On 8/18/2021 at 7:39 AM, jon b said:

A military air traffic controller I spoke said they to used to regularly track  targets moving erratically at great speed on their precision approach radar

Just out of interest, up to what altitude can they track targets?

PARs use  a very narrow beam with fast update, they’ve a very localised scan area compared to a normal approach or area radar.

I’ve not flown one in years but they’re normally used within 10 miles of the runway at the most so their vertical range would only be in the order of around 5,000ft at a guess.

Edited August 19, 20214 yr by jon b

On 8/18/2021 at 7:39 AM, jon b said:

A military air traffic controller I spoke said they to used to regularly track  targets moving erratically at great speed on their precision approach radar

 

6 hours ago, martin-w said:

"Erratically" makes me favour the radar glitch hypothesis or some form of natural phenomenon.

Wouldn't that mean that air traffic controllers are regularly unable to differentiate between genuine targets, radar glitches and some forms of natural phenomena?

2 hours ago, jon b said:

I’ve not flown one in years but they’re normally used within 10 miles of the runway at the most so their vertical range would only be in the order of around 5,000ft at a guess.

So, does that mean all those regularly tracked targets were moving erratically at or below approximately 5,000ft?

Yes, and close by.

PAR is just a basic primary radar but at a high scan rate and frequency for accuracy.

The radar scans and presents in both a vertical and lateral presentation so the controller can give the  classic radar talk down you might see in old films. Any false targets would therefore have to be generated by a simultaneous and co located fault in both the lateral and vertical scans which would be extremely unlikely as they use separate radar heads for each element.

 

On 8/13/2021 at 1:09 AM, UAL744 said:

Hi recently finished watching a news piece from on American Airlines flight 2292 encountering a UFO while crossing New Mexico airspace back in February and I may be new to this but I wanted to ask,

If these truly are aliens why are they so interested in our planes?

and what could they be doing aside from observing them?

Let me know what you think down below, I’m just as curious and perplexed as the next person.

Here’s the link: 

 

 

This particular sighting certainly seems to have been something military. The path shown In the video appears to pass through the airspace controlled by Holloman AFB. That base hosts several combat fighter wings and directly supports activities at the White Sands Missile Range. 

There are multiple restricted areas to the north and south of Holloman. There are two Jet airways that pass through the restricted airspace - J65 and J108 and high altitude enroute charts carry a notation that both airways may be unavailable during days, Monday through Friday. Albuquerque and Fort Worth ATC centers are supposed to coordinate with the Air Force before clearing any civilian traffic on either airway.

When I was in the Air Force in the late 1970s, I spent several weeks at Holloman while our F-4 squadron was on temporary assignment there for combat exercises. Even at that time, Holloman and White Sands was a major testing center for the (then) nascent Tomahawk cruise missile. I assume that much missile and RPV testing and training still takes place there.

The pilot’s report that the object was cylindrical and “looked like a cruise missile” leads me to think that is exactly what it was. Possibly there was a mixup between the Air Force and FAA ATC, where the airspace was not marked closed to civilian traffic (when it should have been) - or it was a scheduled test in a part of the restricted zone that should have been well away from civilian traffic, and the Air Force allowed the missile to stray off course. (Or the missile, which is mainly autonomous was mis-programmed). If the latter, it is very doubtful the military would acknowledge it.

2 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

 

 

The pilot’s report that the object was cylindrical and “looked like a cruise missile” leads me to think that is exactly what it was. Possibly there was a mixup between the Air Force and FAA ATC, where the airspace was not marked closed to civilian traffic (when it should have been) - or it was a scheduled test in a part of the restricted zone that should have been well away from civilian traffic, and the Air Force allowed the missile to stray off course. (Or the missile, which is mainly autonomous was mis-programmed). If the latter, it is very doubtful the military would acknowledge it.

Well that would have really been a horrible mistake had the missile downed a domestic airliner over US airspace. I wonder how they would have tried to spin that?

