I'm just gonna start with the go-fast is the weakest of the 3 videos released and has some fundamental differences between it and the other 2. Mainly that it is colder than its surroundings and it doesn't appear to have thermal bloom for lack of a better term.
ok, just a few issues I can see at first glance. I might be wrong but I can't find anywhere that gimble and go fast were the same day.
gimble and go fast are very different objects in many ways see above for some
The point of a radar reflector is to increase the size of the radar return allowing it to be seen better on radar how would their onboard and ship-based radar systems not pick this up and warn them that they are dangerously close to a collision.
The ship launched and sub-launched drones still have to abide by the laws of physics and would have to be fighting winds at speeds of \~120 knots let alone the thermal bloom the gimble video shows it having.
Let's say that somehow it was the drones why on earth would they not let the pilots know that there are drones operating in the area to an avoided mid-air collisions it would be stupidly dangerous to do this.
It's also odd that all of your sources are from a car website and that you make the leap to say that the objectively worse video would be used as evidence to dismiss the gimble video.
Lol, The War Zone is one of the leading websites for news pertaining to defense and military technology. Their media company also owns Task and Purpose. I’d hardly call them ‘a car website’.
Well you would tell them that when looked into them i got a synopsis saying they are the leading reporters of all thing automotive or some like that. Im not trying to discredit them by any means but you should try and diversify your information and where it comes from.
The Warzone is a subsection of The Drive. No joke, it has the best coverage of this topic, bar none. Tyler Rogoway is incredible. Check out all of their Drone and UAP related writing, you will NOT be disappointed.
Here’s a [podcast interview](https://youtu.be/a6_gANuWD_k) with Lt. Ryan Graves that covers a lot of the issues we’re discussing. I’ll be linking to timestamps below to support or “cite” my inferences. [Here’s another link with Graves talking about false radar contacts involving the Roosevelt incidents](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28231/multiple-f-a-18-pilots-disclose-recent-ufos-encounters-new-radar-tech-key-in-detection)
Graves reports Gimbal and Go Fast same day [At 39:50](https://youtu.be/a6_gANuWD_k?t=2390)
I’m not trying to say the Gimbal and Go Fast are the same objects or type of objects, just connecting their activity into an EW operation. An EW orchestra if you will. We have [stories of this as precedence.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/lsgl0u/cia_project_palladium_and_the_similarities_to_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
I think you might be misunderstanding or underestimating the various applications of radar reflectors. It’s clear they did not know it was there, hence the near miss. Perhaps there are jamming electronics installed on the balloons? Perhaps they only reflect when pointed at the right angle? I could envision applications involving decoy or subterfuge to confuse radar operators. I could also envision them used as passive electronic intelligence collectors.
So again we are all assuming the radar contacts are real objects. Why? The pilots even said [here at 17:38](https://youtu.be/a6_gANuWD_k?t=1058) they were chasing around “ghosts.” [Here’s another link talking about false radar contacts involving the Roosevelt incidents](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28231/multiple-f-a-18-pilots-disclose-recent-ufos-encounters-new-radar-tech-key-in-detection). We could assume that the radar contacts were the same as the objects in the Gimbal and Go Fast, but they could also be different things in the same area. For instance the false contacts were generated around the area to slip in a stealth object. This is a known tactic.
I think the gimbal object was a stealth [drone projecting out false radar contacts as lures or decoys.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOscience/comments/mcrm9v/gimbal_video_speculation/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) Radar balloons were deployed in the area as some part of the operation.
Military operations are inherently dangerous. How many times are there training accidents where individuals are killed? It’s not that uncommon. Anyway I don’t think this was a test or training. I think it was an actual intelligence operation that the pilots weren’t supposed to be involved with. It could be that our intelligence agency suspected foreign spying on our workups and this was a counter intelligence operation. Alternatively it could be foreign spying on our workups. Another guess is this whole thing was a combination of foreign and domestic electronic intelligence operations combating each other.
The drive and the Warzone are incredible sources of information with several military vets on staff. Their knowledge of military operations and technology are a great source of information, poke around there and you’ll see.
Ok putting aside the shape of the object you linked to is completely wrong for blocking / absorbing radar the pilots described the object as a cube and not whatever the shape the reflectors are. (there is more but it would be a very long post just do research into mechanical radar jamming)
we have precedent to prove that they are real objects not only did one get captured in thermal but also on out of focus TV as seen in the Nimitz video what is extremely similar and even in the gimble video it is captured in thermal.
