Search results

Highly improbable that the CAG would not know the position of Navy subs. Especially if weapons were being tested/released. And curious that the sub was not detected in the area in any case. A lot of very weird coincidences and errors need to be put together for this to be possible to explain...

I agree with the data we have this is basically the only viable theory to explain those sightings. It has some glaring holes in it though: - why didn't the carrier group identify the presence of a sub in the area. Subs are a grave threat to carriers and one the main goals of the carrier group...

Excellent work everyone. So to recap: - it is moving north against the prevailing wind. We don't know range but: - distance to horizon from the ship is about 10 miles / 17km - Saphire II laser range finder max range is 20km while Saphire III LRF Max. range is 25 km +/-5 m (but we get no laser...

According to the pilots they used the radar track to point ATFLIR but we have no way of determining that from the video for sure. The video is almost certainly not the unedited original. This was probably cut and the original full length video is probably lost at this point. The reason is...

Here is the source: https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/did-the-dod-oig-get-correspondence-from-congress-that-initiated-their-evaluation-on-uaps/ Interesting. Although FOIAs are usually only relevant if they do find something. Not the other way around since so many...

Well this is interesting... You mean 4150? How could you determine that from that poor copy? I guess they might have made the following mistake: they saw 5° and saw the object below the artificial horizon so assumed this was -5°? Underwoods inconsistent testimony might have also pushed them...

Pretty cool huh :-D watch out they cause addiction! Yes I think it is tracking optically. However ATFIR was presumably pointed at the object using a radar track. ATFLIR has a maximum FOV of 6° in WFOV ( https://www.explorescu.org/post/nimitz_strike_group_2004 page 155) so you need to point it...

It is possible the two functionalities could be distinct. But I agree it doesn't make sense to separate them. Remember pilots use HOTAS most of the time so you can't have unnecessary functions. Also regarding the testimony by that technician there are several inconsistencies and mistakes in...

This is not true though. You need sufficient sensor sensibility to distinguish between the heat source and the background heat. Try standing at 100km with a lighter and see if the ATFLIR sees you. It won't :-) Place a fusion reactor at 150 million km from the earth (the sun) and you will see...

Mick, discarding everything else for a moment: don't you think that sequence of events is highly unlikely? You need both a technical failure (radar malfunction) and a human failure (WSO sucks at his job or is drunk... he's not even flying the plane. Intercepting stuff with those systems is his...

I'm lost here. Could you recap what your analysis of the event is? An object is spotted on radar? ATFLIR is pointed at it but is imprecise and hits something else (a friendly F-18?) The radar malfunctions The F-18 is extremely out of focus for some reason both on IR and TV mode The pilots are...

My understanding is he has ATFLIR lock. He asks for the radar to lock and give him range. The radar returns an error basically. That shouldn't happen. He should immediately see the exact distance and get a radar lock.

Certainly low quality. And I don't know how the FOCS setting works. It isn't simulated usually and I can't find any info looking around. From most videos I've seen it seems to always indicate 8. It's probably a static setting (for example it could mean "infinity"). Given the usual distances...

According to the executive report posted above the initial contact with the target was at 30-40nm which is close to the limit for ATFLIR but well within radar range. In the NYMAG interview Underwood states: If the pointing wasn't accurate: what the hell was also in the sky at the time and...

Those simulations are not able to reproduce all of ATFLIR's functionalities. For example if you watch the "GOFAST" video you will clearly see another way of tracking an object that the pilots refer to as "autotrack" which is not available on DCS as far as I can tell. In the FLIR video we don't...

A couple of questions: Why would the TV image look blurry? When the WSO tried locking the radar on the target why didn't the F-18 get a radar warning and signal a buddy spike? Why didn't the radar lock on properly on an F-18? Where would the other F-18 come from? Another ship? Why wasn't...

I don't understand how it works very well... but I think it is illegal in the US for a journalist to share material clearly marked as "Classified". So it seems journalists are receiving a lot of material but are only cherrypicking what they release based on that. SO we are left with "the scraps"

Agree. Too much money is unlikely since the budgets disclosed are infinitesimal for the DoD (AATIP 22 mil for example). Also there are claims by people like Elizondo and Mellon of branches failing to collaborate effectively, withholding information from one another and stonewalling the UAPTF...

According to the debrief: The Senate Armed Services Committee would mean: Jack Reed (D - RI) Chairman Majority Shaheen, Jeanne (D - NH) Gillibrand, Kirsten E. (D - NY) Blumenthal, Richard (D - CT) Hirono, Mazie K. (D - HI) Kaine, Tim (D - VA) King, Angus (I - ME) Warren, Elizabeth (D - MA)...

Ok just read this article by Tim McMillan: https://thedebrief.org/inspector-general-launching-evaluation-of-the-pentagons-actions-with-ufos/ This is a completely different investigation.