Well, there's your problem. You're letting the wrong end do the thinking. And while it's intoxicated, no less.
Astrophotographer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,843
That is your opinion. However, if you read Dr. Maccabee's report as you stated (instead of just a few sentences), you will discover they are not so "lined up" and they do not rise. They descend just like flares and they are not exactly lined up as I have previously pointed out to you.
chuck4842
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 604
I wonder what the odds of your view equalling a lined up formation as this, with a camera handy, causing a long, large media attention, ...all in common, and the explainable happening again at least within ten years, on a fast technologically advancing society as we have.
Ever heard of stealth?
Astrophotographer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,843
I sure have. However, there is no evidence to suggest that stealth was involved. There are stories and reports that the 8pm did not register on radar but nobody ever proved it. As I have stated previously, there is enough information to suggest that a formation of aircraft did show up on radar but would only be displayed on ATC displays as a single contact because only one craft had its transponder active (which is all that is required for a military formation).
According to most UFOlogists, some of the most convincing UFO cases over the years were ones involving radar-visual contact. Are proponents now suggesting that UFOs only acquired stealth technology after humans did?
Out of all ufo radar contacts, one returns as stealth, and it is criticized. Remember: A civilization more advanced than earthlings could do whatever the heck it wants.
Astrophotographer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,843
You miss my point completely.
1. There is no radar data to examine. Therefore, claims of it not being seen by radar can not be proven. Since several observations indicated it was a formation of aircraft, one must wonder why it may not have been seen by the ATC radar. Examination of the details indicate the no radar contact may have had to do with the 10PM flare event. Even if it were the 8PM event, it appears that local ATCs could have missed the lights because of the nature of their radar and the single transponder being used by the formation.
2. In one instance, we indicate the UFOs are far advanced beyond our own but can be tracked by radar (hence the term radar-visual sighting). Now that it is known that modern aircraft can be designed to avoid radar, it is assumed UFOs can do the same thing. What does it say for all those "radar-visual" sightings that are considered "best evidence"? Maybe it states that the radar blips that are claimed to be from UFOs are more likely due to radar issues (false returns due to weather, operator error, equipment malfunction) than actually recording something that is exotic.
3. Because a UFO avoids radar, does this mean it is not present and the observations were simple misperceptions or does it mean the alien spaceship (AKA the UFO) has stealth abilities?
Unlike you, astro, debunkers would say this: Since ufo's dont show up on radar, they dont exist. If they do show up on radar, they must be due to malfunctions since we know aliens cant appear on radar!
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Whatever the heck it wants? They could cure cancer? Travel faster than light? Teleport? Make your posts consistent, well-thought, articulate, and persuasive?
Mak attack:
Makaya posted at 11:38pm:
And at 12:48am:
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Could they make a rock so big that they can't lift it?
technoextreme
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 3,785
What the fraking hell are you talking about? Go pick up this months Popular Mechanics. There you will discover that this isn't the first time some poor schmoe has mistaken flares for UFOs. In fact we've actually fired at them thinking they were something else. Learning is fun. You should do some.
chuck4842
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 604
Did you say we fired at flares assuming they were unidentified flying objects? WOW learning is FUN! Thanks I'll call POP MEX NOW!.....NOT
chuck4842
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 604
Astro, help me focus, this is getting out of hand and I came hear in hopes of rationalization, which I've got the most from you. Is their any way an ATC can properly direct AT of a "mile wide" formation (one of the most popular descriptions of delusional ufo enthusiasts witnesses), with only one of the jets transponders on.
Last edited:
chuck4842
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 604
sorry ya'll this is a test, thanks alot sweetheart. My wife is about to leave me and I need all the help I can get.
Last edited:
chuck4842
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 604
OH! I can cherry pick with the best of 'em now ! Thanks Patricio, YOU THE BOMB!
Astrophotographer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,843
You question is confusing. Do you mean "detect"? To be honest, I do not know. I am aware that the radar data that is recorded would include the returns of the other aircraft in the formation (see the Stephenville radar report). However, I am under the impression that the ATC does not want his scope cluttered with returns that are unnecessary and he probably has a filter that blanks out undesired returns on his display(otherwise he would get all sorts of returns from birds, balloons, etc). Air traffic around a major airport is rather hectic and one needs to make sure that one can focus on the actual aircraft in the pattern. A formation of aircraft above the airport's controlled airspace is not going to get much attention from the airport ATC and may not even appear on his scope because they are not under his control. It is the responsibility of the enroute ATC, who is elsewhere. One would need to talk to an actual ATC to get the actual information. I am only aware of what I read on the subject and discussions I had with an ATC some time ago. This information could be flawed but it seems to reflect what ATC Grava told Ortega in his article.
Last edited:
Most ATC radar displays are "secondary" radar - that is, it only displays transponder information.
The "primary" or skin-painted information may be recorded somewhere -- see any of a number of endless 9/11 threads -- but is not very useful to the working ATC.
I don't know if information for en route flights in Class A airspace would be displayed on the approach controller's screen or not. You might drop a PM to Cheap Shot, who is an ATC. He'd probably know, or could find out relatively easily.
ETA:
You might also drop PMs to Reheat or beachnut, both of whom were military pilots, and might have some idea of how spread out an en route formation of training aircraft (for the U.S. probably something like the T-37) might be.
The "primary" or skin-painted information may be recorded somewhere -- see any of a number of endless 9/11 threads -- but is not very useful to the working ATC.
I don't know if information for en route flights in Class A airspace would be displayed on the approach controller's screen or not. You might drop a PM to Cheap Shot, who is an ATC. He'd probably know, or could find out relatively easily.
ETA:
You might also drop PMs to Reheat or beachnut, both of whom were military pilots, and might have some idea of how spread out an en route formation of training aircraft (for the U.S. probably something like the T-37) might be.
Last edited: