Nellis AFB UAP video from early 90's

"The one that always jumps out to me is the Nellis range video, it was filmed in the early 1990s [..] it doesn’t move consistent with what we see in aerodynamics of normal aircraft or drones"
Lt. Tim McMillan ret

Looks and moves like the 2017 video we've seen countless times. It's claimed that a contractor operating one of the tracking stations obtained the video by filming the screens of two CCTV monitors. After smuggling out the video, it is said that a copy was given to an Air Force employee who subsequently sold the video to Paramount Studios. Brief excerpts of the video appeared in 1995 on the television programs "Hard Copy" and "Sightings."

In 1995, an in-depth analysis of the footage was performed by Martin J. Powell . Powell's analysis suggests the footage was filmed at differing times on the same day, by two seperate radar tracking stations. Geographic image analysis points to the encounters occurring near Black Mountain and Gold Flat on the Tonopah Test Range.

One of my favorites too. Having said that it does move in a way somewhat familiar to me. Not talking propulsion yet, just lateral/height.

I'm thinking internal gyroscope could do something similar?

To me it kind of moves like the tic tac video, at certain points it turns sideways, and even seems to have the same shape as the tic tac. Many UAP witnesses describe their movement as erratic and similar to a falling leaf, which I see here. I think it may well be the same type of craft

Wow, this footage is incredible. Never seen this before actually. Thanks for posting.

Nellis Range Zoooooms



👽🛸🍸

It moves as if there is an auto correction mechanism constantly making changes to keep it at a central location.
The closer it gets, (the closer the zoom factor) the more erratic the image, like you would expect from device attempting to track it.

It may be the device trying to image it, and this is not the real movement of the object???

An imaging device capable of keeping the background (far away) in focus at the same time it is enlarging the object in the foreground. The enlargement could be so great that atmospheric ripple, vibration or other artifacts of powerful zoom shake it and the imager is trying to keep
it centered, but the objects in the background are not being zoomed in on.

I can imagine a military device with the technology to do that...

Who says they are friendly, they are interested in exploring and experimenting with mind control, and that is dangerous because they can manipulate a nuclear war to study the aftermath, they pick and chose humans to study our reactions, mass shooters may be victims of these experiments.

a reply to: Randomname2

That's a pretty hot take. You think a species with knowledge vast enough to get here would mind-meld random citizens to go and shoot up schools and whatnot? Surely there are more convenient and plausible explanations, like, I dunno, drug abuse, history of psychosis, excetera?
Let's say telepathy was real, would you bother mind melding a random ant to go and kill another ant colony? Of course not.
I understand this is a bit of a dud comparison considering we are much more concious than ants, but you get the idea.

I also don't really understand why they would want to study the aftermath of a nuclear war? That just seems so random. Surely they could just simulate it instead, if they wanted to do so? Why would they actually go about bringing it into the realm of reality? Seems stupid and dangerous, to me. Nukes send shockwaves throughout the cosmos, and if they are extra-dimensional this could even mean trouble for them.
I sincerely doubt they'd want any part in any form of conflict.

a reply to: charlyv

I almost had a stroke trying to read this but I think what you're referring to is simply the camera tracking the object.
It doesn't seem to stay in a central location, judging by the video the craft is moving all over the shop.

What I'm interested in is it's apparent shapeshifting. I'd put this down to gravitational distortion around the craft, but damn it does look fascinating at times.

I've seen another video that showcased a craft performing very similar perceptual distortions, actually.
It was from Puerto Rico. I'll link it below. Perhaps we can draw some comparisons.

www.dailymotion.com...
Skip to 0:54 for the footage.

Bare in mind this thing is flying over/buzzing an airport with no f's given, and continue's on to fly in and out of water.

a reply to: vlawde

This is so boring! It's just an unidentified flying object devoid of any details that could make viewing it more insteresting. You can see superior videos taken by the average Joe and Jane on cell phones on land and from airplanes on such TV shows as "Paranormal Caught On Camera" and similarly titled TV fare. Just because it's an "official" video doesn't give it any special cache.

a reply to: idusmartias

Nice rebuttal. Not gonna post any links then? I'm genuinely interested in seeing the stuff you've seen because if this is boring, the stuff you're sitting on must be out of this world.
Pardon the pun.

a reply to: iKarumba

You contribute, I contribute. All god's chillun contribute.

a reply to: vlawde

I loved it, Thank you. I thought I'd seen them all.

Watching this on a low-rez 8-inch tablet so details unclear. On that note, is the opaque white... whatever... partially shrouding the vehicle an exhaust plume?

a reply to: vlawde

I think the video you refer to is the one from the 1994 reel, which shows a test vehicle equipped with the TAN device for test purposes.

The TAN refers to terrain-aided navigation, which is part of the terrain correlation techniques of which both TERCOM (terrain correlation matching) and TERPROM (terrain profile matching) are the best known and most widely deployed techniques.

The video (if you refer to the 1994 one taken at Nellis AFB) just shows a test run of the UGM/TV (unmanned guided missile/test vehicle) in which the terrain correlation is based on measuring the signal-to-noise ratio as a function of terrain roughness and the combined contribution of instrumental errors (mostly RA (radioaltimeter) and altitude errors). TAN was intensively tested during 1992 all through 1998.

What you see in the video is a failure of the on-board altitude correction algorithm, which cannot process the RA received information correctly, leading to the vehicle behaving erratically after the first major terrain abrupt change. The terminal trajectory is just the test vehicle losing GNC capabilities, and finally crashing. You can find technical articles and complete descriptions of the TAN system if you look for the relevant literature of the 1992-1998 period. You cannot access the Nellis AFB test range log books for those years, though.

Summing up: no UFO, no UAP. Just a military UGM/TV testing of the TAN system.

Hmm what is the 2017 video... another Nellis one?

Or...maybe this? Well, that video (rather, object) reminded me of this one



(unfamiliar with the guy and his legitimacy but I like the vid and the 'thing' in it and strikes me as similar in nature to Nellis 1995)