"Drone" running circles around Police heli and going above 14,000....drone?

Are we STILL in denial about these craft? Even after ATIP, the Defense Dept, The US Navy and all saying they are HERE. www.thedrive.com...

a reply to: HiddenIdentity

If it’s an actual drone, someone put a lot of money into that thing.

My biggest fixed wing drone, just under the size of a picnic table cost $34,000.
It has a 90km range -any direction, and 1.5 hours of battery life.
But being a fixed wing, it’s not good at abrupt manoeuvres.
Nor battling winds greater than 50km/hr.

This would drone the police are reporting would had to of been a Matice style frame, with extra battery payload.
For one, to be large enough to be visible I order to be noticed and tracked, and two having the battery power to manoeuvre that long.

a reply to: HiddenIdentity

For them to repeatedly say “It performed unlike any drone they’ve ever encountered”

It’s not a drone.

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: HiddenIdentity

If it’s an actual drone, someone put a lot of money into that thing.

My biggest fixed wing drone, just under the size of a picnic table cost $34,000.
It has a 90km range -any direction, and 1.5 hours of battery life.
But being a fixed wing, it’s not good at abrupt manoeuvres.
Nor battling winds greater than 50km/hr.

This would drone the police are reporting would had to of been a Matice style frame, with extra battery payload.
For one, to be large enough to be visible I order to be noticed and tracked, and two having the battery power to manoeuvre that long.

Given its speed and endurance, it was almost certainly not battery powered. The referenced report at The Drive makes that point.

But your point about it being an expensive project would be true in either case.

This has “drug smuggler” written all over it.

a reply to: 1947boomer

A drug smuggling drone isn’t going to loiter over any fuel tanks or in restricted air space over an Air Force base or play cat and mouse with a police helicopter at 14,000 feet.

It’s going to go from point A to point B and maybe back.

a reply to: RazorV66

Right! Not sure why someone would think a drug drone would harass law enforcement for no reason. But that's the way the debunking mind works. Any prosaic explanation will do the trick, and if anyone questions said prosaic explanation, they are automatically die hard ET UFO believers.

So since UFOs can't ever display beyond next gen tech (since they aren't real), this object must be a #ing drug drone bro

"
the way the debunking mind work". Actually all the debunking minds I know, would like to see evidence of visitation from non human entities... You just can't show them a video or a picture with no other useful data.

What do you think it is?



a reply to: aairman23

a reply to: vance

I'm not sure what you mean in the context of OP and my comment.

I EXPECT that ALL rational people would desire evidence of something before they believe it. (But what constitutes evidence?)

Most debunkers I chat with say there is literally zero evidence for UFOs being beyond next generation technology, which is not intellectually honest IMO, but sure statements like these give them confidence to go on patronizing people who DO think there is convincing evidence that some UFOs are beyond next generation technology. OR they berate you as a die hard ET UFO believer if you don't immediately buy into their custom prosaic explanation (ie, this is a drug drone).

What do I think this is? I'm divided between UFO and secret USG drone/hologram tech, but IMO this case counts as potential evidence for craft utilizing beyond next generation technology (like the tic-tac). I just CAN'T know if it is ET, wholly human-invented, or back-engineered ET tech...no matter what the answer is, these UFO cases are exciting.

a reply to: Macenroe82

probably a Hybrid drone... flip the switch to haul ass / conserve battery power etc.

originally posted by: imitator
a reply to: Macenroe82

probably a Hybrid drone... flip the switch to haul ass / conserve battery power etc.

Those fancy winged drones that can tilt forward and use the propellers purely for propulsion instead of lift look they they can fly like a bat out of Hell.

a reply to: Blue Shift

no doubt....
there is so many types of drones nowadays, it's mind blowing in what they can do.

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: 1947boomer

A drug smuggling drone isn’t going to loiter over any fuel tanks or in restricted air space over an Air Force base or play cat and mouse with a police helicopter at 14,000 feet.

It’s going to go from point A to point B and maybe back.

Yes it is, if it is a decoy/distraction attempt. Buzzing around a helicopter puts it temporarily at high risk and will have to focus on what the drones doing, not what it was doing.

