• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

New Super Hornet UFO video from 2015

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
No hypersonic wake, no hypersonic boom. Hell of a spoofer though. Must have been VERY expensive.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
369
Now that it's a safety issue, if it's a US black program, somebody's backside is probably going to get a thorough chewing.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
Another article here. This has the smell of hiding the truth in amongst nonsense. Surely it isn’t the case that someone in SAP underestimated the capabilities of the new radar, or were they testing their limits perhaps of capabilities like radar spoofing.

Now stepping back even further, it is very interesting we are hearing of this now. The steady drip, drip, drip of information starting with the disclosure of the Pentagon's Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) in December of 2017 has been peculiar, bordering on downright questionable, to say the least. It is also just days before To The Stars Academy, the quasi-research/entertainment corporation put together by Blink 182 rocker Tom DeLonge and now filled with impressive resumes from the intelligence and aerospace sectors, including the ex-head of the AATIP program, has the first episode of its highly touted new program on the History Channel premiere. You can read more about the strange circumstances surrounding these disclosures in my last piece on the topic.
 

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
It is kind of strange you would want to test your new spoofer with AESA, when almost none of the adversary near peer states have rolled it out. What gives?
 

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
Now the Washington Post is having its say. Well I suppose it fills some column inches.

What a steaming pile of bunk. No, "they" don't exist.
Either we are really in some kind of catch-22 twilight zone where command wants to test classified programs in the field, and has literally no leeway to acknowledge the matter, or this is a deliberate mechanism to intimidate/confuse adversary nations.
 

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
Another article here. This has the smell of hiding the truth in amongst nonsense. Surely it isn’t the case that someone in SAP underestimated the capabilities of the new radar, or were they testing their limits perhaps of capabilities like radar spoofing.

Or a proton beam spoofer. This was actually tested at Area51.
 

Mat Parry

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
417
Reaction score
7
Either we are really in some kind of catch-22 twilight zone where command wants to test classified programs in the field, and has literally no leeway to acknowledge the matter, or this is a deliberate mechanism to intimidate/confuse adversary nations.
Isn't there also the possibility that it is adversary nations testing US Navy capabilities. Are China's subs quiet enough to pull off something like this?

http://aviationtrivia.blogspot.com/2011/01/project-palladium-testing-soviet-radars.html?m=1

"US Navy submarine surfaced just offshore of Havana and released a series of balloons, each carrying a radar reflector corresponding to a specific RCS value".

You might speculate that a translucent spherical ballon with a radar reflector inside might look like...a "sphere encasing a cube" (the UFO described in the more recent NYT article i.e. the Roosevelt in 2014).

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/26/us/politics/ufo-sightings-navy-pilots.html

Whilst I enjoy the idea that the "tic tac" UFO's are remotely generated plasmoids, Im not aware of any evidence to support a claim that particle beams were tested at Area 51?
 
Last edited:

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
Either we are really in some kind of catch-22 twilight zone where command wants to test classified programs in the field, and has literally no leeway to acknowledge the matter, or this is a deliberate mechanism to intimidate/confuse adversary nations.
Isn't there also the possibility that it is adversary nations testing US Navy capabilities. Are China's subs quiet enough to pull off something like this?

http://aviationtrivia.blogspot.com/2011/01/project-palladium-testing-soviet-radars.html?m=1

"US Navy submarine surfaced just offshore of Havana and released a series of balloons, each carrying a radar reflector corresponding to a specific RCS value".

You might speculate that a translucent spherical ballon with a radar reflector inside might look like...a "sphere encasing a cube" (the UFO described in the more recent NYT article i.e. the Roosevelt in 2014).

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/26/us/politics/ufo-sightings-navy-pilots.html

Whilst I enjoy the idea that the "tic tac" UFO's are remotely generated plasmoids, Im not aware of any evidence to support a claim that particle beams were tested at Area 51?
From the article:
does it seem possible what was observed on Wednesday nights in the late 1980s was proton beam testing? And of the two “theories”, saucers from a hidden base at Papoose Lake or a proton beam from Groom Lake, which seems more plausible?
 

