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.

 

Orange UFO over Osaka Airport,Japan.

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:13 AM
link   
Interesting footage showing an unidentified object flying near the wing of an aircraft over Osaka airport in Japan





One of the YouTube posters suggests the object could be a form of ball lightning and there's some pretty intriguing accounts listed here - does anyone have any other thoughts on this one?

Cheers.
edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   
it's interesting footage is that. Especially as it doesn't seem to react to going past a moving plane so close. You'd have thought that if it were a balloon or something, then the movement of a plane going a few hundred kph would have an effect on it. It doesn't, which to me, suggests some form of propulsion system which was stronger than the drag from the aircraft.

thanks for posting



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 07:14 AM
link   
IN MY OPINION

(note the bold please)

It looks to be that the object is much much further from the plane as the reporter make it out to be.

But yes, it is a weird object to be in restricted air space.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by bskivss3
 


Strange object definitely. I'm not sure what that could be. But I agree that it's probably not as close as it looks. Here's a good example of what I mean:



Looks like they are about to collide, but they are actually pretty far apart. It's all about perspective.

Interesting video though.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   
most probably a low orbiting satellite of some kind....also to me, it looks very faraway from the plane....

www.spacetoday.org...



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by booda
 


Very low indeed since it obscures the left wingtip of the plane.
I looks like just another mylar balloon to me.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I agree that the source of the light appears to be far from the plane but it is the intensity of the light that fools the mind into thinking it is close. It was probably another plane way in the distance that happened to reflect the suns light directly towards the cameras location. This sort of thing could explain at least a few similar UFO reports.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Thanks for the replies, there's another interesting video below of a similar object flying near a squadron of helicopters at a Mexican airshow in 1991 (close up towards the end of the footage):





As for the Osaka airport footage, I realise relative perspectives in aerial footage can sometimes be deceptive but the object does appear to be very close to the aircraft - I also could be very wrong but I don't think it's a satellite, star or planet.

Although theres been no testimony forthcoming from the Captain of Flight 1512 about the incident, its worth pointing out that many pilots are extremely reluctant to file UFO reports (if not actively discouraged) and there's some pretty interesting reading in this report about under reporting bias within the pilot community.

Cheers.
edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Very low indeed since it obscures the left wingtip of the plane.



Yes the object looks very low to me too.



I looks like just another mylar balloon to me.



I'd have to disagree with your opinion there.

Cheers.
edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Saw the OPs UFO clip on UFO Hunters this week.
No conclusion after picking things apart, other than it's still unidentified.

The pilots did not see it,nor did people on the ground only the camera picked it up.

Outside of Human spectrum range ?

[edit on 25-2-2009 by azureskys]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
It certainly does appear to go in front of the wingtip.

What show is this from? UFO hunters?

Just read the post above, UFO hunters it is

I wonder if they have the clip online?



[edit on 25-2-2009 by Chadwickus]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Sorry it must have been last week or a rerun this weekend.
check out:
www.history.com...

They did conclude that the object would have to be traveling at around 500 miles per hour

[edit on 25-2-2009 by azureskys]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:55 AM
link   
The skeptical reply about it being a baloon or what not, does not take into consideration that the Object was NOT VISIBLE to the Nake Eye. The person filming it saw it on his camera but when he looked back out, it was invisible.

So, that does not sound like a ballon, satellite or any of the other mundane answers that are usually given.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by azureskys
Sorry it must have been last week or a rerun this weekend.
check out:
www.history.com...

They did conclude that the object would have to be traveling at around 500 miles per hour

[edit on 25-2-2009 by azureskys]


How on Earth could they possibly conclude that? Do they know how far it is from the camera? Do they know how far it is from the plane? Do they know the zoom level of the camera? Do they know the panning speed of the camera? Do they know the direction it is traveling? Do they know the angle between the camera and the direction of travel? All of these things would have to be used to calculated the speed of the object.