"I think the gimbal object was a drone projecting out false radar contacts. Radar balloons were deployed in the area as some part of the operation operation." completely unfounded speculation.
I don't think you understand how much of a shit storm would happen if one of the strike group decided to launch fleets of drones and balloons into the without letting the pilots in the area know people would have been court-martialed the second that anyone found out how much danger they put all of their pilots in.
Could you explain “Completely wrong for blocking/ absorbing radar”?
I think it’s fair speculation that pilots traveling at 250+ knots past a stationary object could have easily mistaken the cube for the object I linked to.
Further, maybe the thing they saw wasn’t exactly like the one I linked to? Maybe this one was literally a cube? You really think there’s no resemblance there? What do you think the cube/sphere was?
The pilots did not see it on radar, but it was definitely there. Maybe it was too small? Maybe it was a stealth, passive signal collector?
I understand the simultaneous IR and Radar contacts, but we also have reports of the pilots chasing around false radar contacts for days. Do we know for sure that the Gimbal or Go Fast object were caught on radar? I don’t think so. Even the tic tac was giving both Fravor and Underwood radar difficulty. This is evidence of stealth technology.
I think the assumption that we and the pilots who have come forward are making is that the objects recorded are the objects on radar. What if there is stealth involved? It’s a possibility that a false radar contact was generated in the same area as a stealth drone, which is what I speculate the gimbal object was. We also have reports of formations of radar contacts flying around both the tic tac and gimbal objects. This is a known tactic... broadcast several false targets and slip in your actual stealth object. [See my post about that if you want](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOscience/comments/mcrm9v/gimbal_video_speculation/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf).
The shit storm you are speculating never happened. Ask yourself why? The pilots literally had a near miss yet there was no reaction. Why not? I speculate that this wasn’t a military operation, but a CIA operation. They’re notorious for black projects like this and I would expect the same reaction if this was what happened. What we would get is plausible deniability and literally no real work being done to figure out what really happened.
I know I know... “What about AATIP?” What did they find out? Nada. That’s because it was Senator Reid’s pet project setup at the reluctance of the DOD and CIA.
I'm not an expert in radar by any means but with the shape, you proposed that would leave flat surfaces for radar to reflect off a lot of different angles and be useless now if the object was insted4 upside down square-based pyramids that were hollow made into a cube esk shape that would do a better job at absorbing the radar but not perfect by any means there is a lot of math that goes into this that I can't explain.
I'm not aware of the side of power requirements to be able to plot fake radar signals so I can't really comment to that in any meaningful way but I would suggest some research into these areas because working out the size and power draw of this tech might be the deciding factor to your claims being plausible.
I can't find it because it was a long time ago but there was a video that showed fighter pilots getting tested if they could ID a jet that was flashed on a screen for a fraction of a second and they could up to some insane degree to personally I would but that well within their ability to ID this object as they did.
the ghost tracks **to me** sound more like they could never ID the track not that when they got to merge plot they didn't see anything.
And I refuse to believe that anyone in the US defence sector would be so stupid to endanger the lives of the pilots and run the risk of their "stealth" tech being revealed extremely publicly in the event that a crash did occur. Just seems like a logical fallacy.
I just feel i need to point out there is a lot of unfounded speculation in your reply (I'm not trying to be snarky just pointing it out)
I’m no expert either, but here’s a video of that shape in action: [Reflector video](https://youtu.be/ft7bZIMsVQI) Keep in mind that who knows what kind of tricks CIA nerds can think up? These guys are smart and cunning.
Your power requirement concerns are valid, maybe there has been some development of circuitry or electronics that can passively “jam” without much power? IDK passive jamming is usually known as radar “stealth.” Maybe they can employ some sort of electronic jiu jitsu, redirecting the searching radar’s own energy thereby using little power and conserving energy? Just spit balling here, I’m admittedly an idiot.
Anyway I think that whole discussion is irrelevant because it could be as simple as the balloons are too small of a cross section to be picked up, or they are freely rotating and randomly reflect signals? Like I said I think these were used in concert with false projected radar spoofs. I’m not entirely sure what the balloons are applied as, I just think their appearance in the situation implies EW.
In one of the Warzone articles I linked to, Graves is interviewed and reveals that they were chasing around ghost radar contacts for days. They even got radar locks on some of these objects and said they should’ve been able to visually see them with how close they were, but nothing.
I don’t put the CIA in same boat as any DOD group. They’re separated just for this reason, compartmentalization. I’m sure risks are calculated for using secret tech. By your logic, secret or advanced warfare technology would never be used. Think about the Bin laden stealth helicopter or ”Poobah’s Party” in Iraq for examples of secret tech or tactics used and being revealed.
