Search results

The 10km distance estimate sounds okay to me. Theoretically the human eye should be able to resolve an object of fair contrast at that distance. But I could also argue that atmospheric influence and lack of contrast can influence this angular resolution. On the other hand, we don't know the...

I noticed another post over at Reddit (link) about the case and a FOI response, and wanted to place it here too to keep things together. I am not sure if it has any added value though.

Yes, but there is clearly a trail/tail/path. This is not seen in the gimbal video. If there is one specific thing with rockets, it is the massive exhaust..

Just watched the whole video. It seems to me they were already in a "alien craft" mindset during the filming, listening to the discussions during filming. FWIW, I have been in Dartmoor national park (not extremely far from discussed event) a number of times (hiking), and one time a military...

Apart from the discussion about the headings and motions etc, what about the fact the object does not show any (heat) tail, which I would assume would be visible knowing the incredibly powerful rocket motor's exhaust-trail? I cannot imagine the heated gasses coming from the rocket instantly cool...

It just shows (to me at least), that reports by pilots have an uncertainty, but we don't know the magnitude.

I guess you are also familiar with these studies, where it is shown that people report completely different things, while being subjected to the same scene. That should indeed already mean that any witness report has a fair degree of uncertainty. The fact the witness claims "they know what they...

Yup, that is what people think was the shape. Looking like it does not make it actually shaped like a tic-tac.

Just highlighting it :) The discussions we have in this thread is not to prove the pilots saw something mundane. The discussion here is to try to find out what they saw.

Agreed. I am not familiar with all the protocols they have to follow, but I am sure it is sensible. I am just a little amused by the idea like, 12 high ranking people are discussing the acronym and cannot come up with something better. :)

I am always amused by all the acronyms these organisations come up with. It seems they have more people to figure out what to write, opposed to people actually doing something useful. The level of bureaucracy is insane I guess.

If it was Atlas, it would continue to ascent, end accelerate even further. Both features are lacking in the gimbal vid. Space is a lot higher up than just above the clouds. So I have no reason to consider Atlas.

Ok, I am not familiar with the whole process in your country.. It is significantly different from my country it's political system.

Ah, another office! Not that it matters. We had many many "offices" and groups and whatever, but do we actually know more than 70 years ago? I see it as a big waste of money.

Not that difficult.. There is also "magic tricks" line available, that is virtually impossible to see, even in real life, up close. Invisible thread I like these videos though. Even if it is all fake, I enjoy the spookiness!

And so OP already in the first post mentioned "drone with light hoax"! We come full circle.

I am not annoyed one bit, I actually enjoy hoaxes like this. I am a bit weird yes.

I am not disagreeing that what we see in the video (object "stopping", rotating while it is stopped moving and then speeding off again) might be possible with an RC plane (well I have not seen anything like that in the videos you supply either). But the idea of a quadcopter with a light bar...

Are you sure you are viewing the video as @jarlrmai is indicating? I see no way of a plane to make a 360+ degree rotation like that. I enjoy optical illusions as any other, but I don't see this being a plane of any kind.

It is a strip of light (1D) and it sometimes looks like a rectangular shape, because it's out-of-focus (a blurred line becomes a rectangle)