Corbell's "U.S. Military Films Huge Disc Hiding In The Clouds" new video 06/17/25

[NorCal Dave]

This is getting a bit of topic but I remember this sighting from a few months ago, it was discussed on reddit here:

It's the same video from post #159, right above your post. One was converted to TicTok, but it's the same. A police helicopter working alongside a police drone.

 

[Calter]

Yes, I shared it to provide more context to the sighting since the Corridor Crew video doesn't really elaborate on it.

I think given this was in a small town next to a military base then it's more likely that this was at least a military helicopter rather than a police one, and I'm more inclined to believe it's two helicopters rather than a helicopter and a drone (but could believe it's a drone and a helicopter)

 

[yoshy]

Anybody know if there's upcoming legislation to enforce more tracking on drones?

FlightRadar has some tracking but not as comprehensive.

How to track drones on Flightradar24

Well, some. Larger uncrewed aerial vehicles (UCAV) can be equipped with ADS-B. At the moment those tend to be operated by military and government agencies. The most-tracked flight on Flightradar24 is often a Global Hawk operated by the US Air Force. Those can operate above commercial airspace, often at 50,000 feet.

For smaller drones, Flightradar24 uses data from the Open Glider Network (OGN), a platform for tracking gliders, drones and other smaller aircraft.

 

[DopVamp]

Hi again, lot of info to process

First, big thank's to @John J. for the long contextualizing post, it is indeed possible that some misinterpretation could be done even by trained operator, i meant to point out that recognizing artifact are directly cited in the training brochure for operators

Responding to the 90% destruction of artifact, @Z.W. Wolf you supposed that i were quoting directly the chart mentioning 90% , which i didn't : i used the data in cited document to calculate through Fresnel equation the percentage of artifact that would be left on the sensor after being absorbed by the coating, which roughly speaking was more then 90% destruction of it, it was an allegory not a direct citation

As for the MIL-F-18870E and military standard @Mauro you've interpreted the document i have cited directly, what i was meaning to say was that some standards for light and artefact more likely then not does exist for such equipment, but are classified

The correlation pointed out by @Mick West is interesting, note that it seems to be recognized by Corbell and interpreted as sign of intelligence, " hiding in the clouds " rather then proof of sunflare, which helps his narrative ( it seems this case have a lot of similarities with the Gimbal )

I would be convinced of it being a light artifact if we could find some similar footage with similar coating and processing system presenting such light artifact

For now, i lean toward Corridor Crew interpretation for it being a spy balloon ( note that they came to the same conclusion as me for the pixel reacting to the object ect )

For me, the correlation of trajectory does not imply that what we are seeing is not a physical object

 

[Kyle Ferriter]

Regarding the "helicopter and ?" clip at 16:40 in the Corridor Crew video I have made a new thread here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/us-army-fundamentals-of-flight-manual.14346/

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Responding to the 90% destruction of artifact, @Z.W. Wolf you supposed that i were quoting directly the chart mentioning 90% , which i didn't : i used the data in cited document to calculate through Fresnel equation the percentage of artifact that would be left on the sensor after being absorbed by the coating, which roughly speaking was more then 90% destruction of it, it was an allegory not a direct citation

This is, frankly, incoherent.

And I will continue to believe that you latched onto that random 90% figure to make an incoherent claim about ghosting in a particular camera, unless you show otherwise.

Please don't make this claim again unless you show us your step by step argument. Otherwise I will ask for moderation of unsupported bunk.

 

[Brian Dunning]

Therefore Corbell never releases source videos anymore so that whenever AARO wants to release a copy of this video, they're forced to release the high quality version they have on their disks, rather than letting the low quality one become the "source" video.

I think it's simpler than that — Jeremy doesn't want versions out there that he hasn't blitzed his name and URL onto.