Fravor's Hypersonic UFO observation. Parallax Illusion? Comparing Accounts

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
https://thenimitzencounters.com/2018/09/17/david-fravors-statement/

So as we’re flying and we’re still heading west. We start looking around. Because of our merged plot, now you’re into a visual arena. You’re not as much worried about your radar. Plus, the WSOs (Weapons Systems Officer in back seat) are gonna do the radar stuff. But we’re still looking out and I look out the right side and I see something in the water. And it looks like about the size of a 737 in the water pointing east. So you don’t see an airplane, but if you’ve ever been out to sea with like an underwater sea mountain, as the waves come and there’s something right under the surface, they’ll break. Same thing that happens on shore. They’ll break and you’ll get whitewater. So this thing looks kind of like that shape. Looks, you know… like if you put a 737 about 10 to 15 feet under the water. The waves are gonna crash over the top and you’re gonna get this whitewater.

So we see that and so he’s pointing the east. So it would be on the right-hand side of the airplane. Just forward of the wing line is this little white thing, which looks like a tic-tac, which is why we call it the tic-tac, and it’s moving around erratically. So it’s doing this. It’s not hovering, you know, it’s not. It’s moving just randomly around. Not fast just kind of left right forward and back. There’s no rotor wash, which you see from a helicopter. It’s just this odd object. And so by this time we passed by it and now I’m starting a right hand turn. So we’re going from a clock-code, from six o’clock towards the 9:00 o’clock position. And I’m like, well that’s interesting. I said, “well, I’m gonna go check it out”.

So at about the nine o’clock, between probably nine and ten, I started an easy descent. And I’m watching this thing and it’s just kind of randomly moving around this vehicle. And it’s basically forward of the right wing by the cockpit and then it goes back and it’s kind of moving around like it was checking it out. That’s kind of odd.

So as we passed through about the twelve o’clock position and we’re descending. It kind of recognizes that we’re there and it starts to mirror us. So now, think of it at the six o’clock position we’re at the 12 o’clock position. We’re coming down and it starts coming up. So it’s going towards nine o’clock and we’re going towards three o’clock. And we do this all the way around until I get all the way back towards about the nine o’clock position. So I’m still coming down nice and easy and I’m watching this thing. Because it’s just kind of watching us and following. And I’m like that’s kind of weird. So now there’s probably about, let me think, 2500, it’s probably about maybe 3,000 feet below us and about a mile across the circle. It’s about the size of an F-18. So you know 47 feet long. But it has no wings. I don’t see any exhaust plume, you know, like an older airplane would have smoke. There’s none of that.

So as I come across, I’m a little above him. He’s at the 3 o’clock position and I go, “well the only way I might get this is to do an aggressive out-of-play maneuver”. So I dump the nose and I go from the 9 o’clock through the vertical down, to go across to the 3 o’clock. So he’s over here and I go like this (motions cutting across the circle). So as I get down to about, I’m probably about 60 degrees nose low a little, pulling through the bottom. It starts to accelerate. It has an incredible rate of acceleration. And it takes off and it goes south. And it takes off like nothing I’ve ever seen. It literally is one minute it’s there and the next minute it’s like, poof, and it’s gone.

So I came up on the radio and I said, “hey let’s just spin around and go back to what was in the water, let’s go see what was in the water.” So right there, it’s kind of below us, you know. So I’m kind of heading to the east. So we do a 180 and go back to the location we’re at and there’s nothing in the water. So I call up the Princeton and I said, ‘hey did you guys, do you guys have all this?” And I was talking back and forth to the controller.
Content from External Source
I've been trying to visualize what's going on here from his verbal description. His initial description of the clock-code seems odd, as he's heading west and making a right turn, but says
I’m starting a right hand turn. So we’re going from a clock-code, from six o’clock towards the 9:00 o’clock position.
Content from External Source
Is West six o'clock? Maybe just a random illustration of the direction of turn.

But the interesting thing is:
So as we passed through about the twelve o’clock position and we’re descending. It kind of recognizes that we’re there and it starts to mirror us. So now, think of it at the six o’clock position we’re at the 12 o’clock position. We’re coming down and it starts coming up. So it’s going towards nine o’clock and we’re going towards three o’clock. And we do this all the way around until I get all the way back towards about the nine o’clock position. So I’m still coming down nice and easy and I’m watching this thing. Because it’s just kind of watching us and following.
Content from External Source
All of this is the Tic-Tac mirroring him. Now if you've got a featureless object over a mile away, and you don't know how big it is, then it's possible that you misjudge where it actually is. If, instead of being a 47 foot object on the other side of this clock face circle, near the water, it's actually a 23 foot in the MIDDLE of the circle, and HALF WAY to the ocean surface. And it's not moving much. Like a balloon.

Then you'd get the mirroring, the circling, the rising to meet him, and then as he cuts across the circle, the illusion of massive acceleration towards and then past and behind him.
 

Agent K

Senior Member
I said this last year, and you agreed.
In the Nimitz "tic tac" encounter, I speculated that the tic tac was a weather balloon, and the pilot, David Fravor, overestimated the range to it and thought it was "mirroring" him by staying on the opposite side of a circle that his jet was tracing, when the tic tac was actually staying in the center of the circle.

