Assistance needed from our Aircraft experts on the TTSA “Go Fast” FA-18 Super Hornet footage

I thought I would start this to get some expert opinion on the To The Stars Academy ( TTSA) footage that was released a few days ago ( and possibly opinion about the two other video they released earlier if possible) . Who better to ask than our friends here in the Aircraft Projects forum.

If you are not familiar with TTSA in a nut shell it’s a team of “insiders” ( term used loosely ) that say they have Gov’t Information on UFO. I know, roll eyes, snicker. Quite a few threads are on going in the UFO forum if any one is interested in more background. I’ll provide links below.


A few questions I have are specifically for this footage below.

m.youtube.com...

TTSA is stating this footage is of an FA-18 Super Hornet flying off the east coast ( Oceana ?). The Fa-18 encounters an unknown in its air space. Is able to manually track then subsequently gain ‘auto tracking’ on the object. When the auto tracking is gained, both pilot and weapons specialist cheer audibly.

Some questions

- does this just seem like a couple guys testing their tracking system on a bird or a test drone?
- if this was a real world engagement wouldn’t things be a bit more serious? An unknown in US air space wouldn’t They Engage the unknown. Wouldn’t be likely there was a one other if not a team of FA -18 s scrambled if an unknown was tracked on radar ( unconfirmed reports say the object was tracked on radar moving approximately 350-400 mph).
- what are the odds DOD would approve declassification of any type of real world engagement, never mind a true “ unknown “?

I’m sure some others will have some good questions and I ask that everyone keep the questions reality based . This is the Aircraft Projects forum.


I appreciate any help and insight.


Additional To The Stars and AATIP threads for additional information

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...




-

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

TTSA. As far as i have seen, they have not presented anything of value. This is prob military footage, maybe from an F-18, but it is a short snippet of what is obviously a longer piece of footage, edited for maximum effect at spinning a story. Like you pointed out, it seems more like a systems test. Probably following a target drone, possibly a target missle. Nothing about this footage seems like a UFO encounter. All of that added to the fact that this is being put out by TTSA, gives more weight to the idea that TTSA is full of crap and are trying to sell you an idea that has no evidence to support it.

a reply to: Paddyofurniture
I would have to look at the footage again to see if a size is represented of the object being tracked. But it does give a speed and altitude the FA-18. Another thing to look for would be zoom of the tracking system. I can’t remember if that is also in the footage. And another thing that would be nice to see is a shadow of the object to give its size so we could determine its altitude.

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

Questions about falsifying speed and altitude, answered in this post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Paddyofurniture

Questions about falsifying speed and altitude, answered in this post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Yes,

Ive seen a number of interpretations of calculating the speed, flight elevation, etc. Unfortunately I do not have the math background to confirm or deny any of them. The following I found on Reddit which was supposedly posted by Dr. Bruce Maccabee on facebook (unconfirmed).

Bruce Maccabee TENTATIVE CALCULATIONS B. Maccabee Mar. 9, 2018 (((Plane at 25000 ft = 4.1 nm Object altitude calculated as: (4.1 nm [height of plane] – (4.1 slant range [plane to object]) x sin 22 = 4.1 – 1.54 = 2.46 below airplane altitude; Height of object = (height of plane – distance below plane ) = 4.1 – 2.5 = 1.6 nm (not close to surface) The sensor is aimed 35 deg left of plane axis and this angle increases to 57 or 58 so at the end so the object was traveling with a velocity component parallel to the track of the airplane. Estimated size of object based on apparent size of black-hot image is approx. (1.5 deg angular width of screen based on narrow FOV) x ([1.5 mm to 2mm diameter of black dot image size on 92 mm wide screen]/[92mm screen width]) x 0.0174 rad/deg x 4.1 nm[slant range] x 6077 ft/nm = 10 to 15 ft!....At 4.1 nm range to the object, the distance across the 1.5 deg FOV is (4.1nm) x [1.5 deg x 0.0174 rad/deg]= 0.1 nm. It crosses the FOV at about a 45 deg angle so the actual approximate distance across the FOV is 0.1 nm/0.707 = 0.14 nm; it crosses in 4 to 3 sec implying a differential speed of the plane and object of 0.14 nm/ ( 4 to 3 sec)/(one hour/ 3600) = 126 to 170 kt)…Since the plane is going at about 250 kt the object was going at the speed approx. (250 – 150) = 100 kt in the same direction as the airplane but clearly slower) (calculation assumes land speed is approx. same as air speed) ))).


