US Navy Patent: Really??

[21st Century Schizoid Man]

crafts coming down from 100k ft+- to close to sea level in less than a second for instance...

Several times reentry speed, and down low where the atmosphere is much thicker - they must have a pretty advanced heat shield.

[Shaula]

Not true. Blurry clips indeed... You obviously have not listened to the first person accounts from both the pilots and the radar techs on board said ship(s) which are out there on the net....listening to their accounts it is obvious that what they witnessed was an inertialess drive.... crafts coming down from 100k ft+- to close to sea level in less than a second for instance... Why do you think the US Gov is releasing these clips? Are they pandering to the UFO nuts? Why do you belittle and marginalize first hand accounts from the military personnel? If nothing else, if these accounts are accurate, the Fermi paradox is no longer a paradox and we are Not alone. The more interesting question is, What are they doing here?

I didn't say blurry clips... I said that your reasoning was driven by a set of assumptions that you accept due to your belief that you know what is really happening. Assumptions I and it appears most others don't agree with.

Other than that Van Rijn covered all the points I would have made. Except one. You rage at my heinous crime of belittling and marginalizing first hand accounts from military personnel - yet why these paragons of accuracy and level headedness investigate further and say there are no aliens involved you ignore them. This for me highlights the pointlessness of this discussion. Anyone who agrees with you is accepted at face value and without reservation. Anyone who doesn't is dismissed or attacked.

[Noclevername]

I was the one who had used the "blurry clips" line.

Judging motion from a fast-moving aircraft is difficult. Even folks standing on solid ground sometimes have the optical illusion of fast motion of stationary sky objects. I'd cast a skeptical eye and reserve judgement on the identity of the UAP's until a more detailed analysis of the videos than naked-eye guesstimate occurs.

[Gillianren]

My partner's in the military. I question his eyewitness testimony all the time, when it contradicts my known experience.

[grant hutchison]

Not true. Blurry clips indeed... You obviously have not listened to the first person accounts from both the pilots and the radar techs on board said ship(s) which are out there on the net....listening to their accounts it is obvious that what they witnessed was an inertialess drive.... crafts coming down from 100k ft+- to close to sea level in less than a second for instance... Why do you think the US Gov is releasing these clips? Are they pandering to the UFO nuts? Why do you belittle and marginalize first hand accounts from the military personnel? If nothing else, if these accounts are accurate, the Fermi paradox is no longer a paradox and we are Not alone. The more interesting question is, What are they doing here?

I'll just repeat something I posted on the "US Nimitz UFO event" thread

I've had personal bitter experience of "good quality" witnesses "determined to tell their story", who sincerely believed they had seen something that not only didn't happen, but couldn't happen, and which would have been impossible for them to observe from where they were standing, even if it had happened. Inconsistencies in their original reports ironed out very quickly after they had spoken to each other, and then some of them began to "remember" details which were consistent with one person's report, but inconsistent with their own original reports.
Being sane and conscientious and "trained to observe" doesn't stop you misinterpreting sensory data, sometimes quite grossly, in order to align it with what you think you're observing, and it doesn't stop you remodelling your own memories for consistency later.

Grant Hutchison

[eburacum45]

The Nimitz event, which was the occasion of the FLIR1 film clip, resolves into three distinct phases.
1/ The first was a series of anomalous radar traces, apparently descending from 80,000 feet to sea level in a matter of seconds. No-one ever saw these phenomena, and it seems very unlikely that any physical object could achieve such speeds in an atmosphere without causing a massive shockwave and plasma trail.
If these supposed craft were somehow isolated from the effects of atmospheric friction and deceleration, how come they reflected radar signals at all?

2/ The second phase was David Fravor's Tic Tac, which displayed none of the characteristics of the first phase. Fravor's sighting started with a disturbance in the water, which may have been a submarine surfacing or submerging, or some biogenic phenomenon such as whales bubble-netting. There were submarines in the area during these exercises, and it seems that the various parts of the Navy do not always know exactly where each submarine is on these occasions (they mention an 'unknown submarine' in a different report, suggesting that they are not always sure).
The Tic Tac itself may have been a misperception by Fravor of a much smaller and closer object, and this is supported by its behaviour, which appeared to 'mirror' his movements in an uncanny way. The 'mirroring' could be the result of a simple parallax error, similar to the one in the 'GOFAST' clip (of which more later).

3/The last phase of the Nimitz event occurred several minutes later, when Chas Underwood arrived in a different plane (with a working Forward Looking InfraRed detector and camera), and was directed to the site of these events by the Nimitz radar. Fravor was long gone by this time and back on the Nimitz.
Underwood did not see anything at all visually, but his detector did pick up (and record) an apparently distant target (perhaps 50km or more away). This distant target behaved exactly like a normal plane, although it did apparently 'zoom off' at the end of the encounter - an effect which seems to have been an artifact of the sensing system, since the FLIR lost contact with the target when the system switched to a higher magnification. Underwood may have been looking towards a San Diego flightpath at this point, so the target may have been an airliner.

