The Nimitz Encounters Documentary

[Elendil]

I'll post it here just in case someone missed it, I'd say it's pretty good. Darn interesting to see the case presented this way:

 

[Randall]

I'll post it here just in case someone missed it, I'd say it's pretty good. Darn interesting to see the case presented this way:

I think it's here someplace else too, but you're right. This particular production is very good. There seems to be no doubt that something out of the ordinary was going on. But what exactly? We're tempted to think it was a UFO ( as in alien craft ), but what if this was some sort of advanced training simulation? Back in the Golden Age of Ufology, it would not have been possible to pull-off anything like the Nimitz encounters. Today however it's conceivable that we could create the illusion of such craft, even if we can't actually engineer them physically.

I'll add this info on pilot David Fravor again as well:

Witness: David Fravor
Airman, Rank: Squadron Commander
Air Wing: VMFA-232

David Fravor has served for 22 years in the Navy and two in the Marines. He has participated in five deployments. During the deployment featured in CARRIER, he was commanding officer of Strike Fighter Squadron 41 (VFA-41), also known as “The Black Aces.” Currently, he works in California for Fidelity Technologies as a simulator instructor, teaching new pilots how to fly the F/A-18. He is a native of Ohio. ( Source )

 

[Elendil]

Yeah Randall, I agree that we don't know what could have been that tic-tac thing. And sure - everything you said is true, albeit that's an old theme in Ufology - are those real object or illusions, are they alien tech or some advanced black budget thing we're not aware of...

But something here is definitely out of the ordinary. Don't know if I'm right on this - but it seems to me that this might be the first time we have pilots, technicians and radar operators coming forward, with both fighter pilots and the crew onboard the Hawkeye claiming visual contact, plus traces being present from various tracking systems, including Aegis and even sonar, at least according to this documentary.
And some Flir footage, with supposedly a high-res version available.

I'm not that knowledgeable regarding various cases throughout history, since I indulge my UFO curiosity now and then when Real Life (TM) allows it, but I can't remember any case having this much crewmen of various ilk stepping forward, at least on film or TV.

I wonder if anyone tried to get more detail on the people accompanying the skipper who supposedly confiscated the flight HD bricks from the Nimitz and left aboard the Seahawk? Anyone tried to talk to the skipper?
I wonder if an FOI request for those bricks could yield any results, most probably not, but still - I think that the guy who runs the Black Vault filed some request regarding the Nimitz case, if I remember correctly...any info on those?

 

[Randall]

I think you're referring to Greenwald. Maybe if he comes onto the show, we can ask some of those questions.

While it's true that the idea of illusions or misperceptions has been a recurring theme in ufology, the ability to convincingly pull them off has become more and more challenging. In the old days there were inflatable tanks and other sorts of physical decoys. However creating the illusion of an actual flying craft that isn't really there was beyond our means until recently.

Today we have the ability to create holograms that look real takes the possibility of military decoys to a whole new level. Together with sophisticated radar spoofing, holographic decoys could make an effective countermeasure. If they're good enough to fool us, then they're good enough to fool an enemy. So maybe that was the test; to see if it could fool a carrier group ( which I believe was actually on a training exercise ).

So this could be an entirely new level of military tech at work. We can't be sure it's not, and therein lies a major problem. We also know that the real thing exists. But these days we can no longer be sure which is which unless it gets up-close and personal.

 

[henris42]

I just wonder - I recall a "real-life" show on an US carrier, round 1999. Sounds like just before this. The commander guy look very familiar. The young lady pilot was then a rook, I remember the Cmdr pulling her off the list in bad weather. She protested, Cmdr flew in her place.

I cannot remember if it was the Nimitz, but was definite on of those air craft carriers. And I don't have video.

I'm 99% sure this is the same BS - do any of you remember this "naval" real television?

 

[Randall]

I just wonder - I recall a "real-life" show on an US carrier, round 1999. Sounds like just before this. The commander guy look very familiar. The young lady pilot was then a rook, I remember the Cmdr pulling her off the list in bad weather. She protested, Cmdr flew in her place.

I cannot remember if it was the Nimitz, but was definite on of those air craft carriers. And I don't have video.

I'm 99% sure this is the same BS - do any of you remember this "naval" real television?

I've never seen any military reality television shows, but I don't think that this documentary is BS. I think these people are telling their experiences as they recall them. What that actually means is another story. One of the things that lends credence to the idea that some sort of super secret tech was behind the strange events, is that there were officials who seemed to have mysteriously showed up to take away the "bricks" ( data recorders ).

