Rare things that have been documented much better than UFOs

[Ann K]

This could also be considered a rare thing that was captured much better than UFOs, video of the outer layer apparently loose and flapping about during launch:

It looks too flexible to be steel, which I think would have broken off quickly after a few bends. Is there any rubberized layer, perhaps connecting a booster that is to be detached?

 

[Trailblazer]

It looks too flexible to be steel, which I think would have broken off quickly after a few bends. Is there any rubberized layer, perhaps connecting a booster that is to be detached?

Duct tape? It holds everything else together, after all.

 

[flarkey]

The SpaceX Starship Test Flight 7 - orbital breakup and re-entry captured from a plane...


Source: https://youtu.be/0zC0K0YZEzg?si=033anZuwTydhuLgW

And others from the ground:


Source: https://youtube.com/shorts/J9hwg-w-eL4?si=ZnWvgMBBRRkAW-Sj


Source: https://youtube.com/shorts/VXL1WBS6LBs?si=j2eEIQHKAFDD0bvC

 

[Hevach]

The flapping bit of metal (it looks like paper flapping like that but that's steel! It's flapping close to "max Q" when the aerodynamic forces on the rocket are at their peak. Less powerful rockets than Starship have had metal deform and even been torn apart by these forces) is just a thin cover over the lift/catch hardware and bump plate. It's not a structural component (I'm honestly not sure what purpose it serves, prior flights and the first stage just have those little lift pegs sticking out the whole time. I's also a long distance from where the leak was. That was at the aft, a fuel line leaked into the space between the engine plate and the bottom of the tank.

Scott Manley has a pretty deep dive into the flight and explosion:


Source: https://youtu.be/vfVm4DTv6lM


Biggest highlight is that somebody was able to match exif data from pictures of the explosion to the timeline. The rocket coasted for over three minutes after losing telemetry before what was probably the flight termination explosives destroyed it. This was done while the craft was dropping and close to reentry, if it had been fired immediately debris would have showered a much larger area. Scott Manley questions if it was even best for the FTS to fire at all, since Starship was heading well out into the Atlantic and a single object is likely less dangerous than a shower. He also notes a number of planes in the risk zone changed their routes in an abundance of caution.



Edit: also, if you've been following the test campaign since the Starhopper tests, a Starship exploding is not a particularly rare event.

 

[Ann K]

Duct tape? It holds everything else together, after all.

Ooh, I remember "green tape" circa 1965, six inches wide and very difficult to peel off a roll, that was used to hold guided missiles together. We had a roll that we ripped into narrower strips for household repairs, and many years later celebrated the fact that our marriage had lasted longer than that roll of green tape.

 

[JMartJr]

Ooh, I remember "green tape" circa 1965, six inches wide and very difficult to peel off a roll, that was used to hold guided missiles together.

Don't tell the Apollo deniers, who get all in a tizzy because tape was used in holding the kapton on the Lunar Module together, under the assumption that tape is an inferior way to hold things together in all circumstances, that all tape is cellophane adhesive tape, and that taping parts on a high-tech flying machine is just a silly idea that would never happen.

 

[Calter]

I don't feel like posting any particular footage since usually people die in them, but it's incredible how often plane crashes and collisions manage to get recorded, sometimes from multiple angles.

 

[John J.]

Being "swallowed" by a humpback whale, along with your kayak, must be quite rare.

A humpback whale briefly trapped a kayaker in its mouth off Chilean Patagonia before quickly releasing him unharmed.

Adrián Simancas was kayaking with his father, Dell Simancas, when the massive whale suddenly surfaced, trapping the young man and his yellow kayak in its mouth for a few seconds before letting him go.

Dell, just meters away, captured the moment on video while encouraging his son to stay calm.

"I thought it had eaten me and swallowed me", Adrián said.

BBC News, Latin America, 13 February 2025 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/c2k5e14vwx4o;

Fox News video on YouTube

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OZj1MJM9_U

 

[Calter]

If I had a penny for every time I've seen a Kayaker go inside a whale's mouth, I'd have two pennies. Which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.

This one has three angles, including one of the people getting eaten


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



Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgwGUNnf2Rc

 

[Mendel]

If you believe that whales pass the threshold of intelligence, we could call these two events 'abduction by NHI' (albeit very brief).

