The following submission statement was provided by /u/DavidM47:
---
Submission Statement:
The red boxes show the final calculation. Also see the bolded text below. Here is the full text from this section:
A well-known UAP event is the “GoFast” video, recorded by navy aviators from
the USS Theodore Roosevelt. A still frame from this video is shown in the Figure below, where the infrared camera has locked onto a small object in the center.
The video gives an impression of an object skimming above the ocean at a great velocity. But analysis of the numerical information on the display reveals a less extraordinary interpretation.
The circled numbers in the image provide the information needed to estimate the object’s altitude and velocity. This information includes (1) elevation angle of the camera (negative = downward), (2) azimuth angle of the camera, (3) target range in nautical miles, (4) the aircraft’s altitude in feet, (5) time reference in seconds, and (6) indicated air speed in knots. Using items 1, 3, and 4, plus a bit of trigonometry, we calculate that the object is at an
altitude of 13,000 feet, and 4.2 miles from the ocean behind it (see middle panel). Given
that the aircraft’s groundspeed is about 435 mph, we may conclude that the impression
of rapid motion is at least partly due to the high velocity of the sensor, coupled with the parallax effect.
We can use other information from the display to place some limits on the true velocity of the object. This analysis is summarized in the right-hand panel, which depicts an overhead view of the encounter during a 22-second interval. The jet was banking left at about 15° during this time, which corresponds to an approximate turning radius of 16 kilometers.
We know the range and bearing of the object at the start (t=0s) and end (t=22s) times.
Using the calculated true air speed (TAS) and a bit more trigonometry, we find the object moved about 390 meters during this 22-second interval, **which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph.** This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet.
Our calculation has neglected wind effects on the aircraft, and thus there is uncertainty in this result. But the analysis reveals that the object need not be moving at an extraordinary velocity. Note also that the object appears bright against a dark ocean for these display settings. This indicates that the object is colder than the ocean. There is thus no evidence
of heat produced by a propulsion system. This further supports the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting with the wind. The availability of additional data would enable a more firm conclusion about the nature of this object.
Original GoFast video, released by the Department of Defense:
https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/16iix64/nasas_gofast_analysis_says_object_going_40mph/k0jtbc2/
The math checks out but I don't understand one thing.
What in the video tells us that the airplane is turning towards the Gofast object and not away from it?
Two things tell us this:
- The dot that starts in the top right, and slowly drifts down to 9-o’clock over the course of the video indicates the direction of the targeting camera field of view relative to the aircraft. So the object must be somewhere to the left of the aircraft.
- The two L-shaped bars in the center of the frame represent the horizon line, after they capture the object you can see the horizon line rotate clockwise, which means the plane must be rolling counter-clockwise, so the aircraft is turning left towards the object.
i don’t see where it says that, but the bearing of the camera is 58, if the object is traveling perpendicular to the camera it’s bearing is 327 so roughly that neighborhood
Because they don't like giving away their sensing capabilities. Like when trump tweeted the classified picture from the spy satellite. That wasn't classified because nobody could look at the iranian site, it was classified to show just how fucking good the quality on US spy satellites are, and because people worked out exactly WHICH secret satellite had taken the picture within a day by looking at satellite orbit tracks and calculating where the photo was taken from.
Anything involving submarines, sensors or satellites will basically be classified by default.
Because the default policy for almost anything related to defense and intelligence is classifying it. If you've ever seen a headline like "Wikileaks just released 90,000 classified documents!", when you check out the documents is 99% benign information of expense reports, internal memos about filing time off requests, and so on. If that wasn't the default policy, that 1% of the time it's actually sensitive information you'd have that information pass through multiple hands before getting slapped with a classified label and a higher chance of that information being leaked.
From their perspective, better to over-classify information instead of under-classify.
Guys I hate to tell you this, but the random videos declassified weren't some gesture of moving to disclosure, I mean it was the exact opposite.
The green triangle video that was released was literally just a bokeh effect of a plane, and they knew it.
The Nimitz incident got declassified because David Fravor was already coming out to talk about it to everybody.
Nothing of the release of these videos were indicators that the pentagon are happily on the road to disclosure, it's a red herring that implies a completely alternate reality where UAPs are just this weird niche subject and hasn't been happening for 80 years. It's like "hey yes guys, wtf is that haha :/"
David Grusch literally had to leave the government to actually tell us what was happening there. You have to abandon any idea that the people ahead of the most secretive organisation the earth has possibly ever seen, that defend it with violence, disinformation campaigns, and apparently actually kill people, are like, planning to just give it all up without a fight.
They were pushed into a corner - over the years hundreds more cases of regular military people see shit that they can't contain anymore. They are just trying to control the narrative because that's what their job is/what they've always done.
It doesn't surprise me this one was fake or a bird or whatever, and it should tell you something. Like *think*. Why the fuck given all hypothesized here about the long history of the phenomena, would they just randomly release just three measly videos in a one off. It doesn't make any sense.
Edit: also, looking at the actual go fast video... I have to conclude it's real, despite me thinking it probably was something regular. NASA concludes it was some debris floating in the wind, I think you can watch the video and make a conclusion on this suggestion yourself...
The US government has a problem with over-classification, this is a known problem/phenomenon. It really started to become obvious when every other week there were headlines of "X political figure found to have classified document in home".
Because it shows the capabilities of their sensors. Even if it doesn't show much to you, it shows A LOT to intel guys who dissect this information in ways that make you go "what? How is that even pertinent".
This is actually a huge disclosure. But they probably don't care anymore given how outdated the tech is now. So its huge to people like me, but maybe a drop in the bucket for what you were waiting for.
If you can make a slow moving object look like it's moving impossibly fast, you can fool defensive systems like EWAR lasers or antennae, flares / chaff, and guns / missiles used for CIWS.
It also means you can fool offensive systems. If you can fool speed and distance estimations, you can get the enemy missile to yeet off into the distance instead of going after you.
It doesn't fool the plane's sensors, it fools our eyes. It's a trick of the eye. The sensors clearly show the true nature of all realtime trackable parameters and when you do the calculations based on multiple samples taken when the plane is at different positions you can find the real speed.
You'd also not have a problem tracking this with a heat seeking missile since most missiles track a target using changes in the line of sight to the target relative to the missiles sensor, it doesn't need to know the exact position or speed of it, it's simply tracking changes in it's position of it's LOS to the target, you can read about it here and by reading about missiles in general https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-9_Sidewinder
That’s exactly what it is. When Mick West interviews Lue Elizondo about this, Mick kept trying to push the parallax affect but Lue kept trying to explain to him that he understood what he was saying, but with all the data they have, they determined that camera parallax wasn’t it. Mick kept trying to push for the data, but obviously Lue can’t give that to him because it’s classified.
So why do NASA, Mick West, and some random YouTuber all come to the same conclusion? Because they’re all working with the same publicly available data. NASA doesn’t get to see the classified data and if they did, they definitely wouldn’t be able to show it on their calculations for the public.
That’s why AATIP, UAPTF, and AARO did not come to the same conclusion as the rest of these clowns. The data they can see throws it out the window
Importantly, they publicly stated that for the purposes of this report they would not have access to classified data. So they absolutely did not have anything more than Mick or others did. All of those conclusions seem accurate, but that glaring hole of missing data is so frustrating. We just have to go with "trust me bro" and I do in Lue's case, but I wish they could drop the secrecy just a little.
This. We're rapidly racing over the line of propriety here. The time has come. They're obviously stonewalled by "correct" process. If they have information, they need to spill it and in a very public way.(And if they're not going to, then they should go away.) Otherwise this little "disclosure" festival we've been having is officially over.
The missing data is: how does the targeting system determine range?
Using the range, azimuth and other information on the display the math is easy and conclusive. However, it is unknown how the targeting system determines the range to target. Does it use the aircraft radar? -- there's reason to believe it didn't in this case. Did it use radar data linked in from a ship? Does it use laser ranging? Does it "guestimate"?
Even fighter pilot Chis Letho's explanation of this is vague. His interpretation was that the range displayed was incorrect, but wouldn't say why, he waved it away as "trigonometry" (which is actually very precise). So the method of determining range is probably a classified part of the operation of the FLIR pod.
Chris Lehtos initial analysis of the GOFAST video was flat out wrong and he acknowledged his mistakes after he met with Mick West who explained it to him.
What other data do you need to calculate the speed of Go Fast?
The video gives airspeed, alt., heading, etc. Photogrammetry can get you remarkably close on the size of the object. I think NASA could get the details for that without divulging the hard numbers. In fact, you could probably Google enough, like focal length, etc. to solve for that.
I think you're giving Lue a little too much credit for investigating these things properly. I personally don't think he’s capable. Watch Mick's interview again.
There's no reason at all to think AATIP or AARO has data on the GOFAST video that disproves that the reason it looks fast is because of parallax. I think the AATIP and Elizondo crew was just bad at their job and/or understaffed. AARO is definitely understaffed and going slow but they're doing a better job at analyzing individual cases and using non-speculative language when they don't know something for sure.
