Search results

I've added the positions of the 'pillars' that I think are electricity or telegraph poles. There seems to be a pretty good match here. Centre of the image on the left is 33.243315 43.617559 (edit: fixed typo)

The UI in the MX turret is configurable for each different camera in the system, ie IR might be green but EON could be yellow. As there is only one IR camera in the MX-20 then there are two options to explain this difference: 1) Its a different MX-20 turret on a different Aerostat 2) The...

Its the second part of the original video from the 0m52s mark, seen in post #1 of the other thread. https://www.metabunk.org/threads/jellyfish-ufo-from-tmzs-ufo-revolution.13304/post-308234

exactly. this is my top hypothesis at the moment for what this is. Remember that the 'gap' is where the supposed alien heads were seen. I think they were these boats on stilts seen elsewhere in the video.

That video is a bit misleading as it is 'tracking' the cross hairs position line-of-sight (boresight) where it intersects with the ground. This gives an unrealistic and erroneous path for the object, just as in the Aguadilla video. Mick's Sitrec shows the object at a position somewhere along...

I don't follow what you mean here. A shaky camera doesn't change how a faked UFO scene was faked. For me a shaky scene in a camera only suggests that the object was not up close (less than a m) but rather was 'far' (comparatively, say tens of m) away. I still think there is some supporting...

yeah (from memory) the IR camera has a telescopic and continuous zoom, which would mean it's an optomechanical change. I think the last step is a digital 2x zoom. I can't remember the full range of focal lengths.

the 3000 - 1000 change is the change in focal length in mm.

Hmm, I still think these images have depth and light diffusion that wouldn't be likely in an internal lens hoaxing methodology. Also when looking at the Kumburgaz video I tend to use this version, which is stabilized. Source...

and... The timelapse looks like it has something wrapped around the lower right appendage (?). Could it be tinsel? I found this photo whilst searching Google for "Iraq Balloons New Year". Also, balloons seem to be a really big thing in Iraq when celebrating anything...

Hey @PaulofNZ - welcome to Metabunk. First off nice debunking-live video! - I'm not going to claim that I have watched all 2h53m50s of it ;) but I've watched your other videos. For a while I too thought that the image might be an internal reflection of some of the lens hardware. I think it was...

Whether used to carry explosives, or as decoys, party balloons have been used in warzones recently. The problem that defending military have when they see a balloon drifting across their camp is trying to determine if it is a threat...

29°09'41.4"N 49°26'56.7"E = 29.161500, 49.449083 Seems to be the same camera type as on this MQ-1B www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSctEE3krMU According to wikipedia it used the AN/AAS-52 Multi-Spectral Targeting System. Data sheet here...

MX-20 Data Sheet https://www.militarysystems-tech.com/sites/militarysystems/files/supplier_docs//PDS-MX-20-20D-January-2017.pdf

Another good site for regular Satellite photos is the Sentinel Hub EO browser (https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/). The imagery is of lower resolution but is updated roughly every 4 weeks with an accurate date of the imagery. This image from 12 Jan 2017 shows the line of tents. (link)...

It means the system calculates the height of the ground where the operator is pointing it - ie at the crosshairs. Different MX systems use different methods for this, a) simple trigonometry or b) looking up a world digital terrain elevation data (DTED). I suspect that US systems use the DTED...

Ground height at the crosshairs.

Its a 3.5km slant range, GoogleEarth gives a range to those buildings as 3.436km Simple trig then puts the aerostat at 0.666 km altitude = 2185. ft.

This is the launch vehicle / tether point for the aerostat - seems like a pretty permanent location - so that gives us its Lat Long. Whats its altitude?

You're right. It was an aerostat ahhhhhh! you beat me to it by about 30 seconds!!!!! I did exactly the same as you- drew the 3.5km radius circle in Google Earth from the aerostat and BINGO!