GIMBAL Video: Simulating the ATFLIR Tracking and Gimbal Rotation

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Let me know what you think of this 3D version of the Gimbal video.
Interesting. Is the movement of the glare image linked to the pod though? Seems like the pod rotation is more continuous.

I've just started playing the with Blender again, trying to get some virtual versions of my backyard experiments
 

Vizee

New Member
Interesting. Is the movement of the glare image linked to the pod though? Seems like the pod rotation is more continuous.

So for this first version I have manually keyframed the pod to look two degrees below the horizon and to the heading angle given in the FLIR video.

I found it pretty interesting how given just those two inputs the rotation of the pod lense starts to line up with the video. From here we can add in more variables that could account for the difference between the FLIR video and the 3D model. Some things I can think of that would change the way gimbal moves are the alignment of the pod to the aircraft, turbulence in the pitch and yaw axis, and the true angle of attack of the aircraft.

What I think this demonstrates at the very least is how much the rotation rate of the outer lense changes as you approach 0 degrees.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
What I think this demonstrates at the very least is how much the rotation rate of the outer lense changes as you approach 0 degrees.

The system tries to minimize turns of the outer gimbals, as they are heavy, vibration-inducing, and inaccurate. So most of the time it relies on the inner gimbaled mirrors to point the line of sight. It can't avoid some turns close to 0°, but the algorithm it uses to decide when to do this is unknown.
 

Vizee

New Member
The system tries to minimize turns of the outer gimbals, as they are heavy, vibration-inducing, and inaccurate. So most of the time it relies on the inner gimbaled mirrors to point the line of sight. It can't avoid some turns close to 0°, but the algorithm it uses to decide when to do this is unknown.

This behavior actually became pretty clear when playing around in 3D. Here's the output of my tests. I think it shows where the pod is moving the outer gimbals and where it's using internal mirrors. Right now I have the pod automatically tracking an object set to follow the heading shown in the video. The "Simulated Lens Rotation" is the actual change in rotation of the gimbal lens in the normal direction facing the object, so that's how the glare would rotate in this model.

Simulated Lens Rotation vs Observed Object Rotation.png
 

Vizee

New Member
Here's a render from the simulated gimbal camera's point of view.

The animated elements in this video include:
- The relative position of the object from the aircraft using the heading value in video.
- The roll attitude of the aircraft aprox. From original video.
- The heading of the aircraft, manually keyframed to (attempt to) match the original video.

The rest is rendered as is. The glare object is an actual light emissive object and the background is a static skybox.

With this setup we may be able to determine the turn rate of the aircraft and with that the actual movement using the onscreen airspeed. This particular render should not be used for analyzing the turn rate as I have yet to determine the correct field of view for the camera. It's currently set to 6 degrees and the jet is turning at a rate of about 2 degrees per second which I got as the standard turn rate from a F-18 NATOPS manual for the indicated bank angle at the indicated true airspeed.

Overall the simulation is proving to be a pretty good resource for working with and cross checking the variables at play in the gimbal video.

I welcome all observations and inputs as I keep working on this. I personally feel all signs point to a glare but this seems be a good way to provide concrete data/visualizations that support the hypothesis.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpgmXTL9VL0
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This is great! Do you plan to do do a side-by side with an overhead view?

Maybe combine four views, the ATFLIR POV, the focus on the ATFLIR pod rotating, a follow-cam behind the jet, and an overhead view. With some kind of FOV volume indicated.

Also, maybe a simulated HD VIS mode - showing the ATFLIR's POV, but with an actual jet model at the target position. Then that overlaid with the IR simulated view.
 

Vizee

New Member
This is great! Do you plan to do do a side-by side with an overhead view?

I've been trying to figure out how to best use this sim to explain the Lens/Glare rotation without getting into anything else. We may be able to show the jet's movement but that's not what's important here.

I think at this point the glare theory is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But how do we communicate this idea? It's incredibly important to get this right because the real data clearly contradicts the professionals that are being used as witnesses in this case.

