Monday, April 29, 2019

A Long Way from Kitty Hawk

This is not an easy post to write, but some things need to be said and nobody is saying them (as usual).
Tyler Rogoway, Twitter

Tyler Rogoway is a writer, photographer, & journalist on aviation and military topics. If you haven't heard yet, which you should have if you're interested in UFOs, on April 26 he posted an article, What the hell is going on with UFOs and the Department of Defense?. The post explores the U.S. Navy updating UFO reporting procedures for its personnel, as well as the influence that Team TTSA is having on shaping UFO talk. I urge reading the article in full, and there are some points in particular I'd like to explore.

Ours or Theirs?

Rogoway addressed the possibility human beings, not extraterrestrials or a non-human intelligence, are the forces behind some craft perceived as UFOs. This was accomplished while sufficiently acknowledging technology demonstrated during the now much discussed Nimitz encounters involved flight capabilities that shatter our perception of propulsion and even physics. That's a difficult thing for many people to accept, he wrote.  

That's competently argued. Even without the decades-long laugh factor associated with controversial flying objects, lots of people, certainly including those with skeptical leanings and expert backgrounds, tend to bail on discussions when reduced to sighing, "I don't know."

Others are fond of drawing questionable conclusions about select UFO cases involving craft which display flight capabilities beyond current known technology. "It couldn't be ours," they surmise.

To that we might ask, "How do they know?" Are they experts with special access to classified aircraft and not bound by security oaths? 

The possibility many UFO cases can potentially be explained as quite human technology is a likelihood that absolutely must be given its due, particularly prior to jumping to unfounded speculation and conclusions. This doesn't necessarily mean human technology explains every case, but we can reasonably assume it's a strong contender for a whole lot of them.

This is how it started, Dec. 17, 1903
In the history of mankind, humans are the only beings conclusively known to construct and launch machines into flight in this neck of the woods. If you see a vehicle of some sort flying around, there's a really, really good chance people put it up there. Let's just say there's a lot of supporting documentation.

That doesn't have to mean there are no interesting mysteries. It does mean that scientists, academics, and intelligence personnel who wade into ufology to work for an entertainment company or wander around the desert looking for saucer debris should be held accountable for acting like they don't understand horses come before carts.  

Setting the Stage

Rogoway took his post a big step further than most and indeed explained something that needs to be said. In 2004, when the "Tic Tac" case unfolded, the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group was the only flotilla equipped with and testing a state of the art surveillance and tracking system called Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC). 

Rogoway wrote, "What many may not know about this event is that it occurred in a place and time where the most powerful set of aerial surveillance sensors ever created were amassed together and were watching and recording it all."

USS Nimitz
CEC combined multiple data sources to enable target visibility to an extent never before achieved. It was cutting edge, continues to evolve, and "this integrated air defense system architecture was just being fielded on a Strike Group level for the first time aboard the Nimitz and its flotilla."

How significant was it?

"We are talking about a quantum leap in capability and fidelity here folks," Rogoway continued.

What's more, the location the encounters occurred, off the Baja Coast, is potentially significant. According to Rogoway, there's no better place to test such a system. The location is not an operational environment and aircraft are not armed because nobody's expecting to engage in a fight. 

"In other words," Rogoway explained, "it was an ideal testing environment that featured the very best aerial, surface, and undersea surveillance sensors and sensor crews on the planet."
He further clarified, "The key takeaway here is that if ever there was an opportune time to capture the very best real-world sensor data on a high-performance target in near lab-like controlled settings offered by the restricted airspace off the Baja Coast, this was it. And by intention or chance, this is exactly what happened."

It would seem reasonable to be a bit annoyed that ufology's self-proclaimed intelligence insiders, as well as supposedly qualified experts who delved extensively into the Tic Tac case, seem unaware of the CEC and the significance of the location of the Nimitz during the events. I very much appreciate Tyler Rogoway reporting on these potentially important circumstances. His post is objective, informative, and recommended. 

A Question of What's Being Concealed

It has been argued that Uncle Sam's armed forces are negligent in not recognizing select reports of UFOs as legitimate threats to national security. Perhaps that is true. A lot of UFO researchers sure think so.

A counterpoint could be made there could be other, more rational reasons for official stances of disinterest in UFOs. Those reasons could in some cases also be much less dramatic than the widely believed UFO cover-up.

