When a “UFO” is Tracked on Military Radar

[Sweetpumper]

Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) are grabbing the attention of more people everyday, and for good reason. Obviously, if there are unknown objects in the sky, military/defence organizations will see them on radar, along with other organizations that monitor air traffic, like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This happens on a regular basis, objects of unknown origin are constantly tracked on radar, along with visual confirmation by pilots, performing maneuvers that defy our understanding of physics as well as traveling at unattainable speeds.

Cont:

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/04/01/this-is-what-happens-when-a-ufo-is-tracked-on-military-radar/

[zoser]

Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) are grabbing the attention of more people everyday, and for good reason. Obviously, if there are unknown objects in the sky, military/defence organizations will see them on radar, along with other organizations that monitor air traffic, like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This happens on a regular basis, objects of unknown origin are constantly tracked on radar, along with visual confirmation by pilots, performing maneuvers that defy our understanding of physics as well as traveling at unattainable speeds.

Cont:

http://www.collectiv...military-radar/

Nice Article.

I

[MissJatti]

yup "spy kids" have newer and updated gadgets

Edited April 4, 2014 by SkeptcByMindBelievrByHeart

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

One could easily gather, that if extra terrestrial beings, intelligent enough to get here, wanted to go stealth, they could.

It gives me the feeling that they could really care *less* if we see them or not.

It's like us going out into the back yard and not caring if the ants in a pile see us.

[scowl]

So the article quotes a "UFO Historian" and who else but crazy Paul Hellyer. The incidents listed that supposedly happen all the time include one that happened forty years ago, another that happened thirty six years ago, and another that happened almost thirty years ago.

For more recent data, It cites a single incident from June of 2013 in which the unnamed captain of an unspecified commercial flight thought he saw something for a moment however the unnamed copilot didn't see anything.

Yes, the evidence is simply overwhelming.

[psyche101]

How disappointing, more and more cases, yet not a single one comes from, or leaves the atmosphere.

Which means they are terrestrial, doesn't it. Confirmed by RADAR.

They have to go into space to be considered spaceships, none of these UFO's do.

This is what UFOlogists consider "critical thinking" is it?

Good God.

[Sweetpumper]

How disappointing, more and more cases, yet not a single one comes from, or leaves the atmosphere.

Mine did.

[zoser]

One could easily gather, that if extra terrestrial beings, intelligent enough to get here, wanted to go stealth, they could.

It gives me the feeling that they could really care *less* if we see them or not.

It's like us going out into the back yard and not caring if the ants in a pile see us.

Agreed. Also they are not necessarily here to monitor us. I have believed for a while now that they use this part of the universe as some sort of gateway.

What happened to Bobby Fischer by the way?

[Midyin]

Why do they bother looking so deeply into something just to type up reports that are going to be swept under the rug?

[zoser]

Why do they bother looking so deeply into something just to type up reports that are going to be swept under the rug?

They are looking for specific things; security risks, new technology, new information on who they are and where they are from, and what their motives are. Nothing is released to the public. Unless it leaks of course.

[scowl]

They are looking for specific things; security risks, new technology, new information on who they are and where they are from, and what their motives are. Nothing is released to the public. Unless it leaks of course.

And in fifty years they have found no security risks, no new technology, and the only information they have gained that radar can be unreliable and pilots can be even more unreliable.

Fortunately radar has improved tremendously in the past thirty years so the false returns that jumped around the screen happen less often. Pilots however have not improved very much. There are still regular incidents of pilots reporting Venus as an unidentified aircraft.

[zoser]

And in fifty years they have found no security risks, no new technology, and the only information they have gained that radar can be unreliable and pilots can be even more unreliable.

Why the intense US military investigation that went on for years then?

Just to satisfy public concern?

Nah. They wanted to know as much as the public did. The investigation is still going on today. We know where too.

Fortunately radar has improved tremendously in the past thirty years so the false returns that jumped around the screen happen less often. Pilots however have not improved very much. There are still regular incidents of pilots reporting Venus as an unidentified aircraft.

and a whole host of compelling reports along with trace evidence (some involving many witnesses that indicates we are being visited by beings being this time and place.......

Make sure you complete the picture. One might be accused of bias.

Edited April 24, 2014 by zoser

[scowl]

Why the intense US military investigation that went on for years then?

Back then we didn't understand the flaws of radar and the unreliability of pilots looking out of cockpit windows. The Soviet Union did not need to know that a weather system could fool our radar systems into thinking that Soviet bombers were heading toward our cities or even worse, make real Soviet bombers appear to be false returns allowing them to sneak attack.

Please make sure you understand how radar works otherwise you could be accused of ignorance.

and a whole host of compelling reports along with trace evidence (some involving many witnesses that indicates we are being visited by beings being this time and place.......

Do tell us about this "trace evidence".

[psyche101]

Mine did.

Well, you assume it did, it would be hard from the vantage you report to ascertain if something came from space or high altitude.

Either way, it was not tracked by military RADAR as per the thread title unless you have omitted something? Ones tracked by RADAR have never gone into space.

[Sweetpumper]

Oh, it shot up into the atmosphere that second time. That's the time my brother witnessed it also. I have no idea if it was tracked on radar. I never called them.

