• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

U.S. Military: UFO Investigations, Knowledge & Disclosure

I do not believe they had hundreds of encounters recently. Very little evidence has emerged from these hundreds of encounters; there may have been several, but it has grown in the telling. No doubt, if all the evidence were available, these recent encounters would be solvable, just as the GIMBAL movie can be interpreted as a mundane craft.
 
it's because the videos are ambiguous that they were released. What about all of the other intercept footage over the decades? What about the rest of the Mainbrace photos? Why would the Navy have their hand forced by angry pilots about reporting UFOs? Why has this gone on for decades?
 
1952: Tic-Tac UFO. One picture that was released from the many that were taken during Mainbrace:
http://www.project1947.com/47cats/usnavydraft1.htm
http://www.nuforc.org/Mainbrace.html
uss_franklin_d_roosevelt_19_sept_1952.jpg


Sic Semper Dubitantibus..
 
Last edited:
it's because the videos are ambiguous that they were released.
Nonsense. Elizondo is so bad at analysing these videos he thinks they show craft with unusual performance characteristics - they do not.

What about all of the other intercept footage over the decades?
Examples?

What about the rest of the Mainbrace photos?
If that one you posted is an example, it was spherical, not tic-tac shaped, and was possibly a balloon, according to Blue Book.

Why would the Navy have their hand forced by angry pilots about reporting UFOs?
Angry? Fravor is loving his moment in the spotlight.

Why has this gone on for decades?
There will always be UFOs.
 
Concerning Operation Mainbrace; some of those sightings have very tenuous connections to a NATO exercise occurring off Norway.
http://www.nuforc.org/Mainbrace.html
The sighting at RAF Topcliffe, for instance, happened about ten miles north of my house; nowhere near Norway, except perhaps on an astronomical scale.
 
Is anyone here a signed up member of MUFON ?
 
Examples?
Exactly --they are never released.

If that one you posted is an example, it was spherical, not tic-tac shaped, and was possibly a balloon, according to Blue Book.
That's the only one of the pictures they ever released; look at the highlight; it's too long for it to be a round object. Not a chance the objects were balloons:
https://www.nicap.org/ncp/ncp-mainbrace.htm

Angry? Fravor is loving his moment in the spotlight.
Fravor wasn't the only one -just like back in the '40s and '50s. a lot of pilots were and are experiencing UFOs. That's why the Navy (military) was forced to address it, again (and again, and again):
https://www.navytimes.com/off-duty/...loping-guidelines-on-reporting-ufo-sightings/

There will always be UFOs.
Sure, but there will also be eventual acknowledgement of the non-human advanced technology in our skies and oceans, too.
 
Last edited:
Also, the Gimbal video doesn't look like a jet engine, as you posted before; it looks similar, but it's not the same, and there was no visual on the supposed jet. Remember, pilots have had eyes on "flattened tops" and other anomalous objects, recently, again, irregardless of the videos. Should ask: "Where are the other videos of the encounters?" "Why wouldn't the military warn civilians against flying drones in military zones?", "Why won't they release more details?" etc.
 
If that one you posted is an example, it was spherical, not tic-tac shaped, and was possibly a balloon, according to Blue Book.

That particular one was listed as spherical and silver, and:

"The Air Force project chief, Captain Ruppelt stated: “[The pictures] turned out to be excellent . . . . judging by the size of the object in each successive photo, one could see that is was moving rapidly." The possibility that a balloon had been launched from one of the ships was immediately checked out. No unit had launched a balloon. A poor print of one of the photographs appears in the Project Blue Book files, but with no analysis report."
 
Well, these objects will remain UAP until they are identified positively, which probably will never happen. That doesn't rule out conventional but unidentified aircraft.

Secondly this reinforces the observation that Elizondo used false pretences to gain their release; not that this really matters, since this sort of thing needs to be examined in the public arena, even if the eventual conclusion is that these are conventional craft.
 
Secondly this reinforces the observation that Elizondo used false pretences to gain their release; not that this really matters, since this sort of thing needs to be examined in the public arena, even if the eventual conclusion is that these are conventional craft.
I agree.
 
Taking the last analysis first (since this is the only one that is based on the analysis of data from a recorded sensor) Knuth and his colleagues have assumed that the movement of the Nimitz Tic-Tac at the end of the clip was an actual movement of the unknown object. In fact this occurred when the FLIR sensor was changing magnification, at which point the FLIR sensor lost sensor lock and therefore lost track of the object. Most likely the object did not move sideways at all, as the Navy has suggested elsewhere.

