It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Erongaricuaro
Originally posted by TAGBOARD
I ran across this website about San Nicolas Island done by Naval Base Ventura County:
CNIC Naval Base Ventura County - San Nicolas Island
In the website, they state the following:
1) "SNI maintains a 10,000 foot concrete and asphalt runway that can accommodate an aircraft the size of a C-5."
2) Under the 'Newly Assigned' page, "No one is allowed outside of Nicktown for recreational purposes between 30 minutes after sunset and 30 minutes prior to sunrise the next morning." Why is that?
I spent eight years on San Nicolas Island full-time living there as a federal civilian DoD and retired in 2006. My time on the island goes back some almost 30 years. I can talk about it in general terms but need to avoid specifics in some cases.
During most of my time there were about 20 or so of us "techies" civilian DoD's permanently assigned with the test range and a number of military and contract civilians support personnel up to about 60 or so in number. Some of the roads were tricky and the terrain rough so the evening hour restriction applied to most of those support people who were janitors, cooks, supply people, etc., who were not authorized in restricted areas and were to stay in town in the evenings for safety reasons. My work station, a tracking site, was outside of town and frequently was there around the clock or at odd hours for test operations. Not too mysterious.
Our runway was huge and was an alternate site for shuttle landing but was never needed for that. We also operated F-4 and F16 target aircraft by radio control that were piloted over from the mainland then unmanned for operations around the sea test range then landed on SNI like on a carrier with with arrestor cables. These operations could be dangerous so much of the island personnel were restricted to "Nicktown" during those ops.
A lot of what was mentioned earlier in the thread was done there as well as ops with some of the military's latest whizz-bang toys. For obvious reasons I can't be too specific about those. I can answer some questions anyone might have and can be somewhat specific about many things. We did have some operations go on a couple of times that even I wasn't supposed to see up close and personal when it was on the deck though I did my regular instrumentations stuff with it while flying. I think I am allowed to mention I was primary tracker on the two successful Hyper-X ops when it was reaching mach 7 and almost mach 10.
The OLF SNI patch I still have a couple goodies around like a wine glass and a shot glass with the patch that was a gift at Xmas for our crew. I never gave it too much thought to more meaning, it just depicts the island and some of our instrumentation kind of caricaturized and not much detail. -Eron
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
You know this how?
originally posted by: Sublant
If the Tic-Tac is ours, the submarine fleet has nothing to do with it.
I don't know if there was a relationship between whatever was under the water under the tic tac and the tic tac, but Fravor said he thinks it was related. He can't confirm whether or not it was a submarine that caused the disturbance because he only saw the disturbance, but isn't a submarine a possibility for causing a disturbance as Fravor described? He said it was about the size of a 737 and he was guessing a bit so I don't see how that rules out a submarine. I also don't conclude it was a submarine, I keep an open mind.
TIC TAC UFO : AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH THE PILOT WHO CHASED IT : PART 1
At time 28:00:
"Knapp: If not for the thing in the water, you may not have seen [the tic tac], so, what was in the water? It wasn't a rock, because when you went back, it was gone.
Fravor: I have no idea. It was a disturbance, something below the surface that was causing the waves to break on top. When we went back, we could not find it. At all.
Knapp: This thing, a rendezvou? A docking? You're speculating obviously but there's a relationship between the tic tac and what was under the water.
Fravor: I think so."
Maybe it wasn't a submarine causing the disturbance Fravor saw which he thinks was caused by an underwater object, but I don't see how you can rule out a submarine being the cause of the disturbance.
The Navy has funded two industry consortia to conduct five demonstrations in the component advanced development (CAD) phase of this effort. The demonstrations were started late in fiscal year 2001 and are scheduled to be complete by fiscal year 2004. These efforts include: a flexible payload module (FPM); A stealthy affordable capsule system (SACS); processing; a small, unmanned aerial vehicle (SUAV); and, broaching universal buoyant launcher (BUBL).
Mr BARTLETT. What measures or programs are available or could be used to develop and inject advanced technology into the Virginia class submarine?
Admiral MUNNS. The Advanced Submarine System Development (ASSD) program develops and demonstrates the most promising technologies including enablers for lower submarine acquisition and operation costs (Joint Navy/DARPA Tango Bravo Program), sonar/combat systems (eg. Advanced Processing Builds that transistion to Acoustic Rapid COTS Insertion (ARCI), the Stealthy Affordable Capsule System (SACS) for the submarine launch of joint forces weapons and sensors, hull and deployable sensor arrays, stealth components and systems and composite structural materials (VIRGINIA Class advanced sail).
