It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting UFOs

page: 1
28
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+10 more 
posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Space Force, Engage!
Howdy again fellow above top secretions

So apparently The USNavy, with a healthy appropriations package from congress and some disturbing incursions into controlled airspace have taken a renewed proactive approach to investigating UFOs not seen since bluebook and J Allen Hynek



The U.S. Navy is drafting new guidelines for pilots and other personnel to report encounters with "unidentified aircraft," a significant new step in creating a formal process to collect and analyze the unexplained sightings — and destigmatize them.

The previously unreported move is in response to a series of sightings of unknown, highly advanced aircraft intruding on Navy strike groups and other sensitive military formations and facilities, the service says.


So now, OFFICIALLY they will pursue ufo reports instead of discarding them outright.
when the navy comes out and admits that an unidentified bogie buzzed through their carrier group you sit up and take notice...


The development comes amid growing interest from members of Congress following revelations by POLITICO and the New York Times in late 2017 that the Pentagon established a dedicated office inside the Defense Intelligence Agency to study UAPs at the urging of several senators who secretly set aside appropriations for the effort.

That office spent some $25 million conducting a series of technical studies and evaluating numerous unexplained incursions, including one that lasted several days involving the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group in 2004. In that case, Navy fighter jets were outmaneuvered by unidentified aircraft that flew in ways that appeared to defy the laws of known physics.



Inching closer to disclosure?


edit on 4 24 2019 by dashen because: 👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽👽




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 03:47 AM
link   
"is in response to a series of sightings of unknown, highly advanced aircraft intruding on Navy strike groups and other sensitive military formations and facilities, the service says."
"The service says"?
That's getting pretty close to disclosure right there!
edit on 24-4-2019 by BlackIbanez because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 06:12 AM
link   
If you’re prepared to ignore unprecedented levels of investment in tactical airframes and airborne launch platforms by both Russia and China, then yes, they are talking about aliens.

The utter desperation to believe stinks.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerraLiga
If you’re prepared to ignore unprecedented levels of investment in tactical airframes and airborne launch platforms by both Russia and China, then yes, they are talking about aliens.

The utter desperation to believe stinks.



USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group in 2004. In that case, Navy fighter jets were outmaneuvered by unidentified aircraft that flew in ways that appeared to defy the laws of known physics.


So China and Russia were able to outmaneuver US aircraft with their own planes which seem to defy the laws of physics since at least 2004?

Please do provide a link to these mysterious Chinese airplanes from 15 years ago. Or even some from today.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 06:36 AM
link   
No problem. Tell me, with definitive proof, what US aircraft the article refers to please. Do you honestly believe that just because it’s American it can’t be bettered?



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: TerraLiga

The article refers to an F18 super hornet. There is video of the indecent that has been released by the military. You haven't seen it?


Prior to the incident, early November 2004, the Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser USS Princeton, part of Carrier Strike Group 11, had been tracking mysterious aircraft intermittently for two weeks on an advanced AN/SPY-1B passive radar.Navy Chief Petty Officer (NCO, E-7) Kevin Day, stationed on the Princeton, recalls that he first noticed the clear radar traces of 8 to 10 objects around the 10th of November. They were travelling southwards in a loose though fixed formation at 28,000 ft in the immediate vicinity of Catalina Island. He was startled by their slow speed of 100 knots, but received confirmation of their presence from radar operators on other vessels. Regular observations were made of a similar number of objects over the following six days.[10] The objects were also faintly detected by E-2C Hawkeye plane after Princeton sent them coordinates



When the same event occurred again around 9:30 PST on 14 November 2004, an operations officer aboard Princeton contacted two airborne U.S. Navy Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets from USS Nimitz, flying a combat exercise at the time. The aircraft were two-seat variants, and each pilot was accompanied by a weapon systems officer (WSO). The lead Super Hornet was piloted by Commander David Fravor, commanding officer of Strike Fighter Squadron 41. The second fighter, flying as wingman, included Lieutenant commander Jim Slaight as one of the two officers aboard. [9]

Princeton's radio operator, Kevin Day, directly instructed the pilots to change their course and investigate the unidentified radar spot observed by Princeton's own radar. This was done to determine if the objects posed any collision danger to an upcoming air defense exercise. A female radio operator on the Princeton however asked the pilots if they were carrying operational weapons, and the pilots replied that they were not. The weather conditions for that day showed excellent visibility with a blue sky, no cloud cover, and a calm sea.

