• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

UFOs?

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
She's a permanent instructor at USNA, if any of our ambitious midshipman want to try to get her to give the inside scoop...
Or don’t. I’m sure she’s tired of storytelling. Leave her alone.
 

Hair Warrior

New Member


TL;DR: Per open sources, the Office of Naval Intelligence now runs the UAPTF, and an astrophysicist contractor (?) for the DoD UAP program mentioned physical evidence of “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”
 

P3 F0

Well-Known Member
None
I’ll believe it when I see it, and it’s tested/examined by other scientists that concur. Things will certainly be interesting if so..... aside from the obvious scientific ramifications, would pretty much validate Fravor’s account.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor


TL;DR: Per open sources, the Office of Naval Intelligence now runs the UAPTF, and an astrophysicist contractor (?) for the DoD UAP program mentioned physical evidence of “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”
That’s a fucking stretch. I can’t identify this material... therefore it is “not of this earth.” I cannot roll my eyes any more dramatically.
I don’t understand why you’re so keen on buying this trash reporting.
 

MGoBrew11

Well-Known Member
pilot
Another quote in the same article says many of the materials discovered on these things is man-made. That quote seems to be conveniently overlooked in Twitter threads on this subject.
 

Hair Warrior

New Member
I don’t understand why you’re so keen on buying this trash reporting.
I agree a lot of the reporting is sensationalist - but not all of it. There are credible accounts from Sex, as well as an OS3 who was onboard the Nimitz that day and claims to have watched a different, higher-res video in CVIC than the one publicly released. If we aren’t curious for human history’s sake, the technology of the “tic tac” would at minimum have national security implications, especially if it turns out to be a manmade aircraft invented by Russia or China.
 

nittany03

FUBIJAR
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
I agree a lot of the reporting is sensationalist - but not all of it. There are credible accounts from Sex, as well as an OS3 who was onboard the Nimitz that day and claims to have watched a different, higher-res video in CVIC than the one publicly released. If we aren’t curious for human history’s sake, the technology of the “tic tac” would at minimum have national security implications, especially if it turns out to be a manmade aircraft invented by Russia or China.
Sigh . . . an 18XX of all people should understand that any credible analysis of such a thing, if it exists, would be SAPed up the wazoo for incredibly obvious reasons.
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
I agree a lot of the reporting is sensationalist - but not all of it. There are credible accounts from Sex, as well as an OS3 who was onboard the Nimitz that day and claims to have watched a different, higher-res video in CVIC than the one publicly released. If we aren’t curious for human history’s sake, the technology of the “tic tac” would at minimum have national security implications, especially if it turns out to be a manmade aircraft invented by Russia or China.
Yeah I'm plenty curious as to what's going on with these...but I'm not sure what the value of that is if the only conclusion remains "we have no idea what this is." Even if these were interstellar visitors, there's precious little we could realistically do about it one way or the other until they decide to do us a solid and crash one into Area 51 to study.

As for manmade tic tac theories, I have a hard time buying that Russia or China is going to go and take their UFO prototype and run it around in the SOCAL OPAREA for the entire US Navy to see.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
I agree a lot of the reporting is sensationalist - but not all of it. There are credible accounts from Sex, as well as an OS3 who was onboard the Nimitz that day and claims to have watched a different, higher-res video in CVIC than the one publicly released. If we aren’t curious for human history’s sake, the technology of the “tic tac” would at minimum have national security implications, especially if it turns out to be a manmade aircraft invented by Russia or China.
Now you’re mixing different incidents together, as though they’re related. Why are you so hell bent on the SOCAL Nimitz stuff being extraterrestrial? That is a foolish position to take, particularly for someone in your field. It also makes zero sense that an adversary would trot out this kind of capability. OPSEC isn’t just something that the US practices. This is an unhealthy obsession for you.
 
