Slashdot Mirror


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

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."

155 comments

  1. Let me guess... by Semptimilius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Roofs?

    1. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After reading, its even better.

      Decoy planes made of cardboard.

    2. Re:Let me guess... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Roofs?

      Perhaps you were joking, but walls and ceilings make it difficult to test radar profiles because they cause radar to bounce all over.

    3. Re:Let me guess... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Decoy planes made of cardboard.

      But why all the saucer-shaped cutouts?

    4. Re:Let me guess... by lennier · · Score: 1

      Volcano lair.

      The heat screens your rocket silos from prying infrared images, plus acts as a handy geothermal power source. And you get a permanent way to dispose of unwanted guests / security risks / repeated fashion offenders. Elegant and practical.

      There's a reason good cliches become cliches, darlings!

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    5. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you had bothered to RTFA you'd have learned that yes, they used roofs, but there was rather more to it. Why don't you read before you comment?

  2. Beware link... by Brett+Buck · · Score: 0

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

    1. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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

    2. Re:Beware link... by Pikoro · · Score: 1

      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

      --
      "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    3. Re:Beware link... by Aerorae · · Score: 1

      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/

    4. Re:Beware link... by zonky · · Score: 1

      False feeling of safety!

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

    5. Re:Beware link... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

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

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    6. Re:Beware link... by Brett+Buck · · Score: 2

      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.

    7. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    8. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    9. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC you replied to here.

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

    10. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    11. Re:Beware link... by crafty.munchkin · · Score: 1

      checked for malware lately?

      --
      ... wait, what?
    12. Re:Beware link... by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Interesting

          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 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 is my favorite feature of the area.

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

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    13. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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 :)

    14. Re:Beware link... by stjobe · · Score: 1

      This 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?

      --
      "Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
    15. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    16. Re:Beware link... by gilleain · · Score: 1

      This 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.

    17. Re:Beware link... by Dan+Dankleton · · Score: 1

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

    18. Re:Beware link... by qubezz · · Score: 1

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

    19. Re:Beware link... by weave · · Score: 1

      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....

    20. Re:Beware link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    21. Re:Beware link... by JohnG · · Score: 1

      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.

    22. Re:Beware link... by cynyr · · Score: 1

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

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    23. Re:Beware link... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

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

      The conspiracy crackpots will have a blast with that one.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    24. Re:Beware link... by avgjoe62 · · Score: 1

      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...

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    25. Re:Beware link... by mindbooger · · Score: 1

      > 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_. :-(

    26. Re:Beware link... by spydum · · Score: 1

      There is a large crater left over from nuclear testing out there -- Sedan crater:
      http://deputy-dog.com/2009/06/worlds-largest-man-made-explosion.html

      I would assume all the others are smaller craters from various other experiments.

    27. Re:Beware link... by fifedrum · · Score: 1

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

    28. Re:Beware link... by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      [Cue Wine compatibility jokes]

    29. Re:Beware link... by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

          Yup. :) The did a lot of nuke testing in that area. That's probably one of the biggest reasons the area is off limits. There's another test area, Area 25 if I recall correctly, where they did an atmospheric nuke test, and that test area is still hot.

          The largest civil purpose nuke was tested in that test range. Google for the "Sedan Crater". They were testing to see if a nuke could move a mountain. It worked very well, except for the pesky radiation problem. It's safe enough to go out and visit for a few minutes, and they do take tour groups, but they're limited, and can't stay very long.

          From what I heard, there is an Executive Order from the POTUS stating that they are exempt from EPA testing and inspection. It makes perfect sense though. If they're testing new or exotic fuels, and they had to dump it, testing of the residue could show what was being tested.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    30. Re:Beware link... by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          It's well documented, that was a weapons test range, and they did nuclear testing there.

          You could go with what some of the conspiracy theorists say though. They make up stuff about a network of secret government tunnels that span the entire country. A lot of their maps show Area 51 to be a central hub. That kind of stuff is made up by people with their tinfoil hats screwed on a little too tight though. :) I'm sure they could find straight lines through there, which lead directly to arbitrary cities, and they'd claim that there were accidents landing UFOs or some such nonsense, and the tunnels collapsed.

