Congress Public Hearings About UFO

jarlrmai

Senior Member
UAV = Drone, otherwise it would have been UAP
Yes, but I still think the Corbell one (the 1st video he showed) is a more likely commercial airliner flight however the UAV could just be the second one.

Still it turns out that this forum and the general sceptical community is light years ahead of the Navy on being able to id this stuff.

I was like "do GIMBAL next.." but no joy :(
 

Ravi

Senior Member.
Videos shown are unimpressive to say the least. Funny also that they don't know how to walk through a video frame by frame. Even I know that. :rolleyes:
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
Yes, but I still think the Corbell one (the 1st video he showed) is a more likely commercial airliner flight however the UAV could just be the second one.

Still it turns out that this forum and the general sceptical community is light years ahead of the Navy on being able to id this stuff.

I was like "do GIMBAL next.." but no joy :(
I was hoping he'd show Gimbal also
And yeah, could have been drones but the triangle object a plane.
 

KilliK

Member
aaand they confirmed the existence of anomalous solid UAPs interfering with their military. that's all what I wanted to hear. I am satisfied.
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
For those wanting to see the still pic of the object that flys by in that video shown in the Sub committee meeting on UAP. I'm going to guess mylar balloon

1652795970289.png
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
UAV = Drone, otherwise it would have been UAP
Yes, but I still think the Corbell one (the 1st video he showed is a more likley commercial flight) however the UAV
For those wanting to see the still pic of the object that flys by in that video shown in the Sub committee meeting on UAP. I'm going to guess mylar balloon

1652795970289.png
Any way we can tell if it's from the same flight as the batman balloon, the setup looks very similar, but then I guess iPhone videos from the WSO seat of a F/18 in a blue sky are all gonna look fairly similar.
 

KilliK

Member
so, it's basically a repetition of the UAPTF report. and they are taking this seriously. also no accidental flying by F18s to explain those phenomena. good. good hearing.
 

Ravi

Senior Member.
so, it's basically a repetition of the UAPTF report. and they are taking this seriously. also no accidental flying by F18s to explain those phenomena. good. good hearing.
Hm, Not impressed. Not that I expected some more revelations though.
The guys representing the military are clearly not eager to say anything more than vague terms. This will never change, period.

There was an interesting question about these 18 "very clear objects". I am paraphrasing (sorry), but it was like "how sure are you that they are truly physical objects?". The answer was vague.
 

KilliK

Member
i wonder what they will talk about in the private hearings.

ps. i missed that they mentioned Mick in the hearings. meanwhile, Jeremy is silent in twitter. :)
 

Mauro

Active Member
What I expect will be discussed (largely based on Kirby's statement)
  • Setting up a process to identify the unidentified phenomena
  • Being more proactive, and coordinated
  • Addressing safety concerns in training ranges
  • No conclusions about what the unidentified things are
  • Better reporting procedures
  • Complains about lack of progress
I would add:
  • Ask for more money
 

KilliK

Member
No we’re not talking about air clutter. I don’t know what that is. I just looked it up and got nothing. Did you mean radar clutter?

I’m arguing that detection and identification of airborne threats isn’t lacking for funds or attention. It’s a priority. The aircraft, ships and personnel you’re referring to are designed/trained specifically to detect, identify and repel threats. That’s literally their job. Arguing that it isn’t a priority is like arguing the United States government doesn’t prioritize air superiority, or accurate rifles.
they mentioned air clutter in the hearings.
 

KilliK

Member
Have we any verified instances of UFOs "interfering with pilots and ships"? I agree that pilots getting distracted could be a problem, but that's just as true if they're being distracted by misperception of a natural phenomenon. And certainly all the examples of people seeing something on an older video and saying "What's that thing" were not distracting the pilots who didn't notice it at the time.

I think the important part of your statement is "if this is truly happening", with emphasis on the "IF".
they mentioned 11 nearly misses in the hearings.
 

JMartJr

Senior Member
Videos shown are unimpressive to say the least. Funny also that they don't know how to walk through a video frame by frame. Even I know that. :rolleyes:
The folks on 4ch*n's /x/ board were also laughing at that. So there is some common ground...
 