Now we even have a decent simulation of it, which I talked about in June.
The film The Nimitz Encounters re-creates the tic tac chase. Here's the part where the tic tac "mirrors" the pilot. Notice how it's hard to tell whether the tic tac is actually moving in a circle or just staying still in the center like a balloon.
Source: https://youtu.be/PRgoisHRmUE?t=1003
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I figured it would have been discussed before. I was originally trying to compare the different versions of the story, but reading Fravor's version, and trying to visualize it, really brought it home.

It's not just the circling though, it's the rising up as he descends, and then I think it also explains the "hypersonic" departure. It's not that clear from this transcript:
So as I come across, I’m a little above him. He’s at the 3 o’clock position and I go, “well the only way I might get this is to do an aggressive out-of-play maneuver”. So I dump the nose and I go from the 9 o’clock through the vertical down, to go across to the 3 o’clock. So he’s over here and I go like this (motions cutting across the circle). So as I get down to about, I’m probably about 60 degrees nose low a little, pulling through the bottom. It starts to accelerate. It has an incredible rate of acceleration. And it takes off and it goes south.
Content from External Source
Compare withe the older version of the story:

The AAV then began to rise from its hover. The object, which he would later describe as a while tic-tac, rose in right 2-circle flow about a mile cross-circle from Dave’s Hornet. BFM instincts took over and Dave dug nose-low to cut across the bottom of the circle. As he was looking at the AAV and pulling his nose up to bear, the tried again to slave his radar via the HMCS. Again, the APG-73 was unable to lock on the white, fighter-sized flying object now just a couple of thousand feet away and closing.
...
As Dave was pulling for nose-on and trying to get a dogfight lock with his radar, the AAV tightened its turn, “lift vector on, then aft” as Dave described, passed behind his tail and accelerated away at multi-Mach speed.
Content from External Source
I think I was thinking of the clock code wrong before. It's essentially a position on the circle described by the clockwise right turn he does, with 12 o'clock being North. He starts at 6 o'clock, heading West, with the object off to his right, the North, at what he thinks is about 12 o'clock, so he continues from 6, all the way around past 12 to 3. The object has been mirroring him the whole time.

Then he decides to fly across. He says: "I’m probably about 60 degrees nose low a little." What is that? 60 degrees down? Why would he do that if " it’s probably about maybe 3,000 feet below us and about a mile across the circle." That's only 28 degrees down.

But perhaps the key thing here is the acceleration. If you think an object is a mile away, but it's only 0.5 miles away, then as you fly 0.5 miles towards it you'd expect it to just get 0.5 miles closer, and 2x bigger. Instead it gets to 0 miles away, and asymptotically larger. The change in expected speed would be incredible, and would seem like, especially as it got closer, to have near instant acceleration, both towards you, and to the side (depending on how far off-axis it was)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
On Fox News Fravor says:

Source: https://youtu.be/EDj9ZZQY2kA?t=94


I get to the 8 o'clock position, I'm at the 2 o'clock position. I decide I'm going to go across and see what it is, and it's about 2,000 feet below me. I cut across the circle, and I get within about a half mile of it, it rapidly accelerates towards the south in about 2 seconds and disappears.
Content from External Source
Compare with the TTSA account:
2500, it’s probably about maybe 3,000 feet below us and about a mile across the circle ... He’s at the 3 o’clock position and I go, “well the only way I might get this is to do an aggressive out-of-play maneuver”. So I dump the nose and I go from the 9 o’clock through the vertical down, to go across to the 3 o’clock. So he’s over here and I go like this (motions cutting across the circle). So as I get down to about, I’m probably about 60 degrees nose low a little, pulling through the bottom. It starts to accelerate. It has an incredible rate of acceleration. And it takes off and it goes south.
Content from External Source
This makes sense with the parallax hypothesis. If you think it's a mile away, but it's only half a mile, then when "I cut across the circle, and I get within about a half mile of it, " you will think it's going super fast.
 

Agent K

Senior Member
This doesn't explain a couple of things though: the random ping-ponging that Fravor described and the possibility that the other pilot saw the same thing from a different angle.

I discussed this in June.
I might have mentioned this before, but could the Nimitz tic tac have been the same kind of thing [as Go Fast]? Cmdr. Fravor said it "mirrored" him as he circled down and it stayed on the same circle but opposite him. Perhaps it was actually at the center of the circle, and he assumed it was bigger, farther away, and moving. Then, it popped and he assumed it flew off quickly.
But if the other pilot saw them moving in a circle from above, then this explanation doesn't work.

Fravor also said that the tic tac was ping-ponging randomly when he first noticed it, which reminded me of someone who saw planet Venus ping-ponging randomly due to the saccade of his own eyes, in the absence of a stationary background for reference.