[Sweetpumper]

And if military radar didn't pick it up, we are ripe for invasion from an enemy with that kind of tech.

[Merc14]

If people had a chance to actually look at radar returns they'd understand that all is not cut and dry. The radar I used in my jet had both a pulse doppler mode and pulse mode. PD saw speed only and was fairly impervious to weather but was also blind in teh beam (when an aircraft was flying perpendicular to yur flight path) since tehre was no closure rate. Modern PD radars have beaten this through various methods but way back in my day we had to deal with the problem and for that I used the pulse radar. It was a throwback to the old days in that it simply sent out a radar pulse and with minimal processing, displayed reflected energy on a B-Trace scope. We could traverse ebedded thunderstorms with the pulse radar because it painted the cells very clearly. It could paint ships at sea and one time I even picked up a submarine periscope. None of this is classified because the AWG-9 is long gone and ancient as compared to the new radars out there.

That is the type of radar a lot of these older systems were using and it required a fair amount of experience and training to use properly because the returns could be very confusing to an inexperienced operator. It was easily fooled by chaff and electronic warfare and also weather conditions. It was nearly useless looking down or cose to the earth, which was always a problem for earthbound pulse radars. Some channels worked and some didn't and since the computers were minimal between operator and radar return and the sensitivity could vary greatly between units.

The point of all this is it that it shouldn't surprise anyone that there was much more radar evidence back 40 years ago because spurious returns could be so easily confused by even experienced operators. More modern radars have much better processing and use different modes and frequencies to clean up the return and process the information, hence the lack of radar evidence for modern day UFO sighting that was so common back in zoser's "Golden Days of UFOlogy". The new radars see through weather and other phenomenon and report back that there is nothing there. They do this very reliably and clearly although nothing is perfect and there are still some old radar sets out there.

[Midyin]

How disappointing, more and more cases, yet not a single one comes from, or leaves the atmosphere.

Which means they are terrestrial, doesn't it. Confirmed by RADAR.

They have to go into space to be considered spaceships, none of these UFO's do.

This is what UFOlogists consider "critical thinking" is it?

Good God.

Actually they are still Unidentified Flying Objects until they are Identified..

People hear UFO, and immediately think Extraterrestrial, and that(in my opinion) is an incredibly irresponsible jump in conclusions...

There are lots of things in the sky that I can ID, but I'm willing to bet that none of them are Extraterrestrial..

Personally, I think most UFO sightings could have just been drones on a test flight..

Edited April 28, 2014 by Midyin

[scowl]

In his 1976 book "UFOs Explained" Phillip Klass who has a degree in Electrical Engineering and was the editor of Aviation Week does an excellent job of explaining the flaws of radar. He even went through unclassified military manuals of radar systems involved in UFO reports and they all had long sections on how the systems could be fooled by such things as birds and weather. In some cases they can also pick up emissions from other radar system due to errors in frequency allocation or unexpected propagation due to conditions like thermal ducting. Radar systems on aircraft have also been fooled by large metal structures on hills.

[zoser]

Do tell us about this "trace evidence".

Covered thoroughly in this post.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=265345&st=105#entry5148114

[zoser]

Actually they are still Unidentified Flying Objects until they are Identified..

People hear UFO, and immediately think Extraterrestrial, and that(in my opinion) is an incredibly irresponsible jump in conclusions...

There are lots of things in the sky that I can ID, but I'm willing to bet that none of them are Extraterrestrial..

Personally, I think most UFO sightings could have just been drones on a test flight..

What about these?

[AZDZ]

One could easily gather, that if extra terrestrial beings, intelligent enough to get here, wanted to go stealth, they could.

It gives me the feeling that they could really care *less* if we see them or not.

It's like us going out into the back yard and not caring if the ants in a pile see us.

Yep. I've had encounters in which the whole point seemed to be to allow me time to become absolutely convinced that what I was seeing was real. As soon as I came to that conclusion the encounter would end.

How disappointing, more and more cases, yet not a single one comes from, or leaves the atmosphere.

Which means they are terrestrial, doesn't it. Confirmed by RADAR.

They have to go into space to be considered spaceships, none of these UFO's do.

This is what UFOlogists consider "critical thinking" is it?

Good God.

One thing I recently learned from Charles is that non-believers do not look at the opposing evidence. If you did you might have seen the recently posted video of a retired Air Force officer claiming their craft are radar identified as entering/exiting our atmosphere around 50 times combined a month.

[zoser]

Yep. I've had encounters in which the whole point seemed to be to allow me time to become absolutely convinced that what I was seeing was real. As soon as I came to that conclusion the encounter would end.

One thing I recently learned from Charles is that non-believers do not look at the opposing evidence. If you did you might have seen the recently posted video of a retired Air Force officer claiming their craft are radar identified as entering/exiting our atmosphere around 50 times combined a month.

Totally true,

[scowl]

Covered thoroughly in this post.

http://www.unexplain...05#entry5148114

There was no trace evidence left in these cases.

[zoser]

There was no trace evidence left in these cases I didn't watch the video and couldn't be bothered to read up on those cases that included trace evidence.

Never mind. Perhaps you never had time. You know where to find the clip if you feel like familiarising yourself with those case.