America West Airlines Flight 564 UFO Case

page: 2
21
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


C0bzz...I stand (sit) corrected....although the A-340 with the forward-looking camera was a gimmik, I think. More of the idea that the passengers could see that view, interspersed with the usual navigation display of location, altitude, temperature, and time to destination, etc.

As to the B-777-300 and other stretched models, then it comports quite well with my notion of the A-380. It has become harder for the pilot taxiing to have a real grasp of where all of his main gear are, as airplanes have grown so large.

Since I've flown the B-767-400, I think I have a certain understanding of the challenge. One can look at the taxiway, and any turns involved, and anticipate. One also has to have a sense of where the nosewheel is, since it is several feet behind you, and know the limits of the nosewheel steering angle, to ensure that all the tires stay on the paved surfaces.

It's not difficult, if you think ahead, stay aware of your speed and thrust requirements...but, as you pointed out, say in the B767-300 a QUICK glance at a camera view of the Mains can help in a tight turn. This, because not ALL airports around the World are built to the same standards.




posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Side lights again.
Flight directors or vectors.
Only when activated go in the direction of the light.
Light is from atmospheric gases reaction to HVHF.
Electrostatic light balls at the edges have nothing to do
propulsion and is an accumulation of electrostatic charges at
the apex and landing gear covers.
Most likely a triangle craft.
I have a similar image in a photo at a distance from the ground.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Tesla....huh???

Are you attempting to imply that an otherwise 'stealth' airplane would give itself away, at night, becouse of 'St. Elmo's Fire' collecting on the gear doors???

Dontcha think they've thought of THAT already???

Anyways.....What the America West crew observed was most certainly NOT a secret military experiment, IMO. I mean, think about it....a Military so capable would let its top-secret experimental craft close enough to a civilian airliner, on a Airway, to be plainly seen???

Unless you wish to think the Military has a sense of humor, and I doubt that VERY much.......



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Second reply to Tesla, re: your second sentence "Flight directors or vectors"

Errrrr.....to a pilot, at least an Airline Pilot, a 'Flight Director' has a certain meaning. It is an Instrument, something to assist a pilot during IFR (instrument only) flight. A 'vector' is simply a heading assigned by an air traffic controller. THEY call it a vector, since they think of it as a track over the ground. They can impute, in their heads, the known winds and assign a heading to accomplish what they wish, which is to maintain certain separation standards between airplanes.

SO, from the ATC viewpoint, a 'vector' is to determine a certain track over the ground. Of course, with modern GPS capabilities, airplanes can very, very accurately fly determined tracks over the ground, but as yet the airplanes don't talk to each other enough (except for TCAS) to allow for the spacing and routing decisions to be made, especially in the Terminal areas.

Also, the airspace IS three-dimensional....a concept that is often lost on people who spend their lives stuck in traffic on the FreeWay.

ATC know that we now have, as I mentioned, TCAS onboard....that is an acronym for 'Traffic Collision Avoidance System'....but, it only works IF the other airplane has a compliant transponder, so that they 'talk' to each other.

In the case of 'cactus' 564, what they saw was not anything that is normaly seen...AND, it was well before the wide-spread implementation of TCAS anyway....I just threw that in for an update to what we have today.

The other thing to remember is, then, and now, upper-level radar accuracy is not nearly as precise as lower-level...in layman's terms, think of a flashlight (or torch, if you're British). Turn on the flashlight, and put your hand 12 inches away. Look at how wide the beam is. THEN, shine the 'torch' at a wall 12 feet away. Notice the width of the beam then.

THIS is the nature of light, unless it's lasered....but I guarantee that RADAR is simply a spectrum of the EM range, (not laser) that suffers a similar dispersion as visible light.

So, essentially, RADAR is most effective, and most accurate, at the closest ranges.

Of course, in Military applications, RADAR can be more precise, but those things are left to the Military, since they are secret.

I have been able to use my airplane's weather radar to 'paint' another airplane, but only for a few minutes, since airliner's radar is designed to look for water concentrations....and, it can 'paint' land, when you are out over the ocean...

Of course, in the case of AW (cactus) 564, if the thing they saw was at 3 o'clock, well....the radar antenna is in the nose, and only sweeps about 15 degrees per side...depending on the brand. MAX would be about 18 degrees, for a total of 36....and THAT'S pushing it!

So, this incident relies on the tapes, as saved from ATC, and eyewitness accounts. ANY RADAR contacts from Military sources are sure to be buried deep, so deep a FOIA request may never reach them.....



