UAP Tic-Tac Russia April 4th, 2019

Not much in the way of info other than the video. Looks very similar (in movement) to the one filmed in Utah recently. I included that footage as well for a comparison of the choppy movement we see.

As an aside I don't believe the videographer was zooming in on the UAP. Looks like it might be some stock footage where the videographer caught the UAP by accident. Unless we see the raw video file like we did with the Beaver Creek footage then the Russia Tic-Tac could be CGI.

The similarities in movement are strikingly similar if not identical. They even look nearly identical as well. Play both videos simultaneously and you will see what I mean.

Russia Tic-Tac UAP


Beaver Creek Utah UFO Footage

Nice find!

That object says ‘there are no wings on me’.

originally posted by: KKLOCO
Nice find!

That object says ‘there are no wings on me’.

It's amazing how the UAPs in each video move the same and look the same. Since the Beaver Creek, Utah footage has been proven to be unaltered it lends higher credibility to the Russia Tic Tac being possibly legitimate. I say "possibly" only because we don't have raw footage of the event that I am aware.

I'm glad the word " UFO" has evolved to "UAP" but wondering what it in ten years called to be?

great vid..

a reply to: 1point92AU
To me, I wouldn't expect the object to bank into a corner...It's being governed by the rules of aerodynamics. If it would have turned without tilting it's frame, I would believe it more. JMO.

a reply to: 1point92AU

Here’s a video analysis proving that Utah Sighting was not a bug like some are claiming.
The video gives an excellent breakdown showing proofs and validation.
The author did a great job with it.

originally posted by: donktheclown
a reply to: 1point92AU
To me, I wouldn't expect the object to bank into a corner...It's being governed by the rules of aerodynamics. If it would have turned without tilting it's frame, I would believe it more. JMO.

You make a very valid point and honestly one I have never considered before. Since we have no information on how a UFO's propulsion system works aside from what Bob Lazar has stated it makes it challenging to answer. For argument's sake let's assume Bob Lazar's account of the propulsion system is accurate. An array of gravity amplifies focus on a point in space and the craft begins to travel in that direction by distorting the gravity field around the craft.

I agree with your logic but what I don't know is if we distort the gravity field if that would somehow impact the laws of aerodynamics? By distorting the gravity field around the craft it would seem to imply some level of aerodynamics would still apply. If Bob had said the gravity amplifiers ELIMINATE the gravity field around the craft then I would lean towards your observation because at that point gravity has no effect and neither would the laws of aerodynamics. I'm hypothesizing here and could be completely wrong.

All of that being said you make a very valid point.

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: 1point92AU

Here’s a video analysis proving that Utah Sighting was not a bug like some are claiming.
The video gives an excellent breakdown showing proofs and validation.
The author did a great job with it.

While I don't think it was a bug or a bird, that video doesn't conclusively prove it. The entire premise of any proofs of that video so far, is the object supposedly disappearing behind some trees on the far ridge for a few pixels. That is what they are basing speed, size etc. on. If it didn't actually pass behind those trees, there is no proof it actually came from that valley and over that ridge. It could have been much closer and smaller.

I personally think it did pass behind those trees and over that ridge, but there is not definitive proof of that.

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: 1point92AU

Here’s a video analysis proving that Utah Sighting was not a bug like some are claiming.
The video gives an excellent breakdown showing proofs and validation.
The author did a great job with it.

While I don't think it was a bug or a bird, that video doesn't conclusively prove it. The entire premise of any proofs of that video so far, is the object supposedly disappearing behind some trees on the far ridge for a few pixels. That is what they are basing speed, size etc. on. If it didn't actually pass behind those trees, there is no proof it actually came from that valley and over that ridge. It could have been much closer and smaller.

I personally think it did pass behind those trees and over that ridge, but there is not definitive proof of that.

Not to stray off the topic of the Russia tic tac sighting my point in providing the comparison video (Beaver, UT UFO) was to illustrate the near identical appearance and movement of the two UAPs. Since the Beaver, UT video has been proven to be unedited whatever is on that video (terrestrial or not) exists in another video taken in Russia of this year. While that is in no way "proof" of anything it certainly is corroborating evidence of something nearly identical being captured on two sides of the planet.

a reply to: fleabit

But at least a more solid foundation to stand on when people try to claim its a bug.

a reply to: Macenroe82

This is very interesting, I've watched all 3 videos and if they are not CGI then I am out of ideas except for secret military craft or something not from our world. The speed at such a low altitude has me ruling out any aircraft in known military or civilian use. This is the kind of thread which leaves me thinking I hope it is not fake.

a reply to: 1point92AU

Nice find.

I wonder how many of those there are flying out there where there are no cameras filming.

Could it be a drone, tho? It seems pretty fast to me, but of course speed is relative specially in video.