So far the logical explanation was that the slow,low flying V-formation, wasn't picked up by radar and seen by alot of upclose eyewitnesses as one craft, except for Mitch Stanley who looked at it thru his telescope and saw 5 planes in formation.
Not exactly.
1) There is no concrete evidence that it was not picked up on radar. If the planes were out of controlled airspace (which the altitude implies), the ATCs would not be looking for them. It would be the duties of the enroute controller in NM (as noted in the Readers digest article). Additionally, if it were a formation of aircraft, only one transponder would be operating giving the impression of possibly one aircraft.
2) The evidence from observations by witnesses indicate it was NOT low flying but very high.
3) The actual ground speed indicates it was not slow but moving quickly. It flew over most of the state in just over an hour. Pretty quick for "slow moving".
4) Many witnesses reported seeing individual lights and not one distinct craft. Only those witnesses who appeared on TV seemed to give the impression that there was large object behind the lights. The only video of the lights show a shifting formation of lights, which indicates there was nothing behind the lights and they were independent of each other.
5) Mitch Stanley is not the only person. Rich Contry reported seeing aircraft wtih lights on in formation from Northern Arizona flying south. The Pilot from the readers digest article states the enroute controller informed him the lights were a formation of Tutor aircraft at 19,000 feet.
Plenty of evidence from the data to indicate Mitch was correct in his observations and those reporting a massive object behind the lights were in error.
No military had any scheduled exercises they were aware of, until months after the event because the Military doesn't concern itself with unidentified low flying formations over major american cities.
It did not have to be an exercise. All it had to be was a flight of aircraft. There were numerous exercises that night. There was a helicopter training exercise south of Phoenix. One of the pilots saw the lights and determined it to be a formation of aircraft flying in a wedge formation. Was it the same flight? Possibly or he could have seen the A-10s returning from the range because he also stated he saw flare drops.
As far as concern with formations over major american cities is concerned. That is a concern for the FAA since it poses a threat to civilian aircraft. There was no military threat. Apparently, the formation had complete permission to fly over Phoenix that night. It is not unusual for military jet formations to fly over cities.
The second flare incident which also appeared to many eyewitnesses and in the video as a formation or even one craft, was actually the result of multiple A-10 warthogs dropping flares, not the regular flares, but some kind of special flares that just added to the illusion. The Airforce still doesn't have the time nor concern to produce the name of a single one of these pilots. Just spokesmen.
They were regular flares. They were typical illumination flares that are held up by parachutes. Somebody posted a video of flares used to avoid heat seeking missiles. They were not these kind of flares.
As far as the AF not having time to produce a name of one of the pilots, why was Tanaka allowed to appear on the Discovery channel show (which was shot in 1997)? Why has Ed Jones come forward and stated he was one of the pilots? If it were a big secret, neither would be allowed to appear. A simple FOIA request can find the names of the pilots if the records still exist. BTW, Capt Drew Sullins was the PAO and it is his job to talk to the media. Sometimes you get the commanding officer or executive officer if it is important. However, usually the role is given to the PAO. That is how the military operates when it comes to media issues. Usually, the pilots and enlisted personnel do not speak unless it is requested or desired. For some reason, you are creating some sort of conspiracy out of it.
Did I sum it up on one page. Go ahead and tell me what I missed. I'm trying to see both sides of this story and hope you can see why some of this just isn't "logical explanation"
You have ignored the data and the witness reports. You also have ignored the analysis of the videos done by numerous individuals. To me that indicates you are not interested in looking at everything but your own interpretation of what is important. IMO it is a very logical explanation. It is based on facts and sound reasoning. To suggest there was a massive object flying low and slow over Phoenix that night ignores several issues:
1) How could an object that was so low be seen over a wide area at the same time? Only something at high altitude could do that.
2) If it were traveling at "blimp speed", it would take many hours to traverse the state. Instead it took a little over an hour.
3) If it were a massive dark object, why did it disappear when it passed in front of the moon? Why does the video show a shifting formation of lights? Why do so many witnesses state the lights shifted as they observed them or they saw no dark object between the lights?
That is just the V-shaped formation. We beat to death the issue about the 10PM videos. Feel free to believe all you desire but the facts and data indicates that Stanley is correct in his observations and the 10PM videos were of flares. Demonstrate with facts and data that this is not the case.
REALLY? Dang, Nobody taped it? Can I have a reference? I believe you, just want to verify....another one that baffles me is the AF states these warthogs carry 4 flares each,am I right? That would mean the Tom King "flare"video which shows 7 or 8 flares is the result of at least 2 warthogs dropping flares so precisely.Also the first AF media response to the V-formation on Fox news was flares too.