Woolery

Active Member
they mentioned air clutter in the hearings.
I didn’t watch the hearings but after thoroughly searching the UAP preliminary assessment I found a similar term. It looks like they at least use the term “airborne clutter” in the report summary:
Our analysis of the data supports the construct that if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved they will fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, USG or U.S. industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a catchall “other” bin.
Source: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdf

Edit: I found the official definition later in the report:

Airborne Clutter: These objects include birds, balloons, recreational unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), or airborne debris like plastic bags that muddle a scene and affect an operator’s ability to identify true targets, such as enemy aircraft.
Is this what you mean? If so, can you help me understand why the pilots can’t be seeing these things?
 
Last edited:

Ann K

Active Member
they mentioned 11 nearly misses in the hearings.
I've not been glued to the proceedings. What were those "near misses", objects or camera artifacts or unknown phenomena? If the size, distance, and speed are unknown, they might not be "near". If observers can't tell distance, they can't tell size and speed, and vice versa. And if they can't be identified as objects, they can't really be called "misses".

Am I correct in thinking that they are reporting the impressions they got based on unverified assumptions?
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
I think the important part of your statement is "if this is truly happening", with emphasis on the "IF".
Agreed. I've long felt that all of this is much ado about nothing, or at least very little.
they mentioned 11 nearly misses in the hearings.
Eleven misses last week? That would be a concern. Eleven misses in the last 20 years? That sounds pretty good. And what constitutes a "near miss with a UAP"?

This sounds like the same problem from the 2021 report:
A 2021 report – a redacted classified version of which was published by The Black Vault earlier this year – said the government recorded 144 reports from 2004 to 2021, including 80 that "involved observation with multiple sensors." The report also included information on "common shapes" of the UAPs, although the entire sections on the shapes are redacted.
Content from External Source
www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ufo-hearing-pentagon-shows-declassified-photos-and-video-clip-of-unexplainable-floating-object/ar-AAXnpqT?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=8f4b3c8632164478bf64fa82b6aec2f6

They had 144 reports over the course of 17 years.

What's even more important is out of how many flight hours? Over the course of 17 years, how many flights or sorties or whatever they're called, occurred? What's the context for those 144 reports, or 11 misses, relative to how many flights are being conducted over a giving period of time?

If it's 11 misses out of 22 flights, that's a problem. If it's 11 misses out of thousands of flights, it sounds almost normal giving the nature of military flights.
 

ventsyv

New Member
Agreed. I've long felt that all of this is much ado about nothing, or at least very little.

Eleven misses last week? That would be a concern. Eleven misses in the last 20 years? That sounds pretty good. And what constitutes a "near miss with a UAP"?

This sounds like the same problem from the 2021 report:
A 2021 report – a redacted classified version of which was published by The Black Vault earlier this year – said the government recorded 144 reports from 2004 to 2021, including 80 that "involved observation with multiple sensors." The report also included information on "common shapes" of the UAPs, although the entire sections on the shapes are redacted.
Content from External Source
www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ufo-hearing-pentagon-shows-declassified-photos-and-video-clip-of-unexplainable-floating-object/ar-AAXnpqT?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=8f4b3c8632164478bf64fa82b6aec2f6

They had 144 reports over the course of 17 years.

What's even more important is out of how many flight hours? Over the course of 17 years, how many flights or sorties or whatever they're called, occurred? What's the context for those 144 reports, or 11 misses, relative to how many flights are being conducted over a giving period of time?

If it's 11 misses out of 22 flights, that's a problem. If it's 11 misses out of thousands of flights, it sounds almost normal giving the nature of military flights.
The 11 misses is not what's concerning, the fact they don't know what those things are is.
I wish they qualify what a 'near miss' is. Is the Fravor encounter a near miss?

The Congresman didn't see at all interested in find out. Of course they have the closed session so maybe this was just a per-functionary hearing.
 