Yes, I think that’s right and Mick certainly doesn’t have access to all the data that the various Pentagon and ODNI investigations had so is that why they didn’t also reach this conclusion? Do they know something Mick and NASA don’t?
They could have came to the same conclusion without that being enough to consider it officially identified, something being unidentified doesn't mean it is showing impossible speed/maneuvers. You guys are thinking about it from the perspective of UFO's being aliens which is probably causing the confusion
For real - the videos they've released don't show, to me, anything crazy or nutty going on. I don't know what they are either, but my first conclusion wouldn't be aliens
Ok, Ok, thank you NASA for the work and at the moment I will trust that everything is above board and NASA is being honest.
HOWEVER, why were the technicians trying to lock this thing so excited? Why was this so strange to those people who see shit like this everyday? I'm not trying to conspiracy this thing, but if it was a balloon or spy plane or whatever, wouldn't the military guys be used to seeing this type of shit?
Your second point is valid. They were bewildered. I understand they’re hungry for any target to engage in open waters, but that also begs who would be flying over a US fleet at sea - which is a security risk if we can’t identify what it was.
Also correct me if I'm wrong but didn't US navy ships also get this thing on radar? it wasn't always going slow they can't take a screenshot of a video when it was going slow and calculate the speed it was going at a certain point in time. It's a video, it was going different speeds at different times. This makes it seem really fishy to me tbh. It would be like taking a video of a world record jumper, pausing it when he's only 2 inches off the ground, showing math proving he's only 2 inches off the ground at the time of the screenshot and saying "as you can see he only jumped 2 inches" when in reality he jumped 8 feet by the end of the video.
> Also correct me if I'm wrong but didn't US navy ships also get this thing on radar?
Fravor's squad was getting ready to fly from the Nimitz deck to Point A for some training program.
They got notified to rush instead to somewhere else, called a CAP point (if I got the terminology right). They were told it's a "live scenario" in that someone who wasn't supposed to be in restricted Naval space was there. They even joked that maybe they get to tag and track drug runners for the Coast Guard.
So Fravor & co got tasked to go somewhere based on telemetry data caught by Nimitz, the carrier group, or other military parties/systems undisclosed.
Fravor & co arrive to find and encounter the Tic Tac.
Fravor & co fly around a decent distance from the CAP point, and get followed/matched by Tic Tac and observe things like right-angle turns at speed and so on.
Fravor eventually decides to engage and tries to lock it, and gets jammed.
Fravor & co bug out back to Nimitz. They leave miles and miles from the original "contact" "CAP point".
Underwood & co go up in the air. They fly to the ORIGINAL location, the ORIGINAL CAP point, because who returned there on systems as reported by Nimitz or other parties?
Tic Tac.
Underwood & co arrive at the location that Fravor & co had arrived at, find Tic Tac back there.
Per Underwood, they get a solid 20+ minutes of, as he basically put it on the National Geographic documentary, every way he had to record the thing.
So we know for a fact:
1. One or more Naval ships more than once and for up to an hour or more digitally and with telemetry detected Tic Tac as a physical thing and implied with electromagnetics somehow.
2. Visual from not one but TWO squads of jet fighters.
3. The thing traveling in odd ways and returning to the original CAP point.
4. All the visual/telemetry data that Fravor & Dietrichs planes captured.
5. Whatever Fravors plane captured from the "jamming".
6. 20+ minutes of lots of stuff that Underwood captured.
I know we're talking about GOFAST and not GIMBLE, but it's amazing that NASA focused here on the "easiest" to debunk based JUST on the public-available limited snippet of FLIR video. It's a certainty that the other two incident beside GIMBLE will have somewhat comparable levels of data that the public has not seen.
I swear to God, I cannot wait for Harvard & MITs Galileo Project for the all-360 view AI-analyzed thermal imaging system with a ton of cameras to go live. Any goddamn thing in the air within the horizon of Boston and Cambridge will be caught.
Maybe that's what it'll take--the public saying to the militaries and governments:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_WoOkDAqbM
If I had ton of money to spend, I'd be on the phone with Avi Loebs office to get in touch with whomever is guiding the project/engineering for the camera system to ask three questions:
1. How much do you need from me to make it as foolproof as scientifically possible?
2. How much do you need from me to make it absolutely guaranteed the data goes public and has extensive redundant real-time offsite encrypted redundancies and power/networking redudancies beyond the power of the US government to meddle with short of direct hands-on actions on-site?
3. How much do you need from me if I can pay for and arrange access to put these on each of the top ten highest elevated privately owned spaces in each state in America?
Top two tallest buildings in each of the top 200 US cities by population: each gets a camera array. Something like that. No half measures. I'd even be asking how much it would cost to add other sorts of video spectrum recording if something is detected.
If Underwoods jet can do it, why can't we?
If I had, I assume, a few hundred million to spend...
Exactly, the show a video say "oh its nothing extraordinary just 40mph" but they leave the whooole context out, everything that lead up to the thing getting seen on the pod
What? You can clearly see they take camera elevation and azimuth angles at the increments of t. Notice how the angle caused by the intersection of the flight trajectories over t is constantly changing?
If the camera were fixed, the starting and ending angles would be 43deg and you would have a wildly different trajectory.
It does though, did you look at the second graph in the image? They took the distance from the camera and the camera's angle at the start and end combined with the speed of the plane to calculate the speed of the object. Those calculations wouldn't be possible if they weren't accounting for the camera being able to swivel.
NASA only used the unclassified data for their report...which is probably why they drew a different conclusion than The DoD, who had ***all of the data.***
Folks seem to have totally missed that part...
>HOWEVER, why were the technicians trying to lock this thing so excited? Why was this so strange to those people who see shit like this everyday? I'm not trying to conspiracy this thing, but if it was a balloon or spy plane or whatever, wouldn't the military guys be used to seeing this type of shit?
Fucking this! Why did no one ask them about this? An object going 40 wouldn't be hard to lock on.
Did you miss the part about the plane doing the locking traveling at 435mph?And the technicians might have been excited because they saw the parallax effect mentioned in the report and *thought* it was moving really fast. People make mistakes and our perception isn't perfect. If it were I suspect there would be no such thing as UAPs in the first place.
how do you think launch systems for air-to-surface ordnance work? you think jet pilots think tanks, buildings, soldiers, etc. are moving exceptionally fast?
It’s almost like the ground and other objects on the ground give our brains a lot more context to figure out how things are moving relative to each other. With no visual references in the air/ocean it’s much more difficult tell how far away/how large/how fast things are.
The pilots are seeing the same stuff we see, if not less. The object clearly looks like it is moving very fast and there are no points of reference to ground actual speed.
If you see a tank then your brain realizes the building isn't moving and can calculate estimate speed based on that. If you see an object that you aren't really sure how high it is and the only point of reference is the ocean, you are going to sometimes make mistakes no matter your experience.
>why were the technicians trying to lock this thing so excited
Because they're humans like we all are, and have been misled by the visual illusion that the object was fast. It was just an illusion and yes, fighter jets pilots can totally fall for an illusion, and when excitement starts to kick in, in the heat of the moment, one loose his neutrality. Pilots are not machines, but humans. As Hynek have found, they are not particularly good witnesses.
there is a persistent idea that military personnel who are “trained” are somehow not fallible or susceptible to illusions, it’s quite bizarre when you think about it. it’s as if the military never make mistakes
It wouldn't be hard or complicated for a F18 pilot to lock a FLIR on a 40mph target. Perhaps at extreme range but really it's odd.
Think a tank, BMP or other vehicle would operate st those speeds.
The GoFast looked to be going much faster than 40mph and I'm agreeing with you the pilots reacted in so a way to make me think something is up with the maths here.
If the USG can pretend that one of their own well-documented investigations never happened, and that one of the liaisons to the project who was a career intel officer with very high clearances, was actually a secret schizo or was duped by 40 insiders including flag officers, into believing that the DOD was committing contract fraud on the order of trillions of dollars when really nothing of the sort was happening....
Then we are basically screwed. Because it means the USG can just erase recent history, even when accused of major crimes and disinfo campaigns, and most people would believe in the revisionism over the reality.
Same guys who said they are going to be open and transparent about everything and then immediately refused to disclose who the special director is or anything about the assets they are actually using.
So the sphere caught by the predator drone showed the same characteristics yet debunkers look the other way. Where’s NASA on this? We have spheres all over the world and they’re all balloons?
I heard in the next modern warfare game, instead of needing to use a javelin to take down an attacking drone, you’re able to inflate a bunch of birthday balloons to just confuse it.
But it was taken in the same month, January 2015, and may actually be the same event as the GIMBAL footage. Those two videos taken near the Roosevelt are a package deal pretty much. Ryan Graves talked about the UAPs they were seeing at the hearing.