Mat Parry

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
417
Reaction score
7
Yes I've read the article, it doesn't support your claim that a proton beam spoofer was actually tested at Area51
 
Last edited:

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
915
Reaction score
49
I understand the scepticism but sometime science step forward through experimental research and a full understanding of the theories behind an embodiment only come after.
Meanwhile that would rest as an invention that need to be protected.
 
Last edited:

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
The U.S. Navy has confirmed that three online videos purportedly showing UFOs are genuine. The service says the videos, taken by Navy pilots, show “unexplained aerial phenomena,” but also states that the clips should have never been released to the public in the first place.
In other words, the Pentagon says the aerial objects in the videos are simply unidentified, and for now, unexplained. The Navy is pointedly not saying the objects are flying saucers or otherwise controlled by aliens.

Earlier this year, the Department of Defense told The Black Vault that the videos were unclassified, but never cleared for public release, and that there had been no review process within the Pentagon for releasing them.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
Follow up article of analysis.

First, there were at least two different UFOs/UAPs involved in the Navy sightings. In a 2017 New York Times interview, retired U.S. Navy Commander David Fravnor said the flying object that he observed from the cockpit of his F/A-18F Super Hornet in 2004 was "around 40 feet long and oval in shape," and described it as similar to a Tic Tac.
Lieutenant Ryan Graves, another Super Hornet pilot, told the Times that the objects he saw in 2014 and and 2015 looked like a “sphere encasing a cube.” These sightings could be of two separate objects or a single object viewed from different perspectives.
The objects were detected with a variety of means. Fravnor and other pilots saw the UAPs with their own eyes, while the radar operators aboard the nearby guided missile cruiser USS Princetonobserved the objects for “several weeks” with their SPY-1 radar system.
Fravnor couldn't detect the craft with his APG-73 radar, but Graves was able to do so in 2015 with his new APG-79 active electronically scanned array radar. The APG-79 has increased sensitivity and processing power over the older radar system.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
It’s interesting that the ships involved didn’t switch to any kind of defensive posture as far as we know, so they clearly didn’t perceive whatever these things were as a threat.

Also there’s this sceptic article but I am not very keen on it as the author asks why aren’t other sources available seemingly not realising such material would be routinely classified. In fact the whole article looks like a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water and just as bad as aliens are here websites.

 
Last edited:

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
This is the best link in this recent resurgence as it is source for the above articles.


Good follow up article from the same site.

 
Last edited:

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
The UFOs are inventions that need to be protected. For decades, guidance to military personnel has been issued via JANAP, or Joint Army Navy Air Publication. JANAP 146, for example, specifically mentions Unidentified Flying Objects. JANAP would eventually include commercial pilots. All of this was part of CIRVIS, or Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings which included Canada which was a partner with NORAD, like it or not. The goal was the rapid reporting of all unidentified aircraft. This made sense during the Cold War when even false alarms were tolerated so long as real threats, like Russian bombers, were spotted.

It is no surprise the U.S. Navy is involved. There will be no follow-up as far as the Navy or any other service branch. That has been the pattern for decades, namely, statements followed by no substantive action, aside from widening the net regarding who cannot say anything about what they saw.
 

r16

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
373
Reaction score
3
oh , uh ... so there are Republican Senators out there who accuse USN of keeping information from people that should know . These are kind of things one picks up in blogs which people here might not like . Now that they perhaps also want to claim there is a race between China and the US in some whole new aviation field . Personally loved to discover the flame is still burning in these parts .
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,134
Reaction score
369
oh , uh ... so there are Republican Senators out there who accuse USN of keeping information from people that should know . These are kind of things one picks up in blogs which people here might not like . Now that they perhaps also want to claim there is a race between China and the US in some whole new aviation field . Personally loved to discover the flame is still burning in these parts .
Could we get that in English?
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
What’s disappointing about the coverage of this story is that I have found quite a number off the sceptic article just as nonsensical as the wow it’s aliens articles.
 

