Airliner 'had narrow miss with UFO'

page: 1
8

log in

join

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Just came across this whilst reading BBC News...

www.bbc.co.uk...

A report by the UK Airprox Board said investigators had been unable to establish what the object had been.

MSM now reporting near misses? Usually this sort of thing isn’t almost front page news.


Sorry did not spot already posted
edit on 1-5-2013 by smartie because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:08 AM
link   
Yes I noticed that too, very unusual for MSM to report a large section without the usual debunk at some point.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ksarge1
Yes I noticed that too, very unusual for MSM to report a large section without the usual debunk at some point.

The times, they 'r a changin'

edit on 1-5-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
I was just about to post this but you beat me to it! Very unusual for such a report on BBC without any substantial debunking efforts. This has definitely piqued my interest. A UFO story hasn't interested me for years as they are mainly blatant fakes or just videos of 'lights'. A report from two airline pilots seems very reliable and the fact that nothing showed up on radar is very unusual.

S&F
edit on 1-5-2013 by fiftyfifty because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:40 AM
link   
Maybe because no one was claiming it was a visiting alien space ship there was nothing to debunk.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by fiftyfifty
I was just about to post this but you beat me to it! Very unusual for such a report on BBC without any substantial debunking efforts. This has definitely piqued my interest. A UFO story hasn't interested me for years as they are mainly blatant fakes or just videos of 'lights'. A report from two airline pilots seems very reliable and the fact that nothing showed up on radar is very unusual.

S&F
edit on 1-5-2013 by fiftyfifty because: (no reason given)


Not sure how unusual this actually is - I hope very as it could easily have led to the airliner crashing.

It has to be said though, even the pilot says it could have been a microlite and a glider has also not been ruled out.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   
You do realize UFO doesn't stand for flying saucer, beamship or alien pod?

U.F.O. doesn't need to be a taboo or dirty thing, man-made aircraft can officially be UFOs all day and night.

From what I read in the article they don't know what it was but some type of glider seems to be the best bet, maybe a significantly smaller glider than they are used to seeing.

Heck, it sounds like it could've been a drone, drones could easily be mistaken for small gliders. This wouldn't be the first time a drone was mistaken as a UFO, the countries around the world don't exactly press-release their latest drone schematics.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by malchir
You do realize UFO doesn't stand for flying saucer, beamship or alien pod?

U.F.O. doesn't need to be a taboo or dirty thing, man-made aircraft can officially be UFOs all day and night.

From what I read in the article they don't know what it was but some type of glider seems to be the best bet, maybe a significantly smaller glider than they are used to seeing.

.


Correcto. Author Robert Anton Wilson, fnord bless his departed husk, said he was saw several UFO's a day. Maybe insects, maybe birds, could'a'been fairies, just things that zipped by the corner of his eyesight that he couldn't identify. Lots of mice zip by at speeds where they are just a blur, but that's URO (unidentified running object).



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
This is a good report, military personal very rarely get things they see wrong. Especially pilots:

www.telegraph.co.uk...



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   
For those saying "glider" it must be noted that this explanation is unlikely due to the contents of the report of "unlikely", when the "unlikely" reference is used in these investigation reports then that in its self is a red flag.


The Airprox report concluded: "Investigation of the available surveillance sources was unable to trace any activity matching that described by the A320 pilot. Additionally there was no other information to indicate the presence or otherwise of activity in the area." The report said the Airprox board had been of the opinion that the object was unlikely to have been a fixed wing aircraft, helicopter or hot air balloon, given that it had not shown up on radar. It was also thought that a meteorological balloon would be radar significant and unlikely to be released in the area. A glider could not be discounted, the report said, but it was unlikely that one would be operating in the area because of the constrained airspace and the lack of thermal activity because of the low temperature.

Similarly, the board believed that a hang-glider or para-motor would be radar significant and that conditions precluded them, as they did para-gliders or parascenders. The report stated: "Members were unable to reach a conclusion as to a likely candidate for the conflicting aircraft and it was therefore felt that the board had insufficient information to determine a Cause or Risk".


www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   
A Microlight is also very unlikely as they are not allowed to fly in controlled airspace, also in this area they do not fly over 2000 Feet.
I would not expect a drone in this area, also this may show up on Radar. Plus it would need to be UK MOD and they are in no way going to risk flying a drone onto a commercial flight path.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by malchir
You do realize UFO doesn't stand for flying saucer, beamship or alien pod?

U.F.O. doesn't need to be a taboo or dirty thing, man-made aircraft can officially be UFOs all day and night.

From what I read in the article they don't know what it was but some type of glider seems to be the best bet, maybe a significantly smaller glider than they are used to seeing.

Heck, it sounds like it could've been a drone, drones could easily be mistaken for small gliders. This wouldn't be the first time a drone was mistaken as a UFO, the countries around the world don't exactly press-release their latest drone schematics.


You must be insecure within yourself, at not one point before your reply did anyone mention "flying saucer, beamship or alien pod". UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object, which as it stands right now, this object appears to be just that.

Additionally, are you trying to tell me that the pilot (with probably hundreds, if not thousands of flying hours) of an Airbus can't tell what a glider or drone looks like?

I've no idea what it may have been, but if it's unidentified, then it's unidentified.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Existing thread, here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add to the ongoing discussion.

Thank you



-thread closed-





new topics
top topics
 
8

log in

join