Navy Pilot Who Chased USS Nimitz UFO Says Encounter Tapes Are 'Missing'

Wreckless

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
105
Likes
156
Points
44
Location
SWF, USA
#1
Navy pilot who chased USS Nimitz UFO says there are tapes of encounter 'missing'

Commander David Fravor was one of two fighter jet pilots to first witness the USS Nimitz UFO's astonishing speeds off the coast of San Diego

One of the first US Navy pilots to have encountered the famed tic-tac UFO off the coast of San Diego has said there are tapes “missing”.

Commander David Fravor was flying one of the two F/A-18E/F Super Hornets that had taken off from the USS Nimitz, during a combat exercise on November 14, 2004.

They were directed to change course and investigate an unidentified object spotted on another carrier’s, the USS Princeton, radar.

To their amazement, the two fighter jets saw a tic-tac shaped object flying at incredible speeds above a mysterious turbulent area of water below.

When they returned to the USS Nimitz, a second team was sent out to investigate and again saw the object – and this time it was all caught on camera.

The footage was made famous by a 2017 New York Times article, but Fravor has since suggested there may be more information out there.

He appeared on The Fighter Pilot Podcast earlier this year to recount his experience, where he made an interesting revelation.

“All the radar tapes from the Princeton are missing and they can’t find,” Fravor told host and former US Navy pilot Vincent Aiello.

“I was chatting to someone at the archives and they’ve said someone has taken that page from the logbook.”

He then explained that, soon after returning from their encounter, he made copies of the tapes which also disappeared.

“We copied the tapes and wrapped them up and stuff them in the space,” Fravor added.

“They were put in a safe on the Princeton and they stayed there.

“We came back from a cruise and they were there.

“But then, somehow, they disappeared – no one knows where they went.

“There have been several COs (Commanding Officers) since then, no one knows where they went.”

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/navy-pilot-who-chased-uss-20822356
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#2
Navy pilot who chased USS Nimitz UFO says there are tapes of encounter 'missing'

Commander David Fravor was one of two fighter jet pilots to first witness the USS Nimitz UFO's astonishing speeds off the coast of San Diego

One of the first US Navy pilots to have encountered the famed tic-tac UFO off the coast of San Diego has said there are tapes “missing”.

Commander David Fravor was flying one of the two F/A-18E/F Super Hornets that had taken off from the USS Nimitz, during a combat exercise on November 14, 2004.

They were directed to change course and investigate an unidentified object spotted on another carrier’s, the USS Princeton, radar.

To their amazement, the two fighter jets saw a tic-tac shaped object flying at incredible speeds above a mysterious turbulent area of water below.

When they returned to the USS Nimitz, a second team was sent out to investigate and again saw the object – and this time it was all caught on camera.

The footage was made famous by a 2017 New York Times article, but Fravor has since suggested there may be more information out there.

He appeared on The Fighter Pilot Podcast earlier this year to recount his experience, where he made an interesting revelation.

“All the radar tapes from the Princeton are missing and they can’t find,” Fravor told host and former US Navy pilot Vincent Aiello.

“I was chatting to someone at the archives and they’ve said someone has taken that page from the logbook.”

He then explained that, soon after returning from their encounter, he made copies of the tapes which also disappeared.

“We copied the tapes and wrapped them up and stuff them in the space,” Fravor added.

“They were put in a safe on the Princeton and they stayed there.

“We came back from a cruise and they were there.

“But then, somehow, they disappeared – no one knows where they went.

“There have been several COs (Commanding Officers) since then, no one knows where they went.”

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/navy-pilot-who-chased-uss-20822356
There are apparently military personnel who, in addition to regular duties are also "UFO Officers"; they are part of the coverup.
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#3
hmm... hard to say what sort of reason there is for them being classified and redacted. It is pretty typical for the crew to NOT get told though.
 

Wreckless

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
105
Likes
156
Points
44
Location
SWF, USA
#4
The Witnesses
What, exactly, did the Navy encounter 15 years ago off the Southern California coast, when fighter pilots spotted a UFO? These men were there, too⁠—and it's time they tell their side of the story.

