'Fast Movers' and 'Transmedium' Vehicles

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
transmedium header.jpg
In an article that was widely anticipated by the UFO community, Tim McMillan of The Debrief provides several nuggets of stories and information that will surely excite many, and provide a welcome distraction for some reporters, but ultimately does not advance the quest for actual physical evidence. The sources were either anonymous, vague, or speculative.

Article:
Given the report’s classification and their discussion of a “sensitive intelligence matter,” the officials we spoke with did so only under strict conditions of anonymity.


There are descriptions of two photos (but not the actual photos)

Firstly a silver "cube-shaped" object, which sounds like a balloon.
Article:
One of the intelligence reports, released in 2018, is said to have provided a general overview of the UAP topic and included details of previous military encounters. According to sources who had read it, the report also contained an unreleased photograph of an “aerial phenomena” categorized as “unidentified.”

The Debrief was told the accompanying photo was captured from within the cockpit of an F/A-18 fighter jet with a pilot’s personal cell phone. According to three U.S. officials who had seen it, the photo showed an unidentified silver “cube-shaped” object. The report is said to have indicated the object was “hovering” or completely motionless when military pilots encountered it. All three officials agreed that based on the photo, the object appeared to be at an altitude of roughly 30,000 to 35,000 feet and approximately 1,000 feet from the fighter jet.

Secondly a triangle-shaped craft.
Article:
Overwhelmingly, everyone The Debrief spoke with said the most striking feature of the recently released UAPTF intelligence position report was the inclusion of new and “extremely clear” photograph of an unidentifiable triangular aircraft.

The photograph, which is said to have also been taken from inside the cockpit of a military fighter jet, depicted an apparent aerospace vehicle described as a large equilateral triangle with rounded or “blunted” edges and large, perfectly spherical white “lights” in each corner. Officials who had seen it said the image was captured in 2019 by an F/A-18 fighter pilot.

Two officials that received the report said the photo was taken after the triangular craft emerged from the ocean and began to ascend straight upwards at a 90-degree angle. It was indicated that this event occurred off the eastern coast of the United States. Several other sources confirmed the photo’s existence; however, they declined to provide any further specifics of the incident.


Then there's a report from the UAP task force that reportedly focusses on underwater detections of apparent "transmedium" (going between air and water) craft and "fast-movers" (what it sounds like, but specifically a sonar return that looks like a fast-moving object)

Article:
Agreeing only to speak on background, a senior member of the Intelligence Community whose responsibilities for decades involved underwater surveillance and reconnaissance programs told The Debrief there was validity to claims of extremely fast-moving underwater objects being detected by U.S. military systems.

“On occasion, there are detections made of non-cavitational, extremely fast-moving objects within the ocean.” The intelligence official declined to elaborate further, citing the high-levels of security classification associated with underwater reconnaissance.

Officials who had read the reports say the UAPTF appears particularly interested in “transmedium vehicles.”

Fun stuff, but not a lot that submits to analysis, because there's no actual data, just stories. Without seeing these photos and without any useful numbers (other than the silver balloon-like object at cruising altitude), there's very little to analyze from my perspective.

One mischaracterization caught my eye, and I've already seen this repeated elsewhere.

Article:
McClintock, who also served as Senior Defense Attaché to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, seemed equally doubtful that UAP might represent the technology of a foreign adversary.

“It is not outside the realm of the plausible that an adversary would test the ability of the United States to detect some new capability, although it would be more likely they would only do this after testing the capability within or closer to their own territory before trying to penetrate U.S. airspace,” he stated.

McClintock is not saying that he's "doubtful that UAP might represent the technology of a foreign adversary," he's saying that a foreign adversary would not use US airspace for initial testing. This is a hugely significant difference.

One thing that is interesting is the statement from "a senior member of the Intelligence Community" that: “On occasion, there are detections made of non-cavitational, extremely fast-moving objects within the ocean.”

Non-cavitational, put simply, means it does not make any bubbles. When something is moving quickly underwater the changes in pressure cause some of the water to vaporize into a gas. Commonly this is an issue around propellers where cavitation happens on the leading edges, causing both damage and a distinctive audio signal. Any very fast-moving object underwater is going to cavitate, and much attention is paid to the shape of the object (like a propellor, a submarine, or a torpedo) to avoid this.

Here's what cavitation looks like around a very fast-moving object that is not designed for underwater travel.


The trail of cavitation behind the object is presumably something that could be detected as the collapsing bubbles would create a sonic signal, something like the thunder created by lighting.

But avoiding cavitation is not always the goal. The fastest underwater objects actually use a technique called "supercavitation" where cavitation is encouraged at the front of the object, creating enough vapor to form a bubble around the object, greatly reducing surface friction. Of course, you've still got the make the bubble, and sustained cavitation requires a powerful engine - usually a rocket in torpedos - so while the object is very fast, it's not quiet.

So for something to be "non-cavitational, extremely fast-moving" that would be highly unusual, representing an inexplicable jump in technology. Almost seeming physically impossible, because, in the same way that the insanely fast reported speeds of "tic-tac" UFOs would have to violently push aside vast amounts of air, underwater objects would have to push aside the water, which means vast changes in pressure, which would result in cavitation.