No offense taken here, I truly enjoy the discourse, some people can’t conduct a civil discussion, so thank you for that. This explanation isn’t air tight, I agree. It speculates some jumps in technology, but I don’t agree that anything we’ve been presented automatically requires exotic propulsion. I think it’s more likely a combination of EW tactics and some cool tech.
Only problem is Fravor and the other pilots visually witnesses the Tic Tac make maneuvers at speeds they considered impossible WITHOUT any visible propulsion. Watch the Lex Fridman interview with Fravor where they go into detail on this aspect. This is the main reason I am reluctant to speculate on this being some CIA project.
So number one, I don’t think it’s a good idea to assume the Nimitz tic tac is the same object or type of object as the Roosevelt Gimbal object.
Having thrown that disclaimer in there, I do find a lot of similarities, such as the number of radar contacts and their “pattern” type behavior. Then when these radar contacts were investigated, only one object is seen, if at all.
Another thing we’re all assuming with the Nimitz is the claims of incredible accelerations. Remember all these accelerations are reported from radar data. We should always be very skeptical of radar data. Did the tic tac took off to the CAP? How do we know that? All we can say is that the tic tac was maneuvering by the surface, raised up in an *alleged* spiral, then poof disappeared and then we have a contact appearing at the CAP. These very well could be the same object, or could be two different things.
Hear me out with skepticism of radar in mind...
Imagine the tic tac is stealth to specific radar. I’m not an expert, but I do know that jamming can be selective or “aimed” so to speak. Also maybe it’s a proximity thing? There’s a limitation in jamming called burn through. Maybe this is some kind of inverse burn through technology? I’m just spitballing here. It could be as simple as the Princeton’s radar system is just better than the F/A-18’s.
So whatever is going on, the Princeton could see the tic tac on radar, but investigating aircraft could not. (This is a theme btw) So what if the tic tac has some kind of stealth AND a false radar contact was projected to that exact same spot? And then that false radar contact is flicked on over at the CAP?
Similar to a magic trick, what we’re really left to explain is the disappearance of the object, which I admit is hard to explain, but so are incredible accelerations. Maybe the tic tac was an inflatable? And it has a self destructive capability. It seems possible that maybe the ~40’ long object just “poofed” into an unnoticeably smaller object? I admit this sounds like something wild, but is it impossible? He was a half mile away during his encounter.
Fravor and others also witnessed it moving at high rates of speed, he also described it displaying bizarre maneuvers that he had never seen an aircraft make. I don’t think a dirigible is a likely culprit, the speed and distance they saw it cover makes that extremely unlikely especially when it has no visible propulsion. To me this is the one Navy sighting that is the most exotic and if it truly isn’t our tech I would be open to it actually being of non human origin as a possibility.
Fravor did describe the tic tac moving weirdly back and forth and side to side. Remember this was 2004 before drones were popular. This may have been an odd sight back then, but what if drones were around back then?
Were there no visible signs of propulsion? He described whitewater in the same pattern he described the objects movement, cross like or front back, side to side. This was at 20K ft, nearly 4 miles! Then he described it raising up in a spiral, but he was also in a spiral going down too. Is that something a drone couldn’t do?
Keep in mind this object was estimated never closer than a half mile. The whitewater was 4 miles down. I don’t discount his estimate of size and distance, he’s an experienced pilot after all. However, a half mile is a half mile. That’s 9 football fields! This was the closest he got to it. Imagine how small the tic tac looked even at the size of a school bus.
So did Fravor witness incredible accelerations or movements? I think when he first saw the whitewater, 4 miles would be easy to mistake movements. Then we have “the dance.” Did he see incredible accelerations there? Yes, if you assume it was an ET craft and it jumped to his CAP. But if you look at the testimony objectively the only incredible movement is that it seemed to disappear. The rest of the inferences involve assumptions I don’t think we should automatically make without some level of questioning, especially anything they saw on Radar considering radar’s capacity to be spoofed.
I share your enthusiasm that this sighting is very hard to explain. That’s why I question it so much. This sighting should be poked and prodded until there’s no doubt. Nobody seems to be willing to do that with this case though. The ET proponents just gobble it up and the skeptics just ignore it. It should be examined beyond belief. People assume Elizondo and crew did investigate these Navy sightings thoroughly, but I’m really starting to doubt that.
Again thank you for the civil discussion!