The Nimitz pilot report gave a different version of the initial sighting, where "The object appeared to travel at a speed of approximately 300 to 500 knots in a straight line" instead of ping-ponging, but this version is not consistent with a balloon either, and no more reliable than Fravor's version.
 

div

New Member
speed of approximately 300 to 500 knots in a straight line" instead of ping-ponging, but this version is not consistent with a balloon either, and no more reliable than Fravor's version.

with slight turns of plane to left/right, balloon would appear moving to another direction(if it's at half way to surface)
 
Last edited:

Nesper

New Member
I think the parallax and 0.5 rather than 1 mile away balloon does answer much of Fravor's observations. I'm still puzzled by the wing man's statement as to what she observed from the higher altitude, where there would not be much parallax:

“It was so unpredictable—high G, rapid velocity, rapid acceleration. So you’re wondering: How can I possibly fight this?”
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The Nimitz pilot report gave a different version of the initial sighting, where "The object appeared to travel at a speed of approximately 300 to 500 knots in a straight line" instead of ping-ponging, but this version is not consistent with a balloon either, and no more reliable than Fravor's version.
Yeah, that really has very few points of detailed correlation (which is what I was originally trying to figure out here - do the stories match?). After her rather incredible set of mental gymnastics imagining what they might be flying towards, she continues (or rather the interviewer paraphrases) in a very detail-lacking manner compared to Fravor, but with enough detail that you can tell it's not the same account AT ALL.


Both F-18s assumed combat formation enroute to the new location. “Source” and OK-1’s aircraft was approximately .3 NM behind OK-2 and OK-3’s aircraft and both F-18s proceeded East [Fravor: "we’re still heading West"] at an altitude of approximately 10,000 to 20,000 feet towards San Clemente Island.
...
Approximately two seconds after noticing the unusual water disturbance, “Source” described witnessing a small, unidentified aerial system (UAS) cross over the turbulent area of water. The unidentified object was elongated, approximately 30 to 40 feet in length, white in color, and described resembling a ‘tic-tac candy mint. [Fravor:"Just forward of the wing line is this little white thing, which looks like a tic-tac, which is why we call it the tic-tac, "]The object had no distinguishable control surfaces, was uniformly smooth, with no windows. doors, or lights visible. The object was opaque with a solid, definable edge. The object did not appear to emit any noticeable light or radiation from its surface nor did it have any noticeable exhaust trail. The object traveled from left to right over the disturbed water at an altitude of approximately 1000 to 3000 feet. The object appeared to travel at a speed of approximately 300 to 500 knots in a straight line. ... [Fravor:"and it’s moving around erratically."

OK-2 [Fravor] conducted an aggressive banking maneuver and dropped his aircraft while turning at the same time in order to catch up with the object [Fravor: "I started an easy descent"]. As OK-2 conducted the maneuver, “Source” noticed the object immediately respond to OK-2’s change of direction [Fravor: "it’s just kind of randomly moving around this vehicle. And it’s basically forward of the right wing by the cockpit and then it goes back and it’s kind of moving around like it was checking it out. "]. (“Source” Comment – the UFO turned on [Fravor] and ______ as if it knew or somehow anticipated what they were going to do and even pointed towards them! I was worried for them because whatever this was. [Fravor] and ______ didn’t stand a chance against it! There is no way any aircraft or missile that I know of could conduct maneuvers like what we saw that day.) “Source” indicated that the object began to make deliberate changes in its altitude and angle in response to OK-2’s aircraft in a manner that seemed to defy the laws of flight physics. [Fravor: " It kind of recognizes that we’re there and it starts to mirror us."] The object instantaneously but in a controlled, intelligent manner ‘tumbled” into nonsensical angles, that made any engagement by the F-18 impossible [Fravor: "So I’m still coming down nice and easy and I’m watching this thing. Because it’s just kind of watching us and following."]. OK-2 and OK-3 were approximately 1000 to 3000 feet from the object when the object turned and “pointed at them”. OK-2 conducted one or two evasive turns in their F-18 [Fravor: "He’s at the 3 o’clock position and I go, “well the only way I might get this is to do an aggressive out-of-play maneuver”. So I dump the nose and I go from the 9 o’clock through the vertical down, to go across to the 3 o’clock. "] but the object appeared to maintain positive and dominant control of the airspace [Fravor: It starts to accelerate. It has an incredible rate of acceleration. And it takes off and it goes south. And it takes off like nothing I’ve ever seen. It literally is one minute it’s there and the next minute it’s like, poof, and it’s gone."].

At no time during the incident did either F-18 have radar contact with the object; however, OK-6 and the female air controller confirmed radar contact. After approximately 8 to 10 seconds, both “Source” and OK-2 lost visual contact with the object. When “Source” looked back at the area where the ocean was disturbed, the water was again smooth and calm with no signs of anything submerging. (Field Comment – “Source” used a pen to describe how the object behaved when OK-2 and OK-3 approached it. “Source” also drew a picture of the incident, see attachment.)
Content from External Source
And where is that picture? It really seems, from this account alone, like the interviewer is paraphrasing the witness statements. There's very little verbatim from "source" (the Female pilot).

