"Military Airborne Emergency ?"

[rbts]

Done with this thread too.

Mods, please lock this one down.

 

[gvranchosbill]

To jimim

Thats a good possibilty but can they check relays,solienoids when there in those space suits in cramped cockpit? or do they have gauges that relay that info? i suppose they would i guess in the not so recent past i have heard calsign "Pinion" regarding traffic to beale and they upon transmitting had that whining/howling sound that i was trying explain somehow, and given that i was hearing return comms with same sound & signal strength had to be in close proximity to plane discussing there options and the mission that can't be fullfilled they also had to be at extremly high alltitude. Listening to "Pinion 505" one day sounded like what i had heard, except "ops are normal" what i heard was on a freq "UHF am" labled "U.S.N. high altitude" Now dosent Mil Vhf overlap 136.mhz? i swear that N.A.S. Fallon had comms on 136.???mhz.
They have changed some freqs it appears after 9/11. We will never know. Maybe this 136.925 was just a quick jump out of band trying to be discrete also i thought that U.S.Miltary can tune to what ever frequency they desire without disrupting civilian comms? I'll be back iam busy now but i liked your input it was more of sharing info rather than dictating it. Heres a better way to discribe sound Linear Amp Buzzing,High Pitched Wining.

gvranchosbill

 

[CalebATC]

Some good and valid points were brough up, and some just needed to be thrown out.

Come on guys?!?!?! Let's get off the topic about who's better at milair, we ALL have our strengths and weaknesses....

And lets figure out what this plane was doing...........

 

[Hooligan]

Wow, some of you really get irate pretty easily.

I've stayed agnostic about whether they're military aircraft or not. Obviously, none of us know, no matter how many years you want to say you've been monitoring stuff for, etc. Ranchosbill, to be perfectly honest, your posts are rather rambling & you seemed not to know that SR-71s haven't been flying for a long time & McClellan hasn't been an AFB for a long time. You're not a credible source of valid information. So that's why I tried to ask you a lot of follow-up questions. The babies crying about my 'King of All Monitoring' moniker don't realize how much pleasure I derive out of their whining about it.

Someone makes a response saying "I agree with __ because I've monitored for __ years & only military aircraft use "missions!" then starts squealing & wanting the thread closed when I point-out a few examples of non-military aircraft having & using the "missions" vernacular too.

If this thread should be closed, it's only due to the inability to stick to a pretty straightforward topic by a few immature people. For the mature people, there are several options here -- don't read the thread, and/or ask an adult to show you how to filter-out certain members so you don't see their posts/responses. For the immature people, yeah, beg the thread to be locked because you can't handle it any more.

Bill, I now believe what you heard was an SR-71 communicating with a TR-3A 'Black Manta' based out of McClellan AFB. Their true mission was to root out nitwits on RR.com, and they succeeded! Hope you're happy, fella!

 

[rbts]

Wow, some of you really get irate pretty easily.

I've stayed agnostic about whether they're military aircraft or not. Obviously, none of us know, no matter how many years you want to say you've been monitoring stuff for, etc. Ranchosbill, to be perfectly honest, your posts are rather rambling & you seemed not to know that SR-71s haven't been flying for a long time & McClellan hasn't been an AFB for a long time. You're not a credible source of valid information. So that's why I tried to ask you a lot of follow-up questions. The babies crying about my 'King of All Monitoring' moniker don't realize how much pleasure I derive out of their whining about it.

Someone makes a response saying "I agree with __ because I've monitored for __ years & only military aircraft use "missions!" then starts squealing & wanting the thread closed when I point-out a few examples of non-military aircraft having & using the "missions" vernacular too.

If this thread should be closed, it's only due to the inability to stick to a pretty straightforward topic by a few immature people. For the mature people, there are several options here -- don't read the thread, and/or ask an adult to show you how to filter-out certain members so you don't see their posts/responses. For the immature people, yeah, beg the thread to be locked because you can't handle it any more.

Bill, I now believe what you heard was an SR-71 communicating with a TR-3A 'Black Manta' based out of McClellan AFB. Their true mission was to root out nitwits on RR.com, and they succeeded! Hope you're happy, fella!

Hooligan, what cracks me up is that you think because you listen, monitor or whatever you want to call it, to aircraft communications on a scanner, you're an automatic subject matter expert on the topic.

If you work in the aviation industry, my sincere apologies and thank you for your professional input. I seriously doubt this is the case though.

 

[CalebATC]

Nobody is perfect. Nor should people claim they are.


The thread should be locked.

 

[gvranchosbill]

00000

 

[Tech792]

Here on the east coast, FBI aviation and other select Feds have a few air-to-air discretes in the 136-137 mhz area. Could have been one of them.

 

[burner50]

I think we're done here.