UFO Hunters are a joke.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
This footage was on UFO Hunters over the weekend. The story was that it was filmed, but the Pilot didn't see it and it didn't show up on any Radar. The "investigator" went on to ask an "expert" if it's possible tht something in the sky like that show up on video but be "invisible to the naked eye". My husband found that question quite amusing. Obviously it WASN'T invisible to the naked eye since the videographer took out his camera and started filimg "the object". Anyway, the investigation was "inconclusive".



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
The skeptical reply about it being a baloon or what not, does not take into consideration that the Object was NOT VISIBLE to the Nake Eye. The person filming it saw it on his camera but when he looked back out, it was invisible.

So, that does not sound like a ballon, satellite or any of the other mundane answers that are usually given.


Just because the filmmaker couldn't spot the object does not mean it was invisible. What sort of magic allows something to show up on a video camera but be invisible to the naked eye? A more rational explanation is that when he looked away from the camera, he was looking in the wrong place. He thought he was looking for a large object distant object when it was more likely a near, small object. Easy to do when the camera is zoomed in on a very small point in the sky.

[edit on 2/25/2009 by Phage]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a very small point, handily marked out by a whacking great jumbo jet? In that video, you can't really tell how fast the camera has to pan to keep up, as there are no reference points. But they must have got to 500mph from something. It's not just a random number some knucklef~ picked out of the air.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


The UFO Hunters pull things out of much nastier places than the air. They have no qualms about making completely unsubstantiated claims.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


You really should review the programs investigetion on this film footage before making such unsubstantiated claims.

'They' went There.

They talked to the owner of camera and film.Saw said camera and had all info on the camera,film speed,air trafic,weather etc..
They did All that go's along with an extensive, in depth, professional investigation giving careful consideration to all details and aspects of the subject.

They took the film to a Professional who analyzes Film for a living.
I don't remember what his title is but it is not any thing to do with UFOs.

He made a "still" of the plane, removed the moving plane, placed the "still"
in its place and allowed said object to move on its path, as though the plane had stopped in mid flight.
THAt is how HE determined The aprox.speed of 500mph.

I probably don't have the right way of how it was done but then I don't analyze film for a living.

'They' Questioned why 'No One' in the plane saw said object nor did the person filming (he pulled back to look without the camera-Not there)

'They' then went to a Professional Spectral analyzer(I probably have this title wrong too)
He explained to them that it is possible for a camera to pick up things that the eye can not see, as the human spectral range is minimal compared to the range of all spectrum that Science knows of.
A simple camera can see a wider range than we can.
A more complex one can see even more.

Thats how it would seem invisable to the naked eye.

This would have been easier if you had gone to History channel's web site and investigated this yourself before passing judgement and making unfounded allegations.

I am surprised. You generally have lots of fact to back you up.

By the way the person with the camera was not filming the object in question..only filming the plane ! People do that

[edit on 26-2-2009 by azureskys]



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by azureskys
 


I have seen the UFO Hunter's "extensive" investigations. They are strictly entertainment (and bad entertainment at that). I've wasted time on too many other episodes to know that their "analyses" make no sense in the real world.

Without knowing the distance and size of the object it is impossible to determine its speed. To suggest that somehow using a single frame, without knowing these two factors (at least), it is possible to determine the speed is ludicrous. It cannot be done. Removing the plane makes it worse as that is the only thing that provides any frame of reference.

Yes video cameras can capture wavelengths of light which are not visible to the human eye. But they must be purposely made or modified to do so. Was the camera used for this video such a camera? This is exactly the kind of misdirection that UFO Hunters uses routinely. Was the professional talking about this camera? Was he talking about all cameras? Or was he talking about some cameras? I bet they were a little bit vague on that point, weren't they?

I have no doubt the filmmaker was only filming the plane. He then noticed the object then followed it, convinced he was witnessing a UFO. I have personally witnessed people being fooled by balloons.

[edit on 2/26/2009 by Phage]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join