It seems to me that just appearing without anyone knowing how they got there meant that they were probably there from the start, but stayed out of sight while the exercise was going on so that they could monitor the situation and retrieve the data, which meant they had foreknowledge of the events, which implies that it was planned on some higher level, which means it was probably something of ours rather than something alien.

 

[Farlig Gulstein]

do any of you remember this "naval" real television?

You are probably referring to the ten-part PBS series "Carrier" mentioned in Fravor's resume above. The blurb reads:

CARRIER, a 10-part series filmed aboard the USS Nimitz, is a character-driven immersion in the high- stakes world of a nuclear aircraft carrier. The episodes follow a core group of characters as they navigate their jobs, families, faith, patriotism, love, the rites of passage and the war on terror.​

On the other hand, I think the Nimiz "Tic-Tac" Documentary is actually pretty helpful in recreating the reported events.

 

[Randall]

Another interview featuring pilots who were seeing UFOs on the east coast.

 

[Randall]

This is a must watch for those who want a terrestrial explanation.

 

[Farlig Gulstein]

This is a must watch for those who want a terrestrial explanation.

Personally, I've never been too impressed with these three videos.

However, Mr. West does not seem to have thought very deeply about the first explanation he gave, IMHO. A carrier task force has ship-borne radars that extend radar coverage for hundreds of miles. They also have IFF interrogators (Identification, Friend or Foe) to automatically identify friendly aircraft or any "bogey". So if there was some airliner flying by, beyond a hundred miles, but within visual, then it seems impossible that the task force radar-IFF systems would not identify the object. An airliner flying at a 450 kt to 500 kt speed could rapidly intercept the task force and theoretically pull a Sept. 11th. So there is a potential for risk that a task force would have to deal with and be aware of.

The second MAJOR item is that David Fravor has repeated that in one incident when the fighter's radar did attempt to lock on to one of these "bogies" the radar was "jammed" and that cannot be explained by a wayward pelican. Whatever the object was, and where ever it came from, it had the ability to sample a USN airborne radar signal, process the signal and transmit a powerful return signal in a range of frequencies right around the frequency it received from the USN airborne radar.

The third significant issue is that the object evidently left David Fravor's location and immediately showed up at the CAP point, and that location was a classified piece of information.

Fourth, for at least one of the reported incidents there was a USN AWACS bird in the air that also showed contact with something other than a civilian airliner.

Fifth, I roll my eyes at Mick West's extensive flight experience to be able to provide the "correct" explanation of a mundane experience for something that all four USN aircrew understood as precisely NOT mundane.

So, even though I don't think much of the three videos, the testimony by Fravor and others leaves these reports by USN aviators in a class of experience far beyond the puny explanations of Mick West.

 

[Ian]

Were there any witnesses that saw these objects with their naked eye - including through normal binoculars?

 

[Randall]

Personally, I've never been too impressed with these three videos ...

I'm with you on all points. But there are also a few little loopholes in the story that keep me from buying all the way into an alien explanation. The main one is that there were discrepancies at times between the shipboard radar coordinates and the presence ( or lack thereof ) of a visual confirmation. So the incredible maneuvers indicated on radar, and the radar jamming, can be hypothetically explained by advanced radar countermeasures and spoofing, which exists within our own technology, and has been posted elsewhere on the topic.

The other thing, is that the visual encounters were always very short lived. Therefore we cannot assume with 100% certainty that the radar detections and the objects ( or phenomena ) sighted visually are one in the same. Some sort of advanced visual countermeasures are not inconceivable with today's technology, but if directed energy ( holographic or projected ) in nature, would not be able to last for hours. That would explain those discrepancies. I'm not so sure about the power requirements for radar spoofing equipment.

Between that and a couple of other coincidences, like some unusual officers onboard the ship, and the objects seeming to have knowledge about the coordinates of the CAP point, the case for a super-secret countermeasures test cannot be entirely ruled out ( IMO ).

Were there any witnesses that saw these objects with their naked eye - including through normal binoculars?

Yes. Fravor and the flight crews he was with when he saw the "TicTac".