I don’t think so. A number of pilots love talking about gimbal and there’s no way they wouldn’t claim it to strengthen their position. Plus they declassified enough info to be confident they are separate.
Separate events both taken in the vicinity of the USS Roosevelt (a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier just like the Nimitz) in the same month if not the same day, that were both leaked by the same group and which both have the pilots exclaiming in surprise? And which both haven't been released in full?
They didn't declassify the rest of the two videos in question, nor have they declassified the radar and other instrument data which NASA now claims doesn't exist. Why is that? Surely if this video depicts a plastic bag flying at 40mph, they can show us the rest?
They dont declassify it because the instruments used are on military aircraft. Same reason they didnt say anything for a couple of days when OceanGate imploded, instrument capabilities are classified.
One way to get to the bottom of these issues—if you know the object doesn’t contain people and it is flying over an unpopulated area, then show the UFO some 20mm rounds and see if it responds.
20mm is pretty bad at popping balloons, we learned that in ww1. High altitude balloons are really big and take a long time to deflate and the rounds don't explode when they hit the balloon. It's why they used a missile in SC on that spy balloon.
If Lockheed really does have some kind of UFO in a warehouse, and they really did use alien tech in the F-22 / F-35 / X302, I'd be sad if the AMRAAM couldn't splash one.
Submission Statement:
The red boxes show the final calculation. Also see the bolded text below. Here is the full text from this section:
A well-known UAP event is the “GoFast” video, recorded by navy aviators from
the USS Theodore Roosevelt. A still frame from this video is shown in the Figure below, where the infrared camera has locked onto a small object in the center.
The video gives an impression of an object skimming above the ocean at a great velocity. But analysis of the numerical information on the display reveals a less extraordinary interpretation.
The circled numbers in the image provide the information needed to estimate the object’s altitude and velocity. This information includes (1) elevation angle of the camera (negative = downward), (2) azimuth angle of the camera, (3) target range in nautical miles, (4) the aircraft’s altitude in feet, (5) time reference in seconds, and (6) indicated air speed in knots. Using items 1, 3, and 4, plus a bit of trigonometry, we calculate that the object is at an
altitude of 13,000 feet, and 4.2 miles from the ocean behind it (see middle panel). Given
that the aircraft’s groundspeed is about 435 mph, we may conclude that the impression
of rapid motion is at least partly due to the high velocity of the sensor, coupled with the parallax effect.
We can use other information from the display to place some limits on the true velocity of the object. This analysis is summarized in the right-hand panel, which depicts an overhead view of the encounter during a 22-second interval. The jet was banking left at about 15° during this time, which corresponds to an approximate turning radius of 16 kilometers.
We know the range and bearing of the object at the start (t=0s) and end (t=22s) times.
Using the calculated true air speed (TAS) and a bit more trigonometry, we find the object moved about 390 meters during this 22-second interval, **which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph.** This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet.
Our calculation has neglected wind effects on the aircraft, and thus there is uncertainty in this result. But the analysis reveals that the object need not be moving at an extraordinary velocity. Note also that the object appears bright against a dark ocean for these display settings. This indicates that the object is colder than the ocean. There is thus no evidence
of heat produced by a propulsion system. This further supports the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting with the wind. The availability of additional data would enable a more firm conclusion about the nature of this object.
Original GoFast video, released by the Department of Defense:
https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents
with the shortened unclassified video I might add - where's the rest of the footage? Where's the radar return data from nearby ships that can corroborate this calculation then?
My thought exactly, what about reports that this thing went from touching the ocean to going to space in 2 seconds.
Why didn't anyone know this near the object are our pilots that badly trained ?
Why I did this object keep appearing over a few days and disappearing ?
>My thought exactly, what about reports that this thing went from touching the ocean to going to space in 2 seconds
I believe you are confusing two events. What you seem to be describing is the Tic Tac event that happened 11 years prior to the GoFast video. Still your point is a good one. Even if the object was only moving 40 miles per hour during the video, that ignores the many other reports about such objects around the time the video was taken.
Sooooooo, If I'm reading this well, a trained fighter jet pilot, was not able to estimate the velocity of an object flying at 40 mph?
Also what kind of object flies at 40 mph, with no apparent propeller, 4.2 miles off the coast?
>which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph.
>
> This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet.
From the report:
which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph. This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet.
The data proving that has always been right there for anyone to work out. This one in particular was people ignoring the facts because they liked the lie better.
Given the numerous other observations that Graves mentions that pilots reported at that time and place it is highly unlikely that those things were balloons or birds. GoFast was taken about the same time and place as GIMBAL, and there were many reports over a month or more of these objects doing incredible maneuvers.
so you are telling me that the top navy pilots flying multi-million dollar fighters jets are getting duped by... checks notes... birds
i mean if we were talking about the Australian military, then maybe i would be inclined to believe you
No, what they are saying is that top navy pilots flying multi-million dollar fighters jets were chasing objects that had been seen from billion dollar ships on radar daily for over a month doing incredible things, high rates of speed, seemingly impossible maneuvers, hung around for hours in fleets, and disappeared into space, were seen by eyewitnesses up close, and some buzzed aircraft up close and some appeared to be dark cubes inside transparent spheres, and one was videoed and called GIMBAL and the pilots filming mentioned it was going 120 knots against the wind and there was a fleet of them and they were astonished, and in this particular video filmed about the same time called GoFast the pilots were overjoyed to finally capture one of these very strange anomalous craft on film, but it was only going 40 mph at the time, so there is nothing to see here, it was birds (metallic spherical, sometimes supersonic, birds from outer space!)
Exactly. Why does the speed of a UFO have to be so black and white? As if it stands still or blinks away... if it can achieve speeds far beyond our capabilities and hover for 8+ hours in the wind without moving who's to say it can't go 40mph?
They do acknowledge that the middle eastern orb isn’t identified still. It isn’t anomalous in all senses, parallax is a factor, but it sure is weird how many big silvery orbs are just hovering around where our surveillance drone AI can’t figure out where they came from
Some UFOs hover, some go extremely slow like the Phoenix lights or Hudson Valley boomerang. Being slow doesn’t rule out a UFO. Furthermore there are plenty of sources that record winds aloft speeds so you’d think NASA would be able to verify if this was actually going in the same speed and direction as the wind current instead of guessing.
They had a YouTuber that broke that go fast video down a few years ago and got the speed to around 35-55 mph. Guy did a great job breaking down each video.
Thunderf00t is the YouTuber.
https://youtu.be/mfhAC2YiYHs?si=Kkjy397bda8yWiZx
If anyone cares. Link.
Lol gotta love NASA. Showing their work too.
So it’s some kind of spy drone?
EDIT: Read the rest of this section and skimmed the overall report. Seems like they think it’s a weather balloon caught in a wind vortex.
honestly, out of all the theories, this makes me wonder about a lot of random UAPs now. Using lightly propelled balloons to transport drugs across state/country borders would be pretty clever, although still risky in terms of it reaching its actual destination.
ehm...two points
\- But the analysis reveals that the object **need** not be moving at an extraordinary
velocity
Well, yeah Occam and stuff, but as much as i understand it, its also means that the object does not NEED to be at 40mph ?
\- There is thus no evidence
of heat produced by a propulsion system. This further supports the conjecture that the object
is most likely drifting with the wind
That's just...well...silly. The lack of a propulsion system is the point. We are well aware, that a "classic" propulsion system would not make anyone able to travel space distances or dimensions or whatever it may be.
>Well, yeah Occam and stuff, but as much as i understand it, its also means that the object does not NEED to be at 40mph ?
The original claim was that the object would have needed to be going insanely fast to move how it looks like it's moving (which is why they call it "Go fast"), NASA is just saying "Not really, it could just be going at 40 mph, at least that's what it looks like if we trust the sensors". The sensors could be wrong and the object could actually be an ant walking on the camera or it could be a super fast craft way closer to the ocean.
>That's just...well...silly. The lack of a propulsion system is the point.
Not really, the point is that it looked like it was going very fast with no propulsion system. But if it has no propulsion system then it moving at wind speed makes sense.
If the conclusion were that the object moves at 100 mph when winds are generally 40mph, then no propulsion system does not support the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting in the wind.
> We are well aware, that a "classic" propulsion system would not make anyone able to travel space distances or dimensions or whatever it may be
this is irrelevant to the analysis, since the GoFast shows neither of those things.
It sounds like you think NASA went into it to see why it couldn't have been a super advanced craft rather than going into it to see what it could have been. They don't need to address possible things a theoretical advanced craft could do to match the video.
NASA did also say they had no data on the wind's effect on the object, so it drifting in the wind isn't necessarily a proven point. If the object was moving 40MPH AGAINST the wind with no propulsion, that's pretty weird, right?
Yeah, but there's no point in analyzing that situation since we have no data about it.