r16

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
373
Reaction score
3
oh , uh ... so there are Republican Senators out there who accuse USN of keeping information from people that should know . These are kind of things one picks up in blogs which people here might not like . Now that they perhaps also want to claim there is a race between China and the US in some whole new aviation field . Personally loved to discover the flame is still burning in these parts .
Could we get that in English?
yes , you can . Like how about calling US Senators fools and worse , now that it's not my defence budget ? Just like everyone would be -before this got official in a way . But then this will also need a translation , maybe ?
 

aliensporebomb

If it flies, it's probably interesting...
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
66
Reaction score
1
Website
www.aliensporebomb.com
Musing: If it is "ours" what possible benefit would there be to let adversaries know there is apparently "something out there we can't stop or out maneuver"?
What's more, testing "advanced craft" against our own crews?

And if not "ours" - whose? The Navy? Testing Navy craft against itself? Is there a precedent for that? I won't go in the UFO direction.

My thinking, classified at a very high level whatever it is and if it's a projection of some type it's the most convincing ever produced. if it's a physical vehicle, a new paradigm in aviation has been reached.
 
Last edited:

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
The US Air Force has had this UFO problem since 1947. They control all information about it. For some reason, they hired J. Allen Hynek, an astronomer, to look into this. As time passed, various study projects going by various names came and went. The early consensus was that these craft were Russian. In 1968, the US Air Force funded a study of UFOs to be completed by select persons at the University of Colorado, who concluded that the study of UFOs should not be continued, and based on past reports, no increase in scientific knowledge has occurred. The paperback version, at over 1,000 pages, was released in January 1969. There has been no progress and certainly no disclosure since 1947.

I have every reason to believe these are reconnaissance aircraft that will not be disclosed. And further reason to believe that false and misleading statements have been made concerning their performance. 1966, Michigan. J. Allen Hynek blames a UFO sighting on swamp gas.
 

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
You're leaving out the whole part where the Air Force worked with the CIA to create project blue book for the sole purpose of covering for sightings of U2 / A12 / SR 71 and presumably something else.

Don't believe it? It's chronicled in this exhaustive CIA report. Case closed.
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
That is certainly not the whole story. I have studied this subject for 30 years. The number of sightings for each year, starting with 1947, exceeds the number of all tests of all aircraft mentioned. The history of the SR-71 is well chronicled. It was designed for a certain purpose and to operate in a certain environment. It was not designed to be easy to spot. The CIA was in charge of all secret aircraft development. Their credibility in this matter is low for security reasons.

Let's review project names: Project Saucer, Project Sign, Project Grudge and so on. Many projects, no results. No defense. No answers.
 

greenmartian2017

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
42
Reaction score
13
The current news cycles relating to the UFO sightings (via radar, etc.) off the southern coast of California during US Naval exercises has a smell of familiarity. Spoofing our radar systems with ECM has been around since the 1950s, with signatures that seem to be tracking at 10,000 miles/hour. Back in the 1950s. These tests are not showing that the UAPs are from Zeta Reticuli; no, these just happen to be stuff we (as in, the US) is developing. It may UAPs for those who don't have "a need to know," that's all. I think that the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff probably know what these are (if they request briefings), including the CNO. You might remember a month or two or three back a number of congresspersons requested the USN to provide them with a classified briefing about the Nimitz stuff. That briefing actually happened. You do notice that none of the congresspersons who had requested that briefing have said we need open hearings subsequently.

There's a reason for that result.

I am now providing you with an article written by a Dr. Leon Davidson (a real PhD, not in psychology, not in the study of sex like "Dr. Ruth," etc.) back in February/March 1959. Its title is:

"ECM + CIA + UFO." (I think the original title was actually "ECM + ZYA =UFO," but to have clarity, Davidson changed the spoofed acronym later on in reprints of the article to make clear that he meant the CIA (and connected IC agencies).)


I suspect that the techniques used in the 1950s are pretty much, procedures-wise, the same as what was probably used during the Nimitz events.
 

