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.

 

O'Hare Airport UFO Sighting -- UPDATE: Photos & Analysis

page: 97
99
<< 94  95  96    98  99  100 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jbird
I agree, W' , do you think it would be fruitful to shoot them a question or two about it's origin?


I was thinking the same thing. I am going to email them and see if I can get any info. The odd thing is they posted this but there are no comments from them about it.




posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I just listened to the Paracast for 4 February, and found that it shed a lot of light on this thread. Recommended.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Sweet! thanks dsky.


I keep forgetting to check Paracast, after recently finding it.

I didn't see any heads up about Springer being on tonite.

About half way thru...

Oh, I see, this is a previous cast from Feb. 11

[edit on 18-2-2007 by Jbird]



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I might have a 1 hour audio tape coming to me from the FAA dealing with the UFO sighting over O'hare airport. I'm trying to get it now. Just keep this in mind. I don't know what's on it. But they said they are willing to send it to me. I'm trying to get them to send it to me for free rather than having to pay them $30 for it.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Classified

Did your request include copies of any of the printed materials like logs or other forms or was it just the audio? Do you know if any of that is available?



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Classified, be sure to ask if there is a Written Transcript of the tape available.

If there is one available, or if one will be made available, ask that it be sent as well.

Having both the tape and the "Official" written transcript of the tape will help to clear up any "interpetive misunderstandings" that might crop up should something "embarrassingly sensitive" pop up on the tape.

Best of Luck!



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I know you have all heard me mention a stronger than usual military presence at ORD during the sighting. My sister recently gave me a chicago tribune newspaper clipping. This was a follow up to the original story. It also prints a sample of some of the emails that JON HILKEVITCH, and that IS how it is spelled in the clipping (which I will scan and post soon), has received. A couple of the responses are interesting one of which is from a professor of anthropology and the other is from a passenger traveling from Port Columbus, OHIO. His flight was suppose to arrive at 4:30pm on Nov 7th but sat on the ground in OHIO for approx 1 hour and then was kept in the air circling for approx 1 hour. The pilot gave no reason for the delay and his daughter who picked him up said there were many many military personal at the airport. Both give names, titles and where they are from.

This subject is so murky that quite honestly I don't trust anyone. History suggests that the PTB do know much more about this than we do. Therefore there must be an organized effort at keeping ufos from being verified NOT OF OUR MAKING. Think of how easily and somewhat uninvolved this would be given the nature of the subject. For the internet all you would have to do is provide an "eyewitness" to any sighting with a contradicting view. You could take any real photo and slightly alter it. In an extreme case you could fly a real blimp, break out a new conventional aircraft, drop real flares and then you would in fact have witnesses to both who would disagree. CASE CLOSED.

The media can easily be silenced especially if they are told that the UFO in question is top secret military hardware used to prevent another 911. That dark day gave all Governments carte blanch for dealing with anything labled a threat to national security.

SO where does that leave the truth seekers? I guess the answer to that is in what you hope to accomplish. If the answer to that question is to prove to the world that UFO's are really craft created by something non human then I would say FAT CHANCE. Statistics already show that most people do believe in life outside of what we know. Most also believe the GOVT knows and keeps it a secret. Yet the subject is still somewhat fringe. People on the right tend to be the first to roll their eyes. The leaders of these people make the rules as well. This is also the "establishment" or "the man" if you will. I guess what im saying is that the world will only know when and if these CREATURES decide to make it so. That assumes that they also have the ability to make such an event occur and that they have an interest in doing so. I am only looking to prove it to myself and for me that means looking at the big picture and seeing if it spells out something genuine or not.

In the case of ORD that would mean understanding that there would have to be a reaction at the airport to such a thing. Confusion in the tower, the airport security and local police? What would the military really do in the event of an airspace violation? When a human gets ill we look at the syptoms to figure out the disease. The same can apply to sightings like these. Look at the reaction. Look at the proposed evidence and listen to the eyewitnesses. In that sea of data lies a clear picture of the truth. It will have to do until like they say: they land on the white house lawn.

AS



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
I have been speaking with Jon H. and emailing him. I will be in Chicago the first week of March shooting a documentary with the Discovery Channel about this event and Jon is going to go on camera with us.

You are RIGHT, there is MUCH that has yet to be "discerned" about this incident. I spoke with "eyewitness" today also and she re-iterated her pilot friend (the reason she was at ORD in the first place) mentioned that he was asked by an airport employee (FAA?) if he "saw anything up there" while he was walking through the Pilot's area of the airport to leave.