Like the 2 car trick, if a drug carrying car gets pulled by cops a following car will ram the cop car then drive off in the hope the cop makes chase, drug car carries on.

originally posted by: RazorV66

A drug smuggling drone isn’t going to loiter over any fuel tanks or in restricted air space over an Air Force base or play cat and mouse with a police helicopter at 14,000 feet.

Exactly my thoughts.

Now, that green light on the underbelly. I didn't read in the report how the observer determined it was on the underbelly. Maybe I missed it? I understand it's a common spot for a position light. But my mind needs to know if he saw a reflection off the underbelly or just guessing because that's all he can think of?

He stated his night vision made it hard to see too, so how does he know it wasn't a classic UFO---that being a self-illuminating "ball of light?" Important question I think. Ya' paying attention here, Boomer you old air dog? Think!

However, let's get back to the night-vision. This craft seems designed to do what it did even down to the right color to mess with said night-vision.

So, I agree with the ol' Boom in that it's probably manmade but think his thinking is characteristically sloppy on the drug-running thing. If you don't think about it for a second before you post it, it is a pretty good guess. And it's possible, but as pointed out doesn't best fit the facts as reported.

If it is manmade I hope it's ours, but it's probably China with some of their student spies doing test-runs doh! They do pretty much have the monopoly on producing hi-quanity low-cost hi-tech flying stuffs. Them infamous shipping containers are gonna pop open and release swarms one day you watch heh. Then again, that kind of technology will ultimately be used against regardless of whose it is.

ETA: What evidence was presented in that article that it even was a quad or hex?

If this isn't the first time and potential sightings may occur again, wouldn't it make sense to have something on hand to record it?

Video should be 2nd nature now.

originally posted by: HiddenIdentity
Are we STILL in denial about these craft? Even after ATIP, the Defense Dept, The US Navy and all saying they are HERE. www.thedrive.com...

That's not much of an opening post.
This is a duplicate thread.

In the previous thread, the poster put a little more information in the opening post, which links to exactly the same link as yours, so you could have just added something to the existing thread if you had anything to add:
Here we go again. Tucson AZ “drone” evades authorities at 14,000 + ft.

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: HiddenIdentity

If it’s an actual drone, someone put a lot of money into that thing.

You're right, a drone with such capabilities I'd expect to be very costly but if it's involved with drugs in some way, they can afford expensive drones. They even try to build submarines sometimes and those are very costly.

originally posted by: aairman23
a reply to: RazorV66

Right! Not sure why someone would think a drug drone would harass law enforcement for no reason.

Maybe they had a good reason as moohide suggested, but if you don't think that's what it is, who else do you think is harassing the cops for no reason? What's your theory?

originally posted by: Moohide
Yes it is, if it is a decoy/distraction attempt. Buzzing around a helicopter puts it temporarily at high risk and will have to focus on what the drones doing, not what it was doing.

Like the 2 car trick, if a drug carrying car gets pulled by cops a following car will ram the cop car then drive off in the hope the cop makes chase, drug car carries on.

Good point!

a reply to: HiddenIdentity

Guys i dont know with who to speak, i m doing on something revolucionary, and my ideas and the thing i want to made cost a lot of money i cant afford in my 100 lives. Its about my flying object hwerk with multiple inhuman abilitys.

Thats all what i can tell you about. Any suggestions and solutions who is doing on same thing?
Thanks.

originally posted by: aairman23
a reply to: RazorV66

Right! Not sure why someone would think a drug drone would harass law enforcement for no reason.

Maybe they had a good reason as moohide suggested, but if you don't think that's what it is, who else do you think is harassing the cops for no reason? What's your theory?

originally posted by: Moohide
Yes it is, if it is a decoy/distraction attempt. Buzzing around a helicopter puts it temporarily at high risk and will have to focus on what the drones doing, not what it was doing.

Like the 2 car trick, if a drug carrying car gets pulled by cops a following car will ram the cop car then drive off in the hope the cop makes chase, drug car carries on.

Good point!


This doesn't makes sense to me at all unless you really want it to be a drug drone. The drug car situation isn't analogous at all because in that situation one of the assets is clearly about to get caught (hence the need for distraction). If the drone really had the speed/acceleration that both helos observed then there would be no reason to screw around as a distraction. Just get the hell out of there so they don't catch you. I don't see an advantage to hanging around two helos for 30 mins, when you already know that you can zip away without follow. Going back to the drug car analogy, if the pulled over car can zip away at speed much faster than the cop car, there is no reason for a second car to distract and catch a charge for no reason.