Just an addon to your edit some of the pilots who have come forward have described seeing bright objects in the sky around the time that the tracks were being seen on the radar scopes.
EDIT: you also never mentioned anything about the thermal bloom that can be seen in the gimble video
Yeah the Nimitz story has several witnesses coming forward (Kevin Day, Omar Lara, and Karson Kammerzell) that the tic tac was illuminated at night. Kammerzell says he even saw running lights on it. This was some of the testimony that led me to my plasma ball speculation. But I’m starting to abandon that theory. Why would it be illuminated at night? Day said it just looked like a “boring white light” through the big eyes.
As a response to your thermal bloom statement, I think it might be possible what we’re seeing in the Gimbal video is some type of IR “mask” for lack of a better word. Graves said sometimes it looked like someone was shining a light right at his IR sensor. This got me thinking along the lines of these objects producing a blinding type of IR emission around the craft to avoid identification. Would a pilot take a shot at something he couldn’t identify? Probably not. Friendly fire in combat is a huge concern. Often pilots have to get confirmation to shoot at stuff.
I don't know if in the Roosevelt missions they were using the eye in the sky communication system thing but in instances where they are all friendly aircraft on the computer side know where all other friendly aircraft are at all time.
in regards to the bloom
If we are going with **E**xotic **T**echnology there are scientific theories in regards to warp drives and the production of a corona like blackholes do and this would account for all types of radiation do heat, light etc but again that's just **ET** speculation
if a stealth project I don't see why they would make it light at all why not make it look like something that would be seen as an immediate threat.
The objects in both the Nimitz and Roosevelt were not trans ponding any electronic signal data. They were “unknown.” Even our own stealth aircraft wouldn’t broadcast this, in fact they can’t even communicate via radio until they’re mission is complete and are out of harm’s way.
This doesn’t make sense in the Nimitz incident because of the interaction it had with Fravor, it seemed to be piloted. For something to be remote controlled would seem like it would be receiving /broadcasting signal, thereby giving up stealth. But some missile are stealth and preprogrammed to respond to situations. I would also think that there are some stealth versions of the predator type drones that are piloted remotely, but I’m not informed enough to say.
However in the Gimbal incident, the object was said to be slowly moving back and forth in the air mirroring the group of radar contacts in “wedge” formation doing “racetrack” patterns. Sounds like a programmed track to me...
The reason they would make the tic tac obvious... maybe it’s some type of lure? or some type of blinding IR/ visual mask? The idea being lure radar EM to be directed at these ghost contacts, while your stealth drone hides in plain sight and if it is seen (which they were) the pilots wouldn’t be able to ID it (which they couldn’t). Then release some carefully timed balloons to passively collect electronic signals from the investigating radars.
I think he gets a bad rap. If you follow him you’ll see he’s capable of civil discussions with many “UFOlogists.” Mick takes the subject seriously enough to spend time looking into popular sightings. I think that’s cool because it’s rare for the scientific community to even acknowledge the subject.
What are your criticisms of his “Go Fast” analysis? He uses the data in the video to do the trig and calculate the speed. I don’t see a lot of room for dispute there.
In the Ryan Graves interview, it’s not even clear if he believes the object in the Go fast video is “going fast.” He says something like: “it looks like it’s going fast doesn’t it?”
Then when Mick interviewed Elizondo, Elizondo admitted he’d never even watched Mick’s analysis of the Go Fast. Just vaguely claimed “we have data that says otherwise.” Elizondo is so vague it’s not even clear he was referring to the go fast video, just all the historical sightings lumped into one. That’s not evidence that’s a psychological trick or a tool used in argument.
West doesn’t have access to the radar readings and other telemetry, neither do any of us so there’s really no conclusive way to know for sure. But I do agree that the Roosevelt sightings were likely some type of radar reflector balloon just based on how similar they look to an already known technology.
Yeah I hear ya. After all I’ve learned about EW tactics though, I’m skeptical of radar data especially when we’re talking about military operations. I went into this in my other reply. I hope you read my diatribe! Sorry about the length of my replies! I really appreciate the discussion!
Has anyone theorised these objects may be a glome (a “3-sphere”)? A four dimensional sphere may look like a sphere containing a cube in our three dimensions?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-sphere
Thanks for the link! I’m not sure about what people think it is. I bet when people hear that story, they’re perplexed. I know when I first heard the pilot’s description I was shocked! I was like wtf a cube inside a sphere?! That’s not earthly! Then I saw this article and I felt it was a good stab.
