I think people have plotted this, but their data was missing the crucial time periods on the evening of the 15th.
USS Omaha UFO / UAP Radar Video
- Thread starter Alphadunk
- Start date
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
I wonder if there is some way of extracting any data for co-ordinates within ~12NM of the position of the Omaha
I guess we just need to filter on the latlongs for any tracks that are close even a 12NM square would be good
Maybe that means the ship dropped anchor at that time ?
Heavytread
Active Member
Yes, and I will work on this. I can use geospatial data types in the database, I think, to determine whether or not a given point falls within a certain radius of another point. Let me dig into it.
Max Phalange
Senior Member
Corbell's Instagram post says:
So three cuts.External Quote:
From The War Zone's piece on the drone incident:
So this may include switching off the AIS transponder. The deck logs may show when EMCON was engaged.External Quote:
Heavytread
Active Member
Hey Mick. My dataset seems have samples for the 15th up until 7:00 AM (ish) according to my query (using the raw imported dataset-- I assume these are all UTC datetimes)
..but the data does indeed end there. My last sample is at 2019-07-15 07:13:29. I double-checked my database and confirmed that I have data for other ships up until 2019-07-16 23:59:59
We seem to have complete data for the entirety of July 14, which is when the first incidents apparently occurred around 10:00 PM local time.
Heavytread
Active Member
USS Omaha track for July 14th (green) and July 15th (white). Clearly they got very excited at some point.
Interestingly, the sharp turn to starboard that begins the period of maneuvering happens at about 5:00 AM local time on July 14:
For context, they seemed to be sailing fairly evenly up until that point:
Now this is super interesting: from examining the video, it seems they were way west of where the track ends when that recording was actually made. I'll spend some time tonight to analyze the video and get actual positions, assuming I'm reading the display correctly.
Interestingly, the sharp turn to starboard that begins the period of maneuvering happens at about 5:00 AM local time on July 14:
For context, they seemed to be sailing fairly evenly up until that point:
Now this is super interesting: from examining the video, it seems they were way west of where the track ends when that recording was actually made. I'll spend some time tonight to analyze the video and get actual positions, assuming I'm reading the display correctly.
Last edited:
Heavytread
Active Member
BTW I'm pretty sure we can get the correct ship position from the video, because the AICS data of the Swan Ace closely matches what's shown on the radar screen in the video, assuming the ranging circles on the display are at 6 NM and 12 NM. From this, we should be able to make a reasonable guess at the time these videos were recorded. For instance, I'm pretty sure that this frame in the video took place around 9:45 PM local time on July 15.
Hmm, I was just opening the CSV in Excel, and it did give me a warning that it was too big. So maybe it had not loaded it all.
Heavytread
Active Member
That's probably it. Excel will load a max of about a million rows but there's 1.75 million rows for the 14th and 15th.
Heavytread
Active Member
OK. Just in case this is useful: by examining the video at various time indexes when there is a reasonably clear picture of the screen, you can determine the position, bearing and range of the cursor. From that you can make a reasonable guess at the location of the ship. We have all the data for the path of the Swan Ace, so if you match up her track with her approximate location on screen you can determine the approximate time and date when the video was taken. The rings on the radar console are actually at 5 NM and 10 NM (not 6 and 12). You can reasonably match them up with circles drawn at those ranges on Google Earth, then infer the time the video was taken by the timestamp of the matching AIS record that's closest to where the Swan Ace was shown on the radar console.
There are four clips, but only three show the location of the Swan Ace.
Clip 1 was recorded at about 2019-07-16 04:40:58 UTC
Clip 2 was recorded at about 2019-07-16 04:43:22 UTC
Clip 3 is so close that there's no meaningful difference between it and clip 2 but it may have been taken at 2019-07-16 04:42:16 UTC. There are too many stacking tolerances here to be exact and the position of Swan Ace on the scope is almost exactly the same.
Clip 4 can't really be analyzed because the Swan Ace does not appear on the scope.
There are four clips, but only three show the location of the Swan Ace.