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 04:29 AM
link   
I remember when I was younger, well before 9/11, when you could go have a look in the cockpit of an aeroplane mid flight and me and my dad went up, and my dad asked the pilots if they had ever seen anything strange while up in the air. And they replied 'we arent't allowed to discuss things like that'. Which me and my dad found quite funny at the time. I always wondered if they had actually seen anything.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Lee_K
 


Lee_K....yes, you've hit upon a certain point of, not only nostalgia, and an era more innocent...in some ways.

...AND, a little more ... sorry, I get a phone call in the middle of writing a sentence, and thoughts fly out the window!

There was a time, in decades past, when, as a professional, reporting strange sightings would be met with ridicule, and could possibly affect your livelihood. I'm hoping that times are changing. Look at this America West event, for example....it happened more than ten years ago! These guys, everyone involved, were very brave to risk their reputations by coming forward.

When there is a strange 'encounter' observed by only Military individuals, then they must balance their sense of duty and oath of office, and 'secrecy' pledges that they have taken...civilians are, of course, not bound by those oaths. SO...ridicule and embarassment tactics (or worse) are better techniques to shut THEM up.

Well, it's time to step up to the plate and stand the ground...not wishing to sound paranoid, but this is real-world. AND humans have an innate capacity for lying, when needed.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
GOOD JOB! bringing the transcripts to light!!! Airline pilots can read, and understand the verbiage...the proper 'cadence'...that shows the reality of this encounter. Going on 13-14 years hence, and no real accounting, by the US Government!

Great job, OZ!


Yep, and airline pilots are quite well informed on cloud types, weather balloons, other aircraft and for the most part weather phenomenen. Thats why this story is extremely credible. If a pilot knew what he saw, then Im sure he wouldnt be having such a conversation with ATC like that



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lee_K
I remember when I was younger, well before 9/11, when you could go have a look in the cockpit of an aeroplane mid flight and me and my dad went up, and my dad asked the pilots if they had ever seen anything strange while up in the air. And they replied 'we arent't allowed to discuss things like that'. Which me and my dad found quite funny at the time. I always wondered if they had actually seen anything.


So the war on terror must be worth it.
I'm glad.

A stealth plane? Where. Yeah if there are any.
Far more Tesla craft (aka UFOs) exist.
Why waste money on conventional planes (kept super secrets so
they don't have to make many) when the uber secret craft based
on Tesla designs was gifted to Truman by Hitler.

The OP image is a signature TFM (Tesla Flying Machine aka UFO).

The Vector I refer to is a voltage vector that moves the craft toward
that vector. Only the agile saucer have these devices.

Big and small UFOs need not have these devices.
The only thing I am considering now is from Newton when the
craft is once set in motion it stays in motion.
And wonder how much altitude variation Tesla worked out
in Colorado Springs is applicable to the craft.
These and numerous other factors require discussion but for
an image resolution, this fits the ticket for a UFO configuration.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Tesla.....are you insane????

Serious question, so please try to answer. Honestly, I'd like to know. Most of your responses would seem to be quite off-context, so IF you can respond in a knowledgable way, it will be fun to see!!!

Or, Tesla....just write something that is barely intelligable.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Tesla.....are you insane????

Serious question, so please try to answer. Honestly, I'd like to know. Most of your responses would seem to be quite off-context, so IF you can respond in a knowledgable way, it will be fun to see!!!

Or, Tesla....just write something that is barely intelligable.


I think you are insane.
Why else bother to find out ideas you are not researched into.
ED: What is you problem with the posted image?
Duh, it a UFO.
ED: weedwhacker, I'm cleaning out the Myats links so u2u me if
you have any pressing ideas.

[edit on 1/15/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 1/15/2009 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Tesla...you wish to quote Newton, regarding a 'craft', once I saw that, I realized you (A) know nothing about Newton and, (B), seem to believe in things that surpass normal understanding of physics.

So, TeslaandLyne, please! Regale your audience with your exquisite knowledge.

Really.....we await your incredible technological enhancements....PLEASE, oh PLEASE give them to us!!!!!

Wait!!! Oh, I hear soimething.......shhhhhhh......



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I would like to reiterate a point made by many posters and at other sites.

I am a sceptic, as we should all be, so my first, and I think the healthiest, instinct is to try and debunk the ET hypothesis for most such sightings.

But the thing that bothers me with most attempts at debunking is the patronising attitude. Do some of these armchair debunkers really think that professional pilots with decades of experience don't know what Venus, Betelgeuse, a setting sun, leniticular clouds or a flock of geese look like!

