UFO-Forschung - The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program -Update-3



In unserem dritten Update wollen wir uns um die Videos kümmern welche zur Unterstützung der Pentagon-Story von NYT publiziert wurde. Wie es immer mehr scheint sind die Videos nicht der Fall Nimitz, es ist ein Fall von unbekanntem Ort und Zeit. Die Leute haben es mit dem Fall Nimitz in Verbindung gebracht, aber es gibt keine offizielle Bestätigung.

Und es gibt keine Bestätigung, dass das, was auf dem Radar zu sehen ist, dem entspricht, was in der FLIR der F / A-18 zu sehen ist. Beachten Sie, sie sagten, es gibt eine ganze Flotte von ihnen, aber wir sehen nur ein Ziel.
Es ist schon komisch, dass die Medien diesen Clip Seite an Seite mit Fravors Zeugenaussagen spielen ... hat er tatsächlich bestätigt, dass es das ist?



Former Navy pilot: UFO 'something I had never seen in my life'

Story highlights
  • Former military, defense officials report seeing otherworldly objects in the sky
  • Claims come following reporting that the Pentagon has researched the possible existence of UFOs

(CNN)Retired US Navy pilot David Fravor trusts what he saw with his own two eyes. And what he saw, in 2004, was a flying object that cannot be identified. Otherwise known as a UFO.

It was a "white object, oblong, pointing north, moving erratically," he told CNN's Jim Sciutto on Tuesday evening.

At the time of the sighting, Fravor was a naval commander, in the cockpit of a US aircraft, and the details of the encounter are still fresh in his mind.


"As I got close to it ... it rapidly accelerated to the south, and disappeared in less than two seconds," he said. 

The object in question had no wings. As such, one might think it was a helicopter. Not so, said Fravor, who noted clear differences between a chopper and the aircraft he came across.

"When helicopters move side to side, they kinda slow, and then they pick up speed going the other way," Fravor explained. "This was extremely abrupt, like a ping pong ball, bouncing off a wall. It would hit and go the other way."

The movements of the flying object were unlike anything Fravor had ever seen, largely due to its agility and the way it handled.

Speaking live with Sciutto, the former naval pilot said the aircraft had "the ability to hover over the water, and then start a vertical climb, from basically zero up towards about 12,000 feet, and then accelerate in less than two seconds, and disappear."

As a believer in UFO's, Fravor knows there are skeptics.

"It's easy to doubt what we can't explain," he said. However, he reminded viewers that he was among other aviation experts, all of whom did their due diligence on that day.

"It was an actual object that we tracked ... for somewhere around five minutes, before it rapidly accelerated."



NY Times: Pentagon study of UFOs revealed


Fravor's account comes as the New York Times reported the Pentagon has researched the possible existence of UFOs

According to a report in the paper Saturday, the once completely classified project that began because of the intense interest in the subject by former Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada. 


The Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program was launched in 2007 after the Nevada Democrat spoke to his longtime friend, Robert Bigelow, the billionaire founder of an aerospace company. 

Bigelow has spoken about his belief in UFOs visiting the United States as well as the existence of aliens.

Among the anomalies the program studied, the paper said, were video and audio recordings of aerial encounters by military pilots and unknown objects, as well as interviews with people who said they had experienced physical encounters with such objects.

The Pentagon says the program has since been shuttered.


Former Pentagon UFO official: 'We may not be alone'


A former Pentagon official who led a recently revealed government program to research potential UFOs added Monday evening that he believes there is evidence of alien life reaching Earth.

"My personal belief is that there is very compelling evidence that we may not be alone," Luis Elizondo said in an interview on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront."

Elizondo told the New York Times he resigned from the Department of Defense in October in protest over what he called excessive secrecy surrounding the program and internal opposition to it after funding for the effort ended in 2012.

Elizondo said Monday that he could not speak on behalf of the government, but he strongly implied there was evidence that stopped him from ruling out the possibility that alien aircraft visited Earth.

"These aircraft -- we'll call them aircraft -- are displaying characteristics that are not currently within the US inventory nor in any foreign inventory that we are aware of," Elizondo said of objects they researched.

He said the program sought to identify what had been seen, either through tools or eyewitness reports, and then "ascertain and determine if that information is a potential threat to national security."

"We found a lot," Elizondo said. The former Pentagon official said they identified "anomalous" aircraft that were "seemingly defying the laws of aerodynamics.

"Things that don't have any obvious flight services, any obvious forms of propulsion, and maneuvering in ways that include extreme maneuverability beyond, I would submit, the healthy G-forces of a human or anything biological." 

CNN's Jamie Crawford contributed to this report.
Quelle: CNN
Ausschnitte von Diskurs auf Metabunk /Mick WestAdministratorStaff Member:

NYT: Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object

The program collected video and audio recordings of reported U.F.O. incidents, including footage from a Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet showing an aircraft surrounded by some kind of glowing aura traveling at high speed and rotating as it moves. The Navy pilots can be heard trying to understand what they are seeing. “There’s a whole fleet of them,” one exclaims. Defense officials declined to release the location and date of the incident.

