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.

 

UFO Crash Caught on Video (explain this video)

page: 5
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orkojoker
I've always thought this was an interesting video. Can someone please explain the apparent luminosity of the object, or is that something that doesn't fit into the missile/rocket theory? Is it typical for missiles to give off light like that when they're flying close to the ground?


I think what we are seeing is the thruster.

It looks kinda smoggy in the video, it may well be that due to poor quality video, it didn't pick up the actual rocket, and only the flow of the thruster.




posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aliensun
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


We can make some physics-based armchair observations about this video to determine what it isn’t. It isn’t a missile or conventional aircraft and it isn’t entirely out of control.
The structural integrity of that object would have to be super strong for a missile or aircraft to survive that first impact, and they ain’t made that way. Missiles and aircraft are made as lightweight as possible. They don’t bounce off of the ground, so scratch that possibility. It is fantasy.
We can plainly see in the initial seconds of the video that the craft makes some effort to alter its downward slant as it nears the ground. A missile or a plane could do that, of course, but they have been eliminated as possibilities. What we see is an object that seems to be under partial control.
That low angle of attack is not that of a free-falling body. Certainly it cannot be a meteorite or space junk moving at that relatively slow velocity. We must suppose there is some force keeping the thing almost airborne as shown by the attempt to alter its downward slant at near the final seconds. And that assumption is buttressed by the visual evidence that the craft is not out of control by tumbling or erratic motions at any point in its decent either before and especially after that bounce. Finally, it does not seem to lose much if any velocity as it bounces off of the ground. Without a doubt virtually anything we can think of would have lost power and disintegrated at that point. It did not, it gave every appearance of trying to still recover.
What we seem to know about UFOs? UFOs don’t seem to “fly.” They give every indication that they avoid, repel or eliminate mass in some fashion. With this object, it is difficult to understand how it remains stable and initially can bounce of the ground relatively unscathed. How can anything do that? The answer may be that with the first and even second contact with the desert, that its bulk was partially shielded such that the structural stresses of the contact were greatly reduced and this allowed it to almost recover. Yes, to literally bounce off the ground. Yet, its altitude control system was failing or had failed and its aerodynamic shape was not enough to provide sufficient lift to keep it airborne. After the first ground strike, anything not powered in some fashion could not have maintained the long arch of its gradual descent again to the ground. In fact, it almost seemed to have won its battle with the ground. I maintain that long arch also speaks of an internal power supply that negating the pure forces of gravity to some extent and provide it a bit longer life than nature would allow, thus, defying our expectations of what we witness.
If that seems a rather wild and bizarre explanation, I need to point out that the Mexican crash of 1974 and the secondary (near) Roswell crash of 1947 both gave indications that UFOs are tough hombres, in that they can sustain mid-air collisions with small aircraft with only minor physical damage and/or cannot be totally destroyed when striking the ground, leaving skid marks etc.
I have not claimed that the craft was alien. However, given that the camera work is highly professional and the taken in the desert, there is little doubt but what was recorded wa a test of a UFO-type craft. And I don’t see how anyone can deny that the US government has been working on developing our own versions since day one of our recognition that those were mighty strange craft flitting around in our air and how nifty it would be to have our own.


What background do you have, that you can so accurately explain to us the structural design of a rocket?

You are accusing people of making armchair observations, but until you have proven to me that you actually know what you are talking about. You are doing the same thing.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   
If aeroplanes aren't missiles (9/11), then UFO's aren't missiles either!



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


the source you have linked to the thread (www.ufomystic.com...) has no basis to the legitimacy to the video posted by the op

your link has stated it is either computer generated or a missile crash...with no prove of backing up either

which is it ??

discrediting Loman took up 95% of the facts of debunking the op's vid...

all i care about is the object in the video...we need to know if the video is real ...

ive been looking for similar rocket crashes with the same characteristics but nothing as yet,

the object in the video was 100% under intelligent control and you can clearly see it Maneuver before it hits the ground...now im not saying its an alien craft ...but it is a craft of some sort ..secret tech ..no way its a rocket

then again the video could be fake...best iv'e seen yet if it turns out to be



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Thanks for the info, but...

I am an amateur astronomer, rocketeer and computer scientist, been to JPL and Kennedy Space Center, and have filmed the shuttle launch. I know very well why re-entry vehicles are shaped the way they are.

