Ygtjki

Imaginary part of expression too difficult to calculate

If I cast the Enlarge/Reduce spell on an arrow, what weapon could it count as?

Animating wave motion in water

Do I need an EFI partition for each 18.04 ubuntu I have on my HD?

How to test the sharpness of a knife?

How old is Nick Fury?

Single word to change groups

Jem'Hadar, something strange about their life expectancy

Fair way to split coins

Gauss brackets with double vertical lines

Is VPN a layer 3 concept?

Why didn’t Eve recognize the little cockroach as a living organism?

Symbolism of 18 Journeyers

Hackerrank All Women's Codesprint 2019: Name the Product

Why is this tree refusing to shed its dead leaves?

What are the rules for concealing thieves' tools (or items in general)?

Why I don't get the wanted width of tcbox?

Writing in a Christian voice

What are the consequences of changing the number of hours in a day?

How do researchers send unsolicited emails asking for feedback on their works?

Could any one tell what PN is this Chip? Thanks~

Help with identifying unique aircraft over NE Pennsylvania

How to find the largest number(s) in a list of elements, possibly non-unique?

Isn't the word "experience" wrongly used in this context?

Help with identifying unique aircraft over NE Pennsylvania

Help Identifying a LEGO planeCan you help me identifying this circa 1910 airplane with tail number 72?Can you help me identifying this WW1 German or Austrian airplane from my photo collection?Could you help to identify this WW1 fighter?Can you help me identifying an A-4 Skyhawk-like jet?Partial Serial numbers on Military Aircraft - what combination is unique?Can anyone help me identify the plane in this photograph?Can someone please help me identify this?Are MSN numbers uniqueAny unique characteristics to identify aircraft engine?

14

$begingroup$

Yesterday afternoon I photographed a Boeing 777-300ER flying over my home, according to radar data it was at approximately 32,000 ft. In the photograph there is another aircraft present, it is much smaller and higher in altitude (40,000-50,000 ft) and it is a small aircraft, possibly a drone or military. It did not appear on any flight tracking sites. I usually see military traffic flying in that particular route and heading. I have numerous "raw" images of this particular aircraft.

I originally though it may be an L-39 although that particular aircraft does not have a T tail design and I think that it would struggle at that altitude. The photographs were taken at 1545 EST. over the LVZ VOR.
The aircraft was flying an almost perfect east to west heading usually reserved for military traffic.
One interesting note is that it was not leaving a contrail. I routinely photograph B-52's, tankers, and fighter aircraft transitioning over my home at or about that altitude and they almost always leave contrails.

aircraft-identification

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

New contributor

user38075 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  welcome to aviation.SE. If you want help identifying an aircraft, you will have to provide your data here in the open, we don't do anything via other means.
  $endgroup$
  – Federico♦
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Also note that after enlarging it appears to be a single "inline jet" engine configuration similar to a U-2's fuselage? Thanks Joseph
  $endgroup$
  – user38075
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I asked a co-worker who flew U-2 and he says that to his knowledge all the wings used have a taper on the rear. But he has not flown ALL the variants. Also he points out that there are no visible pods for sensors, which is common with operational flights. Plus the paint schemes on all the U-2 that he has seen as operational are low reflectivity paints, and would not appear as in the photo. How about giving us more data on your photo acquisition details?
  $endgroup$
  – mongo
  15 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  as you seem to have created 2 accounts, please have a look on how to merge them and regain control over the question: aviation.stackexchange.com/help/merging-accounts
  $endgroup$
  – Federico♦
  14 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  please use the edit functionality, if you want to add information.
  $endgroup$
  – Federico♦
  13 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

14

$begingroup$

Yesterday afternoon I photographed a Boeing 777-300ER flying over my home, according to radar data it was at approximately 32,000 ft. In the photograph there is another aircraft present, it is much smaller and higher in altitude (40,000-50,000 ft) and it is a small aircraft, possibly a drone or military. It did not appear on any flight tracking sites. I usually see military traffic flying in that particular route and heading. I have numerous "raw" images of this particular aircraft.