I actually believe Fravor saw something. I think he's a good pilot and squad leader. But how do we show people that what he's being led to repeat is inaccurate? I'm just conflicted on how to approach this problem.

------------------------------------
PS
I just need to scrub the Blender file of my name so I can post it. After that I'll put it out there for anyone to use and pick apart. It's not like I need absolute privacy but people seem to get very offended when you throw out alternate ideas.
 

jarlrmai

Active Member
Sorry if I missed something but how are you actually simulating the glare and and decoration mechanism in your video? I'm interested in how you did that.

I would be interesting to have a "pilot view" camera as well the pod view camera with glare.
 

Vizee

New Member
Sorry if I missed something but how are you actually simulating the glare and and decoration mechanism in your video? I'm interested in how you did that.

I would be interesting to have a "pilot view" camera as well the pod view camera with glare.

I have a virtual camera in the targeting pod following an object that emits light. The targeting camera and pod are set to track that "Target" in the same exact way the ATFLIR pod would.

The glare is an effect added directly to the pod camera in post, flaring up the bright pixels exactly as you would see in a normal camera. As with all real world physical glare artifacts that post effect follows the orientation of the glass lens of the ATFLiR pod. Finally, The entire video is rotated to match the horizon as it does in the original "UFO" video.

The more I describe this effect the more I understand why people aren't just "getting it"... It's a geometry problem and there's a bunch going on at once.
 

jarlrmai

Active Member
Are you keyframing the camera to simulate the gimbal restriction as it crossed 0 degrees? I tried to do something similar for GIMBAL in Blender but my skills were lacking. Very interested in playing with your Blender file, i did some Go Fast simulations back when we were demonstrating the parallax effect was what was causing the apparent motion in that video.

I wonder if it's possible to use Cycles and have the glare actually be created by an object in front of the camera.
 

Vizee

New Member
No the gimbal isn't keyframed. I have it using constraints to follow the object automatically. The outer gimbal axis points the best it can on the aircraft's roll axis and the inner lense points best it can after that on it's own axis. Both work together to track the object which is keyframed to follow the heading given in the original video.

I don't know if cycles creates glares automatically. I was looking at options and the fastest solution was just doing it through blender's compositor. The glare follows the lens so you can just plop it on there before the derotation and you'll get the right output. Like camera "up" always equals glare *up" so as long as your order of operations is correct then you can present the effect without actually simulating it in render.

But yeah, Blender is a mess until you know what you're doing. Even then ... It's a lot. Been messing with that program for over 15 years now...
 

jarlrmai

Active Member
I'm just thinking about if we were to do a video with a breakdown using the glare effect might be seen as "cheating"
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The more I describe this effect the more I understand why people aren't just "getting it"... It's a geometry problem and there's a bunch going on at once.
Yea, it's perfectly understandable why people don't get it. It's very unintuitive. Even with graphics programming and 3D modelling/rendering experience it can make my head hurt following the various transforms.
 

jarlrmai

Active Member
You almost need to start with showing the solving of the ATFLIR image issue (presenting a stable tracked zoomed image of a moving target filmed from a moving viewpoint to the MFD) so all the reasons for why the system is designed like that are apparent. Mick has done that in part with some of his videos, maybe a 3d recreation using F18 models etc would help.
 

Vizee

New Member
I'm just thinking about if we were to do a video with a breakdown using the glare effect might be seen as "cheating"

Yeah I'm constantly thinking about how to make sure this comes across as transparent and fair since a 3D simulation could be dismissed altogether if it seems like I just made a video to look like the gimbal video, rather than plugging in numbers and getting the results we're seeing here.

I looked at using cycles to physically simulate a glare but didn't have any luck. I'm sure it can be done but that's out of my wheelhouse. I think what's most important there is explaining how the 3D process follows the same physical rules, even if it's not a raytraced facsimile.
 