This is related to Tom DeLonge's thing.

Link contains video. Sample frame:

I'm thinking the shape around the object is some kind of IR flare.
I’m not sure about the lens flare angle. It has been claimed that a mysterious aircraft was tracked for two weeks. I doubt that experienced operators would be tracking lens flare (is that even possible?). The quote below is from this article.

“Well, we’ve got a real-world vector for you,” the radio operator said, according to Commander Fravor. For two weeks, the operator said, the Princeton had been tracking mysterious aircraft. The objects appeared suddenly at 80,000 feet, and then hurtled toward the sea, eventually stopping at 20,000 feet and hovering. Then they either dropped out of radar range or shot straight back up.
I meant that the details of the shape might be flaring, not that the entire thing is a lense flare. Compare:
20171216-160117-lsa83. 20171216-160145-st4uz. 
The black is heat sources, we've seen from the Chilean case how multiple sources can blend into to one.
The DeLonge version of the video supplies the following useful info
The sensor heading indicator is very interesting because it goes from 54°L to 6°R. The orientation of the shape flips as it goes over from L to R.

The plane is turning left, the camera is turning right.
The change in angle of the camera appears fairly constant
Top of my list (right now) is that this is not a real object. Instead it's some kind of reflection. With the primary evidence being the way it flips orientation when it crosses the main axis of the plane.
[Update: Now I'm back to it being a distant plane aga
After more analysis I think it's probably a distant aircraft, as when the camera moves at 32;20 (32 seconds 20 frames, timecode from the NYT version of the video) the position of the object moves in sync with the far clouds, which tends to indicate it's part of the environment rather than 
(Stabilized clip attached)

However, notice that when the camera moves the object appears to rotate at the same time, with its long axis goring from tilting to the right to being perpendicular to the horizon. So the question there is is it:

1) Coincidentally object rotating at the same time as the camera movement
2) The object is actually rotating, which is what causes the camera to lose lock
3) The camera loses lock due to turbulence, and the change in camera causes a change in the shape of the IR flare.
I believe it is a distant aircraft as I have said on VORTEX. The camera is locked onto the object which is why it is so well stabilised. As it changes its orientation the camera has to adjust accordingly which is why it loses lock for a short period of time.

The video is consistent with a chasing aircraft banking port to bring an object to its 12 o'clock position, hence the angle between the camera and the aircraft's attitude reducing from 52 to almost 0.

As soon as the chase plane is pointing directly towards the object, the object then banks port sharply. The passing clouds are simply caused by the chase plane banking whilst the camera remains locked onto it and do not indicate true direction of travel. Bear in mind, the chase plane is still in a bank angle as the other aircraft beings to turn sharply.

The IR dark black shows the heat from the other aircraft's engines.
I created this groud track image to explain what you are seeing in the video.

Our aircraft is in RED, the object is in YELLOW, the white lines are showing you the camera view shown in the video.

As you can see at point A, the object is flying away from us and is flying straight and level.

We are already banking to the port and the object is at an angle of 53 degrees left relative to our attitude.

As we continue this bank, this angle reduces as the object comes around to our 12 o'clock position. Extending the white lines which show the camera view point we can see that the background clouds would be tracking left to right quite fast as indeed they do in the video.

When the object gets to about the 6 degree left mark (relative to our direction of flight), it banks sharply to port. This is the image you see at B. As we are still in a bank ourselves, this makes it appear that the object rotates, when in fact it is simply banking. The background clouds no longer track across the frame as fast as they did, because the camera is now pointing almost in the same direction of our aircraft and with respect to the background clouds.

People think this is the view from the cockpit of the aircraft looking straight ahead, it is not, it is the view from the camera which is pointing directly at the aircraft while the chase plane is banking to bring it into view.
Here's an example showing how the IR flare can look very different to the underlying object.
engine flares banked closeup overlay. 

Here's a video showing a rotating flare, with large rotation for small camera movements.
(Obviously a different shape, much longer.).

So we might simply be seeing a single engined jet, with the apparent tilting being a camera artifact.
So we might simply be seeing a single engined jet, with the apparent tilting being a camera artifact.
I think you may be onto something there. 
It would be very useful to see IR footage for other planes that are far away. Unfortunately it mostly seems to be close up so you still see lots of real detail.

Example: here's the last shot of a video of Concorde taking off. You can still see the wings, the vertical stabilizer, and the exhaust gas plumes

Here's an earlier shot in the same video showing the size of the flares even close up, and a "spike" camera artifact. 
There's the Nimitiz "Tic-Tac" video from 2004:

Then the "Look at that thing dude" video, undated by NYT:
Regarding this new UFO video, I think it's worth noting that one of the writers of the NYT article is Leslie Kean, who bought deeply into the Chilean UFO report. She wrote about that case:
And yet that case was solved on Metabunk and Facebook in five days. It was just a plane, and the helicopter pilot had misjudged its position. See:

So now she's got Luis Elizondo, who worked with her on the NYT article: 
Fortsetzung: UFO-Forschung - The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program Update-4





Raumfahrt+Astronomie-Blog von CENAP 0