RanulfC

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
109
Just to be clear; "sensors" (including the Mk1 eyeball) can be spoofed and fooled by things both natural and man-made and quite often when one wants to 'see' something where the more advanced senors are telling you to look WILL see something even if nothing is actually there. Even experts can see things and our recording media has always produced 'artifacts' which can be deciving. Having said that it doesn't help at all when you have agencies, (both official and private) who's "job" it is to obscure and bend the reality to fit either a narative or to hide one.

Randy
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
That's what Top Secret means. It's compartmentalized and the public, much less any potential enemies, has no need to know. It takes a while to get a security clearance.
 

RanulfC

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
109
That's what Top Secret means. It's compartmentalized and the public, much less any potential enemies, has no need to know. It takes a while to get a security clearance.
Actually JUST because it's Top Secret doesn't automatically mean that the public doesn't have the "need to know" and the two don't always preclude sharing information on important subjects. There's also the issue that nothing remains Top Secret forever, or even 'a secret' since time will tend to expand the number of those who know and no one keeps quite forever. (Even the dead if you want to get technical... and more than bit morbid :) ) The very number of projects connected to UFO's in fact is more likely to let things out than keep them in since it raised awareness and has offered endless sources of renewal for interest in the subject. Exactly the opposite effect wouldn't you say if they were trying to use it to 'hide' something?

Add in the fact that in most cases the 'answers' provided by those projects mostly boiled down to "we don't know if anything is going on or if it is what it is" and you have hard time actually arguing the case they were carefully arranged to "hide" anything. Having reviewed several articles and video's on the incident my conclusion is there simply isn't enough hard evidence to decide WHAT it was since even the video can be 'explained' by something other than "aliens" or secret spy planes.

Randy
 

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
nothing remains Top Secret forever
Those various things may not be "top secret" forever, but they may as well be, when organizations and companies lose all records for a project/program and all the principles and stakeholders die, what's left? Maybe the item comes out of storage somewhere or pictures show up, and nobody knows what the hell it is, or who worked on it or paid for it. For example....
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
That's what Top Secret means. It's compartmentalized and the public, much less any potential enemies, has no need to know. It takes a while to get a security clearance.
Actually JUST because it's Top Secret doesn't automatically mean that the public doesn't have the "need to know" and the two don't always preclude sharing information on important subjects. There's also the issue that nothing remains Top Secret forever, or even 'a secret' since time will tend to expand the number of those who know and no one keeps quite forever. (Even the dead if you want to get technical... and more than bit morbid :) ) The very number of projects connected to UFO's in fact is more likely to let things out than keep them in since it raised awareness and has offered endless sources of renewal for interest in the subject. Exactly the opposite effect wouldn't you say if they were trying to use it to 'hide' something?

Add in the fact that in most cases the 'answers' provided by those projects mostly boiled down to "we don't know if anything is going on or if it is what it is" and you have hard time actually arguing the case they were carefully arranged to "hide" anything. Having reviewed several articles and video's on the incident my conclusion is there simply isn't enough hard evidence to decide WHAT it was since even the video can be 'explained' by something other than "aliens" or secret spy planes.

Randy

An amazing reply. The public has no need to know certain things, period. That's just how things are. Regarding UFOs, no Project this or that since the 1940s has answered any questions. Meanwhile, speculation has buried historical UFO inquiry under layer on top of new layers of nonsense. It very much works to obscure the whole thing. Definitely the thing to do in order to hide something. There have been a number of closed-door sessions in the US government over the years. And so it stays closed.

Ed
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
nothing remains Top Secret forever
Those various things may not be "top secret" forever, but they may as well be, when organizations and companies lose all records for a project/program and all the principles and stakeholders die, what's left? Maybe the item comes out of storage somewhere or pictures show up, and nobody knows what the hell it is, or who worked on it or paid for it. For example....

If there were/are secret projects flying around then it's definite that someone was handed the baton as the years passed.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,371
Reaction score
329
The US Air Force has had this UFO problem since 1947. They control all information about it. For some reason, they hired J. Allen Hynek, an astronomer, to look into this. As time passed, various study projects going by various names came and went. The early consensus was that these craft were Russian. In 1968, the US Air Force funded a study of UFOs to be completed by select persons at the University of Colorado, who concluded that the study of UFOs should not be continued, and based on past reports, no increase in scientific knowledge has occurred. The paperback version, at over 1,000 pages, was released in January 1969. There has been no progress and certainly no disclosure since 1947.

