UK Police Tweet for help on UFO: Hot, Invisible & Flying into the wind

a reply to: BlueShaman

Okay, you go with the official story. Can't get more official than the police can we? Except for the Night time Bristol festival with balloons, night time, hot, round target on flir drifting wth the wind at a thousand feet, 'UFO".

Must of course rule that out and declare Aleeens...

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: BlueShaman

Okay, you go with the official story. Can't get more official than the police can we? Except for the Night time Bristol festival with balloons, night time, hot, round target on flir drifting wth the wind at a thousand feet, 'UFO".

Must of course rule that out and declare Aleeens...

Why are you ignoring the fact that balloons are considered and subject to the same rules as light aircraft? They must display night lights when flying at night time, there are no night lights.

When you add this to all the other evidence (such as flying into the prevailing wind, no basket, only visible to IR) it probably wasn't a balloon, but hey, if it floats your balloon then keep on keeping on.

a reply to: Jonjonj

When you add this to all the other evidence (such as flying into the prevailing wind, no basket, only visible to IR) it probably wasn't a balloon, but hey, if it floats your balloon then keep on keeping on.

'Probably' wasn't a balloon? I thought you were sure?

The 'evidence' has to exclude that its a ballon, and it can't. Theres no radar "evidence'. "Against" the wind, how do we tell?

The image is too grainy to determine at extreme magnification if there was any gondola. So far, a balloon can't be ruled out.

If there was an air show in my city and a few days or weeks later I saw vintage bombers and bi planes flying around, I'd be able to connect up the dots. You're denying the connection to the night time festival in Bristol.

Which is okay for you, but I have to be convinced there's no connection first, like any reasonable investigator.

originally posted by: intrptr
Okay, you go with the official story. Can't get more official than the police can we? Except for the Night time Bristol festival with balloons, night time, hot, round target on flir drifting wth the wind at a thousand feet, 'UFO".

Must of course rule that out and declare Aleeens...

Hey I'm not completely discarding the hot air balloon hypothesis. You asked if I had radar image of the area, have you seen the radar images of every UFO sighting that was (or wasn't) detected by radar? No. We usually have to go by what "somebody" says about it.

Are the police lying? Who knows, but seems to me like it would be much easier to not go public with the story, rather than lying.

Last response here, believe what you want... imo, hot air balloon can't be ruled out.

a reply to: BlueShaman

The media is never going to show us the real deal. Just the fluff.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
That's my home City, what is going on?

Just one question, if they couldn't see it with the naked eye, how did they know there was something there in the first place?

Asking the public for suggestions, yeah that sounds like plod alright.

That's what I was wondering. Was it a slow night on the ground, so the police helicopter started sweeping skies, for the fun of it? Perhaps they were looking for drug pigeons.

Although i believe that the object in the video is likely something mundane, i would like to address the comments on "we dont have the technology to make things optically invisible or silent" or comments speculatng on such.

We do!☺

Some food for though to get the imagination going. Or just for the curious.


For being silent. "Aural stealth" is something the military has been developing for a while.

From aircraft that produce no sonic booms to silent jet engines.

No sonic booms!

You can say this article is behind the times....by about a decade. And, if you google images you'll see a pretty green painted lockheed bird with a skunkworks emblem on the side....very telling. **squints eyes and looks at lockheed suspiciously ***

Green airplane!

pop.h-cdn.co...

Behind the times article.
www.popsci.com...

"Pretty bird,.. Pretty bird" ***tries to pet the plane*** (me likes this picture)

aviationweek.com...

Ducting of the exhaust can help silence a plane too. (Too lazy to look for links)

However, there are technologies to mute the engine too.

For instance, the roar of a jet engine comes from turbulance and eddies in the exhaust stream as it exits the exhaust nozzel. Using plasma actuators ringing the inside of the exhaust nozzels in tandem with sensors that detect the eddies and turbulance in the exhuast stream they can pulse the plasma actuators with a right timing to smooth those eddies right out. Presto! No more jet engine roar! Same can be done on the intake to eliminate that pesky hiss or whine of air being sucked into the turbine. Leaves you with a very quiet jet engine thats hardly audible from any realistic distance.

Lets just say this guy in the articles below may be doing something cutting edge for the civilian sector but he may also be slightly behind the times in the military arena. And....the navy developed the tech first not the air force....but they were using it to silence subs....and not always the water flowing around it or the screws cavitation (speaking of screws...ahem. Boomless aircrafy wingtip design gleemed from navy research into queiting propellers....maybe?)

Anyhoo... Untimely article.
www.newscientist.com...

spectrum.ieee.org...



As for optical invisibility. Military has been working on a few ways to do that.

One way i suggest looking into is double negative refraction index metamaterial and or dielect EM resonant nanospheres.


en.m.wikipedia.org...