When the jet fighters arrived on site, the crew of four saw nothing in the air nor on their radar. On the Princeton's radar however, it was noticed that the object now dropped from 28,000 ft to near sea level in less than a second. As the pilots looked down at the sea, they noticed a turbulent oval area of churning water with foam and frothy waves "the size of a Boeing 737 airplane" with a smoother area of lighter color at the center, as if the waves were breaking over something just under the surface. A few seconds later, they noticed an unusual object hovering with erratic movements 50 feet above the churning water. Both Fravor and Slaight later described the object as a large bright white Tic Tac 30 to 46 feet (10 to 14 meters) long, with no windshield nor porthole, no wing nor empennage, and no visible engine nor exhaust plume.

Fravor began a circular descent to approach the object. As Fravor further descended, he reported that the object began ascending along a curved path, maintaining some distance from the F-18, mirroring its trajectory in opposite circles. Fravor then made a more aggressive maneuver, plunging his fighter to aim below the object, but at this point the UFO accelerated and went out of sight in less than two seconds, leaving the pilots "pretty weirded out".


Wiki




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:00 AM
link   
I’ve just read a neutral article about the incident. There is nothing, on balance, that suggests this incident has extra-terrestrial origins. To automatically come to that conclusion is not productive.

Despite this, the Super Hornet is a Mach 1.8 aircraft. The MiG25 Foxbat is Mach 3.2 from 1965 - almost twice as fast. That point is moot, however, as a 25 radar signature would have been beyond dispute on ship-borne radar, so it was not one of those.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: TerraLiga

The article refers to an F18 super hornet. There is video of the incident that has been released by the military. You haven't seen it?


I've seen the one released by Elizondo as part of his fund-raising campaign. When/where was it ever released 'by the military'?



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: TerraLiga

I never came to any conclusion. Just pointing out that automatically suggesting it was a Russian or Chinese aircraft is just as "not productive" as automatically assuming it was extra terrestrial.

The US Navy obviously does not know exactly what happened which is why they are implementing new guidelines for reporting and investigating such incidents.

The pilots that were there seem to think it was not of this world. Whether or not you agree with them is fine, but don't just say its utter desperation for them to believe. They are rational, intelligent people who have come to a conclusion based on what they saw and the knowledge of aerospace that they have.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

It looks like the New York Times is the originator of the story. CNN and a bunch of others also have articles and such saying "DOD releases video". But you're right when you dig into the articles, its more like a "former" DOD official.

Just one example of a misleading title.




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Just makes it easier to report unknowns and every country has them.

Now the video the lack of an exhaust heat signature makes it a bit ????? As far as we know if it flies it has exhaust other than a couple small electrics.




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerraLiga
I’ve just read a neutral article about the incident. There is nothing, on balance, that suggests this incident has extra-terrestrial origins. To automatically come to that conclusion is not productive.

Despite this, the Super Hornet is a Mach 1.8 aircraft. The MiG25 Foxbat is Mach 3.2 from 1965 - almost twice as fast. That point is moot, however, as a 25 radar signature would have been beyond dispute on ship-borne radar, so it was not one of those.
Cool, care to provide us a link to that "neutral article"?

I find it hilarious that you think something described as, "defying the laws of physics" would probably be Russian or Chinese, lmfao.

Waiting on that link.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: TerraLiga

I never came to any conclusion. Just pointing out that automatically suggesting it was a Russian or Chinese aircraft is just as "not productive" as automatically assuming it was extra terrestrial.

The US Navy obviously does not know exactly what happened which is why they are implementing new guidelines for reporting and investigating such incidents.

The pilots that were there seem to think it was not of this world. Whether or not you agree with them is fine, but don't just say its utter desperation for them to believe. They are rational, intelligent people who have come to a conclusion based on what they saw and the knowledge of aerospace that they have.

After writing your OP did you read it? If that isn’t designed to suggest alien visitation I’ll eat my hat.

I didn’t suggest it was enemy aircraft, I suggested that you ignored the possibility. I also suggested that other countries have faster aircraft than the Super Hornet, which is a multi-role tactical aircraft, rather than an interceptor for example.