          Occam says, they're just craters from tests. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    31. Re:Beware link... by Noitatsidem · · Score: 1

      Being someone who uses multiple OSes, it's also pretty funny to see fake Windows XP scans on 7, though with Linux it's especially hilarious. Funny thing is, my Uncle running Linux, fell for it and called me telling me that he had a virus. Sometimes I wonder if I should have left him with those BSOD's on Vista...

      --
      Feel free to mod me down, just know that unlike some Anonymous Cowards I'm not afraid to express my views as myself.
  3. Why 51? by JaydenT · · Score: 1

    Why was it called Area 51?

    1. Re:Why 51? by plover · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why was it called Area 51?

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

      --
      John
    2. Re:Why 51? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

    3. Re:Why 51? by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    4. Re:Why 51? by MrEricSir · · Score: 1

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

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    5. Re:Why 51? by socceroos · · Score: 1

      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'.

    6. Re:Why 51? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 4, Informative

      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:.

    7. Re:Why 51? by shadowfaxcrx · · Score: 1

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

      --
      "I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
    8. Re:Why 51? by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 1

      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.

    9. Re:Why 51? by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 1

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

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

    10. Re:Why 51? by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

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

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    11. Re:Why 51? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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)

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

    12. Re:Why 51? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    13. Re:Why 51? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Nope, you're correct. Pretty much they drew off areas in the middle of the desert, and assigned numbers to them. The area is huge, and it would be a waste of time coming up with names for each part of it.

          I have seen maps indicating some other areas, but that doesn't help reinforce the mystery of "Area 51", so conspiracy folks don't generally publish that much. Come on, if it's Area 51, and assuming it's just an average spot on the map, there may be 100 "Areas". I don't remember how many area the Nevada Test Site was segmented into. But, if all the tinfoil hat crowd are focused on Area 51, then that means they can continue to test whatever they want at the other sites without nutjobs with telescopes watching them. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    14. Re:Why 51? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I've not been out there, closest I've come is Vegas and the Atomic Testing Museum over by UNLV.

      I'm a big history buff on the US nuclear weapon testing programs, less on Area 51 though.

    15. Re:Why 51? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      There are several areas. They are used for a variety of purposes, usually around aircraft.

      They are not sequential. It's just a number someone picked.

      You don't want a neat logical grid of locations. It's one of the many security measures.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    16. Re:Why 51? by treeves · · Score: 1

      In that case, it should have been "CIA Zecret Aircraft Research Area", or possibly "Top Secret Aircraft Research Area".

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    17. Re:Why 51? by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      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.

      What on earth would make anyone think that a giant tourist attraction would be an ideal place to house a top secret military base? If I were going to find a place to hide a military base, it'd be somewhere where no one goes, like a library in New Jersey or anywhere in Idaho.

    18. Re:Why 51? by plover · · Score: 1

      I wish, but had I been that clever I would have come up with a backronym for TSAR, as that's how I spell it. :-)

      --
      John
    19. Re:Why 51? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Probably because anything anyone noticed would simply feed the UFO conspiracies. It would be the equivalent to testing anti-gravity pills in a haunted house :P

  4. Malicious Site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    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.

    1. Re:Malicious Site by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Funny

      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.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    2. Re:Malicious Site by Hamsterdan · · Score: 4, Funny

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

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    3. Re:Malicious Site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    4. Re:Malicious Site by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Malicious Site by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I just got a funny image in my head of Sony's IT Department. I pictured a retarded guy sitting in a corner, banging randomly on a keyboard that isn't even attached to a computer, repeating to himself "I'm SMART."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:Malicious Site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can really pull a wilson when you're fooling with some rented icebreaker on your deck...

    7. Re:Malicious Site by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 1

      Hey, you don't know how to behave in society but we keep letting you in.

  5. Same thing here, malware alert from link by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

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

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Same thing here, malware alert from link by malignant_minded · · Score: 1

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

  6. Some methods still classified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:Some methods still classified by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Thank you for offending 80% of slashdot.

    2. Re:Some methods still classified by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:Some methods still classified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    4. Re:Some methods still classified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Vulcan's are secretly delighted that the Romulans are offended, but sadly all that logic pride prevents them from throwing parties in celebration, much less expressing it openly.

  7. Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by stms · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      "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

    3. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Myria · · Score: 1

      "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.