I originally though it may be an L-39 although that particular aircraft does not have a T tail design and I think that it would struggle at that altitude. The photographs were taken at 1545 EST. over the LVZ VOR.
The aircraft was flying an almost perfect east to west heading usually reserved for military traffic.
One interesting note is that it was not leaving a contrail. I routinely photograph B-52's, tankers, and fighter aircraft transitioning over my home at or about that altitude and they almost always leave contrails.

aircraft-identification

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

New contributor

user38075 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  welcome to aviation.SE. If you want help identifying an aircraft, you will have to provide your data here in the open, we don't do anything via other means.
  $endgroup$
  – Federico♦
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Also note that after enlarging it appears to be a single "inline jet" engine configuration similar to a U-2's fuselage? Thanks Joseph
  $endgroup$
  – user38075
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I asked a co-worker who flew U-2 and he says that to his knowledge all the wings used have a taper on the rear. But he has not flown ALL the variants. Also he points out that there are no visible pods for sensors, which is common with operational flights. Plus the paint schemes on all the U-2 that he has seen as operational are low reflectivity paints, and would not appear as in the photo. How about giving us more data on your photo acquisition details?
  $endgroup$
  – mongo
  15 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  as you seem to have created 2 accounts, please have a look on how to merge them and regain control over the question: aviation.stackexchange.com/help/merging-accounts
  $endgroup$
  – Federico♦
  14 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  please use the edit functionality, if you want to add information.
  $endgroup$
  – Federico♦
  13 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Yesterday afternoon I photographed a Boeing 777-300ER flying over my home, according to radar data it was at approximately 32,000 ft. In the photograph there is another aircraft present, it is much smaller and higher in altitude (40,000-50,000 ft) and it is a small aircraft, possibly a drone or military. It did not appear on any flight tracking sites. I usually see military traffic flying in that particular route and heading. I have numerous "raw" images of this particular aircraft.

I originally though it may be an L-39 although that particular aircraft does not have a T tail design and I think that it would struggle at that altitude. The photographs were taken at 1545 EST. over the LVZ VOR.
The aircraft was flying an almost perfect east to west heading usually reserved for military traffic.
One interesting note is that it was not leaving a contrail. I routinely photograph B-52's, tankers, and fighter aircraft transitioning over my home at or about that altitude and they almost always leave contrails.

aircraft-identification

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

New contributor

user38075 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

New contributor

user38075 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

New contributor

user38075 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

edited 9 hours ago

fooot

53.3k17168321

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

New contributor

user38075 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 17 hours ago

user38075user38075

713

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

32

$begingroup$

Using the location you gave, I tracked back aircraft in that area at that time, and found a scenario that fits with your photo:

So, judging by that, the jet in question is actually a Learjet 31, as said by John K.

Here are some blueprints, and the dimensions are similar:

share|improve this answer

edited 12 hours ago

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

New contributor

LFSS is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Wow well done!!
  $endgroup$
  – John K
  10 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I did a bit of pixel measuring. In the image, the Boeing 777-300ER is 87 pixels long; the Learjet is about 12 pixels long. A 777-300ER in 75 m long; a Learjet 31A is 15 m long. Putting all of these numbers together, we can infer that the Learjet was roughly 1.5 times farther from the camera than the Boeing. That's not too far off from the reported altitudes of 32,000 and 45,000 feet, particularly if the OP was at a higher elevation.
  $endgroup$
  – Michael Seifert
  8 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

27

$begingroup$

I'd say it's a corporate jet. Corporate jets normally play between 40-55000 ft, above the bulk of the airline traffic down in the 30s, so this is a perfectly normal sight.

Based on the wing planform with straight trailing edge and swept leading edge, and what looks like a T tail and ventral fins, I'm going with Lear 45 or a similar Lear variant (Service ceiling 51000 ft). The viewing aspect doesn't look like from directly below so the engines won't stick out very clearly.

share|improve this answer

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  And, if you look carefully at the OP's photo, you can actually see a hint of something just behind the wings, in exactly the right place for the engines on a Learjet.
  $endgroup$
  – Sean
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

protected by Federico♦ 10 hours ago

Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

32

$begingroup$

Using the location you gave, I tracked back aircraft in that area at that time, and found a scenario that fits with your photo:

So, judging by that, the jet in question is actually a Learjet 31, as said by John K.