Notice that in at least what you quoted (the link did not work) they do not mention that it looks very much like a classic UFO...



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Thanks for the info, but...

I am an amateur astronomer, rocketeer and computer scientist, been to JPL and Kennedy Space Center, and have filmed the shuttle launch. I know very well why re-entry vehicles are shaped the way they are.

Notice that in at least what you quoted (the link did not work) they do not mention that it looks very much like a classic UFO...


Hmm. The link worked for me. Try this one:

en.wikipedia.org...

You say it looks like a classic UFO, but even the cone-shaped Apollo capsule had a blunt-body design heat shield design:


and so does bell-shaped the Soyuz:


...neither of which are very saucer-shaped.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 
ok if this was a rocket crash where was the large fireball as the fuel exploded there was an apparent explosion but not of the sort seen during failed rockets i have seen ??




posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


Great post - thank you. I have not seen this video for a long time and I believe it has all the qualities of an Intergalactic Craft. It bounced - that is not something earth made bombs, missiles or aircraft do - they tend to skid, roll or crumple or if a missile they explode.

The Craft - after bouncing - seems to try to regain control but unfortunately does not succeed in gaining either control or altitude. When the Craft finally came crashing to earth the spark like trajectories/shrapnel seemed to glow rather that flame as if on fire.

My understanding of earth made aircraft or missiles is that they explode as aviation fuel is highly combustible and missiles are designed to explode and do as much damage as possible. What I saw flying off the wreckage was luminescent.

We can all post our theories and the science that supports that theory but personally - having seen this video years ago - call Intergalactic Craft. Why? Because I know the Governments tell outright lies as well as deceives the global population - anyone who has a personal unexplained Contact or Experience is ridiculed by the media - too many shills and trolls who are paid to spread disinformation and disrupt the flow of honest opinion and discussion.

I say Intergalactic Craft and I do not need anyone to tell me I am wrong - I have not torn strips off anyone who has contributed to this thread - I am merely expressing myself just as everyone else here. We all have the freedom of thought as well as problem solving creative abilities. I refuse to live in a world where I have to believe someone just because they say so.

Who knows - in amongst all the comments on this thread is the truth - the answers and the explanation that fits exactly what is viewed in the video clip.

Much Peace...



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Cdaddy1034
 


I think you are right, I watched it on a bigger view and after it comes close to the ground, I actually think it doesn't hit and bounce, it rises and goes to a target. The rocket ahead of the flame appears to be visible as it turns upward but it actually doesn't bounce. The flame distorts because of the ground. It appears to be some type of a controlled missile and I think the crash is actually it hitting it's target. Good eye.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheFlash

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


I think the general consensus is the video show a failed missile test at white sands missile range New Mexico .

This one has been floating around the internet for about 7 months. It supposedly shows the crash of a UFO at or near the White Sands Missile Range in southern New Mexico, circa 1997. The footage was “surfaced” by a guy named Ted Loman, who is a story in himself.


When asked about the source of the video, Loman is apparently evasive and has hinted that he received it from Mexican UFO media maven Jaime Maussan–hardly a monument of integrity himself.

www.ufomystic.com...


Why would a missile brightly glow white like that and have no apparent fins, nor other typical aerodynamic features or shape?


It was glowing before the impact and the pieces that flew into the air AFTER the second impact were still luminescent....anyone care to explain that???



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by strafgod
Fact or faked paranormal files (a tv series on sci-fi) did an episode on this video and they came up with the conclusion that it was a rocket. They did a pretty good job of re-creating what is seen in the video and the episode can be found on youtube so you can watch it and come to your own conclusion on it.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Myth Busters also reproduced this.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I would love nothing more than this to be proof of a ufo crash but i dont think it is in my view its just a failed rocket test at a rocket test site of all the places in this masive world for a ufo to crash it happened to be a rocket test site i think that is a fair point. i have seen fireworks bounce and they are made of weaker stuff plus i dont think thex would have a warhead on a rocket test because it is what it is a rocket test plus after the first impact their seems to be a small flash which may suggest a small rupture of accelerant at that point which may suggest why there was no fireball on the second impact the fact that it may just have run low on accelerant and all we saw break up is hot fragments



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Thank you Gortex for the comparison video and thanks to the rest for your opinion on this video and for all the links and information you have contributed.