So the more likely explanation is that these detections are not actually of "non-cavitational, extremely fast-moving objects," but rather are false returns of some sort that simply look like they come from a fast-moving object. The lack of detectable cavitation is a strong indication it's not a real object. The underlying cause of these false returns is either unknown or classified.
 

Attachments

  • underwater bullet revolved slo-mo guys.mp4
    166.6 KB · Views: 4,897
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The word "transmedium" seems to have caught people's attention. Going between water and air is not, in itself, implausible. Here's a drone that can fly between air and water.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FC9EJhs0pc0


But what seems to be claimed is something that can make that transition at high speed. In recent years, this has been codified as one of the "five observables" of UFOs.

Article:
5) Trans-medium travel
Some UAP have been seen moving easily in and between different environments, such as space, the earth’s atmosphere and even water. In the Nimitz incident, witnesses described a UFO hovering over a churning "disturbance" just under the ocean's otherwise calm surface, leading to speculation that another craft had entered the water. USS Princeton radar operator Gary Vorhees later confirmed from a Navy sonar operator in the area that day that a craft was moving faster than 70 knots, roughly two times the speed of nuclear subs.


Article:
Trans-medium travel: Objects that have the ability to travel easily in various environments and conditions seemingly without any change in performance capabilities. Our current understanding of physics requires vehicles to be designed specifically according to their application. For this reason, there are stark differences between those vehicles that orbit in space, fly in the atmosphere, and travel in the sea. Objects that can travel in all three mediums using the same design and without compromising performance or degrading lift remains an enigma.


There is a vanishingly small amount of evidence that this actually happens. The examples in The Debrief article are largely of supposed signals of fast-moving underwater objects. The only trans-medium example given is the triangle UFO, with a very vague description:

Article:
The photograph, which is said to have also been taken from inside the cockpit of a military fighter jet, depicted an apparent aerospace vehicle described as a large equilateral triangle with rounded or “blunted” edges and large, perfectly spherical white “lights” in each corner. Officials who had seen it said the image was captured in 2019 by an F/A-18 fighter pilot.
Two officials that received the report said the photo was taken after the triangular craft emerged from the ocean and began to ascend straight upwards at a 90-degree angle. It was indicated that this event occurred off the eastern coast of the United States. Several other sources confirmed the photo’s existence; however, they declined to provide any further specifics of the incident.


"Began to ascend" does not suggest some hyper-fast object bursting smoothly from the ocean. But given the total lack of details here there's nothing to go on.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
If you filled a helium balloon at the bottom of a swimming pool, it'd turn transmedium soon after you released it.
Article:
Because a high-altitude balloon doesn't have much, if any, of a radar cross-section, metallic radar reflectors, which come in a variety of geometric shapes, are strung below its gas envelope, thus providing a radar return so that it can be tracked. The combination can look pretty bizarre in and of itself and they are cumbersome and clumsy arrangements. But couldn't this be simplified for more conducive deployment and better aerodynamics by just suspending the reflector inside the balloon itself? A similar arrangement is used for radar reflectors that float on the water or are strung up on ships, but what about one that has to travel through the atmosphere?

Just as I thought, an answer to that question has already been proposed. After searching sporadically over a number of days for what I envisioned in my mind, I found just that in U.S. Patent #2,463,517, titled "Airborne Corner Reflector." message-editor_1561155836127-asddaccca.jpg
[..]

What's most interesting is how it describes the ability to be packed into a small space. Being able to launch something just like this in a pre-packaged, all-up canister from a submarine—especially a submerged one—would be highly beneficial. Today, submarines can release canisters to the surface that deploy small aerial drones and it is even possible that balloons could be released from very shallow depths without the use of a canister of any type. Regardless, there is actually a historic precedent for clandestine operations where submarines launched balloons carrying radar reflectors as part of intelligence gathering operations.

[..]

... the CIA needed a way to really gauge just how survivable the A-12 would be against the latest and greatest Soviet radar systems. The rest is history:

One night, a US Navy destroyer equipped with a Palladium transmitter positioned itself beyond the detection range of a Soviet "Tall King" A-band early warning radar situated near Havana. With its antenna protruding just above the horizon the destroyer produced a signal that appeared to be emanating from a US fighter out of Key West, making a high-speed dash towards the capital, Havana.

At a predetermined time, a US Navy submarine surfaced near Havana Bay, just long enough to time-releases a series of balloons carrying radar reflectors of varying sizes. The idea was that having detected the 'aircraft', the Soviets would switch on SA-2 target tracking radars in preparation for engaging the target. Release of the balloons ahead of the 'target' would produce a number of returns, of which the smallest reported would present the highest level of radar sensitivity.