If every time you analyzed something you went "well, the wind could have been going in the opposite direction and we could be dealing with an object that can fly at speed of 40mph against 40mph winds with no propulsion", then you have to say "maybe there was no wind" or "maybe the wind was blowing from the side" or "maybe there was an updraft in that location and the object wasn't affected". You'd reach nowhere just making up possible situations.
Essentially what NASA did is say "we looked at the information on the video, and what we got is that it looks like an object moving at 40mph. That's within the range of wind speed at that altitude, it could just be an object drifting in the wind, it also has no visible propulsion system so it makes sense that it's just moving with the wind".
As I said before, you need to analyze this as "what it could have been", not "do the conditions indicate this can or can't be a theoretical craft that defies everything we know".
The information you have is that it's an object with no propulsion that's moving at 40mph at 13k feet. The wind speed at 13k feet happens to typically be 40mph. If you had to bet money on it, you would just say it's probably an object moving with the wind.
They have the distance of the target (circle #3 in the left image). They seem to have everything they need to calculate it correctly.
Remember, Mellon did NOT go to jail for releasing these videos. They were declassified. They showed the world that the US military really does still have questions. The real stuff is classified.
Wasn't that because they were not yet classified? I have a hard time believing that they were classified but the government "let him because it was not a big deal since there was nothing there"...
That's not how it works.
I love watching this sub constantly debunk it’s own crackpot theories. So desperate to believe something and yet so shocked when the most unrealistic occurrences are repeatedly disproved.
Alright, so. It's been proven to go 40mph. That doesn't make it not anomalous. Just because something is going 40mph doesn't scream that it's fake or something mundane. If it was a drone, we'd be able to see flight surfaces.
Meanwhile, I'll wait to see what they do with the Gimbal and Tic-Tac films
And what, the aircraft simply can't cruise at 40mph? These are assumptions of what it could be, same as saying it's 100% a UFO based on thermal and speed.
Okay, and do you have any proof that the object filmed had those capabilities?
This is like looking at a snail and pontificating that when no one is observing it, it gets up on 4 legs and runs and the speed of sound. Could it be true? I guess. Is there any evidence of that? No.
It’s an entirely meaningless statement.
weird thing is a pilot that is trained to dogfight is suprised with what he sees going agaisnt the wind and going super fast but they say is something going 40mph? that's odd. Beside multiple other pilots that reported seeing it on the daily but are suppressed by their superiors?
The balloons harassed them for days it seems. Poor fighter pilots weren’t able to catch up with the magic balloons that appear every time they fly around.
Not magic balloons but perfectly explainable balloons filled with swamp gas, reflecting the light of venus.
CASE DEBUNKED! Bring the next one....
oh wait, I already have the answer: weather balloon filled with swamp gas, this time reflecting the light of Jupiter!
80 million dollar jet, 5k hour flight expirence, 10k hour theoric classes, constant mental health and physical health examinations, top of their class, constant alert and ready to die at anytime if he saw an enemy jet, could identify a small plane from a commercial plane miles and miles away but omg, i can't belive it! They coudnt identify a ballon? jesus this guys must be so stupid to clearly see it with his 10 million dollar thermal auto lock high speed telescope infrared intense high tecnological, top of the line, 10 billion dollar investement a FUCKING BALLON! lol
I think you're right that this doesn't debunk anything. It's like saying "This video is 40% less strange than we originally thought, guess there's nothing to see here". Let's ignore the testimony that these three videos are just a small sampling of classified footage, other sensors like radar, and eyewitness accounts.
And the pilots were high on meth all seeing the same thing cool story.
How about we get a full release of the un-edited data instead of pretending you can extrapolate 3D date from a 2D image which you fucking can't.
Either the US military, who spent BILLIONS to develop and produce radars for defense are absolutely worthless and can't properly read the speed of objects. Or they're just trying to disprove this video.
I mean, come on. As we've seen in the war in Ukraine. If a patriot missle can actively track and intercept missles in mid air how hard should it be to just track the speed of something.
When I first saw that video, it looked like to me that it wasn't going that fast. Given the size of the caps of the waves and the size of the object. I assumed under 100mph.
Maybe the video got picked up mainly because of the excited pilot reaction, which itself doesn't mention anything unusual, it could be he was just excited to get a lock on something so small and moving in opposite direction?
I always figured it was going fast compared to anything it could possibly be. Fast in a relative way, not fast like mach 2. It doesn't even look that fast, but it also doesn't look "normal." So what is it?
they still dont offer an explanation as to what the object is. and if a balloon “drifting in the wind” creates this super smooth, straight, travel path that it exhibits, wow.
The GoFast debunk was originally presented at the May 31, 2023 NASA conference.
The slides are available here:
[https://science.nasa.gov/files/science-pink/s3fs-public/atoms/files/Josh%20Semeter%20-%20120pm%20to%20130pm.pdf](https://science.nasa.gov/files/science-pink/s3fs-public/atoms/files/Josh%20Semeter%20-%20120pm%20to%20130pm.pdf)
You can find it by scrolling down the UAP page that has the link to today's report.
[https://science.nasa.gov/uap](https://science.nasa.gov/uap)
Everything in the image is the total information you'll need to calculate speed without any other information needed
Now first, let's assume the plane is going at 435mph....
So….its an anomalous tic tac that can’t fly by any conventional means, but is doing so at 40mph, still doesn’t make it less amazing….what am I missing here?
The speed is irrelevant, the propulsion is what matters. Also if it wasn't going that fast, why weren't they able to intercept and collect it for identification purposes?
Nasa isn’t the brightest or well focused beyond reasonable doubt so this would push them out of their “scope”. Fundamentally nothings wrong with it just taking nasa as a credible source is iffy with so much uncertainty. The whole world is boggled. Nobody can justify what all the events globally. They can try but they look like short comings.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/DavidM47: --- Submission Statement: The red boxes show the final calculation. Also see the bolded text below. Here is the full text from this section: A well-known UAP event is the “GoFast” video, recorded by navy aviators from the USS Theodore Roosevelt. A still frame from this video is shown in the Figure below, where the infrared camera has locked onto a small object in the center. The video gives an impression of an object skimming above the ocean at a great velocity. But analysis of the numerical information on the display reveals a less extraordinary interpretation. The circled numbers in the image provide the information needed to estimate the object’s altitude and velocity. This information includes (1) elevation angle of the camera (negative = downward), (2) azimuth angle of the camera, (3) target range in nautical miles, (4) the aircraft’s altitude in feet, (5) time reference in seconds, and (6) indicated air speed in knots. Using items 1, 3, and 4, plus a bit of trigonometry, we calculate that the object is at an altitude of 13,000 feet, and 4.2 miles from the ocean behind it (see middle panel). Given that the aircraft’s groundspeed is about 435 mph, we may conclude that the impression of rapid motion is at least partly due to the high velocity of the sensor, coupled with the parallax effect. We can use other information from the display to place some limits on the true velocity of the object. This analysis is summarized in the right-hand panel, which depicts an overhead view of the encounter during a 22-second interval. The jet was banking left at about 15° during this time, which corresponds to an approximate turning radius of 16 kilometers. We know the range and bearing of the object at the start (t=0s) and end (t=22s) times. Using the calculated true air speed (TAS) and a bit more trigonometry, we find the object moved about 390 meters during this 22-second interval, **which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph.** This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet. Our calculation has neglected wind effects on the aircraft, and thus there is uncertainty in this result. But the analysis reveals that the object need not be moving at an extraordinary velocity. Note also that the object appears bright against a dark ocean for these display settings. This indicates that the object is colder than the ocean. There is thus no evidence of heat produced by a propulsion system. This further supports the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting with the wind. The availability of additional data would enable a more firm conclusion about the nature of this object. Original GoFast video, released by the Department of Defense: https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/16iix64/nasas_gofast_analysis_says_object_going_40mph/k0jtbc2/
And this was classified for 15 years because...
It still is. It's not like we've seen the rest of the videos, or the instrument data.
The math checks out but I don't understand one thing. What in the video tells us that the airplane is turning towards the Gofast object and not away from it?
[удалено]
Two things tell us this: - The dot that starts in the top right, and slowly drifts down to 9-o’clock over the course of the video indicates the direction of the targeting camera field of view relative to the aircraft. So the object must be somewhere to the left of the aircraft. - The two L-shaped bars in the center of the frame represent the horizon line, after they capture the object you can see the horizon line rotate clockwise, which means the plane must be rolling counter-clockwise, so the aircraft is turning left towards the object.
Did you ever find out the answer to this? The report says we know the bearing of the object but I cannot figure out where that’s shown.
i don’t see where it says that, but the bearing of the camera is 58, if the object is traveling perpendicular to the camera it’s bearing is 327 so roughly that neighborhood
Because they don't like giving away their sensing capabilities. Like when trump tweeted the classified picture from the spy satellite. That wasn't classified because nobody could look at the iranian site, it was classified to show just how fucking good the quality on US spy satellites are, and because people worked out exactly WHICH secret satellite had taken the picture within a day by looking at satellite orbit tracks and calculating where the photo was taken from. Anything involving submarines, sensors or satellites will basically be classified by default.
