Airliners And F-15s Involved In Bizarre Encounter With Mystery Aircraft Over Oregon

originally posted by: SirBlackKnight
a reply to: face23785

This video has a shorter version of the atc communication, all the silences are removed. Audio starts at 47 seconds.

That is definitely more useful instead of sitting through 68 minutes of tape, thank you. I still suck at deciphering some of it though.

a reply to: FredT

Dang i missed this. The Drive article you linked didn't open all the way for me. Now I'm able to read more.

Including this piece linked...

foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com...

RAT 55

Doesn't look stealthy.

a reply to: Zaphod58

fifteen is the back up lol. it used to be about that when the F4 torandos were on shout due to (what i remember) the time required to align the INAS platform. Tyhpoons dont have this so are on ready 5 i beleive, not been round them for a while though, Lightnings were 10

originally posted by: Bigburgh
a reply to: FredT

Dang i missed this. The Drive article you linked didn't open all the way for me. Now I'm able to read more.

Including this piece linked...

foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com...

RAT 55

Doesn't look stealthy.

I started reading that too. Pretty cool. I don't think it's meant to be stealthy though? That's not what I was getting out of it, although I wans't able to finish the article.

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: FredT

Did it display any novelistic maneuvers?

Not from what I can tell from the ATC dialog etc. It just kind of flew relatively straight without wild maneuvers. It was also flying faster than a 737 which cruises at 450 knots

it was far off. I can tell you having been up in the air alot, It is difficult to make out a ton of details unless the aircraft is close. Then again I don't have fighter pilot eyesight either. Plus you factor in sun angles etc. and it can get difficult.

I have 20/10 corrected and it's still hard as hell to make out the details of something even at the same level as you when it's more than 3-4 miles out. Half the time, the only way you know what it is was because you heard them say it on the comm...

I assume it would use various powerful radars to try and find the stealth platform and then use data to make modifications to the stealth to make it harder to find?

a reply to: weemadmental

Ready 5 is in the cockpit, engines running. Ten is in the cockpit, engines off. Fifteen is close to the aircraft, ready to go. They normally are airborne in five, or slightly more, but the posture is fifteen.

a reply to: Bigburgh

Because it's not. It uses sensors to check IR and radar signatures, try to intercept radio and datalink, and fun things to check other aircraft stealth.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT

This wasn't day time. It was early evening at least. The pilots are saying "good evening"and "good night". This might have been right at sunset, but it wasn't day time.

Fair enough But its still early to have a an aircraft out if your testing stuff that you don't want to acknowledge or be seen. Why else would you be flying sans transponders etc. And if its a test of one platform or another why chance the F-15's, rather have some 3 star call and tell them to not launch etc?
And 200 miles to the east and you would be over BF Nevada and Idaho and away from all the inter west coast corridor.

I'm also curious however, can the governor of a state order his or her national guard assets to intercept INDEPENDENT of national USAF command?

a reply to: FredT

It may have developed a problem while heading out and had to come back home. They try to time things to get over their target area at the right time, so sometimes that means leaving earlier than they'd like.

They are under NORAD control, not the state while on alert.

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: Woody510
a reply to: FredT

Maybe it took off in the dark and was refuelled at times to keep it up? Maybe the B21 proof of concept as well I'm 98% positive that's what I saw flying over my house.

It could be but Oakland Center was able to get a primary skin paint on the airframe which even with reflectors on would be a stretch as its not really a military search radar and they really are dependent on transponders for proper ATC. This occurred right in the fringe of both Oakland and Seattle centers zones.

It doesn't need to be any specialized radar for a primary return. All a transponder does, if it is a Mode C or S, is to add a data block with ID and altitude info. ATC relied on primary returns for decades before transponders were mandated.

a reply to: FredT

We have entered the season of eternal rain/overcast up here, so as far as flying during the day, he could fly all day long and the only risk of anyone seeing him visually would be other pilots at long range.

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: FredT

We have entered the season of eternal rain/overcast up here, so as far as flying during the day, he could fly all day long and the only risk of anyone seeing him visually would be other pilots at long range.

haha I know, I had to bingo a fixed wing transport into Roseburg cause they were below minimums, land back and Medford, rent two vans to get the team and gear 2 hours north. Then drive back with the two vans and an ambulance to put the patient in to fly back home LOL. The weather this time of year up there is iffy to say the least

a reply to: Bigburgh

nt43

It also shows up at KMHV.

I read this UFO when it hit reddit a few days ago and really don't want to listen to all that audio again. But it is just a plane with the transponder off. Drug planes fly low to stay off the radar. Flying high without a transponder puts you on the radar, so to speak.

Regarding ADS-B, it is not like mode-s where ATC needs to ping you. ADS-B spews out its squitter without interrogation. FR24 could have the data. Or ADSB Exchange if you have archive permission.

Here is my problem with the story. No plane is born without radar contact. Rather you lose it, or request no flight following if that is even allowed these days. So the plane had to have tracking when it took off and then tracking was lost.

originally posted by: gariac

Here is my problem with the story. No plane is born without radar contact. Rather you lose it, or request no flight following if that is even allowed these days. So the plane had to have tracking when it took off and then tracking was lost.

So when we fly fixed wing or Rotary and we call in to whatever center we are in, the pilots when they call into ATC its always Our tail number including if we are lifeguard, course and speed, etc, get the number they want us to squack in the box, clearance to climb or maneuver etc. and they request flight following. ATC never says no, but Ill ask if its optional to do so.

Might it have been an operational test? A now you see me , now you dont,sort of thing? To see just how effective it was in real world circumstances.
They drew attention to themselves, then started a game of hide and seek.

originally posted by: punkinworks10
Might it have been an operational test? A now you see me , now you dont,sort of thing? To see just how effective it was in real world circumstances.
They drew attention to themselves, then started a game of hide and seek.

Could be but then why call off the F-15's or send up an E-3 to scout around and make it a real test

a reply to: FredT

Because when it comes to black projects the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.

My money is on the aircraft being in that heavily trafficked corridor on purpose. I have a colleague who once had a Russian Tu95 bear flying below his aircraft (747).....the Russians were using his 747 to mask their radar return.

Being in that corridor would have provided multiple aircraft to “blend in with” to confuse radar. Probably why they were having a hard time tracking it.

I’m more interested in when they first had a paint on it, what location and what was it’s track and speed. Primary paint will give clues to that....

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT

Because when it comes to black projects the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.

Is that true, I would have thought even 'secret aircraft' would be required to file a flight plan, again even the interceptors should notify ATC they are airborne but do not report the location or the radar tracks publicly but give data to the airforce once the situation is under control?

Seems like it could be a good test but I would have though that kind of test would be over a military range rather than in commercial air space?