In other words, the analysis of the Nimitz event is bullshit. Since all the other analyses are based on much less concrete data, I suspect they are bullshit too.
 
Taking the last analysis first (since this is the only one that is based on the analysis of data from a recorded sensor) Knuth and his colleagues have assumed that the movement of the Nimitz Tic-Tac at the end of the clip was an actual movement of the unknown object. In fact this occurred when the FLIR sensor was changing magnification, at which point the FLIR sensor lost sensor lock and therefore lost track of the object. Most likely the object did not move sideways at all, as the Navy has suggested elsewhere.

In other words, the analysis of the Nimitz event is bullshit. Since all the other analyses are based on much less concrete data, I suspect they are bullshit too.
We'll have to see. The Nimitz encounter is apparently just one encounter analyzed. Not looking good for terrestrial craft theory; the Navy isn't answering Congressman Mark Walker's questions, either..
 
'Member, these things were also tracked on radar from the Princeton and elsewhere..:

"According to Kevin Day, the Princeton’s senior radar operator at the time, his screen showed well over 100 AAVs over the course of the week. “Watching them on the display was like watching snow fall from the sky,” he says in his first-ever on-camera interview, for HISTORY’s “Unidentified: Inside America's UFO Investigation.”
According to Day, the AAVs appeared at an altitude greater than 80,000 feet, far higher than commercial or military jets typically fly. Initially, the Princeton’s radar team didn’t believe what they were seeing, chalking up the anomalies to an equipment malfunction. But after they determined that everything was operating as it should and they began detecting instances in which the AAVs dropped with astounding speed to lower, busier airspace, Day approached the Princeton’s commander about taking action.
“I was chomping at the bit,” he says. “I just really wanted to intercept these things.”

https://www.history.com/news/uss-nimitz-2004-tic-tac-ufo-encounter
 
The traces supposedly seen by Day do not seem to be available for analysis as recorded data, so it is difficult to say exactly what they were. I suspect that if the data were released, the answers might be forthcoming.
 
The traces supposedly seen by Day do not seem to be available for analysis as recorded data, so it is difficult to say exactly what they were. I suspect that if the data were released, the answers might be forthcoming.
That data is not being released --even the original videos of the objects have not been released --Fravor saw a different recording of the Tic Tac than what was released, too. I suspect that it's the same reason Walker is being stonewalled.. They are alien --just like the object si the '40s and before; to release the data or answer the questions would be to admit to it.
 
I'm sure somebody is talking about this somewhere on here, but I can't find it. Merge as appropriate.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/navy-confirms-ufo-video_n_5d81a695e4b0849d47201128
The U.S. Navy has for the first time reportedly verified the authenticity of a series of three UFO videos leaked over the past two years and insisted the footage never should’ve been made public.

“The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena,” Joseph Gradisher, spokesperson for the deputy chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare, told the Black Vault, a website dedicated to exposing secrets and revealing declassified government documents. The statement was later confirmed by Motherboard.
 
I see that CNN also reported on this last night. (Thursday).
 
Here's Mick West from Metabunk on the three clips.
"Several media reports are making much of recent statements from Joseph Gradisher, the spokesperson for the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare, as relayed by John Greenewald of TheBlackVault.com. Before I get into that, let's recap what I think are the most reasonable hypotheses for the three videos in questions:

Flir1 (also called Nimitz, or TicTac) is a fuzzy blob in the distance. It does not move (although it jumps around when the camera changes zoom settings or does a gimbal lock correction). There's what looks like a final "zipping away at high speed" at the end of the video, but it's actually just the camera no-longer tracking the object, combined with a change in zoom that gives the illusion of speed. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/2004-uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo-flir-footage-flir1.t9190/

Gimbal is a saucer-shaped infrared glare. It rotates because the camera is rotating to counter gimbal lock. We can prove this because there are other light patterns in the sky that rotate at the same time the glare rotates. The video is consistent with a jet engine several miles away. it does not have any sudden acceleration. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/nyt-gimbal-video-of-u-s-navy-jet-encounter-with-unknown-object.t9333/

Go Fast is what looks like a cool (he means 'not hot' -eburacum) object moving rapidly across the surface of the ocean. However, the angles and range on the screen allow us to triangulate the position and speed of the object. It turns out it's actually moving quite slowly (under 50 knots) and is quite high (13,000 feet). It does not accelerate at all. In fact, it most closely resembles a balloon, or possibly even a large gliding bird. See:
https://www.metabunk.org/go-fast-footage-from-tom-delonges-to-the-stars-academy-bird-balloon.t9569/ "
 
West also has this to say;
It's surprising this is news because I've never thought the videos were not real. Nor have I really seen this raised as a serious possibility. Nor is this new "it's real" really a progression from seeing the DD1910 form months ago, or the DoD's comments on that, or the email's about if that were FOIAed a few weeks ago.
So it's perfectly understandable that Gradisher is surprised there's so much attention. There's nothing to pay attention to. The videos are the same, the accounts are the same. The Navy has simply weighed in and said they are not going to say anything about the videos. So no change there.
One thing new the Navy has said is that they are not going to speculate about the phenomena seen in these videos. Which is a shame, because we could really do with someone who has all the information giving an opinion.
 