Lack of UFO urgency arguably comes from the top and trickles down. If the brass aren't worried about nuke facilities getting buzzed, then neither are intel analysts. There is indeed precedence and many examples of this dynamic. 

Widely circulated photo of reported
Ghost Rocket originally released
by Swedish Army
James Carrion took a deep dive into the reported Ghost Rocket phenomenon of the 1940's. He presented authenticated memos and documents which showed intel analysts, officers, and even an FBI Special Agent became pretty thoroughly convinced upper echelon members of Swedish and U.S. intelligence were well aware of the origins of the supposed mystery rockets. This was due in substantial part to a lack of official concern, including allowing officers to remain on leave and failing to significantly increase security measures during a reported rocket wave. They just weren't interested, in spite of intel reports and public proclamations. 

Please allow me to emphasize that intelligence reports also cited contradictions in statements by officials and their lack of presenting tangible evidence in assessing it was likely the powers that be were themselves responsible for the Ghost Rockets: They pushed stories lacking verification, and they did not display evidence or concern in proportion to the stories.

U.S. Navy Admiral Henry Kent Hewitt, who Carrion suspects would have been among the informed upper echelon, actually discouraged investigation. He declined a chance to visit a potential rocket crash site to obtain debris for testing. The admiral suggested there would be more opportunities later. Opportunities, of course, which never came. 

It should be noted the purpose of the Ghost Rocket ruse would by no means have been to dupe the public into believing aliens were among us. That seems to have been accomplished by a credulous and often less than intellectually honest UFO community.

Objectives of the operation would have included confusing adversaries about what's in the sky and who's flying it, which would have potentially created a variety of advantageous situations for further exploitation. Perhaps one man's UFO cover-up is another man's classified job description of gas lighting the global intel community. 

A Long Way from Kitty Hawk

Orb-like objects have reportedly been flying in the vicinity of Iranian nuclear facilities. Those up on their UFO lore should quickly recognize a few common themes here, like the seeming nuclear site issue. Also noteworthy are the reported flight capabilities and actions of the flying objects, which include flying outside the atmosphere, achieving Mach 10 speeds, hovering over a target at a speed of zero, and powerful electronic countermeasures (ECM) which jam enemy radar and disrupt navigation systems through the use of high levels of magnetic energy. 

That's a lot to chew on and could sure get one's alien senses tingling. The Iranians, however, who apparently haven't been part of an altar call at a MUFON Symposium, suspected a much different explanation. They assessed their uninvited visitors to be CIA drones.

Iranian Air Force F-14 Tomcats
In 2004, which, by the way, was the same year of the Nimitz events, an Iranian F-14 Tomcat unsuccessfully tried to lock its radar on a luminous object over the Arak nuclear facility. The radar beam was effectively disrupted, apparently by the object, which was described by the pilot as spherical in shape. It reportedly had something described as a green afterburner which caused turbulence in its wake, then increased speed and "disappeared like a meteor." Interestingly, the Iranians seemed to think the flying objects emitted light in order to enable nighttime photography, whatever we may specifically make of that. 

In 2012 the two crewmen of an F-14 were killed when scrambled to intercept an intruder headed towards the Bushehr nuclear power plant. The F-14 exploded seconds after takeoff. I'm not aware of any cause given for the explosion.

In related stories, Wired reported in 2013 that Sandia National Laboratories was developing a Transformer-like drone. The object was designed to fly, swim, drive, and hop its way to its mission, transforming itself to accommodate different terrain.

"Its wings become fins as it dives into water, or underwater paddles that shed casings to reveal wheels as it moves toward land — wheels with the ability to jump 30 feet into the air. An entire campaign could be conducted by a remote operator or, more likely, semi-autonomously," the article explained.

There are clearly a lot of different kinds of machines crawling the planet. They have a wide range of capabilities and diverse appearances. We should expect them to become more frequently reported. 

We don't have to throw the babies out with the bathwater, but let's encourage suspending judgement on extraordinary explanations until conclusive evidence is available - and, of course, actually presented. Let's not ignore the most likely possibilities. We just deceive ourselves if we do, and we deserve better than that, from all involved. 


  1. The most important thing to remember about US military interest in UFOs is that every branch of the service has some responsibility for ensuring the security of US airspace.

    I don’t see the Navy drafting new guidelines as anything more than developing a better method for reporting on and tracking suspicious aircraft in US skies.