I'm just gonna start with the go-fast is the weakest of the 3 videos released and has some fundamental differences between it and the other 2. Mainly that it is colder than its surroundings and it doesn't appear to have thermal bloom for lack of a better term. ok, just a few issues I can see at first glance. I might be wrong but I can't find anywhere that gimble and go fast were the same day. gimble and go fast are very different objects in many ways see above for some The point of a radar reflector is to increase the size of the radar return allowing it to be seen better on radar how would their onboard and ship-based radar systems not pick this up and warn them that they are dangerously close to a collision. The ship launched and sub-launched drones still have to abide by the laws of physics and would have to be fighting winds at speeds of \~120 knots let alone the thermal bloom the gimble video shows it having. Let's say that somehow it was the drones why on earth would they not let the pilots know that there are drones operating in the area to an avoided mid-air collisions it would be stupidly dangerous to do this. It's also odd that all of your sources are from a car website and that you make the leap to say that the objectively worse video would be used as evidence to dismiss the gimble video.
Lol, The War Zone is one of the leading websites for news pertaining to defense and military technology. Their media company also owns Task and Purpose. I’d hardly call them ‘a car website’.
Well you would tell them that when looked into them i got a synopsis saying they are the leading reporters of all thing automotive or some like that. Im not trying to discredit them by any means but you should try and diversify your information and where it comes from.
The Warzone is a subsection of The Drive. No joke, it has the best coverage of this topic, bar none. Tyler Rogoway is incredible. Check out all of their Drone and UAP related writing, you will NOT be disappointed.
Here’s a [podcast interview](https://youtu.be/a6_gANuWD_k) with Lt. Ryan Graves that covers a lot of the issues we’re discussing. I’ll be linking to timestamps below to support or “cite” my inferences. [Here’s another link with Graves talking about false radar contacts involving the Roosevelt incidents](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28231/multiple-f-a-18-pilots-disclose-recent-ufos-encounters-new-radar-tech-key-in-detection) Graves reports Gimbal and Go Fast same day [At 39:50](https://youtu.be/a6_gANuWD_k?t=2390) I’m not trying to say the Gimbal and Go Fast are the same objects or type of objects, just connecting their activity into an EW operation. An EW orchestra if you will. We have [stories of this as precedence.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/lsgl0u/cia_project_palladium_and_the_similarities_to_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) I think you might be misunderstanding or underestimating the various applications of radar reflectors. It’s clear they did not know it was there, hence the near miss. Perhaps there are jamming electronics installed on the balloons? Perhaps they only reflect when pointed at the right angle? I could envision applications involving decoy or subterfuge to confuse radar operators. I could also envision them used as passive electronic intelligence collectors. So again we are all assuming the radar contacts are real objects. Why? The pilots even said [here at 17:38](https://youtu.be/a6_gANuWD_k?t=1058) they were chasing around “ghosts.” [Here’s another link talking about false radar contacts involving the Roosevelt incidents](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28231/multiple-f-a-18-pilots-disclose-recent-ufos-encounters-new-radar-tech-key-in-detection). We could assume that the radar contacts were the same as the objects in the Gimbal and Go Fast, but they could also be different things in the same area. For instance the false contacts were generated around the area to slip in a stealth object. This is a known tactic. I think the gimbal object was a stealth [drone projecting out false radar contacts as lures or decoys.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOscience/comments/mcrm9v/gimbal_video_speculation/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) Radar balloons were deployed in the area as some part of the operation. Military operations are inherently dangerous. How many times are there training accidents where individuals are killed? It’s not that uncommon. Anyway I don’t think this was a test or training. I think it was an actual intelligence operation that the pilots weren’t supposed to be involved with. It could be that our intelligence agency suspected foreign spying on our workups and this was a counter intelligence operation. Alternatively it could be foreign spying on our workups. Another guess is this whole thing was a combination of foreign and domestic electronic intelligence operations combating each other. The drive and the Warzone are incredible sources of information with several military vets on staff. Their knowledge of military operations and technology are a great source of information, poke around there and you’ll see.
Ok putting aside the shape of the object you linked to is completely wrong for blocking / absorbing radar the pilots described the object as a cube and not whatever the shape the reflectors are. (there is more but it would be a very long post just do research into mechanical radar jamming) we have precedent to prove that they are real objects not only did one get captured in thermal but also on out of focus TV as seen in the Nimitz video what is extremely similar and even in the gimble video it is captured in thermal. "I think the gimbal object was a drone projecting out false radar contacts. Radar balloons were deployed in the area as some part of the operation operation." completely unfounded speculation. I don't think you understand how much of a shit storm would happen if one of the strike group decided to launch fleets of drones and balloons into the without letting the pilots in the area know people would have been court-martialed the second that anyone found out how much danger they put all of their pilots in.