After reviewing the new information I have formed an opinion of what the UFO in the OP is and is not.

If you look at the video in full screen watch the UFO where it first makes contact with the ground and don't follow the UFO after that first contact but keep your eyes where it makes contact and you will see some derbies shower upward from the ground from the impact. This I think pretty much settles the question of if it in fact hit the ground the first time. It does.


Here is something to ponder. If this is in fact a rocket then it is too small for us to see. But all that glowing material coming from the second impact far far exceeds the amount of what the proposed rocked would be made up of. However on the other hand the glowing material does seem to equal the amount of material of the glowing "craft" if it were a craft.

Also the luminosity of the pieces of debris match the "craft" before it impacts.

But this might mean that the rocket hit a target and the debris created from the target its self turned molten and glowed (such as steel from a military tank).

Some people say that a rocket would not be able to withstand that first impact. This is a good argument. The video that Gortex provided in page one shows in my opinion a much much smaller rocket than what is shown in the OP. What this means is that as you scale down things (pretty much anything) they get much stronger structurally. Think about it could a bottle rocket skip off the ground? Of course it can! We have all seen one skip off of the ground. But do you think the space shuttle rocket could skip off of the ground? Hell no!

I think that whatever this UFO is it is very strong. It could be a very strong missile or it could be a very strong craft. I'm leaning toward the rocket explanation but I remain on the fence.


-Alien



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


As I've understood it, this was a missile test, but, since I don't have any sources to back that up, it could very well be anything.
I'm poking around to see what, if anything I can find on the matter.

Edit: never mind, Gortex needs to wear a cape or something he's so fast. Thank you Gortex!

edit on 24-4-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)


It's certainly NOT a missile in the traditional sense. Our missiles wouldn't bounce. They'd be destroyed when they hit the ground. It could have been a prototype of the latest high speed space reentry vehicle the navy has been developing (that thing that supposed to go 15,000MPH and hit any target on the planet in like 2 minutes). It has to be hardened to withstand those kinds of pressures and could have bounced before crashing.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


To me it looks like its a craft of some sort especially at the beginning where it is falling headfirst into the ground but all of a sudden it tries to correct itself but is too late and manages to hit ground on flat side only to skip off further and then crash probably due to lost control of said vehicle or it was a remote controlled missile test!!



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


To me it looks like its a craft of some sort especially at the beginning where it is falling headfirst into the ground but all of a sudden it tries to correct itself but is too late and manages to hit ground on flat side only to skip off further and then crash probably due to lost control of said vehicle or it was a remote controlled missile test!!



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 





This one has been floating around the internet for about 7 months. It supposedly shows the crash of a UFO at or near the White Sands Missile Range in southern New Mexico, circa 1997. The footage was “surfaced” by a guy named Ted Loman, who is a story in himself.


This one has been around a lot longer than 7 months. It has been around at least since 2003-2004 because I use to run a conspiracy site back then and I had this one on my site.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by calnorak

Originally posted by strafgod
Fact or faked paranormal files (a tv series on sci-fi) did an episode on this video and they came up with the conclusion that it was a rocket. They did a pretty good job of re-creating what is seen in the video and the episode can be found on youtube so you can watch it and come to your own conclusion on it.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Myth Busters also reproduced this.


There seems to be an implied understanding on these TV shows that if it is possible to reproduce something in a different, 'hoaxed' manner on a TV show then that is evidence or even proof that the original event was a hoax also. This is totally absurd. If you want to look at it that way then watch the Jurrasic Park movies - they prove that the dinosaurs were a total hoax right since they can so accurately fake them now!



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phenomium
reply to post by gortex
 





This one has been floating around the internet for about 7 months. It supposedly shows the crash of a UFO at or near the White Sands Missile Range in southern New Mexico, circa 1997. The footage was “surfaced” by a guy named Ted Loman, who is a story in himself.


This one has been around a lot longer than 7 months. It has been around at least since 2003-2004 because I use to run a conspiracy site back then and I had this one on my site.


I agree. I saw this video back in the 1990's.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   
Since this videos has the logos of a german television series on it, I can research what this episode was about maybe....

Channel: Kabel 1
Series: K11 (some sience series)




top topics



 
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join