The 350 - 400 mph was allegedly stated by Chris Mellon in defending his Washington Post Op-Ed. He stated there is additional data that has not yet been released in the form of radar tracking returns. Again, unconfirmed.

I know, a lot of things are unconfirmed.

My guess is that TTSA didn't plan for the large amount contesting their data and video.

just to give you a heads up.

many in the aviation forum won't bother to respond to this subject. not because they're protecting some secret truth. but because they view ttsa and their antics as juvenile and not serious enough to comment on. most aviation forum members are not impressed with the ttsa weakly presented material nor their MO. nor do they want to get dragged Into pointless arguments or debates with the die hard followers of ttsa.


but ill give you my opinion of ttsa. it's crap.

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

yeah Bruce also screwed up with his prior calculations for the other ttsa releases.

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

My guess is that TTSA didn't plan for the large amount contesting their data and video.

Because they know most people won't look that close, so they bury the truth in a wall of noise.

They do a better job than most US gubment spokespersons.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
just to give you a heads up.

many in the aviation forum won't bother to respond to this subject. not because they're protecting some secret truth. but because they view ttsa and their antics as juvenile and not serious enough to comment on. most aviation forum members are not impressed with the ttsa weakly presented material nor their MO. nor do they want to get dragged Into pointless arguments or debates with the die hard followers of ttsa.


but ill give you my opinion of ttsa. it's crap.

Very articulately put sir, a star for you mate. Couldn't have put it better myself.
In my humble opinion, ttsa will have to do better than what they have presented so far if they want to be taken seriously.

originally posted by: Paddyofurniture
Some questions

- if this was a real world engagement wouldn’t things be a bit more serious? An unknown in US air space wouldn’t They Engage the unknown. Wouldn’t be likely there was a one other if not a team of FA -18 s scrambled if an unknown was tracked on radar ( unconfirmed reports say the object was tracked on radar moving approximately 350-400 mph).

It certainly looks real, and the reactions sound real. They wouldn't "engage" it unless it was deemed hostile. And if these are as common for military pilots to come across as some people think they are, no there wouldn't be a mad scramble to intercept it. Don't forget they studied this back in the 60s and 70s, and probably continued since then. Whatever they are, they haven't been deemed to pose a threat.

- what are the odds DOD would approve declassification of any type of real world engagement, never mind a true “ unknown “?

I'd say the odds are good. Real world engagements get released all the time. If you follow aircraft forums, footage of shootdowns in Syria and things like that do get released. This isn't that big of a deal if you ask me.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
just to give you a heads up.

many in the aviation forum won't bother to respond to this subject. not because they're protecting some secret truth. but because they view ttsa and their antics as juvenile and not serious enough to comment on. most aviation forum members are not impressed with the ttsa weakly presented material nor their MO. nor do they want to get dragged Into pointless arguments or debates with the die hard followers of ttsa.


but ill give you my opinion of ttsa. it's crap.

While I certainly understand your point, I for one hope some of our resident experts will respond. The reason being that in addition to the die hards that will immediately write off their explanations because it's not what they want to hear, there are other members like myself and probably some lurkers who are open to realistic observations from knowledgeable people.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
just to give you a heads up.

many in the aviation forum won't bother to respond to this subject. not because they're protecting some secret truth. but because they view ttsa and their antics as juvenile and not serious enough to comment on. most aviation forum members are not impressed with the ttsa weakly presented material nor their MO. nor do they want to get dragged Into pointless arguments or debates with the die hard followers of ttsa.


but ill give you my opinion of ttsa. it's crap.