Vizee

New Member
You almost need to start with showing the solving of the ATFLIR image issue (presenting a stable tracked zoomed image of a moving target filmed from a moving viewpoint to the MFD) so all the reasons for why the system is designed like that are apparent. Mick has done that in part with some of his videos, maybe a 3d recreation using F18 models etc would help.

I think you're right on this. One of the things that threw me off while working on this was why the glare rotates counterclockwise. I even had a moment where I thought "oh we might be totally wrong". It took a few minutes but I unwrapped my brain.

So yeah it's probably going to need to be a very efficient A-Z explanation including why the video is presented to the pilots in the way that it is.
 

gtoffo

Member
Great job Vizee. Very nice model.

Does the model align with the actual video in terms of amount of rotation observed?

Your model seems to predict an almost full 180° rotation in a single continuous movement but that is not what we see.

Is the yellow line in your graph below taken from the observed motion in the video? (Does it account for the aircraft varying it's bank angle slightly?) Why doesn't it align with the red line (prediction) by almost 50%?

Thanks!

This behavior actually became pretty clear when playing around in 3D. Here's the output of my tests. I think it shows where the pod is moving the outer gimbals and where it's using internal mirrors. Right now I have the pod automatically tracking an object set to follow the heading shown in the video. The "Simulated Lens Rotation" is the actual change in rotation of the gimbal lens in the normal direction facing the object, so that's how the glare would rotate in this model.

View attachment 41628
 

Vizee

New Member
Great job Vizee. Very nice model.

Does the model align with the actual video in terms of amount of rotation observed?

Your model seems to predict an almost full 180° rotation in a single continuous movement but that is not what we see.

Is the yellow line in your graph below taken from the observed motion in the video? (Does it account for the aircraft varying it's bank angle slightly?) Why doesn't it align with the red line (prediction) by almost 50%?

Thanks!

The yellow line is the amount of rotation of the outer lens in the axis pointing at the object. If the camera was fixed to the outer lens that's how much the background/horizon would rotate over the course of the video.

We're seeing a difference because my simulation behaves as if the outer gimbal (the parts we can see moving) is used to track the object directly. In reality the actual targeting pod has a more percise internal mirror that can look up/down and left/right within the field of view of the outer gimbal's window. So what we see in that graph, especially at the end of the video, is the outer gimal moves in distinct steps to give that mirror a line of sight to the target while limiting the actual amount of time those heavy vibration inducing motors are running.
 

gtoffo

Member
The yellow line is the amount of rotation of the outer lens in the axis pointing at the object. If the camera was fixed to the outer lens that's how much the background/horizon would rotate over the course of the video.

We're seeing a difference because my simulation behaves as if the outer gimbal (the parts we can see moving) is used to track the object directly. In reality the actual targeting pod has a more percise internal mirror that can look up/down and left/right within the field of view of the outer gimbal's window. So what we see in that graph, especially at the end of the video, is the outer gimal moves in distinct steps to give that mirror a line of sight to the target while limiting the actual amount of time those heavy vibration inducing motors are running.

I see. What sources is this theory based off? Do we have proof that this is what actually happens on ATFLIR or is it just an educated guess?

Thanks
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I see. What sources is this theory based off? Do we have proof that this is what actually happens on ATFLIR or is it just an educated guess?
It's described in the patents that you saw in this thread:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/gimbal-lock-and-derotation-in-flir-atflir-systems.10792/

And specifically where I answered what looks like the same question from you:

You mean within the system there are mirrors that "point" the camera without moving the external window?

Yes, this patent describes them as "coelostat mirrors", also discusses not wanting to use the main roll axis.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US9121758


