On Mar 18, 2:27 pm, krackula <<krack...@i.am>> wrote:

I haven't heard any such rumors. To fly over commercial airspace with
minimal ATC interference, you need to be above 60kft.

the two times I've heard it,  it seemed to be extremely high in alt
and the guys over  in the valley said the same thing.  the spiral con
trail  aircraft are usually  so high ,  people have to  use   large
telescopes to look for them.

Still, there is

high altitude ATC on the usual freqs. I'm always skeptical of reports
of military testing that isn't over MOAs or SUA.

I think they said it was just traveling  overhead , out to the ocean.
probably the testing / training  taking  place out there . many dozens
of military  flights  from inland ( fallon , colorado springs ..? )
out to the ocean training and testing ranges  and back ,  through the
corridor I mentioned ,  happen each  month.
  it's been a routine thing for over a decade that I know of,
probably much longer.  it's the same route ( to water ) that the
Lamoore NAS uses and many inland  air bases as well.  flights from
Lamoore are seen to join up with some of the flights from inland , on
towards the pacific  areas.   it's  the least  congested  air route to
the open  ocean  from Nv , lower  Utah, Colo , Mojave and many places
east of the Sierras  and  for some the most direct route.

the odd sounding aircraft has been absent for about a week and a half
, so far ....... but you never know.     anyway ...... keep an eye out
for it ....  maybe you'll be lucky enough to be there when it's out
and about !

The problem is nothing experimental is flown without a chase plane or
two. You should see conventional contrails along with that produced by
the experimental airplane. Generally new engines are put in
conventional aircraft, often as only one of a few engines since you
don't trust the new beast. Now if the engine is debugged and has a
corresponding project, I suppose they could be flying a plane, but
there would still be chase.

There is plenty of military action off the coast, but due to overseas
flights, there are notams when the warning areas are in use. I don't
believe you can do much in secrecy over the ocean, though you can
certainly limit prying eyes.

There is a rumor that they use some old Reagan era experimental plane
that was a dud project for engine testing at the TTR. That is, they
put an experimental engine in the failed project just to test engines.
Personally, I suspect they use conventional aircraft for such
purposes. I'd pick something like a B1B for the job. Four engines, so
you can put one or two experimental engines in it. I don't know how
many engines are needed for take off with no load, but if two would do
it, that would make a safe test chassis. For avionics or engines, you
can test in plain sight at some restricted base like the TTR on a very
conventional bird. As you know, most of the avionics for the F22 and
F35 are developed in very conventional aircraft. The CAT-bird at
Mojave is a prime example. Also, N747GE is an example of an engine
test bed.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=18236&rsbci=1&fti=133&ti=0&sc=400
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0326662/M/

Getting back to the chase plane, not only do you need it in the event
the test plane crashes (i.e. the chase knows where the debris field is
located), but I gather the chase plane also receives telemetry from
the test plane.

Here is the test I recorded at Groom Lake for Psycho08
http://www.lazygranch.com/sound/groom_test_psycho_mp3_10192006_8am.wav