US Air Force pilots struggle to explain mystery UFO seen 'falling from sky'

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Thats a aircraft of some sort I've mistaken them for UFOs in the past heres my video :

a reply to: Phage
Yes it looks like a contrail from an airplane. The video seems a little too focused on the types of aircraft at the nearby military bases, but the plane wouldn't have to be from those because Anchorage has long been under a polar route between Japan and the west coast of North America, so it could even be a Japanese aircraft headed back to Japan.

Polar Route

originally posted by: LookingAtMars

originally posted by: Gothmog

US Air Force pilots struggle to explain mystery UFO seen 'falling from sky'

Which does not fall under the job description of a US pilot.

We do seem to have a US pilot here explaining the mystery UFO if I am not mistaken.

"US Air Force pilots struggle to explain mystery UFO seen 'falling from sky'" can mean may things, like they were laughing too hard and struggled to explain it

And which part of that IS IN the job description ?

If it's a plane then why would the FAA in the article state: "Officials from the Federal Aviation Administration added that the object in the video was not an aircraft, and that it hadn't received any reports of aviation issues at the time."

If in fact the FAA did make this statement it would be VERY odd to make this statement.

I will admit to me it looks similar to short contrails, however, not exactly like short contrails.

I've witnessed short contrails behind jet liners, however, what I've noticed is a very noticeable and rapid evaporation of the contrails which is what contributes to them being shortened. In this video I do not see any apparent evaporation.

Again...if the FAA wanted to dismiss it as just an airliner then why would they say it "was not an aircraft"?

a reply to: 1point92AU

Because someone called and said they had a video of something trailing plumes of black smoke falling to earth and asked them if there had been a plane crash?

a reply to: RadioRobert
Possibly. I noticed the article gives a quote of what the spokeswoman of nearby Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson said, but there is no quote of what the FAA said nor even what question they were asked, so it's fair to guess the dialog with the FAA since we weren't given any quotes.

Note the Daily Mirror is a tabloid known for sensationalism, poor fact checking, so Wikipedia doesn't allow it as a source, etc:

www.humantruth.info...
"+Has won Newspaper of the Year once.
-Sensationalism, lack of depth.
-Many PCC complaints against it (4th worse in the list) [2013]8.
-Too untrustworthy to use as a reference by Wikipedia[12]
-Responsible for 19 of 548 articles on false and misleading information about the EU."

originally posted by: 1point92AU
Again...if the FAA wanted to dismiss it as just an airliner then why would they say it "was not an aircraft"?

You put that in quotes, but there is no such quote from the FAA in the article. We don't know that the FAA actually said that. The source has a poor reputation and may have misrepresented what the FAA actually said. It wouldn't be the first time they have misrepresented something.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

The story did not originate from the Mirror, but it is a contrail. Not an aircraft. Can't see the aircraft producing the contrail.
www.ktva.com...

a reply to: Phage
I still don't know exactly what the FAA said. If they said it was a contrail, not an aircraft, then that would convey a different message than not mentioning the contrail.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yeah. The answer would depend upon the question. Neither of which are quoted.

But it is, after all, a contrail.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yeah. The answer would depend upon the question. Neither of which are quoted.

But it is, after all, a contrail.

Unlike any contrail I've ever seen... unless condensed water now turns blackish gray...

a reply to: EternalSolace

Completely unheard of...

a reply to: RadioRobert

I've never heard a contrail.
But I have seen them under varying lighting conditions.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: EternalSolace

Completely unheard of...

Are you after a background pic vote or what?

a reply to: EternalSolace

Blackish gray clouds are the point.

Contrails are clouds. Believe it or not.

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: EternalSolace

Completely unheard of...

Are you after a background pic vote or what?

Sorry, I thought we were talking about dark-coloured, grey-appearing nucleated and condensed water vapour. What are we on about again?

a reply to: RadioRobert

Water vapor is invisible.
Clouds (including contrails) are condensed water vapor. In the case of contrails, frozen.

Fixed for pendantry...

Great video taken from another aircraft of an A380 leaving a short co trail. At first you can't see what it is

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: EternalSolace

Completely unheard of...

Are you after a background pic vote or what?

Sorry, I thought we were talking about dark-coloured, grey-appearing nucleated and condensed water vapour. What are we on about again?

Oh my gherd...we were.... untill you realized said trails are white.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Those light, whispy clouds would also appear white in "normal" lighting conditions...