Clip 1 was recorded at about 2019-07-16 04:40:58 UTC
Clip 2 was recorded at about 2019-07-16 04:43:22 UTC
Clip 3 is so close that there's no meaningful difference between it and clip 2 but it may have been taken at 2019-07-16 04:42:16 UTC. There are too many stacking tolerances here to be exact and the position of Swan Ace on the scope is almost exactly the same.
Clip 4 can't really be analyzed because the Swan Ace does not appear on the scope.
The USS Omaha was being used as a training ship, conducting a surface warfare training program during and around the July events. The program, Surface Warfare Advanced Tactical Training, also involved Carrier Strike Group 9, a training CSG whose flagship is the USS Theodore Roosevelt, and also includes the USS Russell of triangle video fame, and the USS Kidd of the July drone reports.
From https://news.usni.org/2019/09/05/th...-more-ships-to-sea-this-fall-as-class-matures (September 5, 2019)
From https://news.usni.org/2019/09/05/th...-more-ships-to-sea-this-fall-as-class-matures (September 5, 2019)
External Quote:
From https://news.usni.org/2019/05/06/na...air-of-ships-larger-event-planned-this-summer (May 6, 2019)External Quote:
From https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5601540/uss-russell-ddg-59External Quote:
From https://www.dvidshub.net/news/37425...te-surface-warfare-advanced-tactical-trainingExternal Quote:
External Quote:
Just a note, I have looked more at the radar's specs, unless there is a way to somehow combine the S band and X band radars, this radar is not capable of differentiating real surface objects vs low altitude objects, it's fundamentally a 2D radar.
In order to be able to place objects in 3D space it would have to be capable of some form of beamforming, which the VisionMaster FT doesn't appear to be capable of. I might be wrong on this of course, but I cannot find anything in the radar's specs or manual to indicate otherwise, furthermore the USS Omaha also has a seprate, 3D-capable targeting radar, which would be displayed in a different screen (different manufacturer).
mmmh I think the guy on Twitter might be BS-ing about this, the so called "Radar Overlay" function he points to is actually an "ECDIS with Radar Overlay" which basically just shows the ECDIS cartography with radar overlay.
Also, if there was indeed a 3D radar overlay from the AN/SPS-77 you would have altitute information and the tracks would be differentiated between surface and non-surface because the AN/SPS-77 is indeed an active array beamforming radar, unlike the VisionMaster FT - completely different antenna systems.
https://www.sperrymarine.com/visonmaster-ft-totalwatch-radar-system/optional-features
According to a presentation by the Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center (SMWDC), the group who developed and runs the Surface Warfare Advanced Tactical Training (SWATT), an important component are what they call "replay tools", likening it to a football coach playing back video to the team to run them through what happened. During these training events, video is recorded to give feedback in the debrief session. (Full source attached)
This is corroborated by Rear Admiral Scott Robertson, commander of the SMWDC. To quote him from https://navalinstitute.com.au/increasing-lethality-of-surface-force/
An interview with deputy commander of SMWDC Captain Christopher Barnes from https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/military/sd-me-surfing-skipper-20170516-story.htmlExternal Quote:
As a hypothesis, the SWATT training might help point towards some answers as to what they were doing (the strange maneuvers and surface target tracking) and why it was being filmed.External Quote:
jackfrostvc
Senior Member
Are we not going to mention the elephant in the room.
ie The fact the drone sightings happened around San Clemente Island in 2019.
The island has a drone base that was built between 2014 - 2018 .
Quite the coincidence isn't it?
Particularly since the SOCAL Range Complex is used for Fleet readiness and reaction training. They also conduct events which facilitate the test, evaluation, and development of weapon systems and tactics. San Clemente Island is the hub of activity with control of activities in the SOCAL Range Complex done via Range Operations Center (ROC) personnel at NAS North Island, CA
ie The fact the drone sightings happened around San Clemente Island in 2019.
The island has a drone base that was built between 2014 - 2018 .
Quite the coincidence isn't it?
