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

New Super Hornet UFO video from 2015

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91
1617713267079.png

That sounds like baloney. SNOOPIE teams are very well equipped with modern DSLR's. The only reason NOT to fire on the UAV's would be preventing the enemy from seeing your attack response. And the only reason you would withold an attack response, is if you knew exactly who's UAV's they were.
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,413
Reaction score
600
Since 1947, nothing but bad to very bad explanations regarding UFOs. I have no reason to believe that this will change. Example: The US Air Force contracted with the University of Colorado in 1966 to do a scientific study of UFOs. When the Condon Report was released in 1968, it continued the well-worn path of bad to very bad explanations. In 1969, I bought the paperback at over 1,000 pages. Junk... pure junk. Nothing approaching credible scholarship.
 

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
 
Last edited:

Flyaway

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
5,526
Reaction score
3,743


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
They are more likely to be US drones testing capabilities in the fleet. TR sure seems to be getting worked up in that article.
 

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
They are more likely to be US drones testing capabilities in the fleet. TR sure seems to be getting worked up in that article.

If the Chinese were doing close quarters Sigint during the entirety of our AESA rollouts, then that is.... A gigantic problem.
 

Sundog

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,878
Reaction score
368
I think metaphors are definitely being mixed here, intentionally so. Some of the images in the latest article are obviously balloons. IMHO, I think F/A-18 pilots know how balloons look. So, BS on the balloons theory. I'm not saying they aren't being launched, I'm saying pilots and ships would know what they are. I also think there are drones being intentionally flown around, both of U.S. origin, as it's the best test to see what they're capable of, and foreign origin to see what we're capable of. But the tic tac video may be a drone, but if so it's using a technology unknown to most of us. If it isn't our tech, then we're in deep doo-doo, because someone has paradigm shifting tech out there based on the accelerations and maneuvers actually witnessed by the SH pilots.
 

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91
I think metaphors are definitely being mixed here, intentionally so. Some of the images in the latest article are obviously balloons. IMHO, I think F/A-18 pilots know how balloons look. So, BS on the balloons theory. I'm not saying they aren't being launched, I'm saying pilots and ships would know what they are. I also think there are drones being intentionally flown around, both of U.S. origin, as it's the best test to see what they're capable of, and foreign origin to see what we're capable of. But the tic tac video may be a drone, but if so it's using a technology unknown to most of us. If it isn't our tech, then we're in deep doo-doo, because someone has paradigm shifting tech out there based on the accelerations and maneuvers actually witnessed by the SH pilots.
Such activity just doesn't sound reasonable. You don't have "anomalies" in the air space with your superhornets, because if there is a collision, then your entire career is over right there, not to mention the ensuing court marshal for reckless endangerment. This was not even remotely a red flag type exercise. Where was the aggressor squadron? Were the pilots made aware of their presence?
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,885
Reaction score
2,164
Since 1947, nothing but bad to very bad explanations regarding UFOs. I have no reason to believe that this will change. Example: The US Air Force contracted with the University of Colorado in 1966 to do a scientific study of UFOs. When the Condon Report was released in 1968, it continued the well-worn path of bad to very bad explanations. In 1969, I bought the paperback at over 1,000 pages. Junk... pure junk. Nothing approaching credible scholarship.
Sounds like you took one for the team.


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
They are more likely to be US drones testing capabilities in the fleet. TR sure seems to be getting worked up in that article.

If the Chinese were doing close quarters Sigint during the entirety of our AESA rollouts, then that is.... A gigantic problem.
If they have the ability to build craft of the apparent capability SIGINT is the LEAST of our problems.
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,413
Reaction score
600
This all straight from The Art of War by Sun Tzu, circa 5 B.C. No advantage is gained by making this sort of information available except to confuse the enemy and potential enemies.
 

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91
Since 1947, nothing but bad to very bad explanations regarding UFOs. I have no reason to believe that this will change. Example: The US Air Force contracted with the University of Colorado in 1966 to do a scientific study of UFOs. When the Condon Report was released in 1968, it continued the well-worn path of bad to very bad explanations. In 1969, I bought the paperback at over 1,000 pages. Junk... pure junk. Nothing approaching credible scholarship.
Sounds like you took one for the team.


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
They are more likely to be US drones testing capabilities in the fleet. TR sure seems to be getting worked up in that article.

If the Chinese were doing close quarters Sigint during the entirety of our AESA rollouts, then that is.... A gigantic problem.
If they have the ability to build craft of the apparent capability SIGINT is the LEAST of our problems.

