I don’t want to start a debate over UFO’s here but in looking at these videos it occured to me that they had a resemblance to what are called “ghosts” to optical engineers. The imaging systems were recently installed in the planes and that’s when the ufo’s showed up.
I am a retired optical designer and I want to ask if anyone out there might have access to the design specs of one of these optical systems that were used to image these things? If so, I would be able to ray-trace the system to look for suitable ghosts. What I would need would be all the radii of the elements, their spacing and the glass they were made from. I realize its an extreme long shot that anyone reading this would have access to this info but I think its worth a try.
The system that I believe the most famous videos are from is a Raytheon product: AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR. They maintain a website about it that contains basically media-ready summary of what it does. I would be extremely surprised if anything more detailed is released publicly, or legal to release publicly.
Thanks Martin – Model # could be very helpful!
You might look for some of the interviews with Mick West regarding the Navy’s UFO videos. They might confirm your thoughts, or give you some new avenues to consider. There are quite a few online and I am not sure which would be best. If I remember correctly, in some of them he goes quite a bit into discussing the cameras or other equipment on the jets and how the various “UFOs” or “UAPs” are most likely to be artifacts of the imaging systems. Despite the availability of experts who can provide rational explanations of what appears in such videos, many people seem to only want to hear entertaining hype (It’s ALIENS!!!), rather than reasoned analysis.
Here is a link to his YouTube channel.
For full discussions and extensive FOI documents, The War Zone on The Drive has examined these reports and congressional briefings. An example is the triangular shape appearing in photos and videos - an artifact of night vision equipment.
IMO, this is what a picture of a real ufo should look like:
Not a blur, not an artifact, not a duck.
We have pretty good cameras these days.
I went to the War Zone site and found a large hodge-podge of articles, many of which appear to feature politicians and other sound-bite seekers bloviating on the topic of UFOs. Could you provide links directly to some specific articles that you found to be more informative/skeptical?
Most of the Mick West content regarding UFO/UAP videos addresses the OPs line of interest pretty directly - looking at what is in the videos and what they actually show (glare, balloon, aperture artifact, etc.)
I should think that an artifact could be readily reproduced under similar circumstances.
That, or it should go completely unseen. Either the aliens want us to see them, or they don’t. Either way, if they have the technology to travel the stars, they have the technology to do that, as well.
Thanx for the Mick West site, I may be able to do something with it!
When the Phoenix Lights happened, one person looked at them with binoculars or small telescope, saw they were planes, and moved on. Of course no one listens to him. It must be “otherworldly!” Everyone would rather have the mystery, preferably unsolved.
These military UFOs are imaging artifacts, pure and simple. No one wants that to be the truth, no one moreso than the manufacturer of the systems.
Back on line after internet problems. The two primary articles are [earliest]:
And the latest which shows the Navy was aware of drone storms and they were traceable to merchant ships trailing the navy ships:Drone Swarms That Harassed Navy Ships Off California Demystified In New Documents
The famous Air Force Project Blue Book of the 50’s and 60’s was unable to explain 701 out of 12,618 cases. Common explanations were hoaxes, mistaken stars, planets, etc., reflections and so on. So about 95% explained.
But the UFO folk jumped on that and claimed that the unexplained 5% were “real” ET craft.
No. They were also hoaxes, etc. but the USAF just didn’t have enough info to categorize which ones they were.
Regarding the OP, the first thing I thought when I saw those Navy “UFO” videos is that they are merely the Project Blue Book’s 5% all over again. So, weird optics or other artifacts and just not enough info to say exactly which.
I am quite surprised by the number of people who immediately fall for the old Project Blue Book “unexplained = aliens” mistake.
Unexplained optics effects or aliens. Which one is more likely?
I take your point, and fully agree we have great cameras and accepting blurs as evidence should be a thing of the past however…
It seems to me, a craft capable of intergalactic travel would need to be really, really large. They are going to need to be self sufficient for quite some time (accepting our current understanding of physics), possibly generations. Coming here from another star system isn’t akin to crossing the the Atlantic in a bi-plane.
So yes we should see details like the image you provided but probably something more like the size of the moon rather than a jet.
Why wouldn’t you think these mothership aliens have smaller craft on board? These aliens aren’t bringing the mothership into the atmosphere just to harvest cow entrails. They have dedicated craft for that.
If the alien ship was even half the size of the Moon and they brought it into the inner Solar System, we’d see it. Even with Romulan cloaking devices, we’d still see it in IR. It’d be really obvious to orbital infra-red observatories. And no they can’t cloak the IR too. It has to get rid of waste heat somehow and that means IR radiation.
My point exactly. Even with a dedicated dinghy, the mothership would be visible. The notion of an interstellar ship the size of a navy jet fighter seems laughable.
That’s rather a rash statement. On what do you base connecting the technological ability of movement to that of stealth?
When a craft that large enters the solar system, I’m gonna be as worried as Obi-Wan.
https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/75506383/thats-no-moon.jpg
Because stealth in space is really, really easy. Just paint the thing black, and we’d probably never even notice it. And I’m not even talking about Vantablack nano-paint here; I just mean like the stuff you’d get at Home Depot if you asked for black paint. Oh, we might be able to detect it if we knew exactly where to look, but time is very valuable on the instruments that could do it, and so we don’t just point them at random spots in the sky, and we don’t sweep out the entire sky.
I mean, that wouldn’t be enough if you have a craft literally the size of the Moon that’s flying right up to the Earth, but there’s no reason to do that. Even if your starship really is that big for sustainability reasons, just leave it in the outer system and send smaller craft in closer to do… whatever it is they’re here to do.