However, she did give a version of the story on the History Channel. At the start of Episode 1 of "Unidentified"1. Choppy editing prevents forming an accurate timeline from her statement, and there's even LESS detail than in the paraphrased report. About the most substantive things she says is:

"This object seemed to recognize we were there and went from this very low altitude to maneuvering in an erratic, very rapid manner."
Content from External Source
Clearly their stories do not match.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
What other stories are there? There's the "Unofficial CVW-11 Air Wing 11 Event Summary of Nov 14 2004"
https://thenimitzencounters.com/201...-11-air-wing-11-event-summary-of-nov-14-2004/


FAST EAGLES 110/100 UPON TAKE OFF WERE VECTORED BY PRINCETON AND BANGER (1410L) TO INTERCEPT UNID CONTACT AT 160@40NM (N3050.8 W11746.9) (NIMITZ N3129.3 W11752.8). PRINCETON INFORMED FAST EAGLES THAT THE CONTACT WAS MOVING AT 100 KTS @ 25KFT ASL.
FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.
WHILE DESCENDING FROM 24K FT TO GAIN A BETTER VIEW OF THE UNID CONTACT IN THE WATER, FAST EAGLE 110 SIGHTED AN AIRBORNE CONTACT WHICH APPEARED TO BE CAPSULE SHAPED (WINGLESS, MOBILE, WHITE, OBLONG PILL SHAPED, 25-30 FEET IN LENGTH, NO VISIBLE MARKINGS AND NO GLASS) 5NM WEST FROM POSITION OF UNID OBJECT IN WATER.
CAPSULE (ALT 4K FT AT COURSE 300) PASSED UNDER FAST EAGLE 110 (ALT 16KFT). FAST EAGLE 110 BEGAN TURN TO ACQUIRE CAPSULE. WHILE 110 WAS DESCENDING AND TURNING, CAPSULE BEGAN CLIMBING AND TURNED INSIDE OF FAST EAGLE’S TURN
RADIUS. PILOT ESTIMATED THAT CAPSULE ACHIEVED 600-700 KTS. FAST EAGLE 110 COULD NOT KEEP UP WITH THE RATE OF TURN AND THE GAIN OF ALTITUDE BY THE CAPSULE. 110 LOST VISUAL ID OF CAPSULE IN HAZE.
LAST VISUAL CONTACT HAD CAPSULE AT 14KFT HEADING DUE EAST.
NEITHER FAST EAGLES 110 OR 100 COULD ACHIEVE RADAR LOCK OR ANY OTHER MEANS OF POSITIVE ID. FAST EAGLE 100 WAS FLYING HIGH COVER AND SAW THE ENGAGEMENT BY FAST EAGLE 110. FAST EAGLE 100 CONFIRMS 110 VISUAL ID; 100 LOST CONTACT IN HAZE AS WELL.
Content from External Source
"UNID CONTACT AT 160@40NM (N3050.8 W11746.9) (NIMITZ N3129.3 W11752.8)" translates to (I think):

Unidentified contact on a heading of 160°, 40 nautical miles away at lat/lon 30° 50.8', -117° 46.0'. The USS Nimitz was at 31° 29.3', -117° 52.8'

Those locations:

Metabunk 2019-10-05 07-52-29.jpg

So Fravor says quite specifically:

In this event we rendezvous at the CAP (Combat Air Patrol) so we’re gonna come off the aircraft carrier we’re gonna climb up to 20,000 feet. We’re going to go to a point about 40 miles south. We’re gonna hold and wait for the other airplane. ... they gave us a vector 270, which means go west. ... we start tracking out to the west, they’re calling, “Hey 30 miles”. And they’re giving us what’s called BRA, it’s bearing, range and altitude. So they’re saying, “Hey contact is 270, 30, 20,000”, So they start going, “Hey 20 miles”,
Content from External Source
The initial unknown contact given by this report is literally a point about 40 miles south (assuming everyone talking nautical miles here). This is the CAP point that Fravor, by his own account is already at.

Not much else of detail, but:
LAST VISUAL CONTACT HAD CAPSULE AT 14KFT HEADING DUE EAST.
Content from External Source
But Fravor:
And it takes off and it goes south.
Content from External Source
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
On "Unidentified", Fravor describes the first moment he notices the TicTac. As he does this, he seems to mime looking down about 30-40° and about due right.

Metabunk 2019-10-05 08-51-37.jpg

Also there, they seem to give a different contact point:
Metabunk 2019-10-05 08-54-36.jpg
Metabunk 2019-10-05 08-55-42.jpg
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
At around 14:30, he says: "We start a right hand turn, and we're going from a clock code, the object is in the middle of the clock, and we're at six o'clock and we are going around in a circle. We get to around 9 o'clock and it's still doing it's little thing moving around this disturbance in the water."

There's more differences, later....
 

Spectrar Ghost

Senior Member.
And so by this time we passed by it and now I’m starting a right hand turn. So we’re going from a clock-code, from six o’clock towards the 9:00 o’clock position.
Content from External Source
This description seems confused. Remember, clock position is a relative positioning. He passes the object and it’s on his six, behind him. So he starts a right hand turn to come around for another pass. That should move the object to his right, which is toward his three o’clock, not his nine.

The object and his aircraft are described at various clock positions throughout, which doesn’t make sense from how I’ve always heard it used.
 