I appreciate your opinion, but can you put your feelings for DeLonge and friends aside and comment strictly on what is provided in the video? There is obviously something noteworthy in these videos - the team that released them not withstanding. Do you think it's all just a scam? The pilots from the last video are lying?

a reply to: face23785

They didn't engage anything, they tracked it with an IRST pod. No weapons were ever used.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: face23785

They didn't engage anything, they tracked it with an IRST pod. No weapons were ever used.

That's why I put "engage" in quotation marks. ETA: To clarify, in the post you're responding to, I was attempting to explain to another poster why they didn't engage the target.

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

Shot off the East Coast - Pax River is in Maryland.
Supposedly shot in 2015-IRST21 approved for production in 2015.
Crew gets excited they can auto track target.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
just to give you a heads up.

many in the aviation forum won't bother to respond to this subject. not because they're protecting some secret truth. but because they view ttsa and their antics as juvenile and not serious enough to comment on. most aviation forum members are not impressed with the ttsa weakly presented material nor their MO. nor do they want to get dragged Into pointless arguments or debates with the die hard followers of ttsa.


but ill give you my opinion of ttsa. it's crap.

I appreciate your opinion, but can you put your feelings for DeLonge and friends aside and comment strictly on what is provided in the video? There is obviously something noteworthy in these videos - the team that released them not withstanding. Do you think it's all just a scam? The pilots from the last video are lying?

Other than the audio of the aircrew there is nothing extraordinary shown if the FLIR recording.

A pixelated blob traveling in a straight line at an altitude and speed that even the top end estimates put together by the ET proponents are well within the performance envelope of a civilian aircraft ?

Pilots see things all the time. That doesn't make them fantastic or inexplicable just that it was something unknown to the observer.

originally posted by: Drunkenparrot

originally posted by: PokeyJoe

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
just to give you a heads up.

many in the aviation forum won't bother to respond to this subject. not because they're protecting some secret truth. but because they view ttsa and their antics as juvenile and not serious enough to comment on. most aviation forum members are not impressed with the ttsa weakly presented material nor their MO. nor do they want to get dragged Into pointless arguments or debates with the die hard followers of ttsa.


but ill give you my opinion of ttsa. it's crap.

I appreciate your opinion, but can you put your feelings for DeLonge and friends aside and comment strictly on what is provided in the video? There is obviously something noteworthy in these videos - the team that released them not withstanding. Do you think it's all just a scam? The pilots from the last video are lying?

Other than the audio of the aircrew there is nothing extraordinary shown if the FLIR recording.

A pixelated blob traveling in a straight line at an altitude and speed that even the top end estimates put together by the ET proponents are well within the performance envelope of a civilian aircraft ?

Pilots see things all the time. That doesn't make them fantastic or inexplicable just that it was something unknown to the observer.

I'd have to agree with all of that. I definitely don't get the immediate jumps to believing it's aliens. Technically it's a UFO, though there's no indication it's extraterrestrial.

a reply to: Zaphod58

you mean there's a test pilot training school nearby and at the same time this video was filmed a new sensor from Lockheed was being tested for approval of use on navy f18s. a sensor that uses Infrared to search, detect and track air born objects?

holy centerline fuel pod mounted sensor zaphman!!!

I'd be curious to know if anyone has read anything in the accounts of this story that describes how the craft left?
I saw one blurb that indicated it just accelerated away at high speed, but it didn't mention anything unusual about the manner in which it did so--i.e, dramatically shifting direction, etc.

Oftentimes when pilots encounter these UFO's, it's the radical maneuvers like that that seem to jump out in their descriptions. Case in point, my dad was a career pilot for both the military and the airlines. He described witnessing "something" with another pilot. They both watched it moving slowly at first, then watched it come to a complete stop and shoot off at a ridiculous rate of acceleration in the opposite direction. He specifically refused to use the word "UFO," and all he would say was that it "defied all knowledge of aviation science and existing technology that he was personally aware of."

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

I've only listened to USAF training comms. If this is how the Navy behaves...well it is a bit embarrassing.

BTW, on the initial screen where they are explaining the display, isn't the plane in a left turn rather than a right turn?