As pointed out by the airline pilot over Alderney (Channel Islands 2007) here was an apparently large physical object without clearance in controlled airspace used for passenger transport and no one in authority seems to give a damn.

If I pottered through controlled airspace in a Cessna 172 without clearance and my transponder switched off the cops would be waiting for me when I landed.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Tesla...you wish to quote Newton, regarding a 'craft', once I saw that, I realized you (A) know nothing about Newton and, (B), seem to believe in things that surpass normal understanding of physics.

So, TeslaandLyne, please! Regale your audience with your exquisite knowledge.

Really.....we await your incredible technological enhancements....PLEASE, oh PLEASE give them to us!!!!!

Wait!!! Oh, I hear soimething.......shhhhhhh......





You are correct on both counts.
That's what I meant about the research I did for about two years.
I don't want to waste your time on something not interesting to you.
I can tell.

Newton isn't all there is.
But this is Newton:
"Once a body is set in motion, it remains in motion."
This is Newton and taught in first semester college physics
and is most likely being tried in high schools.
You think otherwise.
That is the Newton problem I was considering.

You are not in the mind set to consider the UFO as valid
so I don't think anything I heard about UFOs are of interest
to you.

I was just considering if what Newton said is true for the UFO.
One pulse and its off.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWorldReallyIsThatBorin
 


Spot on!!!

You obviously know a little about flying, based on your post.

I've said it already, I think it was brave for those pilots to come forth...well, maybe since it was already on the ATC tapes...anyway, coming out in public is brave.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWorldReallyIsThatBorin
 


From you post:



But the thing that bothers me with most attempts at debunking is the patronising attitude. Do some of these armchair debunkers really think that professional pilots with decades of experience don't know what Venus, Betelgeuse, a setting sun, leniticular clouds or a flock of geese look like!


The people in charge of these devices have never cared about the
normal course of things.

They are in the above the law category and are thought to be associated
with the people Truman let in this country in 1945.



[edit on 1/16/2009 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Well.....I think normal and intelligent people can NOW see you for what you are, 'TeslaandLyne'....

I won't call you insane...."delusional" ...is SUCH a better word.

Of course, I have NO OPINION as to anyone's aparrent mental state here, at ATS....no, none whatsover......................



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
The people in charge of these devices have never cared about the
normal course of things.

They are in the above the law category and are thought to be associated
with the people Truman let in this country in 1945.


What on earth are you on about? The pilots willingly gave testimony and ATC willingly provided audi recordings of the coversations had at the time the object was observed.

You are really confusing everyone...lets get back on topic



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Well.....I think normal and intelligent people can NOW see you for what you are, 'TeslaandLyne'....

I won't call you insane...."delusional" ...is SUCH a better word.

Of course, I have NO OPINION as to anyone's aparrent mental state here, at ATS....no, none whatsover......................


Well then why point it out on anyone.
Especially in my direction.

Now for the so called delusion:
My delving into specialized so called non sense has its drawbacks.
I am aware. Especially if the understanding we seek fails observations.

I find many unbelievable things in the world of Tesla that are the
reverse of our Illuminati up bringing.
Some of us consider that we are taught just so much.

Tesla thought the electron was larger than the so called tiny
electron measured for us so many years ago.
Unfortunately I can't ask him how the electron mass
measurement fits in with his statements, but he made the
statement.

The man invented radio, so why not listen to what he said.


[edit on 1/16/2009 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
The people in charge of these devices have never cared about the
normal course of things.

They are in the above the law category and are thought to be associated
with the people Truman let in this country in 1945.


What on earth are you on about? The pilots willingly gave testimony and ATC willingly provided audi recordings of the coversations had at the time the object was observed.

You are really confusing everyone...lets get back on topic


You consider pilots saw flying craft.
These craft are owned and operated by the very people putting
down the pilots' observation.
How is that off the topic of pilots seeing unknown craft.
You don't care about the official snubbing of their statements.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
You consider pilots saw flying craft.
These craft are owned and operated by the very people putting
down the pilots' observation.
How is that off the topic of pilots seeing unknown craft.
You don't care about the official snubbing of their statements.


Nobody at all snubbed their statements. I dont know where you are getting this information


All the links I used were done by independant researchers, none of whom doubted the pilots observations, and none of whom were involved with the government in anyway. In fact NORAD admitted to getting an unidentified return on their radar in addition to the light aircraft with a malfunctioning transponder

Sheesh





top topics
 
21
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join