By Tim McMillan
Nov 12, 2019

The five men share an easy rapport with each other, playfully ribbing one another while also communicating a deep sense of mutual respect. It’s clear they all share the bond of having once served in the armed forces. Yet for Gary Voorhis, Jason Turner, P.J. Hughes, Ryan Weigelt, and Kevin Day—assembled together in a private group chat by Popular Mechanics—something much bigger ties them together beyond simply serving in the U.S. Navy.
These men also share a connection of being witnesses to one of the most compelling UFO cases in modern history: the Nimitz UFO Encounters, an event that the Navy recently confirmed indeed involved “unidentified aerial phenomena.”
Largely overshadowed by a grainy black-and-white video, and a former Topgun fighter pilot eyewitness, these veterans offer new and intriguing details on what occurred with the Navy’s Strike Carrier Group-11 as it sailed roughly 100 miles off the Southern California coast in 2004—details that a former career intelligence agent who investigated the Nimitz Encounter while at the Pentagon can neither confirm, deny, or even discuss with Popular Mechanics.
Ultimately, these five men—the “other” Nimitz witnesses—could be key to understanding an event that a leading aviation defense expert says “likely wasn’t ours.”
So whose was it?

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a29771548/navy-ufo-witnesses-tell-truth/
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#7
Hmm this is what I'd expect if they were watching a secret project.
Wouldn't it be easier and less dangerous to test something like that another way? There are so many examples of UFO film, radar tracks etc. This fits in with the rest perfectly.
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#8
Wouldn't it be easier and less dangerous to test something like that another way? There are so many examples of UFO film, radar tracks etc. This fits in with the rest perfectly.
But.. how many of those are also secret military tests? The key flaw with testing aircraft is that you can't test them in the hangar. You have to actually fly them. It's a matter of how many people see your secret prototype rather than IF people see it.
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#9
But.. how many of those are also secret military tests? The key flaw with testing aircraft is that you can't test them in the hangar. You have to actually fly them. It's a matter of how many people see your secret prototype rather than IF people see it.
I think Chris Mellon and others have said that test craft aren't tested this way, or in the ways so many other UFOs are experienced, over airports (Chicago O'hare for example), civilian areas, military bases, missile tests..

"Roger: “Upon arrival back to the Nimitz we were informed to stand by, as if doing a hot pump (running the motors to refuel) for about 20 minutes, which wasn’t standard after the launch cycle had completed. Then once we were instructed to shut down. We were told to follow an individual down below deck for a debriefing (again, not standard). We made our way to a secure area on the ship where the events were discussed individually, then we were told “it did not happen” and asked to sign NDAs. Then escorted back to our ready room to drop our gear where, for the first time, we were not allowed to discuss mission ops, safeties, or any post flight call-outs.”

http://www.ufojoe.net/?p=621
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#10
I think Chris Mellon and others have said that test craft aren't tested this way, or in the ways so many other UFOs are experienced, over airports (Chicago O'hare for example), civilian areas, military bases, missile tests..

"Roger: “Upon arrival back to the Nimitz we were informed to stand by, as if doing a hot pump (running the motors to refuel) for about 20 minutes, which wasn’t standard after the launch cycle had completed. Then once we were instructed to shut down. We were told to follow an individual down below deck for a debriefing (again, not standard). We made our way to a secure area on the ship where the events were discussed individually, then we were told “it did not happen” and asked to sign NDAs. Then escorted back to our ready room to drop our gear where, for the first time, we were not allowed to discuss mission ops, safeties, or any post flight call-outs.”

http://www.ufojoe.net/?p=621
Alaska UFO, another example:
http://www.newsminer.com/close-enco...cle_7b79c90a-6b5f-50c4-ba68-b00039df12d6.html

"The UFO was painted as an extremely large primary target. As a result of the lacking run length identification the FAA computer system treated the UFO RADAR return as ‘weather’ and transmitted it to the controller’s PVD via a non recorded line. (All known aircraft are programed in the FAA computer systems ‘Run Length’ table.) At the conclusion of the hand-off briefing the CIA advised they were ‘confiscating all the data, this event never happened, we were never here and you are all sworn to secrecy.’ They also advised they would not notify the media as it would only ‘scare’ the public.”
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#11
In hindsight, people did manage to sort out UFOs that were actually the "Aurora" project, but not until they found out what the Aurora actually looked like.
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#12
Wanaque too:
https://www.ufoexplorations.com/witness-to-wanaque-great-mass-ufo
This author has learned that unknown men posing as military officials descended upon Wanaque in the period after the sighting to intimidate and dissuade talk about the UFO. And the source for this is the U.S. Pentagon itself! Found buried in the defunct civilian UFO research organization’s publication APRO Bulletin (Jan-Feb 1967) is a detailing of these “MIB” visits:

'Men dressed in Air Force uniforms or bearing credentials from government agencies have been silencing witnesses, according to Colonel George P. Freeman, Pentagon spokesman for Project Bluebook. "We have checked a number of these cases", Colonel Freeman said "and these men are not connected with the Air Force in any way." He cited a recent case in which the police officers and other witnesses at sightings in Wanaque, N. J., were allegedly collected together by a man wearing an Air Force uniform and told that they "hadn't seen anything" and shouldn't discuss the incident. "Whoever he was, he wasn’t from the Air Force," Freeman stated.'

Gordon Cooper:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Cooper
"Cooper recalled that these men, who saw experimental aircraft on a regular basis as part of their job, were clearly unnerved. They explained how the saucer hovered over them, landed 50 yards (46 m) away using three extended landing gears, and then took off as they approached for a closer look. He called a special Pentagon number to call to report such incidents, and was instructed to have their film developed, but to make no prints of it, and send it in to the Pentagon right away in a locked courier pouch.[76] As Cooper had not been instructed to not look at the negatives before sending them, he did. Cooper claimed that the quality of the photography was excellent, and what he saw was exactly what Bittick and Gettys had described to him. He expected that there would be a follow-up investigation, since an aircraft of unknown origin had landed at a classified military installation, but never heard about the incident again. He was never able to track down what happened to those photos, and assumed they ended up going to the Air Force's official UFO investigation, Project Blue Book, which was based at Wright-Patterson Air Force BasE"
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#13
Alaska UFO, another example:
http://www.newsminer.com/close-enco...cle_7b79c90a-6b5f-50c4-ba68-b00039df12d6.html

"The UFO was painted as an extremely large primary target. As a result of the lacking run length identification the FAA computer system treated the UFO RADAR return as ‘weather’ and transmitted it to the controller’s PVD via a non recorded line. (All known aircraft are programed in the FAA computer systems ‘Run Length’ table.) At the conclusion of the hand-off briefing the CIA advised they were ‘confiscating all the data, this event never happened, we were never here and you are all sworn to secrecy.’ They also advised they would not notify the media as it would only ‘scare’ the public.”
That is presumably only publicly known craft, not secret ones. In the case of experimental craft how can you even program in it's radar signature?
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#14
Wanaque too:
https://www.ufoexplorations.com/witness-to-wanaque-great-mass-ufo
This author has learned that unknown men posing as military officials descended upon Wanaque in the period after the sighting to intimidate and dissuade talk about the UFO. And the source for this is the U.S. Pentagon itself! Found buried in the defunct civilian UFO research organization’s publication APRO Bulletin (Jan-Feb 1967) is a detailing of these “MIB” visits:

'Men dressed in Air Force uniforms or bearing credentials from government agencies have been silencing witnesses, according to Colonel George P. Freeman, Pentagon spokesman for Project Bluebook. "We have checked a number of these cases", Colonel Freeman said "and these men are not connected with the Air Force in any way." He cited a recent case in which the police officers and other witnesses at sightings in Wanaque, N. J., were allegedly collected together by a man wearing an Air Force uniform and told that they "hadn't seen anything" and shouldn't discuss the incident. "Whoever he was, he wasn’t from the Air Force," Freeman stated.'
How did people verify they weren't Air Force personnel? As far as I can tell the only info on that comes from Col Freeman who is part of Project Bluebook and maybe lying as part of a coverup.
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#15
That is presumably only publicly known craft, not secret ones. In the case of experimental craft how can you even program in it's radar signature?
It would be poor practice to test craft over cities, missile ranges, military bases, and not tell those individuals; it would be dangerous and even risk hostile action, not to mention flying them over other countries where they could crash and be recovered.
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#16
How did people verify they weren't Air Force personnel? As far as I can tell the only info on that comes from Col Freeman who is part of Project Bluebook and maybe lying as part of a coverup.
I don't know if that info is available now.
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#17
It would be poor practice to test craft over cities, missile ranges, military bases, and not tell those individuals; it would be dangerous and even risk hostile action, not to mention flying them over other countries where they could crash and be recovered.
If we had this kind of tech in the '40s, why bother with toys like the F-35??
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#18
It would be poor practice to test craft over cities, missile ranges, military bases, and not tell those individuals; it would be dangerous and even risk hostile action, not to mention flying them over other countries where they could crash and be recovered.
We know they flew Aurora in places that it'd be reasonably likely to be seen by the public. Why? Well it's a stealth craft. Part of the test was presumably assessing how easily the general public could see it.