Particularly since the SOCAL Range Complex is used for Fleet readiness and reaction training. They also conduct events which facilitate the test, evaluation, and development of weapon systems and tactics. San Clemente Island is the hub of activity with control of activities in the SOCAL Range Complex done via Range Operations Center (ROC) personnel at NAS North Island, CA
Last edited:
abyssal dission
New Member
I
Sounds like you need to download MySQL Workbench and get to using some MySQL to dig through these more effectively. Did I miss if this data was posted on this thread? I'd love to take a look at it myself if thats alright.
Last edited:
Max Phalange
Senior Member
Here - https://marinecadastre.gov/ais/ The dates in question are July 15/16 2019.
abyssal dission
New Member
Thank you much!
Heavytread
Active Member
Hi. You can download the raw CSV files from https://marinecadastre.gov/ais/
All my stuff is in SQL Server so my backups won't help you much. I'm thinking about creating a public API for the data if I get time but the more I think about this the less I think it's likely to tell us much, TBH. Tonight I managed to use geospatial data to figure out all ships in the area around the calculated time of the incident and am working on creating KML files for them but unless we see AIS tracks for tiny little speedboats zipping around the Omaha at 140 knots then I don't think there's much thread left here to pull on.
They must have turned off their Automatic Indentification System (AIS) at that time. I don't see how that helps against suspected drones, though. Besides Swan Ace, were there any other ships in the area at that time
jackfrostvc
Senior Member
If it's the car carrier , it's registered in the Bahamas
Heavytread
Active Member
Yes.. there were 205 separate ships passing through an area 60 NM in diameter centered around a point that seems to include all areas of interest we currently know about, within 4 hours before and 8 hours after the most likely time those videos were recorded. I'm working on some code to build a big KML with tracks for all of them. I'm not sure how useful it will be but who knows? I'm also looking for open source flight data from around that time just for the sake of completeness.
Yeah, but it ferries between lots of different places. For example, right now it's traveling between two ports in Australia. Is there anywhere I can find between which two ports it was traveling in July 2019 ?
While waiting for the excellent work of @Heavytread on the AIS data to conclude, I think I have one last big post left in me for the day. Working from the hypothesis that the radar video is actually capturing a SWATT training exercise (for context, my last two posts here and here), I'm now trying to disprove myself. Is there dispositive evidence for the SWATT theory?
I'm assuming as true what I've already shown before; that the USS Omaha was conducting SWATT training during July 14-15 with other ships in CSG 9 and part of this training involved filming the equipment for debriefing. I'm also assuming the radar is tracking surface targets, as posts following this one suggest based on common symbols. I'm also assuming the AIS data collected and interpreted here by Heavytread accurately depicts USS Omaha's movement.
Established evidence 1: The radar video showing multiple surface targets being tracked.
Q1: Is the radar video consistent with a SWATT exercise? More specifically, is tracking multiple surface targets a component of the training? If not, the theory is pretty well out the window already.
A1: Here is a SWATT exercise from a year earlier, showing both static floating targets and speedboats mimicking multiple hostile surface contacts.
From the SMWDC Facebook page
Follow up on previous answer:
Q2: Did other military ships in the area also spot surface contacts?
A2: Several images from other ships part of the training group taken on July 15 and surrounding dates show people observing surface contacts.
From https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5591926/uss-paul-hamilton-ddg-60
Established evidence 2: The movement of the USS Omaha based on AIS data.
Q3: Is the maneuvering of the USS Omaha consistent with a SWATT training exercise?
A3: Maneuvering is one of the covered exercises in SWATT.
From https://www.dvidshub.net/news/37425...te-surface-warfare-advanced-tactical-training
Established evidence 3: The second Omaha video.
Q4: Is the second Omaha video contradictory to the SWATT theory?
A4: As it was taken at a different time, it could, like the maneuvering data, show a different exercise. Showing evidence for that is beyond the bounds of this thread topic. Regardless, it does not seem to be dispositive to the SWATT theory.
Established evidence 4: The presence of Swan Ace.
Q5: Is the presence of Swan Ace contradictory to the SWATT theory?
