UM-Bot Posted December 20, 2019 #1 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Navy Pilot Chad Underwood has described the 'erratic behavior' of the infamous USS Nimitz 'Tic-Tac' UFO. https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/333122/pilot-who-chased-ufo-speaks-out-for-first-time 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the frog Posted December 20, 2019 #2 Share Posted December 20, 2019 It look like a test of a new toy.... ''Princeton had a specific object that they wanted us to hunt'' Probably new type of drone or something, interesting! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 20, 2019 #3 Share Posted December 20, 2019 In particular we notice that he only mentions detection on radar. He does not mention a visual sighting or a FLIR detection, just radar. It is possible that he was encountering some form of EW. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 20, 2019 #4 Share Posted December 20, 2019 I forgot to mention that the article is somewhat misleading in that the article calls it the Tic-Tac. That name is specifically tied to the sighting by Fravor which is not what this person is describing. He also says it was not a weather ballon or this or that or whatever. Some of those possibilities apply to the 2015 event, not the 2004 event. Have to be careful here and not mix apples and oranges. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllPossible Posted December 20, 2019 #5 Share Posted December 20, 2019 1 hour ago, Jon the frog said: It look like a test of a new toy.... ''Princeton had a specific object that they wanted us to hunt'' Probably new type of drone or something, interesting! That actually sounds like it. 50K feet altitude to 100ft in seconds would kill a human. Then again I dont work on black projects so maybe they came out with a way too counter G-Force lol idk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essan Posted December 20, 2019 #6 Share Posted December 20, 2019 15 minutes ago, stereologist said: In particular we notice that he only mentions detection on radar. He does not mention a visual sighting or a FLIR detection, just radar. It is possible that he was encountering some form of EW. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare Creating false radar images to confound enemy pilots? Appears to have worked. Till the stupid pilot let the cat out of the bag! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 20, 2019 #7 Share Posted December 20, 2019 41 minutes ago, Essan said: Creating false radar images to confound enemy pilots? Appears to have worked. Till the stupid pilot let the cat out of the bag! EW typically involves overwhelming the radar systems with lots of targets. If it is possible to provide a few moving targets it looks less like an EW situation. Overwhelming radar systems requires lots of power. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+joc Posted December 20, 2019 #8 Share Posted December 20, 2019 I have a theory about what it was... A test vehicle that is powered by magnetic energy. Consider two magnets on your desk. Turn the polls N to N or S to S and they push each other away. Suppose we had a machine that could create that energy field...it is definitely possible and definitely electro magnetic...third grade science...wire wrapped around a nail attached to a battery. If we could produce a large electromagnetic field which would in effect rapidly push the craft away at an incredible speed. They did say they detected a heat source...just no heat propulsion which they would normally detect from an aircraft. Geeze...I hope I don't get visited by the MIB. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korrelan Posted December 20, 2019 #9 Share Posted December 20, 2019 It uses an electrostatic field to negate air friction in the same way a cavitating torpedo negates water friction. The small aerials/ protrusions are outside the field and although still subject to air friction, their discharge is used as directed ionized propulsion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+joc Posted December 20, 2019 #10 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Korrelan said: It uses an electrostatic field to negate air friction in the same way a cavitating torpedo negates water friction. The small aerials/ protrusions are outside the field and although still subject to air friction, their discharge is used as directed ionized propulsion. Got any info on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 20, 2019 #11 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Korrelan said: It uses an electrostatic field to negate air friction in the same way a cavitating torpedo negates water friction. The small aerials/ protrusions are outside the field and although still subject to air friction, their discharge is used as directed ionized propulsion. Are you talking about the shape of the object? If you are, do you know that the shape is not the shape of the object but the shape due to the image processing done in the FLIR? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman76 Posted December 20, 2019 #12 Share Posted December 20, 2019 6 hours ago, joc said: I have a theory about what it was... A test vehicle that is powered by magnetic energy. Consider two magnets on your desk. Turn the polls N to N or S to S and they push each other away. Suppose we had a machine that could create that energy field...it is definitely possible and definitely electro magnetic...third grade science...wire wrapped around a nail attached to a battery. If we could produce a large electromagnetic field which would in effect rapidly push the craft away at an incredible speed. They did say they detected a heat source...just no heat propulsion which they would normally detect from an aircraft. Geeze...I hope I don't get visited by the MIB. I think you are probably right about that. If so, they need to introduce this technology to the world. This would change everything. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+joc Posted December 20, 2019 #13 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 hours ago, stereologist said: Are you talking about the shape of the object? If you are, do you know that the shape is not the shape of the object but the shape due to the image processing done in the FLIR? Would the image processing in the FLIR be that much different from the actual shape of the object? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 21, 2019 #14 Share Posted December 21, 2019 5 hours ago, joc said: Would the image processing in the FLIR be that much different from the actual shape of the object? Significantly. I did not realize that the IP, image processing, did change the shape, but that is the case. Remember that the FLIR shape is not necessarily the same shape as the visual shape. Then the image is processed. That is what creates the supposed aura. The rotation seen is actually due to the rotation of the camera and not the object. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted December 21, 2019 #15 Share Posted December 21, 2019 10 hours ago, Korrelan said: It uses an electrostatic field to negate air friction It doesn't work that way https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatics 10 hours ago, Korrelan said: cavitating torpedo negates water friction. Use the right terms... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercavitation 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+joc Posted December 21, 2019 #16 Share Posted December 21, 2019 1 hour ago, stereologist said: Significantly. I did not realize that the IP, image processing, did change the shape, but that is the case. Remember that the FLIR shape is not necessarily the same shape as the visual shape. Then the image is processed. That is what creates the supposed aura. The rotation seen is actually due to the rotation of the camera and not the object. Then why didn't any of them say that to begin with? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 21, 2019 #17 Share Posted December 21, 2019 It should be pointed out that no supercavitating torpedo exceeds 400kph. Claims of supersonic speed in water are absurd. Sounds travels much faster in water than in air. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Posted December 22, 2019 #18 Share Posted December 22, 2019 23 hours ago, joc said: Then why didn't any of them say that to begin with? Because they’re human and can misinterpret things. It was radar anomalies, that is all. Also, the tic-tac FLIR was most likely a sea bird gliding over water, and the other a commercial aircraft at distance. And yes, the camera rolling/yawing caused the apparent shift in velocity. IR footage at a distance will resolve a heat signature as a ‘blob’. You’re not going to see wings etc. at a distance. Just the general heat signature. Some features may influence the heat signature, but not obviously at a distance. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaz Posted December 22, 2019 #19 Share Posted December 22, 2019 (edited) On 12/20/2019 at 12:27 PM, Jon the frog said: It look like a test of a new toy.... ''Princeton had a specific object that they wanted us to hunt'' Probably new type of drone or something, interesting! No way. How come US ships are being rammed out of the SCS? How come US high tech radar planes are being bullied and pushed out of European airspace by Russian fighters? How come the US is powerless against a rising Iran and N Korea? Pull the other one it's got bells on mate. If the US has that level of tech it would quickly show case it to regain it's military edge. It hasn't and continues to suffer miltary embarrassments all over the world as other super powers are rapidly closing the gap. Why does it continue to spend billions on a JSF with ambiguous capabilities in a modern war zone with advanced radar and SAMS owned by Russia for example? Or are you watching different world news to me? Hypothesis debunked. Edited December 22, 2019 by Vaz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaz Posted December 22, 2019 #20 Share Posted December 22, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, Vaz said: Duplicate. Edited December 22, 2019 by Vaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unusual Tournament Posted December 22, 2019 #21 Share Posted December 22, 2019 On 12/20/2019 at 11:32 PM, stereologist said: In particular we notice that he only mentions detection on radar. He does not mention a visual sighting or a FLIR detection, just radar. It is possible that he was encountering some form of EW. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare I suggest you read the entire unredacted version. “Eventually, David Fravor, commanding officer of the Black Aces, made visual confirmation of one of the objects midair during a flight-training exercise. An hour later, Underwood made his infrared recording on a second flight. ” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unusual Tournament Posted December 22, 2019 #22 Share Posted December 22, 2019 5 hours ago, Timothy said: Because they’re human and can misinterpret things. It was radar anomalies, that is all. Also, the tic-tac FLIR was most likely a sea bird gliding over water, and the other a commercial aircraft at distance. And yes, the camera rolling/yawing caused the apparent shift in velocity. IR footage at a distance will resolve a heat signature as a ‘blob’. You’re not going to see wings etc. at a distance. Just the general heat signature. Some features may influence the heat signature, but not obviously at a distance. Lol. Big call with your “radar anomaly.” Check out my direct quote from the OP. Above response to Stereo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+joc Posted December 22, 2019 #23 Share Posted December 22, 2019 3 hours ago, Captain Risky said: Lol. Big call with your “radar anomaly.” Check out my direct quote from the OP. Above response to Stereo. Not only was it seen 'with eyes on it'...It was seen at different times by different crews doing the same thing. Not a seagull...not a commercial airliner... Plus...trained and experienced fighter pilots saying they had no clue what it was...never seen anything like it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 22, 2019 #24 Share Posted December 22, 2019 7 hours ago, Vaz said: No way. How come US ships are being rammed out of the SCS? How come US high tech radar planes are being bullied and pushed out of European airspace by Russian fighters? How come the US is powerless against a rising Iran and N Korea? Pull the other one it's got bells on mate. If the US has that level of tech it would quickly show case it to regain it's military edge. It hasn't and continues to suffer miltary embarrassments all over the world as other super powers are rapidly closing the gap. Why does it continue to spend billions on a JSF with ambiguous capabilities in a modern war zone with advanced radar and SAMS owned by Russia for example? Or are you watching different world news to me? Hypothesis debunked. Love your laughable fiction. None of what you stated is happening, but keep on your hallucinogenic trip. Makes me laugh 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted December 22, 2019 #25 Share Posted December 22, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Captain Risky said: I suggest you read the entire unredacted version. “Eventually, David Fravor, commanding officer of the Black Aces, made visual confirmation of one of the objects midair during a flight-training exercise. An hour later, Underwood made his infrared recording on a second flight. ” I suggest you read my post. The post does NOT discuss Fravor. I was referring to the subject of the article. Please read the thread before commenting. Edited December 22, 2019 by stereologist 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now