What do I think it is? I've already said I don't know. But, I think a real UFO...OR a secret USG test is waaaaaaaaaay more likely to do something like this to cops and military than a drug lord who's just trying to get drugs and money from point A to point B.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

This doesn't makes sense to me at all unless you really want it to be a drug drone. The drug car situation isn't analogous at all because in that situation one of the assets is clearly about to get caught (hence the need for distraction). If the drone really had the speed/acceleration that both helos observed then there would be no reason to screw around as a distraction. Just get the hell out of there so they don't catch you. I don't see an advantage to hanging around two helos for 30 mins, when you already know that you can zip away without follow. Going back to the drug car analogy, if the pulled over car can zip away at speed much faster than the cop car, there is no reason for a second car to distract and catch a charge for no reason.

What do I think it is? I've already said I don't know. But, I think a real UFO...OR a secret USG test is waaaaaaaaaay more likely to do something like this to cops and military than a drug lord who's just trying to get drugs and money from point A to point B.

a reply to: HiddenIdentity

Not being familiar with the case, I just want to point out a few interesting things:

- R/C Helicopters can do AMAZING manoeuvers, including rapid change of speed, height, direction, you name it. They can - for all intents and purposes - move like "an UFO" would (just put "R/C Helicopter" and "3D" (it's called 'doing 3D' for some reason) to some video search engine to see what I mean - it's SO fast, even a UFO would be hard-pressed to surpass it!)

- Alternatively, try to find the video where they are racing superfast with relatively small drones (with lights attached to them) in a forest with POV - it's so fast my stomach wants to react - they have goggles that allow them to 'see what the drone sees', so they can fly in first-person-perspective, like a video game, except for real)

- There are many kinds of drones, from jets, propeller ones, 3D helicopters, and then actual ones that are classified as 'Drones'. A layman might call any and all of these 'drones' in the right circumstances

- A horse can't outrun a human being.

What? Am I crazy for making such a claim? What's wrong with me, how dare I?!

Wait, let me explain.

A horse can't outrun a human being in the right circumstances. It's all about circumstances. A horse takes a long time to turn from right to left while it's running, and also back to right after it has performed the turn. This means, a human can Zig-Zag the same distance a LOT faster than a horse can, because horse's mass, shape and size make it impossible to do as fast Zig-Zagging - a human is MORE MANOEUVERABLE than a horse, due to its smaller size, smaller mass, only having to worry about two legs, smaller turn circle, and so on and so forth.

So in this kind of a race, with the right distance, the human will win every time, even if he's not a very fast runner. In this case, the fastest horse in the world can't outrun a relatively slow human jogger.

Now, to put this example to practice, imagine a R/C heli or drone versus a 'police helicopter'. It's the same situation, isn't it, except more three-dimensional, and more in the air? This means that OF COURSE a drone can 'run circles around a police heli', if you want to put it that way. It's only natural - laws of physics and all that.

A massive vehicle that has a pilot and passengers inside can't even hope to cope against some extremely fast R/C-heli or drone when it comes to turning or changing direction or flying in circles.

None of what I am saying disproves an UFO or anything, I just wanted to point a few things that people might not always consider.

a reply to: aairman23

I EXPECT that ALL rational people would desire evidence of something before they believe it. (But what constitutes evidence?)

Sorry, but this is not necessarily a rational viewpoint or statement.

What about rational people that don't believe anything? Therefore, there's no 'before they believe', because they can never be 'after they believe', rendering the whole thing redundant.

You are saying that DESIRE is rational. Think about that for a moment.

Evidence is for the people that think it means something. Nothing can ever be fully proven, you HAVE to discern and examine yourself, therefore, evidence is not necessary.

There's such a thing as intuition. All rational people should know about this by now. If you go only by 'intelligence' or 'rationality', you will get lost at some point and may even become irrational.

If you are saying rational people can't have visions, can't have intuition, can't have premonitions or feel when someone is lying, then you are not being rational.

I consider myself rational, but I also consider myself a human being with ALL the faculties, not just 'intelligence' and 'evidence' side. There are other ways to know something than evidence, but I will leave it for you to explore reality to find those ways.