At first glance it's disc shaped or eliptical, but when I watch again I see a nose on the plane, almost like a concord. No way to see wings clear
enough in the blurred image if they're being viewed from the side like that.
Watching again there almost is a view of the shape of the wings and tail
edit on 18-6-2017 by violet because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: Gumerk
People in chat saying they saw this live on BBC? Did a search and didn't see it posted yet
First nothing is really live. Second it's funny causes the guy looks like he is taking a piss on a building. Third it might be a bird I dunno not
sharp enough. Living, dead, future, past, wer a seomthing.
It's a plane climbing in altitude having just left Heathrow
It won't be coming out of Heathrow. The footage shows that it is north of the tower block and moving from east to the west.
You can see from the playback that the Heathrow landings at that time were coming from the east. Takes off would have been in the same direction into
Pause the footage at 11:19 and 39 seconds (See timer at bottom of playback screen) and zoom into the map. Air Canada AC847 at 11:19:39 is north of the
tower block. Heathrow is further to the west.
24 flags for an aeroplane ... some people need to spend a day watching aircraft. I'm still going with a plane either flying through London air space,
an aircraft on its final stacking lap to enter Heathrow, a plane that's took off climbed and banked to the north of London to leave the U.K.
it could also have been a plane that's left or approaching London city airport.
There's way too much aircraft movement around London especially when Heathrow has 4 stacking areas. There's one to the north west and south west of
London and two more located to the north east (this one is over my location) and south east of London.
Until someone can prove that it's NOT a plane .. it's just a plane out of focus hence the reason you can't see the wings
Here's a graphic to give people can idea of how aircraft approach Heathrow and their stacking areas. Keep in my this is just for one airport outside
of London there's at least 4 major airports on the out skirts of London
The wings are significantly thinner. Unless the light hit them it would be easy to not see them in that video.
From an angle viewed from the ground?
Same thickness if not more..
But the view of this object IS mostly from the side, so it could be a plane.
What I see is a plane that looks low enough to have recently taken off from (or maybe on approach to) one of the London airports, and is also away
from the camera enough (half-way down to the horizon) that we would be viewing it at least partly from the side.
edit on 2017/6/19 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)
What I saw on Sky News (UK) was black and gliding upwards. It was on the news the next day of the fire. I couldn't see it on youtube but I did see
multiple videos of different UFO'S. I was hoping to find what i saw but no luck yet.
edit on 20-6-2017 by NicholasOvo because: (no reason given)
We have now got to the point where a light in the sky is now a UFO
Where anything that moves in the sky is a UFO.
I don't mean UFO in it's correct meaning either.
It's gotten quite pathetic.
It's not pathetic, it's just a product of a ton of MSM, a greatly increased # of things flying in the sky, and the readily available camera attached
to any device.
For things like this, they are rather pointless, because you can't prove anything. Even if it were piloted by Xzeveth the 12th from S Cassiopeia, a
blurry fly-by with no other relevant eye-witness, radar, or other proofs is just that.. a blurry thing flying by the camera.
That is why I think substantial sightings should be thoroughly and exhaustively investigated. Even if old, even if done a hundred times, because those
are the only cases that will actually yield any sort of proofs. But blurry (or blurds) dots flying in the sky get dozens of pages on many sites
(including this one). And relevant cases oddly just disappear from the front page. I still sadly recall the literally over 100 page thread dedicated
to a white umbrella on someone's patio. Won't advance Ufology with that sort of thing. : )
It ashame this thread has already lost traction and nobody else has come forward who actually watched the BBC News or Euronews broadcast.
Having watched the actual BBC News broadcast on TV it did'nt look like a plane (not even an out of focus one).
It appeared to be flattish ecliptical shaped cloud moving fast across the sky..sounds silly but thats the only way I describe it.
I've found some better quality Youtube videos which I urge everyone check out before reaching the conclusion the white ecliptical shape is in fact a
But first a frame capture of a Youtube video which accurately depicts what I saw on the broadcast. Would a out of focus plane look like this ?
This Youtuber uses his HD Cam to record his TV screen so the quality is good and the best I could find on YT. Worth checking out
The source of my frame capture above and broadcast is from Euronews. Sorry about the cheesy
X-Files music and the watermark. None of these videos are mine.
Another video with some commentary. Not sure of the source whether its BBC News or Euronews broadcast.
Before someone comes along and says 'get a grip man its damn plane'. Im not denying that all im saying it didnt look like a plane and judging by the
number of Youtubers that felt compelled enough to upload it i'm not the only one.
I've tried to make sense of what I saw on the broadcast and YT videos and have come up with my own theory.
The plane/jet is miles away and not actually visible ..the white eclipitical cloud like shape is the contrail from the plane/jet.
Now I know my theory is frought with many problems..why dont we see continuous contrail trail ? How do you explain the speed if that really is a
distant plane ?
It would great we could find a digital transfer from someones PVR and not just a recording of TV screen so that everyone else can clearly see what
many witnessed on the news broadcast.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.