AST Moving Cylinder UFO on Live Newscast - OKLAHOMA

a reply to: markymint

The roof most likely has lights on it for maintenance. Most buildings over a few stories have a readily accessible roof complete with lighting. We would need an image of the building at night.

Edit: Actually, even in the video you can see flood lights pointing directly at the camera almost. The entire roof is illuminated.

See my edit 2 below, ArMap already came to the same conclusion

a reply to: six67seven

The camera is pointing west not east...why do you think it was pointing east? Even your source says it points at OKC to show traffic on the freeway going into the city. This can be confirmed from the curve of the road and how the 40 separates a little bit. It also appears to pass in front of the light source by the curve of the freeway, but isn't actually a light source, it is an exit sign to get off on the 102.

To further show this is pointing west, look at the shape of the parking lot as well as the lack of the fountain that is east.

Edit: I believe this object is very close to the camera. Previously I didn't study the video closely because nothing seemed out of the ordinary, and considering this things "crosses over" a super busy freeway, yet we have no reports of it, I am going to go out on a limb and say it didn't exist for people driving.

Look at this sources image cap, bottom right capture: Source That "light" (rectangular in shape) is the sign for exit 176 for the 102.

Edit 2: 'ArMap already pointed this out. SO we seem to definitevly show that the camera is facing west and that the objects are road signs which are within 1500-2000 ft of the hotel. also, as pointed out, we never see this thing "land" as it cuts back to the studio feed.

a reply to: ArMaP

The camera is probably also in a low light or "night" mode, as can be seen from the stretch of the headlights on the 40. If that's the case you wouldn't necessarily see a bug flapping it's wings, after all that's exactly how people make the "rod" hoax videos. However, I also think it is too straight to be a bug. I think it is a meteor as the local astronomy club claims. I just think it is a lot closer to the camera than a lot of people on here think. As I stated above, and as you showed, it is within 2000 feet of the camera.

Edit: It could be a bug, I just don't think it is.

What day was this video taken? Does anyone have an info on the original feed? I have tried to track down all the times Shelby Hays stood in for Brad Sowder, but it doesn't seem to happen often, only a few times a year.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

The shape "lands" in the area marked with the 2, and there's no airfield there.

Are you also talking about a reflection?

Not a reflection, and it clearly lands. We would have to see views fro the direction of the camera to know for certain, but if you slow the video to a quarter of the normal speed, it's clear this thing lands.

I once saw something land, in an area with no airfield there, too. From the lights, it had to be either a small plane, or a helicopter with the side extensions, all lit up. I assume the latter, based on how it came down, into an area off the side of the road, not on the nearby military post, where there is an airfield, and not on the correct side for the local airport in that area, either. Wasn't a normal spot to land, but I didn't assume it was a "UFO" because of that. Best guess, this object is something of that sort, that was moving too fast for the camera. Possible it wasn't, of course, but looking for simpler explanations first is always best.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I watched the video frame by frame, until the image from the studio replaces the outdoors image, and the object doesn't stop, that's why I say it didn't land.

a reply to: Bullshark012


You don't know the size of the object or the distance you cant work out a speed, why do people on here always do that.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I watched the video frame by frame, until the image from the studio replaces the outdoors image, and the object doesn't stop, that's why I say it didn't land.

I watched it, too, and it looks to me as though it landed. Either way, we still don't have a firm ID. If it was an aircraft, there should be a record of the flight. I wonder if anyone has checked for that.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Tons of small aircraft do NOT have to file a flight plan depending on the use. Crop dusters for example are exempt. There may be zoning laws that prevent them from flying over certain areas, but no flight plan would be logged.

Edit: It also appears one can get a Ferry Permit (special operations) which would also allow them to fly as long as they avoid no fly zones and maintain an altitude of 500 feet during flight. No flight plan would be required.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Tons of small aircraft do NOT have to file a flight plan depending on the use. Crop dusters for example are exempt. There may be zoning laws that prevent them from flying over certain areas, but no flight plan would be logged.

Edit: It also appears one can get a Ferry Permit (special operations) which would also allow them to fly as long as they avoid no fly zones and maintain an altitude of 500 feet during flight. No flight plan would be required.

Very true. Easily could have been a plane. Looked pretty cool, I will admit, but slowed down, it's most likely something totally ordinary.