Spectrar Ghost

Senior Member.
Okay, so it sort of makes sense if he’s talking about relative positions within an area of engagement, with the object’s initial position as the origin. Passing it on a line from 12 to 6, Turing right towards nine. But it doesn’t make sense to me that he’d use that system instead of cardinal directions, since I’m not sure how he determined the objects initial absolute heading and how he maintained a conceptual grasp on where it moved relative to initial position. It is also easy to confuse with the normal relative position usage.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Coincidentally Fravor was on Joe Rogan today for an extended interview . Let's see if if there's some new useful details (or differences) here.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ

He starts out agains saying the TicTac is in the center of the circle, which is a little confusing, as later it's at clock positions.

at around 12:05, he says they go all the way around the circle to 8 o'clock before he cuts across.

Metabunk 2019-10-05 16-20-31.jpg

26:30: Fravor: "There's rumors that this video is 10 minutes long. No, what you are looking at is the entire video"

28:23 - making the same old mistake about it shooting off at the end of the video when it's just the change in zoom level and the lack of tracking.

40:40 Mentions "Aura"

49:05 Discusses how he used to silently buzz campers with his lights off to make them think they saw a UFO

At 55:48, Corbell mocks a few theories from debunkers, Joe asks if he means Mick West.

1:06:10 - Again says the video is not ten minutes long, says that's "bullshit" some guy made up. But he has seen "the radar tapes." Says the "men in black" thing seems unlikely.

1:13:45 - Joe talks about people trying too hard to explain things away. Says it's a lazy way to look at things. Mental gymnastics to explain the Nimitz video fly-off

1:46:58 - Fravor describes the Tic-Tac moving, said it knew they were there, jammed the radar.

Auto Transcript: https://podscribe.app/feeds/http-jo...rss/episodes/d9e17c921e16426f9a7ed615813e6b65
 

Attachments

  • Joe Rogan Experience #1361 - Cmdr. David Fravor & Jermey Corbell.txt
    224.6 KB · Views: 615
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Comparing accounts. Supposedly there are four matching accounts. There's

  • Pilot David Fravor (OK-2) aka "Sex"
  • WSO OK-3 (Fravor's WSO)
  • Female pilot "Source" [Alex Deitrich]
  • WSO Jim/James Slaight (OK-1) aka "Clean"
We have seem Fravor and Source's account, and some variants. But what about WSO OK-3, and Slaight?

Slaight (Source's WSO) gave an interview here with a VERY vague account:
Metabunk 2019-10-06 16-56-34.jpg
Source: https://youtu.be/AuBIBCW5P98?t=79

"Out flying off of the Nimitiz, doing a standard training op, took a vector, headed east towards, sort of heading towards Mexico or the San Diego area. As we approached and we were looking around we noticed down below, just above the surface of the water, was a, really what is best described as a tic-tac.
...
My initial though was that maybe it was a submarine and it had launched a missile. "
Content from External Source
(The host then shows the wrong video and says it does not look like a missile. Nobody corrects him. Fravor does not say they were actually heading West)


I can't find any more.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Then there's also the CVW-11 Event Summary, supposedly written just after the event. during a 2009 investigation.


CVW-11 EVENT SUMMARY
14 NOVEMBER 04
EVENT SUMMARY
EVENT 3
Event
Side
Narrative
ADEX
3A1,3C1,
3D2
110/100, 303/305, 401

FAST EAGLES 110/100 UPON TAKE OFF WERE VECTORED BY PRINCETON AND BANGER (1410L) TO
INTERCEPT UNID CONTACT AT 160@40NM (N3050.8 W11746.9) (NIMITZ N3129.3 W11752.8).
PRINCETON INFORMED FAST EAGLES THAT THE CONTACT WAS MOVING AT 100 KTS @ 25KFT ASL.

FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY
PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID
OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT
DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS
MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.

WHILE DESCENDING FROM 24K FT TO GAIN A BETTER VIEW OF THE UNID CONTACT IN THE WATER,
FAST EAGLE 110 SIGHTED AN AIRBORNE CONTACT WHICH APPEARED TO BE CAPSULE SHAPED
(WINGLESS, MOBILE, WHITE, OBLONG PILL SHAPED, 25-30 FEET IN LENGTH, NO VISIBLE
MARKINGS AND NO GLASS) 5NM WEST FROM POSITION OF UNID OBJECT IN WATER.

CAPSULE (ALT 4K FT AT COURSE 300) PASSED UNDER FAST EAGLE 110 (ALT 16KFT). FAST EAGLE
110 BEGAN TURN TO ACQUIRE CAPSULE. WHILE 110 WAS DESCENDING AND TURNING, CAPSULE
BEGAN CLIMBING AND TURNED INSIDE OF FAST EAGLE’S TURN RADIUS. PILOT ESTIMATED THAT
CAPSULE ACHIEVED 600-700 KTS
. FAST EAGLE 110 COULD NOT KEEP UP WITH THE RATE OF TURN
AND THE GAIN OF ALTITUDE BY THE CAPSULE. 110 LOST VISUAL ID OF CAPSULE IN HAZE.
LAST VISUAL CONTACT HAD CAPSULE AT 14KFT HEADING DUE EAST.