Neither of us were there, so neither of us can determine without doubt what happened. This website and others are full of paranoid fantasists who immediately jump on any slight abnormality and automatically assume it must be alien. All it does is dilute the message and moves those reporting it to the level of fruitcake. Like I said before, it’s not productive.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerraLiga

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: TerraLiga

I never came to any conclusion. Just pointing out that automatically suggesting it was a Russian or Chinese aircraft is just as "not productive" as automatically assuming it was extra terrestrial.

The US Navy obviously does not know exactly what happened which is why they are implementing new guidelines for reporting and investigating such incidents.

The pilots that were there seem to think it was not of this world. Whether or not you agree with them is fine, but don't just say its utter desperation for them to believe. They are rational, intelligent people who have come to a conclusion based on what they saw and the knowledge of aerospace that they have.

After writing your OP did you read it?


You must be confused. I'm not the OP.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 09:52 AM
link   
So the latest sky-watching 'situation awareness' instruments detected readings that look anomalous? Uh, hasn't that actually been the pattern for decades? New instrumentation comes on line, it detects strange stuff, but as familiarity with the behavior of the instrumentation accumulates, the anomalous readings fade away? Again and again with each new generation of sensors?

Perceptive observers of the UFO scene over the last two thirds of a century have noted a tell-tale feature of the evolution of reports – their nature has been changing, keeping uncanny pace with the progress in human observation and detection technologies. As with dragons and sea serpents of half a millennium ago, they always seem to lurk just at or beyond the limits of clear human vision, with ‘Here be dragons’ on the maps obediently retreating in synchronization to the inexorable advance of human technology.

These new ‘UFO reports’, still fragmentary and inadequately documented, nicely fit this time-tested pattern – some anomaly is detected at the limits of sight [that by all means needs to be understood] but isn’t clear enough to unambiguously establish its non-explainability. If the reports truly represent an authentic autonomous phenomenon, they would have been invisible to human observers until recently, just as the UFOs of the 1940s and 1950s, if they really were caused by actual phenomena, would today be exhaustively documented by the vastly improved observation capabilities of humankind.

But. They. Aren’t. Instead, year by year, the ‘old UFOs’ fade away just before the advent of new technologies [that would have unambiguously documented them] come on line, to be replaced by a new flavor of ‘anomalies’ that precisely match the limits of vision of new technologies.

This is a powerful indication that the phenomenon derives its existence NOT from some stand-alone phenomenon, but directly FROM being at the limits of human detection and recognition. As an observer-based rather than reality-based phenomenon, its apparent existence derives from the range – and limits – of human perception. That perception and its limits are real, but the apparent stand-alone stimulus does not have to be, and never did. Such a postulated stimulus [ETI technology] could well exist and be responsible, but may not be mandatory.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackIbanez

There's nothing to disclose .

These are just top secret programs from other Countries . There's no way Alien life forms would travel vast amounts of space just to do drive by's , If you think they are here to spy on our military capability then they are pretty stupid given the time they have been snooping around just hanging out with no agenda .

I'm all for Alien contact but in it's current story line it's just isn't logical .




edit on 4/24/2019 by Gargoyle91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerraLiga

This website and others are full of paranoid fantasists who immediately jump on any slight abnormality and automatically assume it must be alien.


So an object having no wings or exhaust outperforming a fighter jet and, according to pilot witnesses, appearing to defy the laws of physics is merely a "slight abnormality"?

Not sure a person has to be a "paranoid fantasist" to consider that, if such reports are accurate (and very similar observations have been reported by military pilots for about 70 years), whatever these things are, they don't come anywhere near fitting the description (to put it mildly) of any known human technology.



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   


U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting UFOs


Not

U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting Alien Craft

I cannot think of a time where what the thread title says wasn't changed on a regular basis.
USAF did it constantly . Even back in the 70s and 80s

"I used to want to believe"




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: BiffWellington




So an object having no wings or exhaust outperforming a fighter jet and, according to pilot witnesses, appearing to defy the laws of physics is merely a "slight abnormality"?

Learn to use terms such as "apparently"




posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: BlackIbanez

There's nothing to disclose .

These are just top secret programs from other Countries.

Is there any precedent for a top secret program being kept under wraps for 70+ years?


There's no way Alien life forms would travel vast amounts of space just to do drive by's


That assumes that they are (still) traveling vast amounts of space and didn't arrive in this area a billion years ago. It also assumes that we would understand the minds and motivations of a totally alien species that conceivably may have been here for a billion years.


edit on 24-4-2019 by BiffWellington because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
28
<<   2 >>

log in

join