A5: It does provide some dispositive evidence in that carrying out an exercise which involved several vessels or targets that could interfere with a civilian vessel is unlikely. I do not know if the USS Omaha was too close to the Swan Ace to prohibit such an exercise.
That's all the new information I have at the moment. While I am tempted to the SWATT theory, the only dispositive evidence for any other theory that it presents is the lack of response from other vessels in the area shown in the A2 sources. If they are also making contact with surface targets, as part of "drills", it does add credence to surface targets being part of training in the area. The rest of it is a theory, one difficult to prove conclusively. I thought I'd put the facts I've found out there at least.
I'm assuming as true what I've already shown before; that the USS Omaha was conducting SWATT training during July 14-15 with other ships in CSG 9 and part of this training involved filming the equipment for debriefing. I'm also assuming the radar is tracking surface targets, as posts following this one suggest based on common symbols. I'm also assuming the AIS data collected and interpreted here by Heavytread accurately depicts USS Omaha's movement.
Established evidence 1: The radar video showing multiple surface targets being tracked.
Q1: Is the radar video consistent with a SWATT exercise? More specifically, is tracking multiple surface targets a component of the training? If not, the theory is pretty well out the window already.
A1: Here is a SWATT exercise from a year earlier, showing both static floating targets and speedboats mimicking multiple hostile surface contacts.
From the SMWDC Facebook page
External Quote:
Simulated fast attack craft approach the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) during a Surface Warfare Advanced Tactical Training (SWATT) exercise.
Follow up on previous answer:
Q2: Did other military ships in the area also spot surface contacts?
A2: Several images from other ships part of the training group taken on July 15 and surrounding dates show people observing surface contacts.
From https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5591926/uss-paul-hamilton-ddg-60
From https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5591923/uss-bunker-hill-cg-52External Quote:
(July 15, 2019) Ship's Serviceman Seaman Kevin Rodriguez, from Baltimore, photographs a surface contact during a ship's nautical or otherwise photographic interpretation and examination (SNOOPIE) team drill on the bridge wing of the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill (CG 52).
From https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5591902/uss-rafael-peralta-ddg-115External Quote:
(July 15, 2019) Ensign Jessica Robinson, from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., uses binoculars to search for surface contacts from the pilot house of the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill (CG 52).
External Quote:
(July 13, 2019) Ship's Serviceman Seaman Ashley Keistler, from Reno Valley, Calif., looks for surface contacts from the bridge wing of the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Rafael Peralta (DDG 115).
Established evidence 2: The movement of the USS Omaha based on AIS data.
Q3: Is the maneuvering of the USS Omaha consistent with a SWATT training exercise?
A3: Maneuvering is one of the covered exercises in SWATT.
From https://www.dvidshub.net/news/37425...te-surface-warfare-advanced-tactical-training
External Quote:
Established evidence 3: The second Omaha video.
Q4: Is the second Omaha video contradictory to the SWATT theory?
A4: As it was taken at a different time, it could, like the maneuvering data, show a different exercise. Showing evidence for that is beyond the bounds of this thread topic. Regardless, it does not seem to be dispositive to the SWATT theory.
Established evidence 4: The presence of Swan Ace.
Q5: Is the presence of Swan Ace contradictory to the SWATT theory?
A5: It does provide some dispositive evidence in that carrying out an exercise which involved several vessels or targets that could interfere with a civilian vessel is unlikely. I do not know if the USS Omaha was too close to the Swan Ace to prohibit such an exercise.
That's all the new information I have at the moment. While I am tempted to the SWATT theory, the only dispositive evidence for any other theory that it presents is the lack of response from other vessels in the area shown in the A2 sources. If they are also making contact with surface targets, as part of "drills", it does add credence to surface targets being part of training in the area. The rest of it is a theory, one difficult to prove conclusively. I thought I'd put the facts I've found out there at least.
Also, San Clemente Island, which was nearby, is known as a multi-threat warfare training range. Equipment used include shone gunnery, bombardment, air defence, anti-submarine and electronic warfare. Quoting Wikipedia:-
UAPAotearoa
New Member
0 0 0 means straight ahead of the ship.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Yeah I was thinking about that
So we know there's a cut here
:24 "Track 781 just sped up to 46 knots. 50 knots. Closing in."