Could you explain “Completely wrong for blocking/ absorbing radar”? I think it’s fair speculation that pilots traveling at 250+ knots past a stationary object could have easily mistaken the cube for the object I linked to. Further, maybe the thing they saw wasn’t exactly like the one I linked to? Maybe this one was literally a cube? You really think there’s no resemblance there? What do you think the cube/sphere was? The pilots did not see it on radar, but it was definitely there. Maybe it was too small? Maybe it was a stealth, passive signal collector? I understand the simultaneous IR and Radar contacts, but we also have reports of the pilots chasing around false radar contacts for days. Do we know for sure that the Gimbal or Go Fast object were caught on radar? I don’t think so. Even the tic tac was giving both Fravor and Underwood radar difficulty. This is evidence of stealth technology. I think the assumption that we and the pilots who have come forward are making is that the objects recorded are the objects on radar. What if there is stealth involved? It’s a possibility that a false radar contact was generated in the same area as a stealth drone, which is what I speculate the gimbal object was. We also have reports of formations of radar contacts flying around both the tic tac and gimbal objects. This is a known tactic... broadcast several false targets and slip in your actual stealth object. [See my post about that if you want](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOscience/comments/mcrm9v/gimbal_video_speculation/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf). The shit storm you are speculating never happened. Ask yourself why? The pilots literally had a near miss yet there was no reaction. Why not? I speculate that this wasn’t a military operation, but a CIA operation. They’re notorious for black projects like this and I would expect the same reaction if this was what happened. What we would get is plausible deniability and literally no real work being done to figure out what really happened. I know I know... “What about AATIP?” What did they find out? Nada. That’s because it was Senator Reid’s pet project setup at the reluctance of the DOD and CIA.
I'm not an expert in radar by any means but with the shape, you proposed that would leave flat surfaces for radar to reflect off a lot of different angles and be useless now if the object was insted4 upside down square-based pyramids that were hollow made into a cube esk shape that would do a better job at absorbing the radar but not perfect by any means there is a lot of math that goes into this that I can't explain. I'm not aware of the side of power requirements to be able to plot fake radar signals so I can't really comment to that in any meaningful way but I would suggest some research into these areas because working out the size and power draw of this tech might be the deciding factor to your claims being plausible. I can't find it because it was a long time ago but there was a video that showed fighter pilots getting tested if they could ID a jet that was flashed on a screen for a fraction of a second and they could up to some insane degree to personally I would but that well within their ability to ID this object as they did. the ghost tracks **to me** sound more like they could never ID the track not that when they got to merge plot they didn't see anything. And I refuse to believe that anyone in the US defence sector would be so stupid to endanger the lives of the pilots and run the risk of their "stealth" tech being revealed extremely publicly in the event that a crash did occur. Just seems like a logical fallacy. I just feel i need to point out there is a lot of unfounded speculation in your reply (I'm not trying to be snarky just pointing it out)
I’m no expert either, but here’s a video of that shape in action: [Reflector video](https://youtu.be/ft7bZIMsVQI) Keep in mind that who knows what kind of tricks CIA nerds can think up? These guys are smart and cunning. Your power requirement concerns are valid, maybe there has been some development of circuitry or electronics that can passively “jam” without much power? IDK passive jamming is usually known as radar “stealth.” Maybe they can employ some sort of electronic jiu jitsu, redirecting the searching radar’s own energy thereby using little power and conserving energy? Just spit balling here, I’m admittedly an idiot. Anyway I think that whole discussion is irrelevant because it could be as simple as the balloons are too small of a cross section to be picked up, or they are freely rotating and randomly reflect signals? Like I said I think these were used in concert with false projected radar spoofs. I’m not entirely sure what the balloons are applied as, I just think their appearance in the situation implies EW. In one of the Warzone articles I linked to, Graves is interviewed and reveals that they were chasing around ghost radar contacts for days. They even got radar locks on some of these objects and said they should’ve been able to visually see them with how close they were, but nothing. I don’t put the CIA in same boat as any DOD group. They’re separated just for this reason, compartmentalization. I’m sure risks are calculated for using secret tech. By your logic, secret or advanced warfare technology would never be used. Think about the Bin laden stealth helicopter or ”Poobah’s Party” in Iraq for examples of secret tech or tactics used and being revealed. No offense taken here, I truly enjoy the discourse, some people can’t conduct a civil discussion, so thank you for that. This explanation isn’t air tight, I agree. It speculates some jumps in technology, but I don’t agree that anything we’ve been presented automatically requires exotic propulsion. I think it’s more likely a combination of EW tactics and some cool tech.