Googling double negative refractive index metamaterial will bring up a bunch of pdfs from universities and such. Dont think were allowed to link pdfs on ats so....😕

Also research the budding art of Plasmonics. 👍

Digital cameras can be foiled from getting a photo of classified aircraft by a method where a specific frequency of light is strobed by the aircraft. Which in turn, screws over the optical sensors on digital cameras rendering your photo worthless. Ever wonder why so much ufo footage comes out blurry these days?

And then theres a bit if technology that i wont go into that you'll find very little about on the internet that directly interferes with how the brain processes its visual senses and data. Making it so you unsaw what you just saw! 😮Pretty nifty. That one i really wont get into since it involves essentially hacking the brain in a roundabout way using various sense organs as a way in.. Crazy sounding i know.

And yet still, with all the above mentioned stuff, I dont think this object is utilizing any of that.

Interesting video.

I can't buy the 'flying lantern' explanation without knowing how the camera is configured on the aircraft and what altitude the flight was (if this detail has been given, I've missed it).

If the view is lateral, then it looks nothing like a flying lantern, which would be noticeably taller than it is round, would be hottest at the base and inside the envelope, and would show leakage of a plume of heated air above it.

If on the other hand the camera was pointed straight down, then flying lantern is an option as the profile would be circular with a hot spot in the middle (although personally I'm still not wholly convinced by that idea, because the airgap in the envelope would be hotter than the envelope itself).

But no way at all is this a hot air balloon. Not least because it would show up on radar, not to say completely visible to the crew.

a reply to: intrptr

The 'evidence' has to exclude that its a ballon, and it can't. Theres no radar "evidence'. "Against" the wind, how do we tell?

If it doesn't look like a balloon, doesn't act like a balloon and there is no evidence whatsoever that it actually is a balloon...it is probably a balloon, just 'cos.

a reply to: Jonjonj

Helium filled ballons can come in all shapes and sizes.

They can retain heat past nightfall and appear a different temp than the ambient air.

They have a limited altitude like this object.

We dont know what the wi d patterns or conditions were for this object in relation to the helicopter filming it. We dont even know what speed its travelling. Could be going 3 mph for all we know.

A balloon might not be an unreasonable proposition considering all the supposition and conjecture here.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

@ThatBulldog777 Only slight problem is the amount of heat and it was travelling into wind?

@markrally We really don't know but doubt it was a lantern as it was going into the wind..

The police guys in the helicopter (an aircraft that is extremely reliant on wind direction accuracy) seem fairly certain.

It seems as if people just ignored the wind direction indicator in the video or something, I am sure the police did not though, or why would they have said the object was moving into the wind?

a reply to: Jonjonj

Ok so you didnt read anything i posted as to why im skeptical at the wind direction.

Just because the helicopter knows what direction the wind is travelling for it doesnt mean that it knows what the wind conditions are for the object.

And the poluce dont seem like theyre very certain of anything except conjecture.

First question id ask is distance, size and speed. Then id ask flir settings. Then id ask them exactly how they knew what the wind conditions were for the object. Howd they get that data?

Whats the temp of the object....again tied into flir settings.

a reply to: SargonThrall


Here is a good movie of those critters, hole in centre and notch in circumference. They pulsate as they move like jelly fish.

originally posted by: zinc12
Here is a good movie of those critters, hole in centre and notch in circumference. They pulsate as they move like jelly fish.

But the "hole" gets bigger when they zoom in around the 3:15 mark:

originally posted by: BlueShaman
But the "hole" gets bigger when they zoom in around the 3:15 mark

Yes, it does. Which would seem to indicate that the circular pattern in the middle is most likely a camera artifact and not something inherent in the object itself.

As for it being "hot," is there a mention in the article about the actual temperature of the object, or was it just hotter than the surrounding air? I'm thinking that maybe a black mylar balloon might absorb heat naturally and appear dark compared to the cool air around it. Not that it was heated or anything. Just relatively hot.

Otherwise, it doesn't seem to do any crazy flying around other than perhaps going "against the wind," which can move in different directions at different altitudes.

a reply to: Misterlondon

Who is to say the ministry wasn't all over it. Invisible to the naked eye and it was nothing? Really?

I might be wrong here but if they said they were over Bristol they are a mite off. If you care to look at the flight data at the bottom of the screen shot you will see they are approx. 51.24 and 3.20 which puts them over South Wales above a place called Llanbethery which is quite aways from Bristol.

There goes another file into the government UFO files, maybe they should call NASA, not us because we don't give any answers for free, something has to be in it for us too, right?

I think that this video is a fake. The background on the supposed HUD changes at 31 seconds into the video. It displays 3 people looking toward something of interest, but why does it still display the HUD? Then there is the "N" arrow in the bottom right corner of the "HUD." Most of the time it doesn't move. Also notice that the object is very pixelated, as well as several of the arrows on the HUD. It's CGI folks.

Here is a real example of of UK chopper using FLIR. NO pixelation.
www.liveleak.com...
Here is a photo from the above UK chopper FLIR video

Clear as a bell! no pixelation!
Here are 2 chopper FLIR stills taken from video. One is from law enforcement, the other is military.


Sorry OP, but you've been HOAXED.