Source: https://youtu.be/LBKRr5OvF6E
Dated Oct 20th, 2024, in Yemen
It appears to show a missile interception viewed from an MQ-9. After the collision, the debris keeps going, indicating that there's a lot of parallax.
Last edited:
UAP Hearing New Video - Yemen Orb
- Thread starter Mick West
- Start date
Source: https://youtu.be/LBKRr5OvF6E
Dated Oct 20th, 2024, in Yemen
It appears to show a missile interception viewed from an MQ-9. After the collision, the debris keeps going, indicating that there's a lot of parallax.
Comparing the motion blur of the more distinct waves. The angular speed seems to increase after the collision. This would indicate that the target is initially moving in the same general direction as the tracking drone. After the collision it loses power and the it, and the debris transitions to a ballistic trajectory, quickly losing horizontal speed as it's light and not longer aerodynamic.
Giddierone
Senior Member.
Luna, a moment ago, just claimed the object "split" the Hellfire missile.
it reminds me of the video of the A-10s in Afghanistan shooting at target flares.
Thread 'Video purportedly from Afghanistan showing some "dripping" objects' https://www.metabunk.org/threads/vi...hanistan-showing-some-dripping-objects.13765/
Thread 'Video purportedly from Afghanistan showing some "dripping" objects' https://www.metabunk.org/threads/vi...hanistan-showing-some-dripping-objects.13765/
Any thoughts why the object at the center of the reticle (and its debris after collision) has a solid outline around it, but the incoming 'missile" only briefly has a dark halo on the left side after collision.
I am guessing this is due to some overexposure processing, but the missile appears of similar brightness in most of the frames where it is visible.
Edit: It looks like the bright artifacts get an outline when they are more stable within the frame. The missile is moving quickly through the frame so it doesn't get a halo until after impact where its trajectory causes it to briefly appear to move more slowly within the frame.
I am guessing this is due to some overexposure processing, but the missile appears of similar brightness in most of the frames where it is visible.
Edit: It looks like the bright artifacts get an outline when they are more stable within the frame. The missile is moving quickly through the frame so it doesn't get a halo until after impact where its trajectory causes it to briefly appear to move more slowly within the frame.
Last edited:
I've replaced the video on the OP with a more complete one.
It seems like all one take with a camera optical zoom change
We have:
19 seconds of object flying zoomed in
the collision, them
9 seconds of the object and bits of debris tumbling
22 seconds of the object zoomed out, the drone seems to be circling it
Burlison's descriotn:
"This video is of an MQ-9 Drone tracking an orb off the coast of Yemen. You'll see that another MQ-9 launched a Hellfire missile, you cannot see that drone.
It seems like all one take with a camera optical zoom change
We have:
19 seconds of object flying zoomed in
the collision, them
9 seconds of the object and bits of debris tumbling
22 seconds of the object zoomed out, the drone seems to be circling it
Burlison's descriotn:
"This video is of an MQ-9 Drone tracking an orb off the coast of Yemen. You'll see that another MQ-9 launched a Hellfire missile, you cannot see that drone.
Maury Markowitz
Active Member
I am confused... are those waves or dunes? If waves, what's a Hellfire doing there?
Why wouldn't it be there?
I'm not convinced this is a hellfire missile. He might just have been using it as a generic term.
MQ-9 isn't really an air-to-air platform.
americanchimera
New Member
Reminds me of how the Chinese balloon behaved after being shot by an F-22 off the coast of S.C. in Feb. 2023.
boguesuser
Active Member
I find it quite strange the missle didn't detonate.
Is it correcting its trajectory after the impact or did it skip off the top of the object and start to fall?
Is it correcting its trajectory after the impact or did it skip off the top of the object and start to fall?
Montauk
Active Member
Interesting how the source is a person filming the video on a screen with all the needed on-screen data curiously cropped out. Probably not intentional on their part, but something to think about as Mick's analyses of the NYT videos were based on looking at the data in the video itself, which nobody else really thought to do.
boguesuser
Active Member
If it is, it doesn't change when Mick thinks the target would be falling.
It might be Height Above Terrain.
Its played at 1:44:21
Also found here (Nitter mirror)
Anyone know if they are going to host this video on the government's website? The stream quality is pretty poor and I think the twitter one was downscaled when it uploaded.
