Search results

[Admin: This is the original first post in the thread] For audio video content see: https://www.weaponizedpodcast.com/news-1/mojave-triangle-uap Potential ideas? FLARES: the witnesses claim they were stationary. Maybe we can use the timestamps from the videos to verify that. Helicopters...

The release includes the full radar track. Is the aircraft candidate you identified where we expect it to be on the radar relative to the helicopter? That would seal the deal I think.

That's not public and it is classified. What I am showing above is what AT A MINIMUM was available to them based on what is publicly available from the old F/A-18C system manuals and sims.

On the SA page you can normally select targets to see their speed (in mach) and angels (altitude in k of feet). See number 1 on the screenshot below from https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/F/A-18C#HAFU_Symbology That's an unknown (onboard identification) + hostile (offboard identifciation)...

I think he just means the targets were moving within the range of airspeeds at which "cubes in spheres" had been observed at.

Do you have a quote in context? I don't think he is referring to something visual on the SA. I think you need to place the cursor over a target to see speed and angels. He probably meant "bands"="ranges". "We noticed the objects were usuamoving at airspeed ranges between mach x and mach y"

Do you have a quote in context? I don't think he is referring to something visual on the SA. I think you need to place the cursor over a target to see speed and angels. He probably meant "bands"="ranges". "We noticed the objects were usually moving at airspeed ranges between mach x and mach y"

We are only seeing a portion of the event. So we can't assume those movements happened exclusively during the time recorded in this video. If such extreme movements had happened during the video we would certainly hear comments (screams?) by the crew.

Agreed. But usually long wings = long fuselage too (for balance). The reason I'm saying all this because we should take into account only realistic flight paths. We can disqualify a lot of solutions to remain within the flight path of known aircraft types. Also: we know the indicative size of...

Wait I'm lost... the flip is just simulated in the video and not the result from a path in sitrec? If the vector flips like that it means you changed heading 180° and are now heading in the opposite direction. You can't be flying in a straight line or your vector would always be pointing to the...

When I say you need big wings what I mean are many things. For example aspect ratio is crucial. The F-18 has an AR of 4. Cessna Citation X Aspect ratio: 7.8 B52: 8.56 That's twice the aspect ratio with a much wider wing spans. Makes a HUGE difference in performance. For reference: U2 has an...

Wow that flip is crazy. You can see the vector pointing consistently in the same direction basically. In your sim 340° of heading until the flip. So it's a straight line and then inverts direction. The lenght of the vectors does not change as far as I know (in the old version of the HSI that the...

Really cool! Not sure why you think it is hard to determine what is happening. The whole point of this page is to give Situational Awareness (SA) to the crew. You can even overlay the map over it if you want! Pretty cool. You see where everybody is, where they are going and who you are...

Just for reference: 45k feet is within the flight envelope of an F-18. But not comfortably. You need full thrust (no afterburner) to stay in the air with a light load or afterburner with a heavy load. Min speed is 0.6 mach max speed is 1.5ish. It would be great if SITREC included the F-18...

Just wanted to say this is really excellent work... nice job Mick.

I mean..... wow..... This will change significantly the global discourse regarding the subject.

What is the probability of aliens probes in our solar system? Given the Drake Equation and what we now about physics today I'd say pretty high without any exotic propulsion etc. More or less probable than the Nimitz Case being a colossal and concurrent string of epic fails by people, technology...

Doesn't look like motion blur though. It isn't a straight projection of the original image (like your cloud example). It has a shape that changes and expands and follows the expected exhaust don't you think? And you also clearly see the entire scene changing brightness as the "exposure" is...

That image confirms my hypothesis: if you measure the width of the "glare" it approximates the wingspan/lenght of the original aircraft. It doesn't extend much beyond the actual fuselage of the aircraft. Of course it's an approximation. But a pretty good one. We know the error might be around...

By exposure I think I mean "level/gain" in terms of ATFLIR settings. I agree the sytems are not the same and that is a big limit. But I would assume ATFLIR would be better than what Falch is using. Expecially in terms of autofocus/autogain etc. Isn't brightness directly correlated to the...