      --
      "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
    4. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    5. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by creat3d · · Score: 0

      What about satanic spider-men from Germany?

      --
      Grammar nazis are to this community what excrements are to gold.
    6. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    7. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by dkf · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    9. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    10. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there are tiny imps?

    11. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by darkstar949 · · Score: 1

      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.

    12. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought electrons were fairy tears!

    13. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No, they're loons too.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    14. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          You know, from what I've found over the years, you are right. They test some of the most innovative aircraft out there.

          I wrote up something comparing officially government funded aerospace programs, with huge oversight, versus aerospace programs with little to no government oversight. They've done some of the best aerospace work there, and only the good and/or useful stuff makes it out. The A-12, YF-12, and SR-71 are my favorites. They were operating from there for years before it was officially recognized.

         

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    15. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Unless the extra-terrestrials are the ones who introduced the whole God scam so they could produce some pay per view shows similiar to Jackass to sell back home showing the goofy neo-barbs behave.

    16. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by geekoid · · Score: 1

      then the dump itself would generate heat.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    17. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I would use the term irrational. and I would apply it to both groups.

      "Sanity is defined as the norm, not what is rational."
      sigh. No it is not.

      Society just gives tertian irrationalities a pass until the go too far.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    18. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by geekoid · · Score: 1

      since he specifically mention extra-terrestrials, we can assume he is talking about alien craft.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    19. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two wrongs don't make a right.

    20. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by KZigurs · · Score: 1

      hey, mexicans aren't extra-terrestials regardless of whatever definition of terra you use.

    21. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by w0mprat · · Score: 1

      If ETs have the technology to cross interstellar distances then presumably staying hidden from human detection is a trivial technological problem. They may also have plenty of reason to stay hidden, ie to not to disturb us. Especially since we are so obviously easily disturbed. Thus I find it absurd we even bother debating alien technology being on earth at all, why assume we could even percieve it? Leave it to the loons. Area 51 is probably nothing, and if it is something then we're not going to know about it.

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    22. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by plover · · Score: 1

      People want to believe in flying saucers or flying spaghetti monsters can look at a "secret government installation" and blame whatever they want on it. This article is not about those idiots, nor is it about other self-delusional idiots such as Harold Camping. Nobody's giving them attention in this article. This article is about what actually took place at Groom Lake, as told by one of the former workers at the site. Area 51 is where the CIA tested their top secret spy planes. It's no more (or less) exciting than that.

      --
      John
    23. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Welcome to real reality.

    24. Re:Area 51 - the Harold Clamping parallel by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      I don't know what you've been smoking. It is a well established fact that there are no electrons. Simply sheep on bridges and break-dancing chickens. A wizards told me so!

  8. Zoidberg! by antifoidulus · · Score: 0

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

    1. Re:Zoidberg! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    2. Re:Zoidberg! by syousef · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  9. That picture.... by sqldr · · Score: 1

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

    --
    I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    1. Re:That picture.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No ;-)

    2. Re:That picture.... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:That picture.... by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

      Is he green? It's hard to tell in the black-and-white photo.

    4. Re:That picture.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Yea, a little man. What if we got a bigger man?

  10. Similar to Operation Fortitude by jools33 · · Score: 1

    This sounds a little like what the Allies were doing with operation fortitude - 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.

    1. Re:Similar to Operation Fortitude by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Similar to Operation Fortitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    3. Re:Similar to Operation Fortitude by psydeshow · · Score: 1

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

      Well exactly. It probably wasn't a surprise so much as a PR blunder when the real numbers got out. As in, "Oh, sorry, I guess you could have spent more on schools and healthcare. But we really thought they were a threat!"

      Meanwhile, the propaganda in the USSR was in the other direction, with big, government sanctioned peace marches. According to the Russians I've talked to, their mindset was much more defensive than our so-called Defense Department's.

  11. things are easy to hide underground by nido · · Score: 1

    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?

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
    1. Re:things are easy to hide underground by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:things are easy to hide underground by GooberToo · · Score: 2

      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.

    3. Re:things are easy to hide underground by plover · · Score: 1

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

      Perhaps "safer", but definitely not "easier". They needed to get their prototype spy planes in and out of hiding quickly to run their tests before the next soviet satellite was scheduled to come overhead. (They posted a daily list of all the soviet satellites' orbit schedules.) To get the planes underground would have required giant elevators and big caverns. To get them into buildings required nothing more than a tow dolly and a truck.