Beck
New Member
It does have the capability of air-to-air though. And on the official Airforce site they list the AGM-114 Hellfire as one of its weapons:
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104470/mq-9-reaper/
It could still be another missile but why do you think it is?
Got link to better higher resolution video?
After zooming in and inverting newsnation video, from my basement couch... This looks like a balloon-based drone carrying several smaller detachable drones. They seem able to cluster together or fly independently. Just before impact (at 0:23 frame 7 of 30), it almost looks like kinetic blades are protruding from the Hellfire, guessing military were trying to bring down and recover asset using AGM-114R-9X [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire) , they weren't trying to obliterate). After impact, the balloon appears to lose ballast, while the mini-drones attempt to re-dock with the now-flailing balloon.
Shared zoomed inverted video at
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teaHHHfTlfg
The loitering balloon augmented drone cluster tech is interesting to me even if this isn't legit NHI.
After zooming in and inverting newsnation video, from my basement couch... This looks like a balloon-based drone carrying several smaller detachable drones. They seem able to cluster together or fly independently. Just before impact (at 0:23 frame 7 of 30), it almost looks like kinetic blades are protruding from the Hellfire, guessing military were trying to bring down and recover asset using AGM-114R-9X [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire) , they weren't trying to obliterate). After impact, the balloon appears to lose ballast, while the mini-drones attempt to re-dock with the now-flailing balloon.
Shared zoomed inverted video at
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teaHHHfTlfg
The loitering balloon augmented drone cluster tech is interesting to me even if this isn't legit NHI.
itsthematrix
New Member
I'm not an expert, but to me it really looked like it took a pretty hard hit. I'm curious what kind of object could handle something like that. From what I saw, it seemed to wobble right after. Does anyone know if it eventually splashed down in the ocean? If not, that's still pretty remarkable, even without bringing aliens into it. Apologies if this has already been covered.
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
The framing and wiggling of text rendered in the video being displayed and then re-recorded from what appears to be a Windows 11 environment (the presentation computer in the room?) indicates there is cropping and stabilization applied to some original video, which resulted in the video which is being displayed to Congress. A question is who did that cropping and stabilization, and where is the original video? The clip is at 1:16:15 in the Reuters stream. Burlison said he was given the video. But not by who. Or any explanation of the provenance of this video or where the original is. Immediately after, George Knapp says he and Corbell already knew about this video, and that it comes from a server where there is a collection of similar such videos. We've heard reference to these server directories full of collected UFO videos before. If all these people know about these folders of videos and occasionally leak them out, it seems like it should be simple for someone to tell AARO or Congress where it is so they can go look at it and figure out where its coming from and what purpose it serves.
In the bottom right:
There are two numbers here, in this image 5.42NM and 3.62NM
The point of impact they are 3.1 and 2.4 (the last digit is choped off, but immediately AFTER they go to 6.1 and 4.6.
I wonder if this is slant range and horizontal distance. 3.1/2.4 = 1.3, and 6.1/4.6 is 1.3, so they form similar triangles.
Suggesting the laser range finder moves from the target to the ocean surface after the image.
If so, then that means the camaer drone is at 4NM (24300 feet) altitude, and the target is at 2NM, 12150 feet.
There are two numbers here, in this image 5.42NM and 3.62NM
The point of impact they are 3.1 and 2.4 (the last digit is choped off, but immediately AFTER they go to 6.1 and 4.6.
I wonder if this is slant range and horizontal distance. 3.1/2.4 = 1.3, and 6.1/4.6 is 1.3, so they form similar triangles.
Suggesting the laser range finder moves from the target to the ocean surface after the image.
If so, then that means the camaer drone is at 4NM (24300 feet) altitude, and the target is at 2NM, 12150 feet.
Last edited:
If it was a Hellfire, there is at least one variant that doesn't have a warhead, just blades. The AGM-114R-9X was originally developed to kill unarmored human targets -- and there are similar weapons used as anti-drone kinetic kill vehicles. Blades or just physical impact would explain the lack of a blast and the target breaking up into pieces. Also if the target was a Yemen-made drone headed for shipping the drone could certainly be flimsy enough for the missile to continue through/past it.
boguesuser
Active Member
That one is specifically a people killer meant to lower the collateral damage. I'd highly doubt they'd use it on an aerial vehicle over the ocean.
I'd be more inclined to believe the target wasn't substantial enough to activate the warhead.
