have more power and say today in the US than in any country at any time in history.

TL;DR version (1)

argStyopa (232550) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226162)

They moved the mockup planes under cover when Soviet satellites were passing over.
When they supposed that the Soviets were learning about the shapes of the aircraft with infrared from shape the ground shadow left in the hot sun, they made funny-shaped shadows.

That's pretty much the whole article.
Is it just me or is Nat'l Geo running out of things to write about?

Careful! Malware! (1)

iMouse (963104) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226412)

Careful clicking on that link...there is a malicious banner ad on the National Geographic website. It doesn't hit every time, but on the first click, I was redirected to a rogue AV download site where anti-malware.zip was downloaded.

Shameless promotion: Mac OS X, FTW!

Restricted airspace and other curiosities (4, Informative)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226470)

Another interesting thing about Groom Lake is its status as restricted airspace. If you find R-4808N on the FAA's Las Vegas sectional map (e.g., at http://skyvector.com/ [skyvector.com] ), you'll see that it covers two things: a large area over the old Nevada Testing Site, where the Department of Energy used to test nuclear weapons, and a big conspicuously square area with a large dry lake bed called Groom Lake smack dab in the center. The fairly large airport that's been built next to and extending onto the lake bed is also not labeled on those maps, despite the fact that various other land features and manmade structures just a few miles away (including in the Nevada Testing Site) are labeled to serve as landmarks to pilots.

Restricted airspace listings (the text versions, to be used in conjunction with various airspace maps, e.g., http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/SUA.pdf [faa.gov] ) tell you a few things that provide a mechanism for legally accessing them. For instance, they tell you what hours they are restricted (such as a fixed pattern of hours each week, or by specifically issued FAA notice, etc.), what elevations are restricted, the using agency (the agency for the benefit of which the airspace is restricted), and the controlling agency (whom you would contact to try to get clearance to enter the airspace) in the case of "joint use" airspace.

If you look up R-4808N in the restricted airspace listings, it tells you (a) that the restricted airspace is in continuous operation, i.e., it's restricted 24 hours a day every day; (b) it's restricted at all elevations from the ground up; (c) there is no "controlling agency" listed, meaning the airspace is not joint use; and (d) the using agency is the Department of Energy, meaning that the block of restricted airspace is lumped in with the Nevada Test Site even though the Air Force actually runs the Groom Lake facility. All of these characteristics are fairly unusual as restricted airspace goes, and I've only found one other bit of restricted airspace in the listings that doesn't list a controlling facility (a tiny bit of airspace at the Tooele Army Depot in Utah).

Nellis AFB near Las Vegas manages almost all of the restricted and military operation airspace in that area, and they're the ones who will angrily contact you via radio if you even approach the restricted airspace in that area. The restricted airspace is more of a legal mechanism to deal with pilots who encroach on the airspace after they land, and Nellis AFB will send fighters out to strongly dissuade anyone who comes too close to the airspace even if they don't enter it.

One other thing to note is that the runways at Groom Lake are actually quite busy. There is a restricted access terminal at McCarran (Las Vegas) Airport where some thousand or so people board planes that make trips to and from Groom Lake throughout the day. The flights use the name "Janet" when talking to the tower at McCarran (similar to how a United Airlines flight would be referred to as, e.g., "United 123").

Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities (1)

jittles (1613415) | more than 3 years ago | (#36226556)

The fences around Area 51 are still marked with "No trespassing signs" that indicate that they are authorized to use deadly force if you violate the sign.

look what rule 34 hath wrought (2)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227264)

I know Nevada is a sin-friendly state, with it's gambling and prostitution, but what kind of depraved lunatic would violate a sign?!! I mean really, couldn't someone who is, uh, sign oriented easily find a consensual relationship?

Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#36227870)

The fences around Area 51 are still marked with "No trespassing signs" that indicate that they are authorized to use deadly force if you violate the sign.

Oh yeah, you're a dirty little sign, aren't you?

Difference between selling and installing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36227510)

I did RTFA. Cisco is not denying it sold any equipment to China, and frankly, that wouldn't be illegal. Routers pass in and out of China everyday for any number of reasons to be used in industry and administrative applications.

THEY WOULD be complicit if Cisco engineers had gone into China and setup Cisco equipment in a big building that said "Golden Shield Area!" and provided white papers and advisory materials for the censorship and control of a nation. Frankly, I could see this. If Cisco equipment makes up the majority of the firewall, then it might be likely that they were complicit in the censorship. It would be advantageous for the US to see how our international companies cooperate with places like China in this.

Such information would normally be concealed in corporate records, and I think part of the suit is an effort to find some of those documents in terms of discovery.

So much trouble to hide a shadow of an aircraft (1)

Shompol (1690084) | more than 3 years ago | (#36228012)

They went into such pains to hide even a shadow, and yet Soviets obtained blueprints of american supersonic jet, and that is only the one I know of. Talk about management with misguided objectives.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>