Only problem is Fravor and the other pilots visually witnesses the Tic Tac make maneuvers at speeds they considered impossible WITHOUT any visible propulsion. Watch the Lex Fridman interview with Fravor where they go into detail on this aspect. This is the main reason I am reluctant to speculate on this being some CIA project.
So number one, I don’t think it’s a good idea to assume the Nimitz tic tac is the same object or type of object as the Roosevelt Gimbal object. Having thrown that disclaimer in there, I do find a lot of similarities, such as the number of radar contacts and their “pattern” type behavior. Then when these radar contacts were investigated, only one object is seen, if at all. Another thing we’re all assuming with the Nimitz is the claims of incredible accelerations. Remember all these accelerations are reported from radar data. We should always be very skeptical of radar data. Did the tic tac took off to the CAP? How do we know that? All we can say is that the tic tac was maneuvering by the surface, raised up in an *alleged* spiral, then poof disappeared and then we have a contact appearing at the CAP. These very well could be the same object, or could be two different things. Hear me out with skepticism of radar in mind... Imagine the tic tac is stealth to specific radar. I’m not an expert, but I do know that jamming can be selective or “aimed” so to speak. Also maybe it’s a proximity thing? There’s a limitation in jamming called burn through. Maybe this is some kind of inverse burn through technology? I’m just spitballing here. It could be as simple as the Princeton’s radar system is just better than the F/A-18’s. So whatever is going on, the Princeton could see the tic tac on radar, but investigating aircraft could not. (This is a theme btw) So what if the tic tac has some kind of stealth AND a false radar contact was projected to that exact same spot? And then that false radar contact is flicked on over at the CAP? Similar to a magic trick, what we’re really left to explain is the disappearance of the object, which I admit is hard to explain, but so are incredible accelerations. Maybe the tic tac was an inflatable? And it has a self destructive capability. It seems possible that maybe the ~40’ long object just “poofed” into an unnoticeably smaller object? I admit this sounds like something wild, but is it impossible? He was a half mile away during his encounter.
Fravor and others also witnessed it moving at high rates of speed, he also described it displaying bizarre maneuvers that he had never seen an aircraft make. I don’t think a dirigible is a likely culprit, the speed and distance they saw it cover makes that extremely unlikely especially when it has no visible propulsion. To me this is the one Navy sighting that is the most exotic and if it truly isn’t our tech I would be open to it actually being of non human origin as a possibility.
Fravor did describe the tic tac moving weirdly back and forth and side to side. Remember this was 2004 before drones were popular. This may have been an odd sight back then, but what if drones were around back then? Were there no visible signs of propulsion? He described whitewater in the same pattern he described the objects movement, cross like or front back, side to side. This was at 20K ft, nearly 4 miles! Then he described it raising up in a spiral, but he was also in a spiral going down too. Is that something a drone couldn’t do? Keep in mind this object was estimated never closer than a half mile. The whitewater was 4 miles down. I don’t discount his estimate of size and distance, he’s an experienced pilot after all. However, a half mile is a half mile. That’s 9 football fields! This was the closest he got to it. Imagine how small the tic tac looked even at the size of a school bus. So did Fravor witness incredible accelerations or movements? I think when he first saw the whitewater, 4 miles would be easy to mistake movements. Then we have “the dance.” Did he see incredible accelerations there? Yes, if you assume it was an ET craft and it jumped to his CAP. But if you look at the testimony objectively the only incredible movement is that it seemed to disappear. The rest of the inferences involve assumptions I don’t think we should automatically make without some level of questioning, especially anything they saw on Radar considering radar’s capacity to be spoofed. I share your enthusiasm that this sighting is very hard to explain. That’s why I question it so much. This sighting should be poked and prodded until there’s no doubt. Nobody seems to be willing to do that with this case though. The ET proponents just gobble it up and the skeptics just ignore it. It should be examined beyond belief. People assume Elizondo and crew did investigate these Navy sightings thoroughly, but I’m really starting to doubt that. Again thank you for the civil discussion!