    Earlier this year, there were news reports about an unidentified high-speed aircraft flying over the Pacific Northwest (no transponder). Military jets were scrambled but none was able to catch up to the mystery craft.

    Alien spacecraft? More likely a Russian, or Chinese, intelligence gathering overflight. After all there are a number of major military installations in the Northwest, including a communications center for the Navy’s Pacific submarine fleet (“Naval Radio Station Jim Creek is a forested expanse of land near Arlington [WA] that hosts a major communications hub for the Pacific submarine fleet that a Russian broadcaster asserts would be among the top U.S. targets in event of nuclear war.” The Seattle Times, February 26, 2019.).

    I suspect that Navy pilots witnessing unidentifiable exotic aircraft (such as the mystery craft in the Northwest) might be more concerned about violations of our airspace by not-so-friendly foreign governments than by little bug-eyed aliens from the next galaxy over. So, they’re getting what likely will be a more comprehensive and standardized method for collecting data about their encounters with strange, high performance aircraft.

    It’s foolhardy, I believe, to think that the US has all of the most sophisticated aircraft flying in the world’s skies today (US military/defense industry BS – oops, I mean marketing and PR – to the contrary). That likely hasn’t been true since the 1950s.

    If we can develop craft that are invisible to radar, why wouldn’t others be able to do so as well? Maybe at this stage in the deployment of advanced military aircraft worldwide, visual data (reports of sightings by pilots) might provide more information than radar returns, no matter how sophisticated the radar system. They also could provide critical additional information on unidentified returns.

    So, why now? Is it really because of Tic Tac or TTSA? I kind of doubt that. Actually, I majorly doubt that. Escalating tensions between the US and Russia as well as aggressive actions by US and Russian military pilots indicate heightened military tensions, at least in the air. In this neo-Cold War environment, does anyone think the US is NOT conducting intelligence overflights of Russia using advanced exotic aircraft that can elude its most advanced radar? Does anyone think that Russia is NOT doing the same over the US?

    1. It's probable. There is also the Treaty on Open Skies that was passed in 1992. Basically, Russia and the US allow each other to fly over their most sensitive bases. Of course, during these flights representatives from each country are supposedly on board to ensure no funny business occurs. Sanctioned spying...imagine that.

  2. Great summary.
    This whole thing stinks from a mile.
    And a warning bell for me is Elizondo.
    Its like seeing Jamie Maussen or L.M.Howe involved in something and you know it will be garbage.
    Now the US Navy is coming clean..and the usual dupes for for this..again.

  3. Jack, as always, great work in pulling this topic, The Tic Tac Case, together in an insightful cogent article. Unfortunately the contamination of this well sourced corroborated case by DeLonge and Elizondo has begun. I'm waiting for a Tic Tac Slides reveal in Mexico City next.

    On a serious note, there seems to be only two possible explanations; The Tic Tacs were secret U.S. military A.I. drones; Or they were from a place, time or dimension other than our own. A well documented case in which craft defy Newtonian Law as well as the laws of physics should have had all of ufology's brilliant minds fully engaged. Alas, there are few brilliant minds in this field. Even Jacques Valle has been seemingly corrupted by Tom DeLonge.

    Well Jack, keep up the great work and fighting the good fight.

  4. I think Greg Valdez phrased it best when he succinctly wrote in his book Dulce Base, "[A former AFOSI officer] will talk to you all day about aliens, but bring up classified aircraft and he goes silent." Certainly implies what a "real" secret might be behind the phenomena...

  5. I wonder if those tic tac toes were holographic in nature, perhaps projected from whatever was causing the whitewater just under the surface that fravor said he witnessed. Could holograms be rigged to ping radar in an effort to test tech or influence an enemy into believing the craft we're actual nuts and bolts?

  6. After watching the 'nimitz' video and reading the account of the physical sighting the pilot(s) had i do not see at all how that automatically corresponds to the 'craft' being of non human origin. the craft itself on the video was seen by flir and radar. this could easily be some advanced but very human technology that manipulates those sensory technologies to display those artifacts to confuse and confound military forces. the physical sighting itself was of something on or emerging from the water. this could be the 'craft' or 'thing' responsible for interacting with the flir and radar to produce the artifacts seen in the flir video and by the radar.

    it's just a thought but it's also a thought or line of thinking that very few people consider.

    sorry for the grammar.