The Navy is pursuing a strategy of increasing the capabilities of the VIRGINIA Class through the insertion of advanced technology...
SACS and the Flexible Payload Module will allow the users to utilize a common interface between the submarine or ship and the payload, thereby minimizing costly modifications to the submarine and allowing for an employment of a greater variation of payloads. Universal Encapsulation capability will provide the ability to employ off-the-shelf small or large payloads and additionally offers long-term storage capability, variable release depth, and launch-upon-broach or surface-loiter capability.
Having demonstrated the capsule’s ability to carry both large and small payloads, the next step in the development will involve the actual release of a SACS from the submarine USS Georgia acting as a surrogate SSGN during the U.S. Navy’s upcoming SEA TRIAL Limited Objective Experiment “Silent Hammer” this fall off the coast of Southern California.
The first tests previously completed involved the successful launch of test vehicles modeled after the U.S. Air Force Miniature Air Launched Decoy (MALD). For this most recent test, the SACS was enlarged in order to accommodate the Office of Naval Research’s Affordable Weapon -a low-cost, land attack cruise missile. During the test, the 21-foot, tube-shaped container, housing a model weapon, emerged from the testing pool and loitered at the surface.
Trident Warrior allows the navy to identify warfighting capability gaps and provide innovative solutions in an operational environment.
8) Are the Navy proactively investigating UAP, or are investigations only being done after a reported observation?
A: The U.S. Navy and the Department of Defense take these reports very seriously and investigate each and every report. Documented reports of sightings by military personnel form the basis for the investigation process. The investigation of UAP sightings by the multi-agency task force is ongoing.
I wouldn't rule out a humpback. It would be a coincidence that it and the tic tac were so close that Fravor thought they were related, but coincidences happen.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Could have been a humpback. They leave a pretty good sized disturbance after a breech.
Don't think they employ ECM though. So, if it was a whale it didn't have anything to do with what he saw in the sky.
I'm not sure what the tic tac was, but if it's based on the technology explained by physicist Tom Mahood, the basic technology is not that exotic, though the Tic Tac would be an application of it that most people wouldn't be familiar with. Based on some of your cryptic comments like that and others, you may be one of the few people who grasps what Mahood is talking about, but I think most people don't.
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
The tic tac technology is decades old.
I didn't see you stating any objections to the disturbance Fravor saw possibly being a submarine. It seems your assumption is that the Tic Tac was an "exotic thing" that would require a "major chunk of funding and resources" might be the reason for concluding a submarine wasn't involved.
originally posted by: Sublant
Among other things. If a major chunk of funding and resources would've gone to more exotic thing like the Tic-Tac, you could see it, even if you couldn't see the end product.
The newest artifact in the Museum's collection.
originally posted by: celltypespecific
BIG BREAKING NEWS
More info/questions answered by the PENTAGON:
So they call them "UAP" to avoid pre-judging the results of any investigation.
When an observed object is NOT immediately identifiable, the Navy/DOD refers to it as UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena). The generic term UAP is used in communications to avoid pre-judging the results of any investigation...
As the investigation of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) sightings is ongoing, we will not discuss any aspect of individual sighting reports / observations, including frequency of sightings...
“wherein a laser source is mounted on the back of the air vehicle, and wherein the laser source is configured to create a laser-induced plasma, and wherein the laser-induced plasma acts as a decoy for an incoming threat to the air vehicle.”
Are the Navy using the term Anomalous Aerial Vehicles, AAV, in relation to investigation of UAP incursions?
A: When an observed object is NOT immediately identifiable, the Navy/DOD refers to it as UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena). ...For example, a quadcopter would be referred to as an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) or Unmanned Aerial System (UAS). The U.S. Navy does not use the term “Anomalous Aerial Vehicles.”
.....In DOD, the acronym AAV stands for amphibious assault vehicles. The contractors who prepared the 38 technical reports under AATIP occasionally used the term “anomalous aerial vehicles,” but it is not a DOD term.
This response raises further questions, if Luis Elizondo was part of such interagency team as he claims, and if AATIP indeed was a UAP study, as the contractors used the term Anomalous Aerial Vehicles? Further questions have now been sent to the Pentagon.