This, basically, because the patent are both not easy to read, and often have various possible embodiments.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Original Flir1, Gimbal, and Go Fast UFO "Raw" Video Files UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 33
Mick West NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 452
Mick West Why Michio Kaku is wrong about the UFO Burden of Proof & Navy Videos UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 32
Mick West TFTRH #22: Seth Shostak: SETI Senior Astronomer: ETs, UFO "Disclosure" Area 51 Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 3
Getoffthisplanet Flir1, Go Fast, Gimbal - Navy Releases New Information: Official Dates UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 9
Mick West Gimbal Lock and Derotation in FLIR/ATFLIR systems UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 29
Mick West TTSA's Form DD-1910 for FLIR, Go Fast, and Gimbal videos UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 69
Mick West The Shape and Size of Glare Around Bright Lights UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 42
Trailblazer Reutlingen Fake UFO Video 2013 UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 3
Rocky Gettysburg 'ghosts’ run across road [Windscreen smudge] General Discussion 4
D Falmouth "Shadow Creature" Video [Black Cat?] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 10
G Belarus demonstration video Current Events 2
M Fast moving object "intersecting clouds" in Hungarian YouTuber's video [Insect] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 2
U Looking for debunkings of the “Plandemic” video Coronavirus COVID-19 17
Jesse3959 Being seen from space - methods to demonstrate that sats are real and provide live video? Flat Earth 6
R Claim: Apollo 15-17 Live TV Feed - Antenna signal would be interrupted from all the violent shaking when Astronauts touch the buggy General Discussion 26
J Identifying the Mountains in JTolan's "Rocky Mountains" IR Video Flat Earth 31
Mick West Explained: RARE Video Footage of "Alien Space Craft" WATCHING ISS Astronaut! UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
Wizard Mexican UFO Video? [Oil Rigs] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
Mick West Simulating the Nimitz UFO video as a blurry plane UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 51
jarlrmai UFO video in Arizona from Reddit Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 22
Trailblazer Explained: video of concentric circular "chemtrails" (E-3 Sentry AWACS plane, Feb 1 2019) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Mick West Old USAF "UFO" Video Mentioned By Chris Mellon Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 15
mudr0 Need Debunking: Video claiming zigzaggin objects and movement prove EVA filmed in pool General Discussion 33
Ravi Utah Drone video of UFO [Probably an insect] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 126
Mick West Blowing out Candles with a Single Punch General Discussion 47
Mick West Some New-ish WTC7 Photos (and video?) Corner Damage 9/11 6
B Bob Lazar 1989 Video Analysis Method UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
deirdre Debunked: Lights chasing each other carving holes in clouds (fake video, fallstreak holes) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 17
StarGazer SpaceX Falcon 9 Captures Video of its own Contrail from Space UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 17
T FE balloon video curvature analysis using Blender Flat Earth 4
Mick West Explained: Viral Video of 787 Leaving Thick Contrails with Forced Perspective Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
Astro Debunked: Astronaut's Arm Fades During ISS Video Proving "Green Screening" Science and Pseudoscience 1
Trailblazer Jet Airways intercept video "UFO" (airliner, flight LH998 or LH66?) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 14
penk CNN Greenscreened a guy on a ship? [No] General Discussion 12
Mick West Explained: Chilean Navy "UFO" video - Aerodynamic Contrails, Flight IB6830 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 186
Mick West Debunked: Video of "Islamics Marching Through Berlin" [Biker Gangs] General Discussion 4
Mick West Close Up Videos of Contrails Forming And Evolving Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 19
M Bornong "Something Strange" - Hurriyah car bombing video seems staged General Discussion 50
Mick West P900 Plane and Contrails Photos and Video Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 17
mik Lots of wingtip vortices in a FiAF exercise demo video Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 0
Mick West Video of New Orleans Superdome Illustrating Curvature and Refraction Flat Earth 5
Clouds Givemethewillies Automated Video Tracking of Planes Tools for Investigating and Debunking 42
C Strange Flickering in Contrail Video Posted in Earlier Thread [Focussing artifacts] Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Leifer Polite video interviewing/debunking Practical Debunking 8
F Explained: Video of plane leaving "6 chemtrails, then 2" [Mixed Exhaust and Aerodynamic Contrails] Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Trailspotter Formation and Evolution of a Contrail Grid - Satellite Time-Lapse Video Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 22
SamBST Video of hot steel bending 9/11 43
Gary Cook 911 video with edited out planes. 9/11 6
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Latest posts

Top