 

[Edward Current]

Landslide captured in Turkey:

Full video:
Source: https://x.com/volcaholic1/status/1893264074047189340

 

[Mendel]

Landslide captured in Turkey:

it's a bit debatable how rare natural disasters really are, if you look at this compilation:

Source: https://youtu.be/-9TLeN6MIus

 

[Edward Current]

A runway near-miss, with an aborted landing, captured apparently by a bystander or plane spotter will a cell phone. One assumes that aborted landings aren't as rare as crashes (often caught on camera as well). But what makes this relevant to the thread is that the video is rolling along, clear as day, for some time before the rare event occurs. Also rare is how close the landing gear gets to touching down — seemingly inches — and this, too, was captured, with a zoom-in no less. Depending on when the thrust-reverse got disarmed, that could have been a problem.

ABC News story: https://abcnews.go.com/US/southwest-plane-lands-safely-chicago-after-close-call/story?id=119174069

 

[Ann K]

A runway near-miss, with an aborted landing, captured apparently by a bystander or plane spotter will a cell phone. One assumes that aborted landings aren't as rare as crashes (often caught on camera as well). But what makes this relevant to the thread is that the video is rolling along, clear as day, for some time before the rare event occurs. Also rare is how close the landing gear gets to touching down — seemingly inches — and this, too, was captured, with a zoom-in no less. Depending on when the thrust-reverse got disarmed, that could have been a problem.
View attachment 77714

ABC News story: https://abcnews.go.com/US/southwest-plane-lands-safely-chicago-after-close-call/story?id=119174069

No video of this one, but it's getting to be a habit:

An American Airlines flight arriving at Ronald Reagan National Airport was forced to abort its landing to avoid another aircraft Tuesday, officials said, less than a month after a midair collision killed 67 people near the same airport and roughly 90 minutes before a close call between a passenger plane and a private jet in Chicago.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/26/us/reagan-national-american-airlines-go-around/index.html

 

[Mendel]

No video of this one, but it's getting to be a habit:

Runway incursions are not a rare or recent problem; the worst one that really forced aviation to address the issue was the 1977 Tenerife airport disaster. But they're happening all over the world, usually without incident as one of the crews is aware of the situation and avoids a collision.
And sometimes these happen in quick succession randomly; for example (avherald.com):

United B39M at Orlando on Apr 26th 2024, runway incursion forces rejected takeoff​

Southwest B38M at Washington on Apr 18th 2024, runway incursion forces rejected takeoff​

Swiss A333 at New York on Apr 17th 2024, rejected takeoff due to traffic on runway (two aircraft crossing runway)​

 

[Mendel]

No video of this one, but it's getting to be a habit:

An American Airlines flight arriving at Ronald Reagan National Airport was forced to abort its landing to avoid another aircraft Tuesday, officials said, less than a month after a midair collision killed 67 people near the same airport and roughly 90 minutes before a close call between a passenger plane and a private jet in Chicago.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/26/us/reagan-national-american-airlines-go-around/index.html

Unlike the near-miss at Chicago posted above (and the examples I posted), this incident is much less severe. The CNN article does explain why:

Article:

The Tuesday incident at the Washington, DC, airport happened around 8:20 a.m. as American Airlines Flight 2246, en route from Boston, was preparing to land, the Federal Aviation Administration said.

Air traffic control instructed the American Airlines flight to perform a go-around to "ensure separation was maintained between this aircraft and a preceding departure from the same runway," the FAA told CNN.
A go-around is a routine maneuver that allows an aircraft to safely make an alternate landing "at the discretion of a pilot or at the request of an air traffic controller," the FAA said.

The plane that was preparing to take off was moving, but still on the runway, by the time Flight 2246 started its go-around, according to FlightRadar 24.

Flight 2246 eventually landed safely, and Tuesday's go-around was a standard maneuver "to allow another aircraft more time for takeoff," American Airlines told CNN Wednesday in an email.
"It's a tool in both the pilot's and air traffic controller's toolbox to help maintain safe and efficient flight operations, and any assertion that flight 2246's canceled approach was more than that is inaccurate," the airline's email reads.

The closest Flight 2246 came laterally to the departing plane before Flight 2246 turned and climbed was about 1.25 miles, and its lowest altitude before its climb was 450 feet, according to FlightRadar 24.

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/26/us/reagan-national-american-airlines-go-around/index.html

Basically, air traffic control (ATC) has to line up the landing aircraft some time in advance as they approach, and fit departures into the spaces in that line. For one reason or another, a departure may take longer than anticipated, and then ATC takes the nearest approaching aircraft out of the line and has them queue up again at the back, so to speak. In those situations, ATC typically informs the crew of the approaching aircraft well in advance that another aircraft is setting up for departure, so one of the pilots is going to monitor the situation, and they'd both be prepared that a go-around may be necessary. It's very much "business as usual" and not an emergency.

I can't speak to whether the reported minimum separation distance/altitude rates this as an official "incident" or not.