      Actually, you should RTFA because it's really interesting. For example, when they knew the soviets were using satellites with infrared imaging cameras, they'd use big cardboard sheets cut out in "jet shapes" to shade the tarmac from the hot sun, then removed the cardboard before the satellite arrived. The bird would photograph the cool spot of the shadow, recording the outline of the ersatz plane. They even occasionally used heaters to scorch the tarmac behind the cardboard, simulating recent engine burn tests!

      And people say the U.S. government doesn't know how to have a good time.

      --
      John
  12. Are there other secret bases? by nido · · Score: 1

    or is everything else officially accounted for?

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
    1. Re:Are there other secret bases? by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Are there other secret bases?

      or is everything else officially accounted for?

      Yes, in Saudi Arabia.

    2. Re:Are there other secret bases? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

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

    3. Re:Are there other secret bases? by dkf · · Score: 2

      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.)

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    4. Re:Are there other secret bases? by warGod3 · · Score: 1

      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...

      --
      "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." General James Mattis
    5. Re:Are there other secret bases? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    6. Re:Are there other secret bases? by jd2112 · · Score: 4, Funny

      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.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    7. Re:Are there other secret bases? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:Are there other secret bases? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Since we came out of it a head, and without a nuclear war, I don't call it nonsense.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Are there other secret bases? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Try telling people in Hungary and Vietnam that the cold war was nonsense.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    10. Re:Are there other secret bases? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      There's one on the backside of the Moon* and one on the Mid Atlantic ridge, about halfway between Iceland and the Azores. There's probably also one east of Powderville, MT and one west of Spencer, ID. The last one is almost completely underground.

      *) The Space Shuttles are being shelved because the military has something much better.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    11. Re:Are there other secret bases? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Any place that's unpopulated, flat, dry, having high temperature variability, yet predictable weather will do...I guess that pretty much eliminates all terrain but desert. It's not a particular love for deserts, its about meeting their needs. Even some desert is unsuitable if there are water sources nearby, which tend to draw wildlife and recreating people. For safety experimental aircraft need lots of FLAT space. The pilots want to avoid bird strikes, so limiting bird habitat is a serious issue. While there are computer models, they might not be valid for radical designs, test engineers still want wide temperature swings for their resulting air-density effects on control surfaces and propulsion systems. The security types want to avoid people yet easily detect those that do come by. If the plane crashes off-base they want it to be in the middle of nowhere, yet easy for the recovery teams to access.

      Then there's the lifestyle... Culturally, many non-pilots are tinkerers, even off-duty, addicted to speed and have high performance personal vehicles. To avoid citation-issuing MP's, rather than ride on speed-limited roads, some were allowed to test the performance envelope of my motorcycle on an inactive runway. Even a motorcycle, without aerodynamic control surfaces, responds differently because hot vs. cold air impacts engine and tire behavior at 50F vs. 110F. Developing an "instinctive level" of understanding of this is encouraged by the project managers at all levels.

    12. Re:Are there other secret bases? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm..."large chunks of northern Canada are fairly well suited except that they're under major flight routes"...you've either never been to Canada (likely) or you have never looked at a map (more likely based on your comment). Canada is a large country, with most citizens living in the southern parts of Canada (in deference to you, that means the majority of the country has little if any "major flight routes"). Similarly, Alaska, a US state, also has huge tracts of forested land with few if any "major flight routes"...and guess what...they have several public and "secret" bases there! Surprise. Your comment is one of the top million stupidest comments on ./

    13. Re:Are there other secret bases? by lennier · · Score: 1

      Try telling people in Hungary and Vietnam that the cold war was nonsense.

      The millions of dead Vietnamese civilians killed by US saturation bombing to contain the Hanoi "domino" which fell anyway? I think they already know.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    14. Re:Are there other secret bases? by lennier · · Score: 1

      The last one is almost completely underground.