I disagree about the videos; The Gimbal video doesn't look just like a jet exhaust, and it would be having to ascend vertically in some cases as the object moves relative to the horizon. So the Tic-Tac video object might not accelerate to some people's satisfaction --so what? it shouldn't have been there, and Fravor and others personally witnessed its maneuvers. The Tic-Tac objects were also seen by the radar operator on the Princeton --performing impossible maneuvers. The Tic-Tac video isn't even the same one Fravor saw! None of those objects should have been there. Also, if these were drones from Russia or China (they aren't --remember the recent nuclear rocket explosion? [these things don't need to refuel, fly all day!] ), then we would pretty much be at war with them at his point. Gradisher: “The Navy designates the objects contained in these videos as unidentified aerial phenomena,”
So, that's not interfering civilian drones, enemy drones or objects. Just like NICAerial Phenomenon. They do mean UFOs. Walker could have been told that the objects were civilian drones, or even enemy drones (not to be released for national security reasons) --he wasn't, because it's aliens --he would freak out, and they will never admit to that. It's simple.

And.. Hundreds of recent encounters with cloaked and uncloaked objects:

"But then pilots began seeing the objects. In late 2014, Lieutenant Graves said he was back at base in Virginia Beach when he encountered a squadron mate just back from a mission “with a look of shock on his face.”
He said he was stunned to hear the pilot’s words. “I almost hit one of those things,” the pilot told Lieutenant Graves.
The pilot and his wingman were flying in tandem about 100 feet apart over the Atlantic east of Virginia Beach when something flew between them, right past the cockpit. It looked to the pilot, Lieutenant Graves said, like a sphere encasing a cube."


https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...os-encounters-new-radar-tech-key-in-detection
 
Last edited:
The Gimbal video doesn't look just like a jet exhaust,
Except it does. Here are two images at different wavelengths of a confirmed jet exhaust;
note that this perfectly ordinary jet shows a similar shape and flare to the GIMBAL image (these images are positive, while GIMBAL is negative, of course).
metabunk-2019-09-12-06-12-06-jpg.38322


and it would be having to ascend vertically in some cases as the object moves relative to the horizon.
No it doesn't; here is a stabilised version (on the left) which shows that the changes of elevation are due changes in the cloud height, not the target.
6f3bb6d81bb619254ef9d0b521d4ab64.gif

The version on the right is a simulation that shows how the vague patterns seen in the clip rotate with the glare, and therefore are sensor artifacts. This confirms that the apparent rotation of the target is a result of the rotation of the gimballed sensor itself. This clip is called 'GIMBAL' for a good reason.
 
And.. Hundreds of recent encounters with cloaked and uncloaked objects:
I am very doubtful about the 'hundreds' figure. However...

We only have filmed evidence for the GOFAST and GIMBAL clips, which apparently both happened on the same sortie. If both GOFAST and GIMBAL can be explained by mundane objects (and they can) then maybe the FLIR system is prone to this sort of error, and it is possible that the aircrews using this system do report these phenomena on a regular basis simply because of the possibility of false positives.
 
So when the video first starts out, it appears as an ellipse travelling parallel to the horizon. According to video of jet engines, that would mean that the jet would be traveling vertically, or going straight into the ocean. Also, there was / is no visual on the rest of the "jet" --there should not have even been a jet there anyway. Past posts comparing the Gimbal video with jet engines that show the same scale (size of the jet exhaust and Gimbal footage, clearly show the jet at that distance, and there wasn't even a visual, and there should have been no aircraft there at all. The Navy has fessed up to them not being any know craft but instead "anomalous aerial phenomenon" i.e. unknown aerial objects flying through the air, i.e. Unidentified Flying Objects... Where they shouldn't be. I think we ought to forget the videos and focus on witnesses, as the Navy and US Government aren't going to release the clear images others have said exist. Why? They have no visible means of propulsion and aren't from earth, that's why! Just like the objects seen decades and centuries ago.
 
Back
Top