Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
I get it. Obscure reference.Pelicanist!
I get it. Obscure reference.Pelicanist!
External Quote:The aircraft's exact location and heading (compass direction) during the recording are unknown.
Also no mention of the range and how it was measured.External Quote:The sensor pod display shows most of these values as integers, limiting the fidelity of the initial calculations.1
Additionally they provide this map this might be the approximate actual location as it is in the area near the Jacksonville naval air station the FA/18's operated from.
View attachment 77118
They definitely should have shown error bars on their graphs. 2.5 mph above wind speed is, I would guess, well within the margin of error.So there's absolutely no way they can produce detailed speeds like they've done here, I'm sorry but AARO is just poor.
The most logical thing is a balloon at wind speed, but they seemingly preclude it then mention it as a possibility, far more likely it's a balloon than a bird or a drone, given the probable RADAR return for range.
You can get these numbers from a metereological model such as earth.nullschool.net . They're approximate, as stated.So there's absolutely no way they can produce detailed speeds like they've done here, I'm sorry but AARO is just poor.
Which is honestly what I would personally expect from a weird video nearly a decade old recorded during training, but I also have no experience in data storing for militaries.External Quote:
The only data available to AARO from the "Go Fast" event were from a compressed Windows Media File (.wmv) [ref 4]. The recording's metadata does not contain the F/A-18's georeferenced position and heading, which are necessary to determine the UAP's absolute position and flight characteristics.
Is it? If I were out at sea I'd expect to see birds far more often than balloons.So there's absolutely no way they can produce detailed speeds like they've done here, I'm sorry but AARO is just poor.
The most logical thing is a balloon at wind speed, but they seemingly preclude it then mention it as a possibility, far more likely it's a balloon than a bird or a drone, given the probable RADAR return for range.
Is your complaint about the accuracy, or the precision? I agree that they should state their error bars more clearly, and why they are what they claim, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with expected errors not just being in the final significant digit; in physics, they can sometimes cover every digit. There's no way round the issue - they're adding vectors with no way of knowing if they reinforce, are perpendicular, or cancel.So there's absolutely no way they can produce detailed speeds like they've done here, I'm sorry but AARO is just poor.
The most logical thing is a balloon at wind speed, but they seemingly preclude it then mention it as a possibility, far more likely it's a balloon than a bird or a drone, given the probable RADAR return for range.
As a relevant example, AARO mentions
Which is honestly what I would personally expect from a weird video nearly a decade old recorded during training, but I also have no experience in data storing for militaries.External Quote:
The only data available to AARO from the "Go Fast" event were from a compressed Windows Media File (.wmv) [ref 4]. The recording's metadata does not contain the F/A-18's georeferenced position and heading, which are necessary to determine the UAP's absolute position and flight characteristics.
Source: https://law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3373#fExternal Quote:The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, shall ensure that each element of the intelligence community with data relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena makes such data available immediately to the Office.
Is the range from RADAR? If not how is the range worked out? Would a bird or a drone be tracked by the radar to the level of being able to provide a range, if the range is not from radar where is it from, it's a key clue/question that helps solve the problem. It seems highly unlikely if it's a drone it's a non military drone at 13,000 feet out over the ocean back in 2014.
External Quote:To estimate the UAP speed, the first step was to determine its location at two positions separated
by a known time period. For this, the range to the target must be known. From 4232 seconds
until the end of the video, the tracker acquired a target track on the UAP, enabling the range to
be reported. Within this portion AARO focused its analysis on a 13-second excerpt from the
footage between 4239 seconds ("t1") and 4252 seconds ("t2"). AARO selected this segment
because, between t1 and t2, the aircraft's bank angle, altitude, and airspeed remained nearly
constant. This simplified the estimation of the F/A-18 flight characteristics due to the reduced
number of variables. At t1, the F/A-18's range to the UAP was 4.0 NM and closed in range to
3.4 NM at t2
"Withholding" data is one thing; not knowing you have relevant information from 2015 stashed in a pile of hard drives in some warehouse is another.Per 50 U.S. Code § 3373(f)(1)(A) they should have access to any other relevant data, if such were to exist:
Source: https://law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3373#fExternal Quote:The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, shall ensure that each element of the intelligence community with data relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena makes such data available immediately to the Office.
So if more data about this case does exist someone would have to be breaking the law by withholding it from AARO.
That's a fair point. In some other cases, some of the people involved have claimed that hard drives or data collection devices were confiscated after the incident. I don't recall hearing that about this case, but I could be misremembering."Withholding" data is one thing; not knowing you have relevant information from 2015 stashed in a pile of hard drives in some warehouse is another.
Just prior to resigning Lue Elizondo submitted a DD Form 1910 requesting three videos be cleared for release, which he titled as "GoFast"; "Gimble"; "FLIR". The same three videos that were given to Chris Mellon by Elizondo and then leaked to The New York Times in 2017.I do wonder what level of curiousity needs to be satisfied? How much time and government money is it worth trying to narrow down the low information zone on cases like this? (I do wonder what process lead to the creation of this WMV file and who named it.)
Source: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PD...st_Case_Resolution_Card_Methodology_Final.pdfExternal Quote:Video footage collected via military sensors, like the AN/ASQ, are not required to collect Full-Motion Video (FMV) or other Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) products. Therefore, it is not intended to support intelligence or other rigorous analysis. Thus, video footage from these platforms often contains compression artifacts or lacks the necessary metadata to conduct an exhaustive analysis.
No, it very much isn't that, what is needed is HOW did the jet's systems know the range the calculations are based on.Isn't that what they are specifying here? Page 6 of the report:
Interesting, but I don't think it answers the question I meant to ask. There was some process by which the footage was extracted from the jet's systems for review; it sounds like the incident was flagged for some sort of review and analysis. (How much or how little military assessment was done is unknown; I see the AARO report on GoFAST says the video is all the data they have.)That's a fair point. In some other cases, some of the people involved have claimed that hard drives or data collection devices were confiscated after the incident. I don't recall hearing that about this case, but I could be misremembering.
Just prior to resigning Lue Elizondo submitted a DD Form 1910 requesting three videos be cleared for release, which he titled as "GoFast"; "Gimble"; "FLIR". The same three videos that were given to Chris Mellon by Elizondo and then leaked to The New York Times in 2017.
https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/inside-the-pentagons-release-of-three-ufo-videos/