While there's a risk of it taking fire if flown over some place like Russia(who has shot down U2s) or China, flying in US airspace is generally safe, because citizens don't have weapons capable of hitting it, and military people who DO are under orders not to fire without proper authorization.
I don't know if that info is available now.
that's kinda the point. Asking a Project Bluebook official is like asking the MiB if they're hiding something. They'll tell you whatever they feel like.
If we had this kind of tech in the '40s, why bother with toys like the F-35??
Not sure what you mean, but the first part of R&D is figuring out what you can do. Then you have to figure out how to make it safe and reliable, and if it's something meant for mass production, how to make it economical. Not much point to having the most awesome aircraft ever if only one man can fly it and it's too expensive to make copies anyway.
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
36,913
Likes
23,722
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
#19
Not sure what you mean, but the first part of R&D is figuring out what you can do. Then you have to figure out how to make it safe and reliable, and if it's something meant for mass production, how to make it economical. Not much point to having the most awesome aircraft ever if only one man can fly it and it's too expensive to make copies anyway.
There's also the issue of materials. It may require exotic materials that can't easily be sourced.
 

eburacum

Papo-furado
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
3,287
Likes
1,242
Points
169
#20
Gordon Cooper:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Cooper
"Cooper recalled that these men, who saw experimental aircraft on a regular basis as part of their job, were clearly unnerved. They explained how the saucer hovered over them, landed 50 yards (46 m) away using three extended landing gears, and then took off as they approached for a closer look. He called a special Pentagon number to call to report such incidents, and was instructed to have their film developed, but to make no prints of it, and send it in to the Pentagon right away in a locked courier pouch.[76] As Cooper had not been instructed to not look at the negatives before sending them, he did. Cooper claimed that the quality of the photography was excellent, and what he saw was exactly what Bittick and Gettys had described to him. He expected that there would be a follow-up investigation, since an aircraft of unknown origin had landed at a classified military installation, but never heard about the incident again. He was never able to track down what happened to those photos, and assumed they ended up going to the Air Force's official UFO investigation, Project Blue Book, which was based at Wright-Patterson Air Force BasE"
Here's James Oberg on this story
Only THREE people have ever dug seriously into Cooper's 1957 Edwards story -- me, James McDonald, and Brad Sparks. To the best of my knowledge, EVERY other account of it is based solely on Cooper's say-so.
The three of us independently reached the same conclusion:
1. The sighting by Bittick and Gettys was documented and filed per Blue Book procedure and has always been available in the archives. Cooper made up the disappearance story.
2. The object they reported and filmed drifted by without maneuvering or landing. Cooper made up the landing story.
3. Gordon Cooper had absolutely no connection with the event or report, he wasn't anybody's boss, nobody showed him any film, zilch. He made that up.
Three different people made three separate inquiries and got identical results. Everybody else uses Cooper's version.
It's as bad as that.
Here are four frames from the film in the Blue Book archives




This flattened, oblate disk appearance is very similar to the partly deflated weather balloon I saw back in 1966.
 

eburacum

Papo-furado
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
3,287
Likes
1,242
Points
169
#21
Alaska UFO, another example:
http://www.newsminer.com/close-enco...cle_7b79c90a-6b5f-50c4-ba68-b00039df12d6.html

"The UFO was painted as an extremely large primary target. As a result of the lacking run length identification the FAA computer system treated the UFO RADAR return as ‘weather’ and transmitted it to the controller’s PVD via a non recorded line. (All known aircraft are programed in the FAA computer systems ‘Run Length’ table.) At the conclusion of the hand-off briefing the CIA advised they were ‘confiscating all the data, this event never happened, we were never here and you are all sworn to secrecy.’ They also advised they would not notify the media as it would only ‘scare’ the public.”
Once again, this didn't happen. Bruce Maccabee was at that meeting, and no-one confiscated anything. Obviously not, since Callahan retained the original tapes, the pilot's report and the FAA report. To be generous, Callahan was misremembering.
 