NEITHER FAST EAGLES 110 OR 100 COULD ACHIEVE RADAR LOCK OR ANY OTHER MEANS OF
POSITIVE ID. FAST EAGLE 100 WAS FLYING HIGH COVER AND SAW THE ENGAGEMENT BY FAST
EAGLE 110. FAST EAGLE 100 CONFIRMS 110 VISUAL ID; 100 LOST CONTACT IN HAZE AS WELL.
Content from External Source
This all seems totally different.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Seems like I'm duplicating work again:
https://parabunk.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-2004-uss-nimitz-tic-tac-ufo.html
The 2004 USS Nimitz Tic Tac Incident is arguably the most significant recent UFO sighting. So far it has also remained unexplained. But is that because of known facts that can't be explained, or because we don't actually know which information is accurate and what needs to be explained in the first place?

This analysis of the various witness accounts, interviews and reports is part of an ongoing effort to figure out what actually happened and which information can be trusted. I have already analyzed the FLIR video and the executive report in more detail here.

The idea here is to compare how the sources report certain key details and to estimate the reliability of the information based on how they agree and disagree, and to consider which of the sources would most likely contain the most reliable and original information.
Content from External Source
This contains a very good breakdown of the sources and their differences.
 

Agent K

Senior Member
26:30: Fravor: "There's rumors that this video is 10 minutes long. No, what you are looking at is the entire video"

28:23 - making the same old mistake about it shooting off at the end of the video when it's just the change in zoom level and the lack of tracking.

40:40 Mentions "Aura"

49:05 Discusses how he used to silently buzz campers with his lights off to make them think they saw a UFO

At 55:48, Corbell mocks a few theories from debunkers, Joe asks if he means Mick West.

1:06:10 - Again says the video is not ten minutes long, says that's "bullshit" some guy made up. But he has seen "the radar tapes." Says the "men in black" thing seems unlikely.

1:13:45 - Joe talks about people trying too hard to explain things away. Says it's a lazy way to look at things. Mental gymnastics to explain the Nimitz video fly-off

1:46:58 - Fravor describes the Tic-Tac moving, said it knew they were there, jammed the radar.

As I expected, nobody saw the tic tac moving at hypersonic speed. They saw it disappear, and then the USS Princeton's radar saw something appear at the CAP point, according to Fravor.

12:42 - As I'm pulling up, it starts to cross my nose, and it starts to accelerate, and within about less than a second, as I start to pull nose on to it, and it crosses right in front of me, it just goes poof and it's gone. So I call the other airplane, and I said, "You guys see that thing?" And they're like, "Sir, it's gone. We don't see it at all."

13:45 - And they didn't track it. It just appeared. It just shows back up on the radar, and they go, "It's here."

30:35 - And it gets in front of me and just disappears... The thing that we saw disappeared in a second. Just gone... The other airplane is above me looking down, and when it disappeared I said, "Do you guys see it?" And they said, "No, it's gone." It just literally was, "poof."
 

Agent K

Senior Member
Yeah, that really has very few points of detailed correlation (which is what I was originally trying to figure out here - do the stories match?). After her rather incredible set of mental gymnastics imagining what they might be flying towards, she continues (or rather the interviewer paraphrases) in a very detail-lacking manner compared to Fravor, but with enough detail that you can tell it's not the same account AT ALL.

One more comparison between the Nimitz report and Fravor's interview with Joe Rogan.

Nimitz report - "The object instantaneously but in a controlled, intelligent manner 'tumbled' into nonsensical angles, that made any engagement by the F-18 impossible."

Fravor's interview at 1:00:57 - "There's a lot of stuff [being claimed] that it flew around and it came around me. It didn't do any of that stuff. The story that I gave you is just relatively benign."

Immediately prior to this at 1:00:20, Fravor talks about his wingman
You know, some people get very emotional when you talk about it. For me it was like 'meh', you know, I didn't, you know. For her, when you talk to her, she has a disdain for some of the leadership that didn't tell us that these things were out there... No one knew these things existed besides the radar operators, and the radar operators didn't know what they were. They just knew they were seeing blips.
Content from External Source
 
Last edited:

gtoffo

Active Member
Then he decides to fly across. He says: "I’m probably about 60 degrees nose low a little." What is that? 60 degrees down? Why would he do that if " it’s probably about maybe 3,000 feet below us and about a mile across the circle." That's only 28 degrees down.

That's absolutely normal. To "cut across" while in a bank with a more manoeuvrable opponent the most effective/aggressive manoeuvre would be to increase angle of bank to invert and drop the nose pulling hard on the stick as gravity and lift will assist you to turn faster.

Something like a low speed Yo-yo manoeuvre which is a basic fighter manoeuvre when circling with a more agile opponent. Perfectly expected that Fravor would take that action when he notices the opponent mirroring him. You will loose altitude compared to the target but that is necessary to "cut the circle" and isn't dictated by where the target is. You go down and then back up just like a yoyo.

Fighter instinct would have dictated that behaviour to avoid ending up in a defensive position with the opponent behind him (remember your guns point forwards and not backwards). Absolutely normal and consistent with the description of the events.