I am not seeing this exotic or apparent capability, beyond that of a drone with some extra horsepower.

Remember this? It is not from another planet.

View: https://youtu.be/Fzxj1rnCUUg
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,885
Reaction score
2,164
Since 1947, nothing but bad to very bad explanations regarding UFOs. I have no reason to believe that this will change. Example: The US Air Force contracted with the University of Colorado in 1966 to do a scientific study of UFOs. When the Condon Report was released in 1968, it continued the well-worn path of bad to very bad explanations. In 1969, I bought the paperback at over 1,000 pages. Junk... pure junk. Nothing approaching credible scholarship.
Sounds like you took one for the team.


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
They are more likely to be US drones testing capabilities in the fleet. TR sure seems to be getting worked up in that article.

If the Chinese were doing close quarters Sigint during the entirety of our AESA rollouts, then that is.... A gigantic problem.
If they have the ability to build craft of the apparent capability SIGINT is the LEAST of our problems.

I am not seeing this exotic or apparent capability, beyond that of a drone with some extra horsepower.

Remember this? It is not from another planet.

View: https://youtu.be/Fzxj1rnCUUg
That's not going from 80,000 feet down to sea-level in seconds or traveling a dozen miles almost instantaneously.
 

greenmartian2017

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
111
Reaction score
65


We also noted that the most remarkable appearances of these objects seemed to correlate with major Navy exercises where these advances in air defense capabilities were being fully integrated across a Carrier Strike Group. In other words, it seemed that these mysterious craft had a very keen interest in America's latest and greatest operational counter-air capabilities.
They are more likely to be US drones testing capabilities in the fleet. TR sure seems to be getting worked up in that article.
AMEN. When the incidences start increasing in number and in geographical regions outside of fleet exercises, then color me interested. TR gets the one thing right: these are man-made unknowns, most very likely by companies inside the CONUS.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,885
Reaction score
2,164
That's not going from 80,000 feet down to sea-level in seconds or traveling a dozen miles almost instantaneously.

Do you honestly believe that happened?
The videos I saw didn't look like quad copters. Wouldn't be surprised if an APG-79 had the power to fry one of those right out of the sky. (Not make it catch on fire, obviously, but fry it's electronics.)

Going just by what's out there that we know about, the possibilities are endless.



Got a DJI Mavic Mini and even what that little thing can do blows my mind. (Fast it isn't but the capability in something that small and inexpensive should have militaries around the world in a panic over what's coming.)
 
Last edited:

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91
most very likely by companies inside the CONUS.

I think there is one other horrifying possibility that nobody here wants to accept. Look at the long history of American companies getting hacked by the Chinese. They've always faced pressure not to confront them for fear of reprisals from their cash cow.
Now it looks like the Navy faced the same political restrictions. They were diplomatically prevented from confrontations or making accusations but still had the same reporting requirements. What do you do? I would have loved to be in the meeting where they decided that the AATIP was the best option.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,885
Reaction score
2,164
most very likely by companies inside the CONUS.

I think there is one other horrifying possibility that nobody here wants to accept. Look at the long history of American companies getting hacked by the Chinese. They've always faced pressure not to confront them for fear of reprisals from their cash cow.
Now it looks like the Navy faced the same political restrictions. They were diplomatically prevented from confrontations or making accusations but still had the same reporting requirements. What do you do? I would have loved to be in the meeting where they decided that the AATIP was the best option.
Also consider China has four times the population as the US and is run by a wide assortment of specialties, including many former engineers and scientists. The US is run by mostly lawyers.
 

sublight is back

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
808
Reaction score
91
All the clues were there.


Chinese/Russian/etc hacking = advanced persistent threat.

"In 2006, the United States Air Force (USAF) analysts coined the term advanced persistent threat(APT) to facilitate discussion of intrusion activities with their uncleared civilian counterparts. Thus, the military teams could discuss the attack characteristics yet without revealing classified identities."

Chinese/Russian/etc ELINT/SIGINT = Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program.

I am sure there is similar verbiage out there for why the AAT term was created.
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,413
Reaction score
600
The speculation doesn't go far. Look at Air Technical Intelligence at Wright Field in 1947. They were getting and evaluating air intelligence along with the Air Force and Navy. Their goal: "To avoid technological surprise." In a report about guided missiles and pilotless aircraft published in May, 1946, the publisher is Headquarters Air Materiel Command at Wright Field. There is no reason to believe that the mission to defend North America has changed since then.

And regarding hacking, only a madman would use the internet as used by civilians. Another, highly encrypted version is rumored to exist.
 

Similar threads

Top