He also mentioned that his flight was on time for the first time in a long time but they were held in a holding pattern for nearly 20 minutes and by the time he got to the car he was over an hour late.

Jon H. told me he sent my contact info to the Pilot, the Taxi Mechanic and a UAL Supervisor and NONE of them have contacted me. It has been said in many places that UAL has put a gag order on their employees essentially because of their financial woes but one does wonder...

In any event, I am going up there to dig up whatever I can dig up, meet with the witnesses and get their testamony on a permanent video record that will be aired on a pretty big cable network.

If you (or anyone else) know ANYONE who can add to the data we have and is willing to go "on camera" PLEASE U2U me.


Springer...



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   
I haven't checked this thread for a few days and just found this info in a link posted by roadgravel



h. FAAO 7210.56, Air Traffic Quality Assurance, defines situations requiring a Quality Assurance Review (QAR) and the procedures to be followed to accomplish the review. Promptly notify personnel responsible for conducting the review upon identifying the need for a QAR. Record QARs with the minimum detail necessary in order to identify the initiating incident (e.g., unusual go-around) and how it was identified (e.g., in-flight evaluation). Facilities may establish local forms and procedures for recording, disseminating and documenting the resolution of QARs. Local forms used for recording this information are considered supplements to FAA Form 7230-4 and shall be filed with it.


Ok, so this is what was referred to in the log as QAR and it means that there is secondary paperwork describing the event. Was somebody working on an FOI request? If so, they need to be sure and ask for a copy of this QAR generated along with the log.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe

Ok, so this is what was referred to in the log as QAR and it means that there is secondary paperwork describing the event.


That was my take after reading the FAA stuff and it would be very interesting to know what really got put into that report. Is it just something about 'another supposed UFO and it left' or is real data collected and forwarded into the gov channels. I think it would show where the gov really stands on this situation.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Hey I just noticed that the ATC log was edited at some time.

2303 QAR C'___' ABOUT DISC
0148 WAIVER 98-T-53F IS IN EFFECT FOR RWY 32LT10 32RV
2340 UAL562 WAS SENT AROUND ON RWY 22R DUE TO COMPANY ON THE RWY
0049 CONFIGURATION CHANGE PLAN X TRIP
0110 D.DOBRINICH ON WCLC

Notice the times are out of sequence...?

ufosnw.com...



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   
A misorder occurred earlier at 1230 and 1255 and a Waiver is involved. Maybe it has to due with IDs/times in the database and report sorting or such. Guess we need to hear from someone who has actually worked with these logs.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
I haven't checked this thread for a few days and just found this info in a link posted by roadgravel



h. FAAO 7210.56, Air Traffic Quality Assurance, defines situations requiring a Quality Assurance Review (QAR) and the procedures to be followed to accomplish the review. Promptly notify personnel responsible for conducting the review upon identifying the need for a QAR. Record QARs with the minimum detail necessary in order to identify the initiating incident (e.g., unusual go-around) and how it was identified (e.g., in-flight evaluation). Facilities may establish local forms and procedures for recording, disseminating and documenting the resolution of QARs. Local forms used for recording this information are considered supplements to FAA Form 7230-4 and shall be filed with it.


Ok, so this is what was referred to in the log as QAR and it means that there is secondary paperwork describing the event. Was somebody working on an FOI request? If so, they need to be sure and ask for a copy of this QAR generated along with the log.


I'm working on the FOIA request. Trying to get audio recordings etc from the FAA for the Discovery Channel show. Just need a few more days to seal things up with them on whether or not I have to pay or not.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 09:01 PM
link   
chicagos fox news is airing a "mysteries in the skies report" within the next hour 9pm central.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sickboy1313
chicagos fox news is airing a "mysteries in the skies report" within the next hour 9pm central.


Did anyone record it please?

This topic is now officially being forgotten sadly



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Hey I just noticed that the ATC log was edited at some time.

2303 QAR C'___' ABOUT DISC
0148 WAIVER 98-T-53F IS IN EFFECT FOR RWY 32LT10 32RV
2340 UAL562 WAS SENT AROUND ON RWY 22R DUE TO COMPANY ON THE RWY
0049 CONFIGURATION CHANGE PLAN X TRIP
0110 D.DOBRINICH ON WCLC



ok, so lets pretend thats a direct reference to the 'object'. is it just me or is it odd that for a 'weather phenom' it has a word associated to it that can only mean one thing? IF ufo's arent real, why is there a apparently standardized code word for it?

or is it just my lack of sleep clouding things in my mind again?