Giddierone
Senior Member.
Not even a Chinese spy balloon?
Probably, and if they do, they have the original. If history is any guide, they will now be encouraged to publish their analysis to clear the air. It might take some time.
boguesuser
Active Member
I thought they used the side winders on those. Then again, one of the side winders did miss.
I retract my previous statement. Maybe they would start using the flying slap chops against balloons.
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
Technically any combination of vertical/horizontal/slant, in any order, would form workably similar triangle side ratios, right?
Edit: technically not any combination, but a few. Clarified below. Using the height-above-target visible in a few frames that narrows it down to 1 combo that works.
Last edited:
I'm not sure what you mean. Here, we've got two sets of hypotenuse and base of similar triangles. They are similar triangles because the ratio between the numbers is the same (see diagram). You could use other numbers, but these are real numbers from immediately before and after the collision. With other number, the distances and ratio may have changed, but you could still use them assuming the altitudes had not changed.
Hard to say anything meaningful without more context to the incident. (Not that that has stopped me before...)
It's not at all clear what the target was or why someone would want to shoot at it, though this incident occurred in the middle of a series of Houthi drone attacks against shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. The Houthis have a variety of drone designs and claim some can fly at altitudes up to 65,000 feet, so a Houthi drone could certainly reach the ~12,000 feet we see that target at. (And the Houthis also took down six $30 million Reapers at altitude earlier this year. I take back my suggestion that their equipment might be flimsy.)
It would take debris 45-60 seconds to fall to sea level from 12,000 feet, so we would also see debris falling for a fair amount of time.
The numbers are consistent throughout. They show an elevation of about 4NM (above the ground) and 2NM above the target.
Source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10cLwUdTHEMkxGj1RGnclgDDbt_37P7SKPxL36HJHmWQ/edit?usp=sharing
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Do we know if this was unidentified at the time of the incident? Or is it just unidentified NOW because all we get is a context less video? Given that the shot at it, they must have had some idea of what it was, or at least that it wasn't something they'd really not want to shoot down, not a friendly drone for example. Or do they just shoot at anything when they are not able to identify it? That would seem poor policy... given how many balloons, satellites and planes we've been shown as unidentified objects!
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
I mean (3.1, 2.4) could be (vertical, horizontal), (horizontal, vertical), (slant, vertical), or (slant, horizontal). (slant must be greater than horizontal and vertical). And no matter which one it is, the numbers in two selected frames chosen would still form roughly similar triangles. Of those options maybe (slant, horizontal) is the most useful, in a targeting context.
Aha, yes. I did pick the combination that makes most sense.
At this point we have.
And if my theory is correct, that's 4.03 NM, 24,486 feet, which matches the altitude @flarkey noticed.
So this strongly indicates the target is at 2NM altitude, about 12,200 feet.
Last edited:
Which means this is very much a GoFast situation (which was also halfway). People (possibly including the person who used their phone to take the video off the screen) are not going to understand what they are looking at.
Maury Markowitz
Active Member
Air-to-ground weapons intended for use against slow-moving tanks are generally not commonly used air-to-air over water. Certainly doesn't make it impossible, but it seems odd.
Unlikely. The HUD shows it's lasing the object, and the launch platform is IDed, so that narrows things down considerably.
Given the short burn time of the Hellfire motor and its general design, I think we can safely say that this object isn't going that fast. That would make it less likely to be something like a P-20M, and more likely one of their home-grown adaptations.
JudMcCranie
New Member
Its movement and shape after being grazed by the missle suggest that it might be a balloon.
Maury Markowitz
Active Member
Oh, I think there is very little doubt they believed this was some sort of anti-ship missile or drone sent into the Gulf by the Houthis or similar group.
Given the date of the video is October 2024 this is beyond the major campaign from late 2023 into mid-2024, but they were still making attacks during this period.
Scaramanga
Senior Member
Do we actually know that the footage allegedly 'after' the missile hitting was actually after and not before the initial footage ? In other words, is this video actually a compilation that mis-represents the actual order of events.
TEEJ
Senior Member.
Looks like the Houthis were deploying a balloon system which carried drone or glide bomb payload. You can see that after the balloon is deflated the payload freefalls/disperses.
The video shows a potential 'threat' scenario where balloon launched drones are employed to attack a ship
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw2AUTU_GZM
Similar threads