12 hours ago, dmwalker said:

Wouldn't that mean that air traffic controllers are regularly unable to differentiate between genuine targets, radar glitches and some forms of natural phenomena?

 

Dunno, but I cant see how a hyper advanced technology would be unable to fly through our atmosphere in a stable fashion. I would expect them to have mastered stable flight. 

Maybe birds show up on radar. Swarms of insect, etc.

“The thing that stood out to me the most was how erratic it was behaving. And what I mean by “erratic” is that its changes in altitude, air speed, and aspect were just unlike things that I’ve ever encountered before flying against other air targets. It was just behaving in ways that aren’t physically normal”

- Chad Underwood F/A 18 pilot who recorded the “tic-tac” FLIR footage.

Personally I think the days of ridicule and trying to pass these things off as radar glitches, flocks of birds, weather balloons, flares, drones, swamp gas etc are well and truly over, it’s time to move on and face facts, these things are real.

19 hours ago, jon b said:

I’ve not flown one in years but they’re normally used within 10 miles of the runway at the most so their vertical range would only be in the order of around 5,000ft at a guess.

I expect targets within that range and altitude would have numerous visual confirmations.

18 hours ago, dmwalker said:

 

Wouldn't that mean that air traffic controllers are regularly unable to differentiate between genuine targets, radar glitches and some forms of natural phenomena?

ATC radar can pick up large flocks of birds, but not individual birds. 

An artificial object has to be made of a material that reflects high frequency microwave energy to appear. Plain metal certainly will. Military stealth aircraft are deliberately designed to reflect as little radar energy as possible. If (assuming) that some UFO’s are actually alien spacecraft, who knows what kind of material they may be constructed of, or whether it will reflect radar?

1 hour ago, JRBarrett said:

ATC radar can pick up large flocks of birds, but not individual birds. 

An artificial object has to be made of a material that reflects high frequency microwave energy to appear. Plain metal certainly will. Military stealth aircraft are deliberately designed to reflect as little radar energy as possible. If (assuming) that some UFO’s are actually alien spacecraft, who knows what kind of material they may be constructed of, or whether it will reflect radar?

For some reason, I am reminded of Donald Rumsfeld's speech about “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns”.

I believe radar operators can identify a flock of birds by the appearance on the radar screen as well as their behaviour. 

According to jon b, the air traffic controller described only "unknown targets moving erratically at great speed"; He/she didn't then say that they were subsequently found to be glitches, flocks of birds, etc. That would mean there was no explanation for those targets. Whatever they were, they were reflecting the radar waves.

Edited August 20, 20214 yr by dmwalker

6 hours ago, jon b said:

 

Personally I think the days of ridicule and trying to pass these things off as radar glitches, flocks of birds, weather balloons, flares, drones, swamp gas etc are well and truly over, it’s time to move on and face facts, these things are real.

 

You quoted Chad Underwoods encounter though. I was specifically referring to the encouter that was spoken about here, where simply the word "erratic" was used without elaboration. Not The Nimitz encounter. If "erratic" is defined as seemingly physics defying maneuvers then that's a different proposition. So unless that is specifically said I will define erratic as uncoordinated flight.

If you read my previous comments here in the forum regarding the Nimitz encouter and others, you will be aware that the incident is familiar to me and that I find such incidents mysterious and worthy of investigation.

It's important that we look at each incident on its own merits and don't conflate one with the other.

Edited August 20, 20214 yr by martin-w

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

I believe radar operators can identify a flock of birds by the appearance on the radar screen as well as their behaviour. 

That reminds of something that happened in Denver.  When I was in the weather flight one of our officers worked for NWS in Denver.  

He said that when they first got their doppler radar on hot days they would see things rising from the elevated ground east of Denver.  At first they thought it was birds but when they went out to look they saw nothing.

It was finally discovered that they were insects being lifted aloft by the hot, rising air.

Until they discovered the echoes were insects I suppose they could have been called UFOs.

Noel

21 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

f these truly are aliens why are they so interested in our planes?

I think it would be because they are in a shared environment and their movement is predictable along airways and they are isolated from most other activities.