 

[Farlig Gulstein]

a few little loopholes in the story that keep me from buying all the way into an alien explanation

I wouldn't say that I buy into an "alien" explanation -- as in interstellar visitors out-and-about for a little entertainment at the expense of USN F-18s. But I don't find Mr. West's "explanations" of the videos, especially in light of Fravor's comments about the videos, to be nearly sufficient to dismiss the videos as misidentified mundane objects. Though, again, I don't think the available vids show much at all. Fravor said he saw a much higher quality vid that showed a lot more detail. All in all, I don't think Fravor and his aviators, nor the USN shipborne radars, were tracking airliners, balloons or birds. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Randall]

I wouldn't say that I buy into an "alien" explanation -- as in interstellar visitors out-and-about for a little entertainment at the expense of USN F-18s.

Other than perhaps one's own personal experiences, it's difficult to say with confidence that any case in particular represents proof of alien visitation. So we're left to evaluate the other evidence and weigh it accordingly. To do that we need to fair-mindedly review the points made by skeptics, and at least West's points are well presented ( except for a few offhanded comments ).

But I don't find Mr. West's "explanations" of the videos, especially in light of Fravor's comments about the videos, to be nearly sufficient to dismiss the videos as misidentified mundane objects.

The problem there is that the videos were taken during flights that Fravor wasn't on, so there is no direct correlation between what Fravor saw and the objects in the videos.

Though, again, I don't think the available vids show much at all. Fravor said he saw a much higher quality vid that showed a lot more detail. All in all, I don't think Fravor and his aviators, nor the USN shipborne radars, were tracking airliners, balloons or birds. That's all I'm saying.

I agree that Fravor's firsthand eyewitness testimony is powerful. However the analysis of the go-fast video includes numbers in the video itself that allows the trigonometry to be done, which when applied, explains the movement of the object more than adequately. I think we can safely write that one off completely. The other videos are far too inconclusive to be certain about what they are, and given the explanations offered, the images do seem to match a terrestrial object ( like an aircraft ) better than an alien craft.

That leaves us with the eyewitness and radar accounts. The radar tracks can be explained by radar spoofing, so there's insufficient cause to assume those are something alien, which leaves us with only the eyewitness accounts, which if we accept aren't some kind of disinformation, cannot be be explained by any technology known to the public. However it's still not inconceivable that the objects ( or phenomena ) observed, were some sort of military technology not known to the public, and that it wasn't an actual craft, but some sort of projection.

So now we're left with only two options

1. Secret high-tech military technology
2. Aliens.

My rule of thumb is that if it is reasonably conceivable that a terrestrial object or phenomenon is responsible, then it's more likely that the cause is terrestrial rather than alien. So as much as I'd love to hold this case up as proof of alien visitation, I just can't get all the way there due to insufficient evidence ( for me ).

The most significant thing about this evidence ( to me ) is that it reveals that there have been official investigations into UFOs by the Department of Defense, and I personally believe they have evidence we would accept as proof, but this just isn't it.

 

[Farlig Gulstein]

However it's still not inconceivable that the objects ( or phenomena ) observed, were some sort of military technology not known to the public, and that it wasn't an actual craft, but some sort of projection.

So now we're left with only two options

1. Secret high-tech military technology
2. Aliens.

Personally, I doubt the "secret military technology" theory for Fravor's and his fellow aviators' encounters. The military can test their hardware in vast empty stretches of the continental US using existing hardware like F-18's or Princeton type radar systems. There's also an Admiral and staff who command the task force that in that case included the Nimitz and Princeton and other ships, and it seems impossible to me that the task force Admiral would not be kept up-to-date on any possible "testing" of actual US military hardware that his task force might encounter. So, if that had actually happened, the task force Admiral would directly contact the Captain of the Nimitz, who would directly contact the fighter squadron commander Fravor and tell him, "cool your jets son, it was ours"; case closed. In any case, the 1976 Tehran, Iran F-4 encounter case is hard to envision as either US or Soviet hardware.

Also, as was mentioned by recent guest Bruce Maccabee, I personally prefer the term NHI, or non-human intelligence and not "aliens". A "Keelian" or "Valleeian" view of UFO encounter evidence through the decades posits very powerful non-human intelligences that can cause all kinds of mischief to us limited humans.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

If it was high tech why bother keeping archives of UFO -Flying Saucers -UAP data . Also it bull dust and our Solar System is full of life . Furthermore , oxygen -water - throughout the Universe and vast amounts of footage, interviews and images black and white -color from many decades. MJ -12 has credible elements and those who keep debunking it never had access to the archives . They have had contact and more.