      How did that come about? Were there unexpected budget cuts to the XCOM budget before they could dig the last five metres? Or just the typical design snafu where the architect said "But mes ames, you simply must put a swimming pool above the TRIGA reactor! The Cherenkov radiation makes such a bold statement! Non, I will not hear any objections!" and the general sighed and said "okay, whatever, just make sure the alien containment facility on the tenth sub-basement is neutrino shielded and we'll compromise"?

      You know how it is, right? Right?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    15. Re:Are there other secret bases? by plover · · Score: 1

      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.

      I would suggest you do some reading of cold war history before dismissing it as a profiteering gambit by the military industrial complex. If you're interested in what the KGB was doing, I recommend you start with "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB", by Christopher Andrew and Vasily Mitrokhin, as it was written by Mitrokhin, who was the senior historian of the KGB archives. Then, move on to "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America", by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr. Both of these sources validate the stories we heard about the KGB during the Cold War, as told from the point of view of the Russians. TS&tS tells what the KGB was actually doing, while V:DSEiA tells what the Americans learned about the KGB from decrypting Russian messages. "The Main Enemy", by Milt Bearden and James Risen, is a history of the final years of the Cold War, and might address some of your skepticism. There are plenty of other books on the topic, but they all record the same thing from several different vantage points. And for the most part, they all agree and confirm each other.

      The Soviets were absolutely convinced that America was plotting to wipe them out, because that's what the Russian leaders would have done if they were in the same position. They simply did not believe that an actual "democracy" could work without a secret politburo controlling everything that Congress was saying publicly, so they expended tremendous amounts of effort trying to uncover the group of secret leaders that were running the U.S. The more they looked and didn't find them, the more convinced they were that they must have been an ultra-excellent secret bureaucracy, and the more paranoid they became. They were so terrified that they didn't know when we were going to launch H-bombs at them that they ended up deploying their missiles in Cuba and aimed them at the eastern seaboard (more recently the Russians revealed that their Cuban missile capabilities were easily adequate to reach New York and Washington, despite the claims at the time that they had a more limited range.) Read up on the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis to learn more about how that was resolved.

      It may have seemed like Spy vs. Spy to the casual observer, but it was a very real conflict, driven by a series of very real, extremely paranoid tyrants. If we'd been even one quarter as good at it as the Soviets imagined we were, it probably would have become a hot war.

      --
      John
    16. Re:Are there other secret bases? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The point is how long did it last versus how long did it need to last and how much did it cost versus how much did it need to cost.

      If you think the military industrial complex didn't extend the cold war well beyond diplomacy could have ended it, they you fail to acknowledge exactly how it did end. The growth of communication between peoples allowed glasnost http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasnost to come to the fore and gave the opportunity for political reform.

      A process slowed by Mutual assured destruction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction, whilst very profitable for the military industrial complex, it cost many times more than diplomacy would have.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    17. Re:Are there other secret bases? by plover · · Score: 1

      "Hindsight is always 20/20." It's always easy to say "if only we had done this." The thing was, back when this all started there was no talking. None. Nobody could walk across the border, go visit uncle Ivan, nothing. There was no internet, of course. Any international phone calls had to be pre-approved, and were routed directly through KGB headquarters. Any American was under constant surveillance from the moment he stepped through the Iron Curtain. And with reason, from the KGB's perspective - any traveler to the Eastern Bloc was debriefed by the CIA, who was starved for information as to what was going on. We were basing our ideas of Soviet leadership on photographs taken of who sat next to Khrushchev or Brezhnev at the May Day parades! And you're claiming that we armed ourselves unnecessarily "if only we had talked instead." Talking simply wasn't possible in those conditions.

      Later on in the Cold War, defensive spending actually became a key part of the strategy that evolved into what we called "containment". If the Soviets wanted isolation, then fine - isolate them, and let the pressures inside rise. If we claim to have "Star Wars" weapons, then they'll have to spend to create their own Star Wars weapons. They spent huge amounts of money trying to defend against the perceived American threat. Putting Ronnie Raygun in the White House scared the hell out of them, because the hardliners actually believed he'd push the button. Call it saber rattling, call it out of control spending, but it caused the paranoid Soviet leadership to spend an even more disproportionate amount of their economy on defense (over 20% of their GDP!), instead of on the domestic issues that they needed to spend it on. And that spending hastened their collapse by applying tremendous pressure on the Russian people.

      Maybe you're trying to claim that only the last few years of the Cold War were poisoned by the industrialists. Given the history of Russia from the October Revolution through 1982 or so, we knew there was no way these attitudes were going to change overnight through diplomacy alone. Remember, at the time Gorbachev was promising glasnost, he was also trying to implement perestroika, ostensibly to free things up but still keep control in the hands of the Communist party ("free, but not too free" was the joke of the day.) Ultimately, pressures from everywhere were what caused the Soviet Union to collapse. The election of Pope John Paul II, the collapse of their internal economy due to their unchecked military spending, Solidarity, the Afghan war, uskoreniye, democratization, the breakaways by Estonia and Lithuania, the destruction of the Berlin wall. No one piece of this ended the Cold War all by itself. It took the combination of all these factors and many, many more.

      So don't say "oh, glasnost would have taken care of everything, and we wasted our money." Glasnost wasn't offered for no reason. It wouldn't even have happened at all without the pressures of these external forces.

      --
      John
  13. US Paranoia writ large by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  14. These aren't the roofs you're looking for... by denzacar · · Score: 5, Funny

    IT'S A TARP!

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  15. TL;DR version by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    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?

    --
    -Styopa
  16. Careful! Malware! by iMouse · · Score: 1

    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!

  17. Restricted airspace and other curiosities by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Informative

    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/ ), 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 ) 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").

    1. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by jittles · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Informative

      In case you're wondering, that restricted airspace at Tooele Army Depot is likely because of the incinerators that are torching hundreds of tons of nerve gas stored there. I wouldn't be surprised if such a restriction is imposed over the Umatilla Army Depot in eastern Oregon for the same reason.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    4. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Groom Lake was supposedly abandoned for a long time, and supposedly the security patrols stopped and the cameras stopped operating. But more recently, I saw reports that they had re-opened it (maybe they were testing that Air Force space shuttle there or some other anti-terrorist spy gear there).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      I was indeed wondering. Thanks much!

    6. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by plover · · Score: 1

      My favorite Buckaroo Bonzai bit: the sign reading "Trespassers will be Violated"

      --
      John
    7. Re:Restricted airspace and other curiosities by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      Documentaries about Area 51 love to focus on those signs as if they are unique, but they are not. Those signs are pretty ubiquitous on Air Force bases around restricted areas, such as the flight line or a sensitive building. An example is this one from Langley AFB (not my photo). They are also posted on the fences around a base.

      If you ever visit an Air Force base for an air show, look around the entry control points, they are sure to have that sign nearby.

      Deadly force authorized does not mean shoot on sight, you are more likely to be detained or escorted away. It is unlikely you would be shot, even there, unless you were threatening or attempted to do something stupid like a high speed run onto the property.

  18. the hoi-polloi don't reading comprehension by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    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.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:the hoi-polloi don't reading comprehension by Thud457 · · Score: 1

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

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

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  19. look what rule 34 hath wrought by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    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?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  20. Difference between selling and installing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:Difference between selling and installing. by wozzinator · · Score: 0

      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.

      wrong article ftw?

      --
      BSD is for people who love Unix, Linux is for people who hate Microsoft.
  21. Re:really... by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

    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.

  22. So much trouble to hide a shadow of an aircraft by Shompol · · Score: 1

    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.

  23. Alien Hoakam by wozzinator · · Score: 0

    I don't understand why it's so hard for people to understand that the U.S. was testing experimental aircraft (courtesy of Lockheed Skunk Works) at Groom Lake. They just used the Area 51 rumors to fuel the speculation so that if/when people saw the planes they were testing they would come up with some cock-eyed theory as to what it was they saw cause they don't recognize it.

    --
    BSD is for people who love Unix, Linux is for people who hate Microsoft.
  24. Whoa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fascinating article. It's always exciting to read how people can use satellite imaging to their advantage - or hide from it!

    Rebecca
    http://landiscor.com/

  25. So this explains what Bob Lazar saw! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He was probably a lower level position at "area 51" and he saw some of the mach-ups used to fool the Soviets. I bet the guys at the base made all kinds of funny models to fool the IR sats - like "Marvin the Martian" type saucers etc. Bob got one look at them - VERY liberally filled in the blanks re:space aliens, blabbed his mouth to whatever whack jobs would listen and the rest is history :D.