Damn you, Fulongamer! I was going to write this article. $#&$@#&* #@&*$^! haha. Good job, though. I wouldn't have went right ahead and said it was definately of human origin, as it seems much more advanced and alien-like than Skynet's HK-Aerials. I was thinking it may have been captured alien technology that was used as a basic template for the eventual HKs. On the other hand, it's design seem to be similar to the visual style of the new NHHKs seen in the Terminator Salvation trailers. In particular, the fact that the technology seems more Giger-ish or David Lynch-ish in design (see Dune). In any case, it's cool as hell, and definitely resembles the VTOL from the bottom. -Sec_1971 16:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Category Edit

Although these are some kind of progenitor for the Aerial HKs in the TSCC timeline, they are not under the control of Skynet, so are not "Non-Humanoid Hunter Killers" yet. They are (supposedly) unmanned, so they are not vehicles either. Simply "technology" is the best label for them in the current state.Fulongamer 20:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

UFOs and HarriersEdit

Whoever it was who deleted several of the notes in the note section: You're arguing facts about UFOs. There is no "official" type of propulsion that UFOs use. The propulsion systems may vary from story to story, some people hear an E.M. hum, some hear enginge noises, some hear nothing. Nobody knows ANYTHING about UFOs. That's why they're called 'Unidentified Flying Objects. Duh! The sound heard when the Drone flew over Sarah was an almost negligible hum, much like the scientist at the convention described, not a turbine noise. Besides, there is no central axle in any of the circular contraptions on the drones; no blades, nothing. The circular objects are reminiscent of an inverted form of Ezekiel's "four creatures"; that is, they are a series of electromagnets placed along a ring and spun from inside the housing to produced a centrifical gravitation force. Dr. Stephen Hawking designed a similar device in 1963 that looked like a circular bearing case. As it spun, it lifted a small distance off the ground due to the slight cancellation of gravity produced by the spinning magnets. The HK-Aerials use the same kind of engine as a Harrier, nothing resembling the drone. The drone is more advanced, made possible by the altered timelines. BTW, never delete anything in the "Notes" section of the articles, only place your own footnote underneath it. By deleting someone else's notes, you are biasing the article, effectively negating every other possible explanation but your own. You are not all-knowing, all-seeing, and your opinion (which is what they are ), are no more valid than anyone else's. Avoid this practice in the future. -Sec_1971 18:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Who's been deleting notes? I've added notes, and other than you (only on the Talk page) and myself, Heyann, and Bobismyuncle are the only contributors to this page so far. I've been trying to defuse the extremely silly speculation about gravity drives and such with more careful detailed observations of both what is feasible with essentially contemporary tech and what is revealed in an intentionally distorted (read: washed out thru the sun) image. I understand the UFOs are unknowns, however we aren't talking about UFOs, aliens, or anything extraplanetary in nature. It is an artful misdirection used to shell-game the TSCC truth of reverse engineered future tech materials and designs. And note, Mythbusters debunked the "cancellation of gravity" hocus pocus. Magnetic levitation is a known and viable technology, it does not "cancel gravity". If you look at the small circular region near the nose you cannot see thru it, therefore it can easily house some portion of a conventional thrust or lift mechanism. You can also make out (as I detailed) the larger perfectly centered circular shape above the large offset ring and visible ventral spine that can ALSO house a conventional primary lift turbine. The outer open rings probably have nothing to do with the lift or thrust capabilities and are rather sensor arrays and can also be locations for stabilization thrusters vented from the central chamber drive (Like the Harrier and F22 Raptor (VTOL variant). I also offered speculation that there might indeed be rotors/fans in the open ring areas with the assembly washed out by the sun backlight, or potentially radially mounted fans, IE: Fans attached at the circumference, rather than an axis, to provide fine maneuvering and attitude control. In addition, the dorsal areas are completely obscured by both the sun and LOS thru the fuselage, leaving open the possibility (as also mentioned) of a more conventional rotary wing AKA Helicopter assembly above and out of sight with the bizzare fuselage suspended below and visible. All of this speculation os predicated on the assumption that Sarah is actually seeing something and not hallucinating in part or in whole about what was shown to us. The producers/writers are being steadfastly "no comment" as to which is may or may not be.Fulongamer 19:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Now, over on the actual episode article page, I did reorder and cleanup the Q&A section, but did not delete anything there, no matter how much I wanted to. C'mon, research into hyperalloy could not contribute to the successful development of an HK progenitor? Are they high? The entire aviation industry is built on the foundation of research into materials with the highest strength and lowest weight that can be found for the application.Fulongamer 19:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Ah, you misunderstand. There were two theories that were present in the notes section stating that the HK-Aerial was entirely based on this Drone. I put a note under one saying it was more likely that only the "appearance" of the HK-Aerial was based on it, and that the technology was more advanced than an HK, which uses vertical turbine thrusters (like the HK). The drone "appeared" (not definately, just appeared) to use a non-combustion engine type propulsion system, similar to the various sci-fi spaceships we all know and love. The whole point was to illustrate that, like the TV show, tech companies in the "real-world" are believed to base their designs on supposed "alien" technology (think: the "fan" aircraft from the 50s). They kinda look like UFOs, but use conventional technology. When I looked at the article today, those three notes were gone. Three completely plausible, and opposing, explanations were gone for good. There are some people who delete things they don't agree with, instead of offering an alternative explanation. Both counterpoints are relevant, as none of us know for sure. It's like the Nightmare Terminator argument. It's most likely a T-800, but until it's confirmed, it's perfectly fine to speculate that it's a T-888. Could be either, we don't know. Both theories are plausible and, thus, belong in that article. -Sec_1971 20:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
What page are you talking about? So far the History (from my "new" till current) does not support the claim that anything on this page was deleted. There is nothing on the HK-Aerial, HK-VTOL, or HK-Drone history pages, and nothing on the "Earthlings Welcome Here" page in Notes or Q&A either. ??!? Fulongamer 21:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea. It's gone. It was in a Q&A section, though. The question was "Is the drone the forerunner of the Aerial-HK?" then there was an agreement, a counterpoint, then my counterpoint. Now, they're gone. It had to have been on the episode page. Forget it. No biggie. It's pointless to argue facts about fiction anyway. They do it all the time at the Tolkien Wiki. -Sec_1971 21:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I submit that your point/counterpoint and possible answers are still there in the Q&A section. Because of the subject matter and direction of the discussion, I resorted and properly formatted the content of A1-4 regarding Q2 "The three dots and the HKs", but deleted nothing. All the information is still there. There was also no less than 2 binges of new-editor derived damage that had to be cleaned out.Fulongamer 21:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Variants and Pics Edit

Rather than the "UFO Hunters" image used on the "Earthlings Welcome Here" episode page, can we get any of the "Drone as UFO" evidence photos from the episode that may identify earlier experimental trials of this unit as captured in-universe? Yes, they would be screencaps of photographs in the scenes, but they would prove useful. There should be some good ones both from the presentation at the convention as well as the walls of Abraham's trailer.Fulongamer 19:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Vectored ThrustEdit

I just watched the episodes in question. The turbines do not have central axles, but they do have inner rotating vaned rings... similar to the newer Dyson ring fans. Someone said they were "telescoping" - they were *vectoring*. In the daytime scene these movements were slight, because it was hovering in place. In the night-time scene it appears that they rotate to the vertical in sync with the craft's forward motion, and the rear flight surfaces become active right before it zooms away. P0rtn0y23 (talk) 06:41, October 19, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.