Last edited:

Ravi

Senior Member.
Wouldn't it be interesting to know what the reps thought about the things mentioned or shown even, during the closed session?
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
that's not what the report says.
From the FOIA papers (bold by me):

(U) This report provides an overview for policymakers of the challenges associated with characterizing the potential threat posed by UAP while also providing a means to develop relevant processes, policies, technologies, and training for the U.S. military and other U.S. Government (USG) personnel if and when they encounter UAP, so as to enhance the Intelligence Community's (IC) ability to understand the threat. The UAPTF Director, is the official accountable for ensuring the timely collection and consolidation of data on UAP. The dataset described in this report is currently limited primarily to USG reporting of incidents occurring from November 2004 to March 2021. Data continues to be collected and analyzed.
Content from External Source
I'd call that ~17years,

And then this in the same paper (bold by me and it's a little jumbled because the redactions don't copy and paste well):

144 repol1s originated from USG somces.
Content from External Source
Of these, 80 rep0l1s involved n h.,,,,, • .,, ""tt· with multiple sensors including 14(a) ••• and . The remaining IIIEJ observed incidents were (See Tables 1 and 2.) 1.4(a) Of the 144 USG repol1s_ riginated from Navy "Range Fouler,,2 which provide basic infOlmation, such as the time, date, location, description, and what occmred dming the event. _eports were from a 1.4( a) combination of Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and other USG agenCIes. UAP were described in most rep0l1s as objects that intenupted preplanned or other militaIY activity. l.4(a)(g) 50 USc § 3024(1) f the 144 rep011s contained 1 A(
Content from External Source
documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/odni/DEOM-2021-00006.pdf

I understand in the hearings this may have been bumped up to 400 from 140? But again 140/400 out of what? How many thousands of flights are we talking about?

So, has anyone secured more funding?
Yeah, AASWAP/AATIP gave Bigalow $22 million to look for UFOs. And 7' tall bipedal wolves too.
 

Ann K

Active Member
UAV = Drone, otherwise it would have been UAP
The "green" is night scope, the "triangle" is artifact. But at least the principal one seems to be flashing in a double blink, at a constant rate (much like a satellite transit, except there are several). Does that blink rate help identify it?
 
I know Mick posted a hi-res video presented by the UAP Task Force, and I don't know if a low-res image can be "better" but in this case I noticed a dip in the top that reminded me of a love-heart balloon. Then I found a similar dip in a partially deflated heliotrope (solar) balloon due to the way it's constructed. Link to article.
Congress UFO2 heliotrope balloon.jpg
 
Last edited:

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
I understand in the hearings this may have been bumped up to 400 from 140? But again 140/400 out of what? How many thousands of flights are we talking about?
Just to clarify:

A total of 400 reported incidents are being investigated by the Pentagon's Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group, or AOIMSG. The group was created last year as Congress passed a law requiring a formal body in the Defense Department dedicated to probing what it calls unidentified aerial phenomenon and releasing regular reports.

Cases have ballooned from the 144 incidents from 2004 to 2021 cited in an initial public report last summer on the objects -- also ordered up by Congress -- by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That report arrived at a similar conclusion about the lack of data.

Many of the new cases are actually older incidents that are just now being reported by military witnesses as the stigma of UFO sightings in the military eases, Bray said.
Content from External Source
But no little green men it seems:

Still, the Pentagon says there so far is scant evidence backing any extraordinary explanations. During the hearing, lawmakers asked whether any of the objects was sending out unusual signals or apparent communications.

"We have detected no emanations ... that would suggest it's anything non-terrestrial in origin," said Scott Bray, deputy director of Naval Intelligence, who headed the task force that preceded the Pentagon's new UFO office.

Many of the new cases are actually older incidents that are just now being reported by military witnesses as the stigma of UFO sightings in the military eases, Bray said.
Content from External Source
Maybe some bokeh though:

The nighttime video of the triangle-shaped objects flying over the USS Russell was shot in 2019 in the Pacific and was leaked by UFO researchers last year who claimed it was among the best military UFO footage ever released. It was taken with a camera through a night-vision lens by the Navy crew.

Bray said the Pentagon found a second night-vision video shot elsewhere under similar circumstances and was then able to confirm the objects were drones that only appeared triangular due to the camera aperture, a common effect called bokeh.
Content from External Source
www.military.com/daily-news/2022/05/17/congress-first-military-ufo-hearing-50-years-deflates-speculation-alien-spacecraft.html
 
Top