Great explanation of the Low Yo Yo here: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUgJ_37KJgg
 
Last edited:

gtoffo

Active Member
Comparing accounts. Supposedly there are four matching accounts. There's
  • Pilot David Fravor (OK-2) aka "Sex"
  • WSO OK-3, aka "Noodle"
  • Female pilot "Source"
  • WSO Jim/James Slaight (OK-1) aka "Clean"

We also have the CO of Marine Hornet squadron VMFA-232, Lieutenant Colonel “Cheeks” Kurth that was in a single seater F-18 and saw the water disturbance. (not the tic-tac?) Source: https://sofrep.com/fightersweep/x-files-edition/

As Cheeks approached the spot he was being vectored to, Princeton advised him to stay above 10K as the section of Super Hornets were approaching the target. His radar picked up the FASTEAGLE two-ship, but no other contacts. A moment later Princeton directed him to “skip it” and return to the ship. Since he was so close, he decided to fly over the action and sneak a peek.

The sea was calm, almost glassy smooth and it was late morning on a beautiful SoCal day. Perfect conditions. As Cheeks flew over the spot he saw a disturbance on the surface of the ocean. A round section of turbulent water about 50-100 meters in diameter. It was the only area and type of what he called, “whitewater” describing that it looked as if there was something below the surface like a shoal or what he’d heard a ship sinking rapidly would look like.

He overflew the disturbance and circled back in the direction of Nimitz without ever seeing what caused the water to froth. As he turned away, which happened to be the moment the Super Hornets converged on the location, the whitewater cleared and the ocean surface returned to its smooth state. The spot of the previous disturbance was completely indiscernible.
Content from External Source

Also: an E-2 Hawkeye was in the air that day and some reports indicate they saw the object. That would be 5 additional potential witnesses but I don't think any of them is on the record.

However last month when I called Dave to refresh my memory before sitting down to write this bizarre encounter, he informed me that the video had been removed from YouTube. He told me that a government agency with a three letter identifier had recently conducted an investigation into the AAVs and had exhaustively interviewed all parties involved.

All of the seven flight crew, including 6 aircrew from VFA-41 and Cheeks from VMFA-232. The Fire Control Officer and Senior Chief from Princeton, and the radar operator on the E-2. They even queried the crew of the USS Louisville, a Los Angeles-class Fast-Attack submarine that was in the area as part of the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group who reported there were no unidentified sonar contacts or strange underwater noises on that day.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mendel

Senior Member.

PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.
Content from External Source
That makes no sense to me. Common airliners range from ~120ft (A320, B737) to ~240ft (A380, B777). Many submarines are much larger than that.
image.jpeg
 
Last edited:

gtoffo

Active Member
That makes no sense to me. Common airliners range from ~120ft (A320, B737) to ~240ft (A380, B777). Many submarines are much larger than that.
Fravor:
"It's about the size of a 737, has the shape of a cross and is pointing to the east"
Minute 9 here (Fravor on Joe Rogan):
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eco2s3-0zsQ

I think he meant subs don't have a "cross" profile. No wings. Initially the pilots interpreted this as an airliner sinking for that reason.

Also interesting from my quote above:
They even queried the crew of the USS Louisville, a Los Angeles-class Fast-Attack submarine that was in the area as part of the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group who reported there were no unidentified sonar contacts or strange underwater noises on that day.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
I think he meant subs don't have a "cross" profile. No wings.
A small submarine with wings:
Article:
Deepflight-Submarine-Super-Falcon-Mark-II-2.jpg
The Deepflight Super Falcon Mark II is a 17-foot long two-seater submarine, each seat with its own bubble-glass cockpit for an unparalleled immersive experience. It comes with a set of wings on the side and stabilizers in the rear which make it a very agile vessel and can explore the underwater world to a depth of 400 feet.

A huge submarine with wings that doesn't exist yet:
Article:
Covert shores pic-1--25093.jpg
The vessel will be the largest civilian submersible ever constructed and will be fuelled by a nuclear reactor.
Construction is due to begin in 2020.
It is designed to conduct surveys using very low frequency active sonar which can penetrate the sea floor.
It has been compared by one expert to the Airbus A380, the world's largest passenger airliner, which is roughly half its size.
This is largely due to the presence of two sets of wing-like sonar receivers that will retract into the ship's hull.
This will allow the Arctic Research Submarine to make images of its surroundings in every direction, according to reports in Popular Mechanics.

I mujst admit I have no idea what kind of submarine that could have been in that observation, but I also don't know much about ocean wave physics or what kinds of things submarines can deploy that could look like wings.

I also think that it's tough to judge the size of anything on the ocean when you don't have a reference to go by; and in fact, the size of that water effect being identified with an airliner could have influenced the perceived size of the unidentified object.
 

gtoffo

Active Member
I also think that it's tough to judge the size of anything on the ocean when you don't have a reference to go by; and in fact, the size of that water effect being identified with an airliner could have influenced the perceived size of the unidentified object.

Absolutely, but once again: remember those are professionals trained exactly at that. They are Navy pilots flying over water most of their adult life and estimating distance and size very accurately is a pretty basic and required skill for their line of work. Of course they make mistakes as they are human but it isn't very probable.

Regarding the sub: the attack submarine in the area reported no sonar tracks. So now we need both a UAV with next gen tech and a submarine with next gen tech to reconcile the observations.

A solution that would not require sonar tracks would be that the object was creating some kind of rotor/jet wash in the water or affecting the surface in some way causing it to bubble. But nothing was actually in the water.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
They are Navy pilots flying over water most of their adult life and estimating distance and size very accurately is a pretty basic and required skill for their line of work.