Kondoru

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
5,586
Likes
344
Points
164
#22
I suspect telling people not to talk is a great way to get information (or disinformation) out there.

(What is Aurora anyway?)
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#23
I suspect telling people not to talk is a great way to get information (or disinformation) out there.

(What is Aurora anyway?)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(aircraft)

It's never been officially confirmed, but Aurora was probably a code name used for a group of experimental prototypes. These predated the current gen US stealth bombers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-2_Spirit One noted discrepancy here is that the official top speed of the B2 indicates it can't create sonic booms, which the Aurora prototype apparently did... official top speed. It could be that the B2 is revised from the experimental prototype in a way that's meant to extend fuel range, but also makes super-sonic flight unsafe. It does have a wider wedge than the Aurora allegedly had. And well, creating sonic booms in a stealth aircraft is a bit off.

Wouldn't surprise me if Skunkworks is trying to solve that problem though. I forget where but I saw some paper a while ago on how to avoid creating sonic booms that was strictly theoretical. The idea was that if you had the right shape you could get the sound wave to slide around the craft. The proposed shape was similar to the alleged hull configuration of Aurora.

Was it actually a bomber prototype or was it a concept test craft only? As if Skunkworks will ever tell us. :p I forget where it was, but I remember an analysis that suggested that 'black triangle" UFOs were most common in the US SW while the B2 was in development. Which were actually experimental prototypes? If the government wanted us to know they'd have told us already. :p
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#24
Here's James Oberg on this story

Here are four frames from the film in the Blue Book archives




This flattened, oblate disk appearance is very similar to the partly deflated weather balloon I saw back in 1966.
Thanks, I didn't know frames of that film were out there!
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#25
Once again, this didn't happen. Bruce Maccabee was at that meeting, and no-one confiscated anything. Obviously not, since Callahan retained the original tapes, the pilot's report and the FAA report. To be generous, Callahan was misremembering.
After minute :48, it is stated that he made copies, and he recounts the event:
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#26
We know they flew Aurora in places that it'd be reasonably likely to be seen by the public. Why? Well it's a stealth craft. Part of the test was presumably assessing how easily the general public could see it.

While there's a risk of it taking fire if flown over some place like Russia(who has shot down U2s) or China, flying in US airspace is generally safe, because citizens don't have weapons capable of hitting it, and military people who DO are under orders not to fire without proper authorization.
that's kinda the point. Asking a Project Bluebook official is like asking the MiB if they're hiding something. They'll tell you whatever they feel like.
Not sure what you mean, but the first part of R&D is figuring out what you can do. Then you have to figure out how to make it safe and reliable, and if it's something meant for mass production, how to make it economical. Not much point to having the most awesome aircraft ever if only one man can fly it and it's too expensive to make copies anyway.
Folks were also seeing test aircraft, sure, but individuals who got a good look at the obiects or tried to intercept them recounted very different objects, without visible means of propulsion, making impossible maneuvers. They've been watched through binoculars, theodolites and telescopes for extended periods, so there is no mistaking them.
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#27
Here's James Oberg on this story

Here are four frames from the film in the Blue Book archives




This flattened, oblate disk appearance is very similar to the partly deflated weather balloon I saw back in 1966.
At 1:12:48. Cooper discusses the incident:

 

eburacum

Papo-furado
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
3,287
Likes
1,242
Points
169
#28
Interesting; If this account is correct, Cooper did not run the film on a projector, instead he only examined it by hand. No wonder he couldn't see the details clearly.
 

marhawkman

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
46
Likes
19
Points
8
#29
Folks were also seeing test aircraft, sure, but individuals who got a good look at the obiects or tried to intercept them recounted very different objects, without visible means of propulsion, making impossible maneuvers. They've been watched through binoculars, theodolites and telescopes for extended periods, so there is no mistaking them.
Are you talking about something specific or UFOs in general?
 

feinman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
1,052
Likes
440
Points
89
#30
Are you talking about something specific or UFOs in general?
UFOs generally. I believe it is part of the strategy to engage in tactics like that --the devices show themselves or interact so they can be seen, and then take off in a flash.
 
Top