4 ms·

Interesting how so many are willing to accept "camera flare" as a concrete explanation. One thing that bothers me about this explanation is we know those pilot

by oblib 5y ago

Interesting how so many are willing to accept "camera flare" as a concrete explanation. One thing that bothers me about this explanation is we know those pilots had a lot of experience with those systems so I'd expect they'd know "camera flare" when they saw it on those displays. But it's clear from the audio they did not recognize it as that. And there was more than one pilot seeing it, and from different angles. I'd like to hear what the pilots and ship crew members think about this.

zionic 5y ago
https://youtu.be/ro29w4ESw44 https://youtu.be/ro29w4ESw44 Has an actual fighter pilot’s reaction.
- oblib 5y ago
  That was pretty painful to watch with the fast forward going on for so long. I didn't try to take that in. Seems to me like our gov's own investigation would've found gimbal glare to be the culprit if that were the case. But they didn't. What they said is: "Of the 144 reports we are dealing with here, we have no clear indications that there is any non-terrestrial explanation for them — but we will go wherever the data takes us..." And: "We absolutely do believe what we're seeing are not simply sensor artifacts." [https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/25/politics/ufo-report-pentagon-odni/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/25/politics/ufo-report-pentagon-...]
- Workaccount2 5y ago
  Actual video from the pilot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyw4JA00AMc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyw4JA00AMc
  - zionic 5y ago
    This link is much better, thanks. It’s too late for me to edit my post I should have used this.
  - vinkelhake 5y ago
    And here's a long video where Mick West and Chris Lehto discuss: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neTfX9Jx5AY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neTfX9Jx5AY
tsimionescu 5y ago
The US Air force and Navy have a pretty bad track record of incompetent pilots. They have a history of losing numerous planes in training excercises, for example.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > The US Air force and Navy have a pretty bad track record of incompetent pilots. They have a history of losing numerous planes in training excercises, for example. Or flying planes planes for the military is just really hard, and you're holding them to an unreasonable standard. Even the best programmer writes software with bugs, especially when they're not playing it safe and just writing fizzbuzz over and over again.
- RobertMiller 5y ago
  > They have a history of losing numerous planes in training excercises There is a reason virtually every fighter jet ever made was made with ejection seats or retrofitted with them later: They're inherently risky aircraft, and almost impossible to bail out of. If you have some actual statistics that show that USN and USAF pilots crash their jets at a greater rate than other nations, I'd like to see it. The absolute number of crashes tells nothing because some countries (Russia) barely fly their jets at all.
- Workaccount2 5y ago
  And Mick West is a VFX artist who has a hobby of making debunking videos for youtube.
- ARandomerDude 5y ago
  Incredible speed + low altitude flying + statically unstable aircraft + sensors + weapons + offense + defense + communications + ... Yeah. These guys must really suck.
thjkgfgrrioppo 5y ago
Believe the experts! Some people want real proof, not having to rely on believing experts. I guess it is a chasm across society. Some people want to be able to believe.
emkoemko 5y ago
you say that but there is a fighter pilot on youtube trying to debunk these videos but lacks any basic knowledge on how cameras work, while saying things like you can't focus on objects at different distances at the same time... he demonstrates this by having a camera very close to a object ahaha but never noticed he is in focus and so is his background.... :( dose not know what focal length is.. or how parallax works.
gcthomas 5y ago
I'd be wary of taking a pilot's subjective impressions as superior to a technical analysis of the optical system. Pilots may be competent users of these systems, but they are not experts at anything beyond flying their missions, in general. Experience as users is not the same as expertise under unusual conditions.
- shepardrtc 5y ago
  The pilots often say that there are multiple objects, and their cameras can only track one at a time.

by oblib 5y ago

zionic 5y ago

https://youtu.be/ro29w4ESw44 https://youtu.be/ro29w4ESw44 Has an actual fighter pilot’s reaction.

oblib 5y ago
That was pretty painful to watch with the fast forward going on for so long. I didn't try to take that in. Seems to me like our gov's own investigation would've found gimbal glare to be the culprit if that were the case. But they didn't. What they said is: "Of the 144 reports we are dealing with here, we have no clear indications that there is any non-terrestrial explanation for them — but we will go wherever the data takes us..." And: "We absolutely do believe what we're seeing are not simply sensor artifacts." [https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/25/politics/ufo-report-pentagon-odni/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/25/politics/ufo-report-pentagon-...]
Workaccount2 5y ago
Actual video from the pilot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyw4JA00AMc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyw4JA00AMc
- zionic 5y ago
  This link is much better, thanks. It’s too late for me to edit my post I should have used this.
- vinkelhake 5y ago
  And here's a long video where Mick West and Chris Lehto discuss: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neTfX9Jx5AY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neTfX9Jx5AY

tsimionescu 5y ago

The US Air force and Navy have a pretty bad track record of incompetent pilots. They have a history of losing numerous planes in training excercises, for example.

tablespoon 5y ago
> The US Air force and Navy have a pretty bad track record of incompetent pilots. They have a history of losing numerous planes in training excercises, for example. Or flying planes planes for the military is just really hard, and you're holding them to an unreasonable standard. Even the best programmer writes software with bugs, especially when they're not playing it safe and just writing fizzbuzz over and over again.
RobertMiller 5y ago
> They have a history of losing numerous planes in training excercises There is a reason virtually every fighter jet ever made was made with ejection seats or retrofitted with them later: They're inherently risky aircraft, and almost impossible to bail out of. If you have some actual statistics that show that USN and USAF pilots crash their jets at a greater rate than other nations, I'd like to see it. The absolute number of crashes tells nothing because some countries (Russia) barely fly their jets at all.
Workaccount2 5y ago
And Mick West is a VFX artist who has a hobby of making debunking videos for youtube.
ARandomerDude 5y ago
Incredible speed + low altitude flying + statically unstable aircraft + sensors + weapons + offense + defense + communications + ... Yeah. These guys must really suck.

thjkgfgrrioppo 5y ago

Believe the experts! Some people want real proof, not having to rely on believing experts. I guess it is a chasm across society. Some people want to be able to believe.

emkoemko 5y ago

you say that but there is a fighter pilot on youtube trying to debunk these videos but lacks any basic knowledge on how cameras work, while saying things like you can't focus on objects at different distances at the same time... he demonstrates this by having a camera very close to a object ahaha but never noticed he is in focus and so is his background.... :( dose not know what focal length is.. or how parallax works.

gcthomas 5y ago

I'd be wary of taking a pilot's subjective impressions as superior to a technical analysis of the optical system. Pilots may be competent users of these systems, but they are not experts at anything beyond flying their missions, in general. Experience as users is not the same as expertise under unusual conditions.

shepardrtc 5y ago
The pilots often say that there are multiple objects, and their cameras can only track one at a time.