I have every reason to believe these are reconnaissance aircraft that will not be disclosed. And further reason to believe that false and misleading statements have been made concerning their performance. 1966, Michigan. J. Allen Hynek blames a UFO sighting on swamp gas.
That sounds just like the explanation people give for the black triangles. But they in turn seem to be based on the widespread misinterpretation of the so called Belgium case, which when you look into it is nothing like the widely reported so called public facts.
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
589
Reaction score
53
The triangle is another shape found to deflect radar. Also a covert reconnaissance platform.
 

In_A_Dream

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
15
Reaction score
4
US Military Aviators are reluctant to share their experiences for fear of retribution, but if you ever get lucky, they do have some great stories to share.
 

RanulfC

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
109
An amazing reply. The public has no need to know certain things, period. That's just how things are.
But more often than not "what" they do and do not need to know changes due to cirumstances. They didn't need to know how atomic weapons worked but that knowledge was out there anyway. (Which is why I got into a bit of trouble with the military, because my 8th grade school couldn't afford 'new' encylopeida's so I had to make do with ones from the late 50s :) ) That changed later, and it may change again so we can't assume the justification will always be there.

Regarding UFOs, no Project this or that since the 1940s has answered any questions.
Then you're not paying close enough attention to the results :) For one thing it's very clear that "UFO's" come in waves and the amount of publicity and coverage were a major part in propigating the "sightings" along with the undependability of "eye witness" accounts. In the late 50s popularization of the "UFO" pheonomon has resulted in expansion, sensationalizm, and falsification of "known" incidents and evidence along with pushing the narrative that the 'government' knows more than it is saying and this has only gotten worse with the rise of the internet and world wide web. Any 'answers' are disregarded and buried by speculation by enthusisasts and amature researchers and any attempts to do any 'real' investigation are thwarted and degraded by those with actual commercial interest in seeing that no REAL explination every comes out. This is pretty easy to follow.

Meanwhile, speculation has buried historical UFO inquiry under layer on top of new layers of nonsense. It very much works to obscure the whole thing. Definitely the thing to do in order to hide something. There have been a number of closed-door sessions in the US government over the years. And so it stays closed.
In the former case you are quire correct but likely not for the reason you are refering too. UFO 'research' has a large economic aspect to it. People and organizations are paid significant amounts of money to ensure that "mysterious things seen in the sky/water/everywhere" remain mysterious or at least ensure that any reasonable explination remain "questionable". As I noted this is highly counter-productive to keeping anything 'secret' in any real sense because the obscuration and layers of nonsense are easily identified as such. Leading one towards the supposed 'hidden' answers. That many of those adding to this have gotten to the point where they must declare themselves the "only" source of true information only makes things worse for trying to 'hide' something.

Now of course SOME of this does in fact help obscure some government work and explains why there are those "closed-door sessions" but as well you need to keep in mind that it takes only one or two specific incidents of actual overlap to tie up ALL that meeting in secrecy. On the more professional side though each time one of those happens then the chances of a leak increase exponentially. And again long-term viability of any 'cover' is reduced again.
If there were/are secret projects flying around then it's definite that someone was handed the baton as the years passed.
Then you'd have to explain why anyone thinks this would work given that historically it hasn't? As was noted earlier several past secret projects actually DID use "UFO" sightings as cover which didn't last very long so quite obviously as a long-term strategy it is pretty useless. Today even its short term utility is highly questionable due to the depth and breadth of the "UFO" investigation movement and those simply tracking 'government' programs. Worse "passing the baton" is never a easy, or assured of success in fact historically it only increases the chance of leaks and or total failure.

Randy
 

RanulfC

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
109
US Military Aviators are reluctant to share their experiences for fear of retribution, but if you ever get lucky, they do have some great stories to share.
So do maintenance folks, a lot having to do with how gullible and often wrong US Military Aviators are about a whole lot of things ;)

Randy
 
Top