If they don't know what the object is or how it is moving, then how can they tell how far away it is and how big it is?

That's not something you can train to do. It's just impossible.

Here's two different tic-tac models hanging in my room. Which one is bigger? Which one is closer?
Metabunk 2020-05-27 09-50-27.jpg
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
Also: an E-2 Hawkeye was in the air that day and some reports indicate they saw the object. That would be 5 additional potential witnesses but I don't think any of them is on the record.

That Tic-tac sighting by the E-2 Hawkeye is claimed by US Navy Avionics Technician Patrick Hughes. Hughes was interviewed by Luis Elizondo on Unidentified: Inside America's UFO Investigation - The UFO Cover-up (Series 2, Episode 2). Hughes claims that he later talked to one of the Hawkeye crew members and said that the Tic-tac came up close in formation and that all 5 guys on onboard seen it. Elizondo reveals that when he was at AATIP he had no knowledge of the Hawkeye crewmembers sighting. Hughes also reveals to Elizondo that what he believes was two US Air Force personnel in flight suits confiscated the Hawkeye hard drives. Hughes claims that this hard drive confiscation took place approximately 30 minutes after he had removed the drives from the aircraft. Hughes also claims that he attempted to log the handover in a log book, but one of the US Air Force personnel stopped him and took them away without any log in or receipt.
 

Max Phalange

Active Member
So this guy did an animation of the the Tic Tac and I think he is trying to say it moves as it did because of Parallax etc.
But I'm totally confused TBH, maybe someone can take a look and put into words what he is trying to show, because my brain is not getting it

Basically, the idea is that the object was smaller than Fravor perceived it, so was also closer than he perceived it to be. When he began circling the object, which was more-or-less stationary, this gave him the impression that it was moving in the opposite direction around the perimeter of the circle his aircraft was describing.

I think Mick may have made a video specifically about this, but you can get the general gist from this one: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRd1RY2PuvA


On top of that, when Fravor turned to fly directly toward the object he thought was far away, it was actually a lot closer than he expected and he soon flew past it. From his perspective, Fravor thought it was zooming toward him suddenly.

This all makes perfect sense, but is invalidated if Dietrich, from the high-cover position, says she witnessed the same thing Fravor saw. The perspective trick only works if you're in the right place. That's why it's frustrating that on 60 Minutes she just said "it vanished", or words to that effect.
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
Basically, the idea is that the object was smaller than Fravor perceived it, so was also closer than he perceived it to be. When he began circling the object, which was more-or-less stationary, this gave him the impression that it was moving in the opposite direction around the perimeter of the circle his aircraft was describing.

I think Mick may have made a video specifically about this, but you can get the general gist from this one:


On top of that, when Fravor turned to fly directly toward the object he thought was far away, it was actually a lot closer than he expected and he soon flew past it. From his perspective, Fravor thought it was zooming toward him suddenly.

This all makes perfect sense, but is invalidated if Dietrich, from the high-cover position, says she witnessed the same thing Fravor saw. The perspective trick only works if you're in the right place. That's why it's frustrating that on 60 Minutes she just said "it vanished", or words to that effect.

Thanks, but I got the impression he said it explained the ping ponging motion, but I cannot see how
 

Alphadunk

Active Member
In the Reddit thread the OP answered questions about the ping ponging thusly:
Notice in the video that it is actually ping pong-ing in the green reference square. A theory would be that they believe the object was on the surface of the water, when it was in fact 1,000-2000ft up. They made this assumption at 20,000ft which even Fravor says is tricky to do (the water is the same from 20,000ft vs 2,000ft). That would make it appear to dart around strangely.

This doesn't explain the movement, it just changes the perceived degree to which it was moving. I've never seen anyone really come up with a good explanation for the erratic bouncing movement the two pilots and WSO claim to have witnessed.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
This doesn't explain the movement, it just changes the perceived degree to which it was moving. I've never seen anyone really come up with a good explanation for the erratic bouncing movement the two pilots and WSO claim to have witnessed.
tethered balloon in turbulent wind?
 

JMartJr

Senior Member
This doesn't explain the movement, it just changes the perceived degree to which it was moving. I've never seen anyone really come up with a good explanation for the erratic bouncing movement the two pilots and WSO claim to have witnessed.
Mistakes in observation, compounded by being in the middle of a UFO flap?
 

jackfrostvc

Active Member
In the Reddit thread the OP answered questions about the ping ponging thusly:


This doesn't explain the movement, it just changes the perceived degree to which it was moving. I've never seen anyone really come up with a good explanation for the erratic bouncing movement the two pilots and WSO claim to have witnessed.

From what I can tell reading the comments, is that he is saying the ping ponging effect occurs as a combination of the object rising into the air and parrallax seen from Fravor circling, It's both those combined that cause the ping ponging
 

Max Phalange

Active Member
From what I can tell reading the comments, is that he is saying the ping ponging effect occurs as a combination of the object rising into the air and parrallax seen from Fravor circling, It's both those combined that cause the ping ponging
That doesn't seem to add up. Linear motion on the part of the object and observer wouldn't result in apparent abrupt changes of direction.
 
Top