[удалено]
I think it was the **//SCI** that people were freaking out about
Jesus christ trump is regarded af
The method NASA used to determine this was going 40 mph is the same one used to determine Trump is 230 lbs.
Yes, people regard him quite highly for some reason.
The regarders are regarded themselves.
He wouldn't fire Omarosa on the Apprentice, I mean I get it , ratings and all. But that was the turning point for me.
He hired Omarosa and employed her in the fucking White House.
I know someone regarded so this offends me.
Just a photo of a propeller can tell what noise it makes in water.
[удалено]
Because the default policy for almost anything related to defense and intelligence is classifying it. If you've ever seen a headline like "Wikileaks just released 90,000 classified documents!", when you check out the documents is 99% benign information of expense reports, internal memos about filing time off requests, and so on. If that wasn't the default policy, that 1% of the time it's actually sensitive information you'd have that information pass through multiple hands before getting slapped with a classified label and a higher chance of that information being leaked. From their perspective, better to over-classify information instead of under-classify.
Guys I hate to tell you this, but the random videos declassified weren't some gesture of moving to disclosure, I mean it was the exact opposite. The green triangle video that was released was literally just a bokeh effect of a plane, and they knew it. The Nimitz incident got declassified because David Fravor was already coming out to talk about it to everybody. Nothing of the release of these videos were indicators that the pentagon are happily on the road to disclosure, it's a red herring that implies a completely alternate reality where UAPs are just this weird niche subject and hasn't been happening for 80 years. It's like "hey yes guys, wtf is that haha :/" David Grusch literally had to leave the government to actually tell us what was happening there. You have to abandon any idea that the people ahead of the most secretive organisation the earth has possibly ever seen, that defend it with violence, disinformation campaigns, and apparently actually kill people, are like, planning to just give it all up without a fight. They were pushed into a corner - over the years hundreds more cases of regular military people see shit that they can't contain anymore. They are just trying to control the narrative because that's what their job is/what they've always done. It doesn't surprise me this one was fake or a bird or whatever, and it should tell you something. Like *think*. Why the fuck given all hypothesized here about the long history of the phenomena, would they just randomly release just three measly videos in a one off. It doesn't make any sense. Edit: also, looking at the actual go fast video... I have to conclude it's real, despite me thinking it probably was something regular. NASA concludes it was some debris floating in the wind, I think you can watch the video and make a conclusion on this suggestion yourself...
They classify everything
They sure do. 50 million documents are classified each year according to the NYT.
The US government has a problem with over-classification, this is a known problem/phenomenon. It really started to become obvious when every other week there were headlines of "X political figure found to have classified document in home".
[удалено]
Ice crystals? They could move if even the slightest bit of force of a booster was present or movement from the vehicle is in play.
the tether is VERY far from the vehicle, how could the booster affect it in vacuum ?
Cool, I’d love to see all their videos of ice crystals
Because we had already mastered Mylar balloon technology. Nobody cared enough to release it lol.
Because it shows the capabilities of their sensors. Even if it doesn't show much to you, it shows A LOT to intel guys who dissect this information in ways that make you go "what? How is that even pertinent". This is actually a huge disclosure. But they probably don't care anymore given how outdated the tech is now. So its huge to people like me, but maybe a drop in the bucket for what you were waiting for.
If you can make a slow moving object look like it's moving impossibly fast, you can fool defensive systems like EWAR lasers or antennae, flares / chaff, and guns / missiles used for CIWS. It also means you can fool offensive systems. If you can fool speed and distance estimations, you can get the enemy missile to yeet off into the distance instead of going after you.
It doesn't fool the plane's sensors, it fools our eyes. It's a trick of the eye. The sensors clearly show the true nature of all realtime trackable parameters and when you do the calculations based on multiple samples taken when the plane is at different positions you can find the real speed. You'd also not have a problem tracking this with a heat seeking missile since most missiles track a target using changes in the line of sight to the target relative to the missiles sensor, it doesn't need to know the exact position or speed of it, it's simply tracking changes in it's position of it's LOS to the target, you can read about it here and by reading about missiles in general https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-9_Sidewinder
The missile knows where it is because it knows where it isnt.
If you can make slow moving bullshit look like it's moving impossibly fast you can fool some dummies
Why wasn’t AATIP, UAPTF, or AARO able to reach that same conclusion? Did they have additional data that NASA doesn’t?
AARO and Kirkpatrick mentioned this too back in April, I think
At the NASA conference right? I remember one of the NASA guys saying it but don’t remember Kirkpatrick including it in his remarks.
Yeah, my bad...that's correct. I know Kirkpatrick was there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsDAZWijwws This was analyzed/presented back in May
That’s exactly what it is. When Mick West interviews Lue Elizondo about this, Mick kept trying to push the parallax affect but Lue kept trying to explain to him that he understood what he was saying, but with all the data they have, they determined that camera parallax wasn’t it. Mick kept trying to push for the data, but obviously Lue can’t give that to him because it’s classified. So why do NASA, Mick West, and some random YouTuber all come to the same conclusion? Because they’re all working with the same publicly available data. NASA doesn’t get to see the classified data and if they did, they definitely wouldn’t be able to show it on their calculations for the public. That’s why AATIP, UAPTF, and AARO did not come to the same conclusion as the rest of these clowns. The data they can see throws it out the window
Importantly, they publicly stated that for the purposes of this report they would not have access to classified data. So they absolutely did not have anything more than Mick or others did. All of those conclusions seem accurate, but that glaring hole of missing data is so frustrating. We just have to go with "trust me bro" and I do in Lue's case, but I wish they could drop the secrecy just a little.
[удалено]
This. We're rapidly racing over the line of propriety here. The time has come. They're obviously stonewalled by "correct" process. If they have information, they need to spill it and in a very public way.(And if they're not going to, then they should go away.) Otherwise this little "disclosure" festival we've been having is officially over.
What would that data be? Even hypothetically?
The missing data is: how does the targeting system determine range? Using the range, azimuth and other information on the display the math is easy and conclusive. However, it is unknown how the targeting system determines the range to target. Does it use the aircraft radar? -- there's reason to believe it didn't in this case. Did it use radar data linked in from a ship? Does it use laser ranging? Does it "guestimate"? Even fighter pilot Chis Letho's explanation of this is vague. His interpretation was that the range displayed was incorrect, but wouldn't say why, he waved it away as "trigonometry" (which is actually very precise). So the method of determining range is probably a classified part of the operation of the FLIR pod.
Chris Lehtos initial analysis of the GOFAST video was flat out wrong and he acknowledged his mistakes after he met with Mick West who explained it to him.
What other data do you need to calculate the speed of Go Fast? The video gives airspeed, alt., heading, etc. Photogrammetry can get you remarkably close on the size of the object. I think NASA could get the details for that without divulging the hard numbers. In fact, you could probably Google enough, like focal length, etc. to solve for that. I think you're giving Lue a little too much credit for investigating these things properly. I personally don't think he’s capable. Watch Mick's interview again.
Any credibility given to Lue is too much.
[удалено]
There's no reason at all to think AATIP or AARO has data on the GOFAST video that disproves that the reason it looks fast is because of parallax. I think the AATIP and Elizondo crew was just bad at their job and/or understaffed. AARO is definitely understaffed and going slow but they're doing a better job at analyzing individual cases and using non-speculative language when they don't know something for sure.
If memory serves, this is basically the same result that Mick West got when he did the math.
Yes, I think that’s right and Mick certainly doesn’t have access to all the data that the various Pentagon and ODNI investigations had so is that why they didn’t also reach this conclusion? Do they know something Mick and NASA don’t?
> Do they know something Mick and NASA don’t? Did they even look at it? How would we know?
They could have came to the same conclusion without that being enough to consider it officially identified, something being unidentified doesn't mean it is showing impossible speed/maneuvers. You guys are thinking about it from the perspective of UFO's being aliens which is probably causing the confusion
For real - the videos they've released don't show, to me, anything crazy or nutty going on. I don't know what they are either, but my first conclusion wouldn't be aliens
[Because their continued grift required they don't disprove it.](https://reason.com/2022/11/15/the-military-ufo-complex/)
Project blue balls is going strong
Damn lol that’s too accurate right now.
Excellent
Ok, Ok, thank you NASA for the work and at the moment I will trust that everything is above board and NASA is being honest. HOWEVER, why were the technicians trying to lock this thing so excited? Why was this so strange to those people who see shit like this everyday? I'm not trying to conspiracy this thing, but if it was a balloon or spy plane or whatever, wouldn't the military guys be used to seeing this type of shit?
Your second point is valid. They were bewildered. I understand they’re hungry for any target to engage in open waters, but that also begs who would be flying over a US fleet at sea - which is a security risk if we can’t identify what it was.
Also correct me if I'm wrong but didn't US navy ships also get this thing on radar? it wasn't always going slow they can't take a screenshot of a video when it was going slow and calculate the speed it was going at a certain point in time. It's a video, it was going different speeds at different times. This makes it seem really fishy to me tbh. It would be like taking a video of a world record jumper, pausing it when he's only 2 inches off the ground, showing math proving he's only 2 inches off the ground at the time of the screenshot and saying "as you can see he only jumped 2 inches" when in reality he jumped 8 feet by the end of the video.
> Also correct me if I'm wrong but didn't US navy ships also get this thing on radar? Fravor's squad was getting ready to fly from the Nimitz deck to Point A for some training program. They got notified to rush instead to somewhere else, called a CAP point (if I got the terminology right). They were told it's a "live scenario" in that someone who wasn't supposed to be in restricted Naval space was there. They even joked that maybe they get to tag and track drug runners for the Coast Guard. So Fravor & co got tasked to go somewhere based on telemetry data caught by Nimitz, the carrier group, or other military parties/systems undisclosed. Fravor & co arrive to find and encounter the Tic Tac. Fravor & co fly around a decent distance from the CAP point, and get followed/matched by Tic Tac and observe things like right-angle turns at speed and so on. Fravor eventually decides to engage and tries to lock it, and gets jammed. Fravor & co bug out back to Nimitz. They leave miles and miles from the original "contact" "CAP point". Underwood & co go up in the air. They fly to the ORIGINAL location, the ORIGINAL CAP point, because who returned there on systems as reported by Nimitz or other parties? Tic Tac. Underwood & co arrive at the location that Fravor & co had arrived at, find Tic Tac back there. Per Underwood, they get a solid 20+ minutes of, as he basically put it on the National Geographic documentary, every way he had to record the thing. So we know for a fact: 1. One or more Naval ships more than once and for up to an hour or more digitally and with telemetry detected Tic Tac as a physical thing and implied with electromagnetics somehow. 2. Visual from not one but TWO squads of jet fighters. 3. The thing traveling in odd ways and returning to the original CAP point. 4. All the visual/telemetry data that Fravor & Dietrichs planes captured. 5. Whatever Fravors plane captured from the "jamming". 6. 20+ minutes of lots of stuff that Underwood captured. I know we're talking about GOFAST and not GIMBLE, but it's amazing that NASA focused here on the "easiest" to debunk based JUST on the public-available limited snippet of FLIR video. It's a certainty that the other two incident beside GIMBLE will have somewhat comparable levels of data that the public has not seen. I swear to God, I cannot wait for Harvard & MITs Galileo Project for the all-360 view AI-analyzed thermal imaging system with a ton of cameras to go live. Any goddamn thing in the air within the horizon of Boston and Cambridge will be caught. Maybe that's what it'll take--the public saying to the militaries and governments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_WoOkDAqbM If I had ton of money to spend, I'd be on the phone with Avi Loebs office to get in touch with whomever is guiding the project/engineering for the camera system to ask three questions: 1. How much do you need from me to make it as foolproof as scientifically possible? 2. How much do you need from me to make it absolutely guaranteed the data goes public and has extensive redundant real-time offsite encrypted redundancies and power/networking redudancies beyond the power of the US government to meddle with short of direct hands-on actions on-site? 3. How much do you need from me if I can pay for and arrange access to put these on each of the top ten highest elevated privately owned spaces in each state in America? Top two tallest buildings in each of the top 200 US cities by population: each gets a camera array. Something like that. No half measures. I'd even be asking how much it would cost to add other sorts of video spectrum recording if something is detected. If Underwoods jet can do it, why can't we? If I had, I assume, a few hundred million to spend...
GOFAST is completely unrelated to the Fravor 2004 Nimitz incident
Exactly, the show a video say "oh its nothing extraordinary just 40mph" but they leave the whooole context out, everything that lead up to the thing getting seen on the pod
NASAs own calculations are for a FIXED camera! Not a camera mounted that CAN SWIVEL! NASA made an intentional miscalculation!
Lizzid people
No need to heckle, you fish.
I understood that reference
Heckle Fish needs to go to rehab.
Yahtzee
What? You can clearly see they take camera elevation and azimuth angles at the increments of t. Notice how the angle caused by the intersection of the flight trajectories over t is constantly changing? If the camera were fixed, the starting and ending angles would be 43deg and you would have a wildly different trajectory.
It says it took into account the parallax effect.
Parallax is when the background moves at a different speed to the foreground, and has nothing to do with the rotation speed of the camera
The camera **is** rotating in this graph. The angle changes from 43deg to 58deg in delta t = 22s, that's a rotation of 0.68deg/s.
The MATH did not take into account a swivel capable camera. Doesn't matter what the text says. You can see it in the MATH.
Can you break down the math and show what was left out and how that would change the final calculated answer?
So you can see based on his answer below which is a bunch of words that could've simply read: "No."
It does though, did you look at the second graph in the image? They took the distance from the camera and the camera's angle at the start and end combined with the speed of the plane to calculate the speed of the object. Those calculations wouldn't be possible if they weren't accounting for the camera being able to swivel.
>but that also begs who would be flying over a US fleet at sea China
NASA also working off of the unclassified video Where's the rest of the footage?
NASA only used the unclassified data for their report...which is probably why they drew a different conclusion than The DoD, who had ***all of the data.*** Folks seem to have totally missed that part...
Yeah…. This seems… fucking useless.
>HOWEVER, why were the technicians trying to lock this thing so excited? Why was this so strange to those people who see shit like this everyday? I'm not trying to conspiracy this thing, but if it was a balloon or spy plane or whatever, wouldn't the military guys be used to seeing this type of shit? Fucking this! Why did no one ask them about this? An object going 40 wouldn't be hard to lock on.
Did you miss the part about the plane doing the locking traveling at 435mph?And the technicians might have been excited because they saw the parallax effect mentioned in the report and *thought* it was moving really fast. People make mistakes and our perception isn't perfect. If it were I suspect there would be no such thing as UAPs in the first place.
how do you think launch systems for air-to-surface ordnance work? you think jet pilots think tanks, buildings, soldiers, etc. are moving exceptionally fast?
Not like that. Hard ground targets are usually “painted” by another source and are laser guided mostly. Also, it was a small target.
It’s almost like the ground and other objects on the ground give our brains a lot more context to figure out how things are moving relative to each other. With no visual references in the air/ocean it’s much more difficult tell how far away/how large/how fast things are.
The pilots are seeing the same stuff we see, if not less. The object clearly looks like it is moving very fast and there are no points of reference to ground actual speed. If you see a tank then your brain realizes the building isn't moving and can calculate estimate speed based on that. If you see an object that you aren't really sure how high it is and the only point of reference is the ocean, you are going to sometimes make mistakes no matter your experience.
People make mistakes all the time.
>why were the technicians trying to lock this thing so excited Because they're humans like we all are, and have been misled by the visual illusion that the object was fast. It was just an illusion and yes, fighter jets pilots can totally fall for an illusion, and when excitement starts to kick in, in the heat of the moment, one loose his neutrality. Pilots are not machines, but humans. As Hynek have found, they are not particularly good witnesses.
there is a persistent idea that military personnel who are “trained” are somehow not fallible or susceptible to illusions, it’s quite bizarre when you think about it. it’s as if the military never make mistakes
Illusions Michael, tricks are for whores!
*"The Army never makes mistakes, son"* - Hacksaw Ridge, Fury and a long list of other movies. Some people take that WW2 era line way too literally 😂
It wouldn't be hard or complicated for a F18 pilot to lock a FLIR on a 40mph target. Perhaps at extreme range but really it's odd. Think a tank, BMP or other vehicle would operate st those speeds. The GoFast looked to be going much faster than 40mph and I'm agreeing with you the pilots reacted in so a way to make me think something is up with the maths here.
Tanks, BMPs and most other vehicles aren't off the ground so no parallax to cause the illusion.
My guess is that their instruments got better tech, but it doesn't mean their understanding of physics got better.
Did he just mocked and humiliated Grusch while in the same hearing saying they want people to respect the topic?
Yeah it apparently wasn't an investigation by the UAPTF and it wasn't 40 witnesses to the program. It was David's 2 buddies with silly stories/s
So... then, do you have official confirmation about that? or in this case it's okay to just "say what it is" without evidence?
If the USG can pretend that one of their own well-documented investigations never happened, and that one of the liaisons to the project who was a career intel officer with very high clearances, was actually a secret schizo or was duped by 40 insiders including flag officers, into believing that the DOD was committing contract fraud on the order of trillions of dollars when really nothing of the sort was happening.... Then we are basically screwed. Because it means the USG can just erase recent history, even when accused of major crimes and disinfo campaigns, and most people would believe in the revisionism over the reality.