"i dont know whats scarier. losing a nuclear weapon or the fact that it happens enough to have a code name for it"[/qutoe]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Springer, classified> Great work... no no... Awesome work! You're credits to the force...... of uh.. ATS, yeah.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Hey I just noticed that the ATC log was edited at some time.

2303 QAR C'___' ABOUT DISC
0148 WAIVER 98-T-53F IS IN EFFECT FOR RWY 32LT10 32RV
2340 UAL562 WAS SENT AROUND ON RWY 22R DUE TO COMPANY ON THE RWY
0049 CONFIGURATION CHANGE PLAN X TRIP
0110 D.DOBRINICH ON WCLC



ok, so lets pretend thats a direct reference to the 'object'. is it just me or is it odd that for a 'weather phenom' it has a word associated to it that can only mean one thing? IF ufo's arent real, why is there a apparently standardized code word for it?

or is it just my lack of sleep clouding things in my mind again?

[/qutoe]


"Company" does not, necessarily have to mean "UFO", ie. "Alien Spacecraft", of course. Could just refer to an unauthorized vehicle (air or ground) in a restricted area, or an area reserved for another, authorized vehicle.

I'm sure ATC's would be a bit skittish about using the term "UFO" in official records.

But, as your second quote implies, having a euphamistic term at the ready, so to speak, indicates that such unauthorized intrusions do occur frequently enough to justify an "officially accepted" short-hand notational form.

No matter what the True nature of the "intruder" might be.

My question and a question many others have asked, repeatedly (Thank You 'A Sinclair") is" What response procedures are in place to deal with such Company; and were those procedures followed by the authorities at O'Hare that day?

If so, is there a record of what was dertermined about the "Company" on the runway.

If the procedures were NOT enacted in this incident, Why Not?

If there are no procedures.....WTF!


[edit on 21-2-2007 by Bhadhidar]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
LIVE on ATS, I can now bring you the following dramatisation of the O'Hare event:

fade to black

cue title: SCARED AT O'HARE

Narrator: Fred and George, two alien life forms performing reconnaisance on Planet Earth, are on their way down to the surface for yet another sortie. For Fred, its his 23rd straight day on the job without RnR.

Cut to Spacecraft INT:

Fred: I cant believe this # man. Twenty Three and a wake up and i'm still dealin with this #. Human's aint # neither, there's nothing to see here....this is some backwater yokel deal

(as we can see Fred is cranky from lack of rest)

George: Put the cloaking on Fred.

Fred: Yhea yhea I got it......and what bothers me is, these humans, man...theyre so friggin full of themselves. We're millions of light years aheada these fools.....what makes them think that we dont see them as anything more than they see ants or anything else that isnt of importance to them. These dudes are strange. Guess thats what you get from a planet fulla inbreeds.

George: Careful now Fred, dont get your feelers in a twist, there! Thats bordering on slanderous. Here we are now. O'Hare, dead ahead.

Fred: I love this part. Look at em....they think they're so smart. Absolutely oblivious! I could moon them right out of the window for christ sake and they wouldnt even know! This is beautiful. Humans suck! We could sit here all day watchin these morons and they'd never know.

George: ahhhhhh, Fred? See that group standin over there by that plane? Are they pointing at us?

Fred: Where? Uh.....yhea.......they seem to be able to see us.....what the?

George: Now Fred, you DID switch the cloak on didnt you?

*Fred checks cloaking switch and see's that during his rant, he forgot to switch it on. Looks sheepishly towards George*

George: Jesus, Fred! Thats the second time this month you klutz! Now we gotta go through all this negative G at full throttle # again.....I could kill you sometimes!!!!!

Spacecraft leaves sharpish.

Fade to Black

Cue dramatic but cheezy 80's space opera music.

Roll Credits.

[edit on 21-2-2007 by Blayde]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Hilarious 'dramatization'! Awesome work by all on this. ITs tough for me being an Intel Analyst in USAF. I dont go near the subject (yet at least) even in fun for I am not wanting to be labeled a 'nosey' on topics that i dont have the need the know about. While am active in and around the shop and have a great friendly and working relationship with the bros (F-16 pilots), i wont dare sound wacko and ask em anything they may frown at...perhaps one day over beers when i am comfortable enough.. we'll see and if i find out anything (non classified) of value I will pass it along to the fellow members here....



new topics

top topics



 
99
<< 94  95  96    98  99  100 >>

log in

join