That was signal of a fighter that was completely fake. I wonder how fast that fighter could have been faked to appear to move? If a signal can't be physically created by a moving object, maybe it wasn't.
“It is not outside the realm of the plausible that an adversary would test the ability of the United States to detect some new capability, although it would be more likely they would only do this after testing the capability within or closer to their own territory before trying to penetrate U.S. airspace,” [McClintock] stated.
You don't have to have that capability to test for it, you just need to know how to fake it: they didn't use an A-12 to find out whether the Cubans would be able to discover it. If I was in defense planning and wanted to find out whether it was worth to invest in non-cavitation-producing propulsion, I'd want to find out whether that would actually make me undetectable or not before spending a lot of resources on that research. It would explain why that technology wasn't seen before. It would also make the release of that information a political issue: would the US military keep their detection capability a secret; or would they want to release a sighting report to demonstrate their superior capabilities?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
https://patents.google.com/patent/US9010678B1/en



2020-12-02_17-04-20.jpg



https://patents.google.com/patent/US9296270?oq=Multi-modal+flying+airplane+and+underwater+glider
2020-12-02_17-10-57.jpg
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Article:
There have been many bio-inspired approaches to building such a vehicle [3]. These include concepts of vehicles that could land in water and then submerge like a duck [4] or a guillemot [5] or those that would directly plunge-dive into the water like a cormorant [6] or a gannet [7]. Other approaches include vehicles that launch from underwater like a rocket [8,9], and those that can rise from underwater and glide through the air like a flying fish [10]. Bio-inspired vehicles are currently leading the way in the quest to realize such a vehicle. However, a fully functional vehicle has not yet been designed and tested. It is the complexity of operating and transitioning in both mediums (air and water) that has slowed down progress, with prototypes completing some of the tasks (maneuvers) such as landing or taking off from water, but not all that is required for a fully functional system.


Interesting references:
Article:
[1] Paul Marks, "From sea to sky: Submarines that fly," New Scientist, July 2010.
[2] "Broad Agency Announcement: Submersible Aircraft," DARPA, DARPA-BAA-09-06, 2008.
[3] R. Siddall and M. Kovač, "Launching the AquaMAV: bioinspired design for aerial–aquatic robotic platforms," Bioinsp. Biomim., vol. 9, no. 3, 2014.
[4] T. Aigeldinger and F. Fish, "Hydroplaning by ducklings: overcoming limitations to swimming at the water surface," Experimental Biology, Journal of, vol. 198, pp. 1567-1574, July 1995.
[5] R. J. Lock, R. Vaidyanathan, S. C. Burgess, and J. Loveless, "Development of a biologically inspired multi-modal wing model for aerial-aquatic robotic vehicles through empirical and numerical modelling of the common guillemot, Uria aalge," Bioinspir. Biomim., vol. 5, no. 4, 2010.
[6] Terrence A. Weisshaar, "Morphing aircraft systems: historical perspectives and future challenges," Journal of Aircraft, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 337-353, 2013.
[7] A. Fabian, Y. Feng, E. Swartz, D. Thurmer, and R. Wang, "Hybrid Aerial Underwater Vehicle (MIT Lincoln Lab)," 2012 SCOPE Projects, Paper 8 (2012), http://digitalcommons.olin.edu/scope_2012/8/.
[8] Kollmorgen, "Sea Sentry Organic Submarine Launched UAV," Kollmorgen Corporation, Radford, 2009.
[9] D. Majumdar, "U.S. Navy Launches UAV from a Submarine," U.S. Naval Institute News, 2013.[/atricle]
 

Sagittarius

Member
So, almost three weeks later, has that 'extremely clear' photo of the triangular UFO been released, or was it all a sham, just as most of us expected? Does anyone have an update?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So, almost three weeks later, has that 'extremely clear' photo of the triangular UFO been released, or was it all a sham, just as most of us expected? Does anyone have an update?
Lou Elizondo, in interview with George Knapp on 20-12-2020, said it exists:
Article:
Elizondo indicated the current UAP Task Force has obtained images of multiple unknown aerial objects, including a clear image of a mysterious triangle emerging from the ocean, recorded by military pilots.


This does not appear to be a new claim.
 

Sagittarius

Member
Lou Elizondo, in interview with George Knapp on 20-12-2020, said it exists:
Article:
Elizondo indicated the current UAP Task Force has obtained images of multiple unknown aerial objects, including a clear image of a mysterious triangle emerging from the ocean, recorded by military pilots.


This does not appear to be a new claim.
I wonder what's keeping them from releasing it, then?
 

gtoffo

Member
I wonder what's keeping them from releasing it, then?
Let's say the image exists and is true.

If the Navy released a classified image of an enemy drone and said it was a UFO: the enemy would know that they have a huge advantage.

The fact they don't know what it is doesn't mean it is an alien craft. They might be looking at advanced enemy tech.
 

Mauro

Member
The fact they don't know what it is doesn't mean it is an alien craft. They might be looking at advanced enemy tech.

Advanced enemy tech, at least, scores less than aliens on the bunk scale. My guess is they have got nothing at all, as always happens with such announcements.
 

Sagittarius

Member
They might be looking at advanced enemy tech.
If it exists, I'd imagine most people would think it's 'advanced enemy tech' - some sort of stealth thing that probably also explains a lot of the other 'black triangle' sightings over the years. The idea of it being an alien craft is just too off-the-wall to be true.
 

Election 2020

Related Articles

Top