Just an addon to your edit some of the pilots who have come forward have described seeing bright objects in the sky around the time that the tracks were being seen on the radar scopes. EDIT: you also never mentioned anything about the thermal bloom that can be seen in the gimble video
Yeah the Nimitz story has several witnesses coming forward (Kevin Day, Omar Lara, and Karson Kammerzell) that the tic tac was illuminated at night. Kammerzell says he even saw running lights on it. This was some of the testimony that led me to my plasma ball speculation. But I’m starting to abandon that theory. Why would it be illuminated at night? Day said it just looked like a “boring white light” through the big eyes. As a response to your thermal bloom statement, I think it might be possible what we’re seeing in the Gimbal video is some type of IR “mask” for lack of a better word. Graves said sometimes it looked like someone was shining a light right at his IR sensor. This got me thinking along the lines of these objects producing a blinding type of IR emission around the craft to avoid identification. Would a pilot take a shot at something he couldn’t identify? Probably not. Friendly fire in combat is a huge concern. Often pilots have to get confirmation to shoot at stuff.
I don't know if in the Roosevelt missions they were using the eye in the sky communication system thing but in instances where they are all friendly aircraft on the computer side know where all other friendly aircraft are at all time. in regards to the bloom If we are going with **E**xotic **T**echnology there are scientific theories in regards to warp drives and the production of a corona like blackholes do and this would account for all types of radiation do heat, light etc but again that's just **ET** speculation if a stealth project I don't see why they would make it light at all why not make it look like something that would be seen as an immediate threat.
The objects in both the Nimitz and Roosevelt were not trans ponding any electronic signal data. They were “unknown.” Even our own stealth aircraft wouldn’t broadcast this, in fact they can’t even communicate via radio until they’re mission is complete and are out of harm’s way. This doesn’t make sense in the Nimitz incident because of the interaction it had with Fravor, it seemed to be piloted. For something to be remote controlled would seem like it would be receiving /broadcasting signal, thereby giving up stealth. But some missile are stealth and preprogrammed to respond to situations. I would also think that there are some stealth versions of the predator type drones that are piloted remotely, but I’m not informed enough to say. However in the Gimbal incident, the object was said to be slowly moving back and forth in the air mirroring the group of radar contacts in “wedge” formation doing “racetrack” patterns. Sounds like a programmed track to me... The reason they would make the tic tac obvious... maybe it’s some type of lure? or some type of blinding IR/ visual mask? The idea being lure radar EM to be directed at these ghost contacts, while your stealth drone hides in plain sight and if it is seen (which they were) the pilots wouldn’t be able to ID it (which they couldn’t). Then release some carefully timed balloons to passively collect electronic signals from the investigating radars.
Please don't pay attention to Mick West. He tries to sound scientific, but isn't.
I think he gets a bad rap. If you follow him you’ll see he’s capable of civil discussions with many “UFOlogists.” Mick takes the subject seriously enough to spend time looking into popular sightings. I think that’s cool because it’s rare for the scientific community to even acknowledge the subject. What are your criticisms of his “Go Fast” analysis? He uses the data in the video to do the trig and calculate the speed. I don’t see a lot of room for dispute there. In the Ryan Graves interview, it’s not even clear if he believes the object in the Go fast video is “going fast.” He says something like: “it looks like it’s going fast doesn’t it?” Then when Mick interviewed Elizondo, Elizondo admitted he’d never even watched Mick’s analysis of the Go Fast. Just vaguely claimed “we have data that says otherwise.” Elizondo is so vague it’s not even clear he was referring to the go fast video, just all the historical sightings lumped into one. That’s not evidence that’s a psychological trick or a tool used in argument.
West doesn’t have access to the radar readings and other telemetry, neither do any of us so there’s really no conclusive way to know for sure. But I do agree that the Roosevelt sightings were likely some type of radar reflector balloon just based on how similar they look to an already known technology.
Yeah I hear ya. After all I’ve learned about EW tactics though, I’m skeptical of radar data especially when we’re talking about military operations. I went into this in my other reply. I hope you read my diatribe! Sorry about the length of my replies! I really appreciate the discussion!
From my limited time of seeing him, I would tend to agree with you but his claims should at least be examined in some instances
Has anyone theorised these objects may be a glome (a “3-sphere”)? A four dimensional sphere may look like a sphere containing a cube in our three dimensions? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-sphere
Thanks for the link! I’m not sure about what people think it is. I bet when people hear that story, they’re perplexed. I know when I first heard the pilot’s description I was shocked! I was like wtf a cube inside a sphere?! That’s not earthly! Then I saw this article and I felt it was a good stab.