So there doesn't seem to be anything particularly unusual about the FLIR1/Nimitz event.

The other two clips, GOFAST and GIMBAL, from 2015, do not have any named witnesses or other details, and can be similarly explained by mundane phenomena. GOFAST in particular seems to have been a small bird-sized object halfway between the sea and the plane, and all the 'fast' movement is an artifact of parallax. So I don't see much here to get excited about.

[stutefish]

Well, ok, but then add in the Gov's release of a few videos of Navy pilots filming UAP's which according to the pilots own accounts as well as ship radar techs seem to exhibit the characteristics of the "Drive" and to me it seems as though there may be more to this story than is now appreciated.

This makes no sense at all. If the drive is supposed to be secret, why patent anything at all? If the drive is not supposed to be secret, why conceal the nature of is observations from Naval personnel?

Further, if the drive is supposed to be secret, why are they testing it in the vicinity of Navy ships and personnel conducting routine operations? If this thing were real, I'd expect there to be leaks that a certain region of the world's oceans had been quietly marked off-limits for Navy activity.

[deadie148]

The Nimitz event, which was the occasion of the FLIR1 film clip, resolves into three distinct phases.

Thank you for this post. The deliberate confabulation of stories and events really is an annoying ufological rhetorical device. I mean, I remember Fravor himself was being interviewed, on CNN I believe. The host was showing the GIMBAL video and describing it while Fravor sat and claimed that yep, that's what he saw. The fact that it was filmed 11 years later than the event Fravor is now famous for seems lost on everyone.

[Grant Hatch]

From Eburacum45's post:

"1/ The first was a series of anomalous radar traces, apparently descending from 80,000 feet to sea level in a matter of seconds. No-one ever saw these phenomena, and it seems very unlikely that any physical object could achieve such speeds in an atmosphere without causing a massive shockwave and plasma trail."

There has been some recent progress in reducing the shockwave which we hear as a sonic boom.

""To alleviate noise concerns, both Lockheed Martin and NASA promise the LBFD's sonic boom will be much quieter than the thunderous noise Concorde produced, sounding instead, they insist, more like a car door slamming. Instead of the two sharp pressure pulses that formed Concorde's sonic boom, an LBFD observer on the ground would discern only a very gradual pressure rise, if they noticed anything at all.""

"There are other things that could come into play like atmospheric conditions and background noise," Iosifidis says. "It's possible you might not even distinguish [the sound] as a sonic boom versus literally a car door slamming."

https://www.cnet.com/news/supersonic-without-the-boom/

This is Our tech. Who knows what the tech of Aliens, IF these are indeed craft of their making, has achieved.

[grant hutchison]

https://www.cnet.com/news/supersonic-without-the-boom/

This is Our tech. Who knows what the tech of Aliens, IF these are indeed craft of their making, has achieved.

I'm not seeing anything in your link that's remotely relevant to the extreme hypersonic regime implied by "80000 feet in a few seconds".

Grant Hutchison

[Shaula]

There has been some recent progress in reducing the shockwave which we hear as a sonic boom.

Not at speeds between mach 10 - 40 there hasn't. And believe me it is a very, very different engineering domain to mach 1 - 2 (which is what the article you linked to is talking about). The design you are suggesting woiuld reduce the shockwaves would literally melt at mach 10+. So eburacum45's points stand.

[Grant Hatch]

OK, Sonic booms are not even a part of this "drive" if it exists, since the space/time fabric around the craft is "warped" by the inertialess drive. Additionally, those observing these alleged craft have not reported sonic booms......

[Shaula]

OK, Sonic booms are not even a part of this "drive" if it exists, since the space/time fabric around the craft is "warped" by the inertialess drive. Additionally, those observing these alleged craft have not reported sonic booms......

Then why did you mention them?

So if there a huge warps of time and space going on all the time I assume LIGO and any other similar scientific experiments are clearly in on this too? Or is there some other convoluted and unsupported reason you are going to supply why what you believe is right whatever the evidence?

[stutefish]

It seems like the first step is always to assume that any two anomalous radar returns must necessarily be the same exact object, no matter how far apart they are in space and time. In fact, the further apart they are in space, the better.

[KaiYeves]

It seems like the first step is always to assume that any two anomalous radar returns must necessarily be the same exact object, no matter how far apart they are in space and time. In fact, the further apart they are in space, the better.

Exactly! Just like I’m certain the banana I ate yesterday must have come from the very same tree as this one I ate in Australia 13 years ago!