Here are some blueprints, and the dimensions are similar:

share|improve this answer

edited 12 hours ago

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

New contributor

LFSS is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Wow well done!!
  $endgroup$
  – John K
  10 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I did a bit of pixel measuring. In the image, the Boeing 777-300ER is 87 pixels long; the Learjet is about 12 pixels long. A 777-300ER in 75 m long; a Learjet 31A is 15 m long. Putting all of these numbers together, we can infer that the Learjet was roughly 1.5 times farther from the camera than the Boeing. That's not too far off from the reported altitudes of 32,000 and 45,000 feet, particularly if the OP was at a higher elevation.
  $endgroup$
  – Michael Seifert
  8 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

32

$begingroup$

Using the location you gave, I tracked back aircraft in that area at that time, and found a scenario that fits with your photo:

So, judging by that, the jet in question is actually a Learjet 31, as said by John K.

Here are some blueprints, and the dimensions are similar:

share|improve this answer

edited 12 hours ago

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

New contributor

LFSS is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Wow well done!!
  $endgroup$
  – John K
  10 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I did a bit of pixel measuring. In the image, the Boeing 777-300ER is 87 pixels long; the Learjet is about 12 pixels long. A 777-300ER in 75 m long; a Learjet 31A is 15 m long. Putting all of these numbers together, we can infer that the Learjet was roughly 1.5 times farther from the camera than the Boeing. That's not too far off from the reported altitudes of 32,000 and 45,000 feet, particularly if the OP was at a higher elevation.
  $endgroup$
  – Michael Seifert
  8 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Using the location you gave, I tracked back aircraft in that area at that time, and found a scenario that fits with your photo:

So, judging by that, the jet in question is actually a Learjet 31, as said by John K.

Here are some blueprints, and the dimensions are similar:

share|improve this answer

edited 12 hours ago

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

New contributor

LFSS is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

edited 12 hours ago

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

New contributor

LFSS is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

New contributor

LFSS is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 12 hours ago

LFSSLFSS

33114

27

$begingroup$

I'd say it's a corporate jet. Corporate jets normally play between 40-55000 ft, above the bulk of the airline traffic down in the 30s, so this is a perfectly normal sight.

Based on the wing planform with straight trailing edge and swept leading edge, and what looks like a T tail and ventral fins, I'm going with Lear 45 or a similar Lear variant (Service ceiling 51000 ft). The viewing aspect doesn't look like from directly below so the engines won't stick out very clearly.

share|improve this answer

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  And, if you look carefully at the OP's photo, you can actually see a hint of something just behind the wings, in exactly the right place for the engines on a Learjet.
  $endgroup$
  – Sean
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

27

$begingroup$

I'd say it's a corporate jet. Corporate jets normally play between 40-55000 ft, above the bulk of the airline traffic down in the 30s, so this is a perfectly normal sight.

Based on the wing planform with straight trailing edge and swept leading edge, and what looks like a T tail and ventral fins, I'm going with Lear 45 or a similar Lear variant (Service ceiling 51000 ft). The viewing aspect doesn't look like from directly below so the engines won't stick out very clearly.

share|improve this answer

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  And, if you look carefully at the OP's photo, you can actually see a hint of something just behind the wings, in exactly the right place for the engines on a Learjet.
  $endgroup$
  – Sean
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I'd say it's a corporate jet. Corporate jets normally play between 40-55000 ft, above the bulk of the airline traffic down in the 30s, so this is a perfectly normal sight.

Based on the wing planform with straight trailing edge and swept leading edge, and what looks like a T tail and ventral fins, I'm going with Lear 45 or a similar Lear variant (Service ceiling 51000 ft). The viewing aspect doesn't look like from directly below so the engines won't stick out very clearly.

share|improve this answer

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

edited 11 hours ago

reirab

14.1k139108

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166

answered 14 hours ago

John KJohn K

22.1k13166