CUT 2?, tracks move slightly and VV changes direction and camera jumps again.
:33 "138 knots. Holy s***. They're going fast. Oh, it's turning around."
I assume here the easy assumption (that we would expect people to take from a cursory glance at the video) is that track 781 goes 46 knots, 50 knots, then 138 knots a good acceleration.
But when he says directly after with no cut
:36 "That one's pretty much perfectly zero zero zero relative, right?"
:39 "Yeah."
You can see track 781 is the boxed track near the cursor there's no speed given on the RADAR screen.
There is a different track almost exactly on the line inside the cone which I think is the directly forward of the ship (0,0,0) with a long velocity vector line.
So we know there's a cut here
:24 "Track 781 just sped up to 46 knots. 50 knots. Closing in."
CUT 2?, tracks move slightly and VV changes direction and camera jumps again.
:33 "138 knots. Holy s***. They're going fast. Oh, it's turning around."
I assume here the easy assumption (that we would expect people to take from a cursory glance at the video) is that track 781 goes 46 knots, 50 knots, then 138 knots a good acceleration.
But when he says directly after with no cut
:36 "That one's pretty much perfectly zero zero zero relative, right?"
:39 "Yeah."
You can see track 781 is the boxed track near the cursor there's no speed given on the RADAR screen.
There is a different track almost exactly on the line inside the cone which I think is the directly forward of the ship (0,0,0) with a long velocity vector line.
JFDee
Senior Member.
The Swan Ace came down the West Coast from Richmond / Tacoma. The green flag designates the start of the track excerpt, at July 11 00:00h UTC.
Last edited:
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
They are vector showing direction lines, they can be True or Relative depending on the mode of the RADAR.
The length seeming indicates predicted distance that will be travelled in whatever time the RADAR is configured for
You can also have "trails" indicating previous position if you want
This is a manual for a similar RADAR system I mean it's possible it means something completely different in this RADAR but it's not likley.
https://www.marinsat.com/marinsat/dosyalar/dosya/CD65800010A-6_Rev_A_-_User_Manual.pdf
Chapter 5
JFDee
Senior Member.
There is actually some rather sudden slowing-down in the profile of the Swan Ace. It's at July 16, around 1:37h (UTC), so local time is July 15, 18:37h.
I only have the one-hour resolution of the position data, maybe @Heavytread can check the position at that time? Or anyone else who is awake?
Edit: checked the AIS data myself. Position at 1:37h was 32.84908 N, -119.85227 W.
For a map, see next post, further down.
I only have the one-hour resolution of the position data, maybe @Heavytread can check the position at that time? Or anyone else who is awake?
Edit: checked the AIS data myself. Position at 1:37h was 32.84908 N, -119.85227 W.
For a map, see next post, further down.
Last edited:
FatPhil
Senior Member.
Can someone please explain the mathematics of that to me? When you divide frames per second by frames per second, you get a undimensioned constant, not something measuring anything per second.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
If the RADAR updates positions every 40 frames of video and the video is at 30fps then every 1.33 seconds of video you get a RADAR update.
It's just a way of trying to work out the frequency of the RADAR updates, they could have just timed it with a stop watch but going frame by frame makes it easier to do it that way, is my understanding.
It's just a way of trying to work out the frequency of the RADAR updates, they could have just timed it with a stop watch but going frame by frame makes it easier to do it that way, is my understanding.
Leak
Member
40 frames / (30 frames / 1 second) => (40 frames * 1 second) / 30 frames => (40 frames / 30 frames) * 1 second => (40 / 30) second
Similar threads
Trending content
-
-
-
Thread 'Issues with Dalia Bergoin's presentation at Contact in the Desert'- Charlie Wiser
Replies: 13 -
-
Thread 'Tim Phillips lends credence to the existence of anomalous black triangle UFOs'
- beku-mant
Replies: 237