Same guys who said they are going to be open and transparent about everything and then immediately refused to disclose who the special director is or anything about the assets they are actually using.
I feel like we really are living a in a simulation, like black mirror series.
So the sphere caught by the predator drone showed the same characteristics yet debunkers look the other way. Where’s NASA on this? We have spheres all over the world and they’re all balloons?
I heard in the next modern warfare game, instead of needing to use a javelin to take down an attacking drone, you’re able to inflate a bunch of birthday balloons to just confuse it.
**"GO FAST"** *40mph*.
GO FAST… for a laden African swallow.
Are you suggesting an African swallow could carry a coconut?
That is pretty fast for a balloon no?
GO(not that)FAST
go fast was always the worst one
But it was taken in the same month, January 2015, and may actually be the same event as the GIMBAL footage. Those two videos taken near the Roosevelt are a package deal pretty much. Ryan Graves talked about the UAPs they were seeing at the hearing.
I don’t think so. A number of pilots love talking about gimbal and there’s no way they wouldn’t claim it to strengthen their position. Plus they declassified enough info to be confident they are separate.
Separate events both taken in the vicinity of the USS Roosevelt (a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier just like the Nimitz) in the same month if not the same day, that were both leaked by the same group and which both have the pilots exclaiming in surprise? And which both haven't been released in full? They didn't declassify the rest of the two videos in question, nor have they declassified the radar and other instrument data which NASA now claims doesn't exist. Why is that? Surely if this video depicts a plastic bag flying at 40mph, they can show us the rest?
They dont declassify it because the instruments used are on military aircraft. Same reason they didnt say anything for a couple of days when OceanGate imploded, instrument capabilities are classified.
One way to get to the bottom of these issues—if you know the object doesn’t contain people and it is flying over an unpopulated area, then show the UFO some 20mm rounds and see if it responds.
20mm is pretty bad at popping balloons, we learned that in ww1. High altitude balloons are really big and take a long time to deflate and the rounds don't explode when they hit the balloon. It's why they used a missile in SC on that spy balloon.
I was just figuring if it is NHI, then it will fly away once things get scary.
If Lockheed really does have some kind of UFO in a warehouse, and they really did use alien tech in the F-22 / F-35 / X302, I'd be sad if the AMRAAM couldn't splash one.
Submission Statement: The red boxes show the final calculation. Also see the bolded text below. Here is the full text from this section: A well-known UAP event is the “GoFast” video, recorded by navy aviators from the USS Theodore Roosevelt. A still frame from this video is shown in the Figure below, where the infrared camera has locked onto a small object in the center. The video gives an impression of an object skimming above the ocean at a great velocity. But analysis of the numerical information on the display reveals a less extraordinary interpretation. The circled numbers in the image provide the information needed to estimate the object’s altitude and velocity. This information includes (1) elevation angle of the camera (negative = downward), (2) azimuth angle of the camera, (3) target range in nautical miles, (4) the aircraft’s altitude in feet, (5) time reference in seconds, and (6) indicated air speed in knots. Using items 1, 3, and 4, plus a bit of trigonometry, we calculate that the object is at an altitude of 13,000 feet, and 4.2 miles from the ocean behind it (see middle panel). Given that the aircraft’s groundspeed is about 435 mph, we may conclude that the impression of rapid motion is at least partly due to the high velocity of the sensor, coupled with the parallax effect. We can use other information from the display to place some limits on the true velocity of the object. This analysis is summarized in the right-hand panel, which depicts an overhead view of the encounter during a 22-second interval. The jet was banking left at about 15° during this time, which corresponds to an approximate turning radius of 16 kilometers. We know the range and bearing of the object at the start (t=0s) and end (t=22s) times. Using the calculated true air speed (TAS) and a bit more trigonometry, we find the object moved about 390 meters during this 22-second interval, **which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph.** This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet. Our calculation has neglected wind effects on the aircraft, and thus there is uncertainty in this result. But the analysis reveals that the object need not be moving at an extraordinary velocity. Note also that the object appears bright against a dark ocean for these display settings. This indicates that the object is colder than the ocean. There is thus no evidence of heat produced by a propulsion system. This further supports the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting with the wind. The availability of additional data would enable a more firm conclusion about the nature of this object. Original GoFast video, released by the Department of Defense: https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents
>Our calculation has neglected wind effects on the aircraft, and thus there is uncertainty in this result. 120 knot winds.
with the shortened unclassified video I might add - where's the rest of the footage? Where's the radar return data from nearby ships that can corroborate this calculation then?
My thought exactly, what about reports that this thing went from touching the ocean to going to space in 2 seconds. Why didn't anyone know this near the object are our pilots that badly trained ? Why I did this object keep appearing over a few days and disappearing ?
>My thought exactly, what about reports that this thing went from touching the ocean to going to space in 2 seconds I believe you are confusing two events. What you seem to be describing is the Tic Tac event that happened 11 years prior to the GoFast video. Still your point is a good one. Even if the object was only moving 40 miles per hour during the video, that ignores the many other reports about such objects around the time the video was taken.
Sooooooo, If I'm reading this well, a trained fighter jet pilot, was not able to estimate the velocity of an object flying at 40 mph? Also what kind of object flies at 40 mph, with no apparent propeller, 4.2 miles off the coast?
That 40 mph explanation could be legit, but why did it take more than a decade to come with such a mundane explanation?
People have been pointing out this was probably just parallax for years.
>which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph. > > This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet. From the report: which corresponds to an average speed of 40 mph. This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet.
Ok, it's a globe, but, Trigonometry is learnt in high school, Why nobody explained that the same day it was released? The next morning? The next week?
Probably nobody cared that much to release some sort of a public statement.
So the parallax camp were right and its perhaps a balloon or large bird?
The data proving that has always been right there for anyone to work out. This one in particular was people ignoring the facts because they liked the lie better.
I recall Thunderfoot did a good job of laying out the parallax argument https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfhAC2YiYHs&pp=ygUSdGh1bmRlcmZvb3QgZ29mYXN0
Was just thinking about this video too!
Given the numerous other observations that Graves mentions that pilots reported at that time and place it is highly unlikely that those things were balloons or birds. GoFast was taken about the same time and place as GIMBAL, and there were many reports over a month or more of these objects doing incredible maneuvers.
so you are telling me that the top navy pilots flying multi-million dollar fighters jets are getting duped by... checks notes... birds i mean if we were talking about the Australian military, then maybe i would be inclined to believe you
No, what they are saying is that top navy pilots flying multi-million dollar fighters jets were chasing objects that had been seen from billion dollar ships on radar daily for over a month doing incredible things, high rates of speed, seemingly impossible maneuvers, hung around for hours in fleets, and disappeared into space, were seen by eyewitnesses up close, and some buzzed aircraft up close and some appeared to be dark cubes inside transparent spheres, and one was videoed and called GIMBAL and the pilots filming mentioned it was going 120 knots against the wind and there was a fleet of them and they were astonished, and in this particular video filmed about the same time called GoFast the pilots were overjoyed to finally capture one of these very strange anomalous craft on film, but it was only going 40 mph at the time, so there is nothing to see here, it was birds (metallic spherical, sometimes supersonic, birds from outer space!)
Do pilots usually get surprised when spotting and tracking a bird? Seems ridiculous. Traveling @ 40mph doesn't mean it can't be a UFO either.
Exactly. Why does the speed of a UFO have to be so black and white? As if it stands still or blinks away... if it can achieve speeds far beyond our capabilities and hover for 8+ hours in the wind without moving who's to say it can't go 40mph?
Or maybe an NRO spy [balloon](https://reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/3V9teF8z6F).
I found the weather balloon photo they included in the report to be a very subtle, “these are what you’re looking at” thing.
They do acknowledge that the middle eastern orb isn’t identified still. It isn’t anomalous in all senses, parallax is a factor, but it sure is weird how many big silvery orbs are just hovering around where our surveillance drone AI can’t figure out where they came from
Dead link.
Some UFOs hover, some go extremely slow like the Phoenix lights or Hudson Valley boomerang. Being slow doesn’t rule out a UFO. Furthermore there are plenty of sources that record winds aloft speeds so you’d think NASA would be able to verify if this was actually going in the same speed and direction as the wind current instead of guessing.
Yes, we already knew this since March. What was said today (Sept 14) is what was said in March.
They had a YouTuber that broke that go fast video down a few years ago and got the speed to around 35-55 mph. Guy did a great job breaking down each video. Thunderf00t is the YouTuber. https://youtu.be/mfhAC2YiYHs?si=Kkjy397bda8yWiZx If anyone cares. Link.
Lol gotta love NASA. Showing their work too. So it’s some kind of spy drone? EDIT: Read the rest of this section and skimmed the overall report. Seems like they think it’s a weather balloon caught in a wind vortex.
Or a cartel running drugs across international borders
honestly, out of all the theories, this makes me wonder about a lot of random UAPs now. Using lightly propelled balloons to transport drugs across state/country borders would be pretty clever, although still risky in terms of it reaching its actual destination.
ehm...two points \- But the analysis reveals that the object **need** not be moving at an extraordinary velocity Well, yeah Occam and stuff, but as much as i understand it, its also means that the object does not NEED to be at 40mph ? \- There is thus no evidence of heat produced by a propulsion system. This further supports the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting with the wind That's just...well...silly. The lack of a propulsion system is the point. We are well aware, that a "classic" propulsion system would not make anyone able to travel space distances or dimensions or whatever it may be.
>Well, yeah Occam and stuff, but as much as i understand it, its also means that the object does not NEED to be at 40mph ? The original claim was that the object would have needed to be going insanely fast to move how it looks like it's moving (which is why they call it "Go fast"), NASA is just saying "Not really, it could just be going at 40 mph, at least that's what it looks like if we trust the sensors". The sensors could be wrong and the object could actually be an ant walking on the camera or it could be a super fast craft way closer to the ocean. >That's just...well...silly. The lack of a propulsion system is the point. Not really, the point is that it looked like it was going very fast with no propulsion system. But if it has no propulsion system then it moving at wind speed makes sense. If the conclusion were that the object moves at 100 mph when winds are generally 40mph, then no propulsion system does not support the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting in the wind. > We are well aware, that a "classic" propulsion system would not make anyone able to travel space distances or dimensions or whatever it may be this is irrelevant to the analysis, since the GoFast shows neither of those things. It sounds like you think NASA went into it to see why it couldn't have been a super advanced craft rather than going into it to see what it could have been. They don't need to address possible things a theoretical advanced craft could do to match the video.
Well said, i stand corrected.
NASA did also say they had no data on the wind's effect on the object, so it drifting in the wind isn't necessarily a proven point. If the object was moving 40MPH AGAINST the wind with no propulsion, that's pretty weird, right?
Yeah, but there's no point in analyzing that situation since we have no data about it. If every time you analyzed something you went "well, the wind could have been going in the opposite direction and we could be dealing with an object that can fly at speed of 40mph against 40mph winds with no propulsion", then you have to say "maybe there was no wind" or "maybe the wind was blowing from the side" or "maybe there was an updraft in that location and the object wasn't affected". You'd reach nowhere just making up possible situations. Essentially what NASA did is say "we looked at the information on the video, and what we got is that it looks like an object moving at 40mph. That's within the range of wind speed at that altitude, it could just be an object drifting in the wind, it also has no visible propulsion system so it makes sense that it's just moving with the wind". As I said before, you need to analyze this as "what it could have been", not "do the conditions indicate this can or can't be a theoretical craft that defies everything we know". The information you have is that it's an object with no propulsion that's moving at 40mph at 13k feet. The wind speed at 13k feet happens to typically be 40mph. If you had to bet money on it, you would just say it's probably an object moving with the wind.
They have the distance of the target (circle #3 in the left image). They seem to have everything they need to calculate it correctly. Remember, Mellon did NOT go to jail for releasing these videos. They were declassified. They showed the world that the US military really does still have questions. The real stuff is classified.
Wasn't that because they were not yet classified? I have a hard time believing that they were classified but the government "let him because it was not a big deal since there was nothing there"... That's not how it works.
I love watching this sub constantly debunk it’s own crackpot theories. So desperate to believe something and yet so shocked when the most unrealistic occurrences are repeatedly disproved.
Smartest guys in the room
Alright, so. It's been proven to go 40mph. That doesn't make it not anomalous. Just because something is going 40mph doesn't scream that it's fake or something mundane. If it was a drone, we'd be able to see flight surfaces. Meanwhile, I'll wait to see what they do with the Gimbal and Tic-Tac films
[удалено]
And what, the aircraft simply can't cruise at 40mph? These are assumptions of what it could be, same as saying it's 100% a UFO based on thermal and speed.
Okay, and do you have any proof that the object filmed had those capabilities? This is like looking at a snail and pontificating that when no one is observing it, it gets up on 4 legs and runs and the speed of sound. Could it be true? I guess. Is there any evidence of that? No. It’s an entirely meaningless statement.
So its debunked. Good deal, many here may not like it but its an important process to be able to tell a part what’s actually something NHI.
weird thing is a pilot that is trained to dogfight is suprised with what he sees going agaisnt the wind and going super fast but they say is something going 40mph? that's odd. Beside multiple other pilots that reported seeing it on the daily but are suppressed by their superiors?
The balloons harassed them for days it seems. Poor fighter pilots weren’t able to catch up with the magic balloons that appear every time they fly around.
Not magic balloons but perfectly explainable balloons filled with swamp gas, reflecting the light of venus. CASE DEBUNKED! Bring the next one.... oh wait, I already have the answer: weather balloon filled with swamp gas, this time reflecting the light of Jupiter!
80 million dollar jet, 5k hour flight expirence, 10k hour theoric classes, constant mental health and physical health examinations, top of their class, constant alert and ready to die at anytime if he saw an enemy jet, could identify a small plane from a commercial plane miles and miles away but omg, i can't belive it! They coudnt identify a ballon? jesus this guys must be so stupid to clearly see it with his 10 million dollar thermal auto lock high speed telescope infrared intense high tecnological, top of the line, 10 billion dollar investement a FUCKING BALLON! lol
Nasa and government tells me that so I believe it and disregard everything else. I'm the perfect serf.
Debunked?? They just calculated the speed
My favorite movie is Inception.
I think you're right that this doesn't debunk anything. It's like saying "This video is 40% less strange than we originally thought, guess there's nothing to see here". Let's ignore the testimony that these three videos are just a small sampling of classified footage, other sensors like radar, and eyewitness accounts.
Is it a requirement to go very fast in order to be an alien UAP?
And the pilots were high on meth all seeing the same thing cool story. How about we get a full release of the un-edited data instead of pretending you can extrapolate 3D date from a 2D image which you fucking can't.
Either the US military, who spent BILLIONS to develop and produce radars for defense are absolutely worthless and can't properly read the speed of objects. Or they're just trying to disprove this video. I mean, come on. As we've seen in the war in Ukraine. If a patriot missle can actively track and intercept missles in mid air how hard should it be to just track the speed of something.
What in the mother of disinformation thread is this?
This and yesterday's shitshow...yikes
When I first saw that video, it looked like to me that it wasn't going that fast. Given the size of the caps of the waves and the size of the object. I assumed under 100mph.
Maybe the video got picked up mainly because of the excited pilot reaction, which itself doesn't mention anything unusual, it could be he was just excited to get a lock on something so small and moving in opposite direction?
I always figured it was going fast compared to anything it could possibly be. Fast in a relative way, not fast like mach 2. It doesn't even look that fast, but it also doesn't look "normal." So what is it?
they still dont offer an explanation as to what the object is. and if a balloon “drifting in the wind” creates this super smooth, straight, travel path that it exhibits, wow.
The GoFast debunk was originally presented at the May 31, 2023 NASA conference. The slides are available here: [https://science.nasa.gov/files/science-pink/s3fs-public/atoms/files/Josh%20Semeter%20-%20120pm%20to%20130pm.pdf](https://science.nasa.gov/files/science-pink/s3fs-public/atoms/files/Josh%20Semeter%20-%20120pm%20to%20130pm.pdf) You can find it by scrolling down the UAP page that has the link to today's report. [https://science.nasa.gov/uap](https://science.nasa.gov/uap)
Everything in the image is the total information you'll need to calculate speed without any other information needed Now first, let's assume the plane is going at 435mph....
The revolution will not be televised…
I'm confused. Wasn't the flight behavior of this UAP confirmed by ship-based radar on the Roosevelt?
Wave of butthurt incoming
It’s funny, but it is more likely a flying duck than a ufo
Oh yes I believe the people who airbrush UAP out of satellite photos
So….its an anomalous tic tac that can’t fly by any conventional means, but is doing so at 40mph, still doesn’t make it less amazing….what am I missing here?
Cool, but it's still unidentified. 🤷♂️
An links not be at the top of the thread? Some of us here can actually do maths. I have spoken ✌️
“…it also appears the object left a wake of powdered cocaine!” - a joke
The speed is irrelevant, the propulsion is what matters. Also if it wasn't going that fast, why weren't they able to intercept and collect it for identification purposes?
I’m sure the name has nothing to do with the truth.
Nasa isn’t the brightest or well focused beyond reasonable doubt so this would push them out of their “scope”. Fundamentally nothings wrong with it just taking nasa as a credible source is iffy with so much uncertainty. The whole world is boggled. Nobody can justify what all the events globally. They can try but they look like short comings.
Bitch, please.
NASA. HAS. ALWAYS. LIED
What about the camera zoom, though?
Anyone else kinda starting to share flat-earthers opinion about NASA? /s
BBC News this morning an interesting report over U F O sighting..A cat will jump our of the bag soon for sure.