Last edited:

Hair Warrior

New Member
Sigh . . . an 18XX of all people should understand that any credible analysis of such a thing, if it exists, would be SAPed up the wazoo for incredibly obvious reasons.
Why would the Pentagon publicly release videos and reports of its own SAP program? I agree that credible analysis should be done behind closed doors, but the NY Times is now reporting that the Pentagon intends to release some of its analysis.
Now you’re mixing different incidents together, as though they’re related. Why are you so hell bent on the SOCAL Nimitz stuff being extraterrestrial?
They're the same event. The OS3 was discussing the same incident where CDR Fravor was vectored to take a look.

I didn't say it's extraterrestrial for certain - but it's a remote possibility, and the Pentagon and Congress want to identify it.
That is a foolish position to take, particularly for someone in your field.
I've already told you what I think... and I'm just fine with saying "we don't know."
Cool. It would be more foolish for the intelligence field writ-large to be content not knowing. Recognition of vehicles is a job of intel. So is preventing strategic surprise.
It also makes zero sense that an adversary would trot out this kind of capability. OPSEC isn’t just something that the US practices.
Given that we, as a society have zero evidence of the existence of #1 or #2 from your list, I find it odd that they’re on your list at all. Why not list divine influence, or a plot by Bigfoot? Some of you have very active imaginations.
First you find it odd that a non-earth vehicle is even considered on a list of possibilities, then you say it makes zero sense it could be Russian or Chinese.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Why would the Pentagon publicly release videos and reports of its own SAP program? I agree that credible analysis should be done behind closed doors, but the NY Times is now reporting that the Pentagon intends to release some of its analysis.

They're the same event. The OS3 was discussing the same incident where CDR Fravor was vectored to take a look.

I didn't say it's extraterrestrial for certain - but it's a remote possibility, and the Pentagon and Congress want to identify it.


Cool. It would be more foolish for the intelligence field writ-large to be content not knowing. Recognition of vehicles is a job of intel. So is preventing strategic surprise.


First you find it odd that a non-earth vehicle is even considered on a list of possibilities, then you say it makes zero sense it could be Russian or Chinese.
From reading this post, it’s clear to me that you’re very confused about the topic being discussed.
 

cfam

A pilot is a pilot. An NFO is something else.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Why would the Pentagon publicly release videos and reports of its own SAP program? I agree that credible analysis should be done behind closed doors, but The NY Times is now reporting that the Pentagon intends to release some of its analysis.
Just because the NYT says that some of the analysis is being released doesn’t mean that there will be anything remotely sensitive (or interesting) in that release (assuming no errors with the reporting to begin with).

The only reason that anything has been released thus far is because someone who has declassification authority reviewed all of those videos and reports and determined that they were not of any value.

Personally, I’m content to wait until actual data is declassified decades from now (if ever) ala Constant Peg, instead of trying to parse words from Popular Mechanics, The Drive, and the NYT so I can figure out where the little green men are hiding.
 
Last edited:

jmcquate

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Just because the NYT says that some of the analysis is being released doesn’t mean that there will be anything remotely sensitive (or interesting) in that release (assuming no errors with the reporting to begin with).
Unless the "Tic Tack" is deemed racist, the Grey Lady will soon lose interest.
 

Hair Warrior

New Member
Just because the NYT says that some of the analysis is being released doesn’t mean that there will be anything remotely sensitive (or interesting) in that release (assuming no errors with the reporting to begin with).

The only reason that anything has been released thus far is because someone who has declassification authority reviewed all of those videos and reports and determined that they were not of any value.

Personally, I’m content to wait until actual data is declassified decades from now (if ever) ala Constant Peg, instead of trying to parse words from Popular Mechanics, The Drive, and the NYT so I can figure out where the little green men are hiding.
Fair enough, no bombshells, but aviation stuff is more interesting to me than COVID statistics, mask rules, Fauci conspiracies, Portland riots, BLM, or the Washington Football Team name.
From reading this post, it’s clear to me that you’re very confused about the topic being discussed.
The thread title says it all.
 
Top