GO FAST video captured by a U.S. Navy

Filakius

Adept
https://nypost.com/2018/03/10/footage-of-mysterious-object-above-ocean-stuns-military-personnel/


GO FAST is the third of three official USG videos selected for release after official review by multiple government organizations. While To The Stars Academy of Arts & Science was the first to obtain a copy, it should be available to any member of the press or public via the Freedom of Information Act. This footage was captured by a U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet using the Raytheon ATFLIR Pod that was being operated by a highly trained aerial observer and weapons system operator whom the government has spent millions of dollars to train. Go Fast reveals a Navy encounter that occurred off the East Coast of the United States in 2015 and the object in view remains unidentified.

 

Filakius

Adept
2015 GO FAST FOOTAGE

GO FAST is an authentic DoD video that captures the high-speed flight of an unidentified aircraft at low altitude by a F/A-18 Super Hornet ATFLIR forward-looking infrared system. While TTSA was the first to obtain a copy, it should be available to any member of the press or public via the Freedom of Information Act.

BACKGROUND
This video, GO FAST, was captured by a U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet using the Raytheon AN/ASQ- 228 Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pod. This sensor has two imaging modes – mid-wave infrared and visual. It has high resolution and can locate and designate targets at distances exceeding 40 nm. The video imagery represents the image displayed in the cockpit to the pilot and Weapon Systems Operators (WSO). Major features of the display are shown in Figure 1.

The date, location, and other information has been removed by the originating authority as part of the release approval process.

GO FAST was selected for release, like GIMBAL and FLIR1, after review by multiple government organizations. The object in this video remains unidentified.

ANALYZING THE VIDEO
As the video starts, the sensor is in infrared “black-hot” mode – black elements in the display are warmer than the dark, or lighter color, areas. It is at zoom factor 1.0. The F/A-18 Super Hornet is at 25,000 feet altitude, 259 knots (~300 mph, Mach 0.61), and in level flight. The sensor is aimed 22 degrees below the horizon and 36 degrees to the left of the F/A-18’s direction. The ATFLIR tracking trap box is a square in the center of the screen. The ocean surface is clearly visible in the background.
Raytheon-web.jpg

Figure 1 - The ATFLIR display reveals significant information regarding flight conditions and characteristics of the imagery



The unidentified vehicle appears as a white oval shape moving at high speed from top right to lower left of the screen flying very low over the water. Initially, the sensor is unable to capture the object. The Weapon Systems Operator (WSO) steers the sensor ahead of the object to attempt another capture. On the third attempt, the sensor tracking capture is successful. The sensor is now in “autotrack” mode, where the sensor uses contrast and other parameters to lock-on to a target, automatically keeping it centered in the sensors viewing frame. This mode can track objects that possess speeds and accelerations within defined limits, which are set by expected target maneuver limits. Autotrack was developed because manual target track with an optical sensor is very difficult. The automatic modes in the ATFLIR system, specifically “autotrack”, reduces operator workload to facilitate target assessment and engagement. The operator expresses excitement at having successfully captured the object and the sensor is tracking it.

At the right of the screen, the rangefinder denotes that the object is at 4.4 nautical miles (5.1 statute miles) slant range. The F/A-18 begins a left turn to keep the object within the field of view of the ATFLIR sensor.

At 0:22, the WSO is asked, “Did you box a moving target?” and responds, “No, it’s in autotrack.” The question reveals surprise at the possibility of manually capturing the object. This is indicative of the difficulty in manually tracking the object with the ATFLIR sensor.

OBSERVATIONS
It is important to note:

There are no obvious wings or tails on the object. Even IR imagery of a cruise missile, would have visible wings at this range.
There is no exhaust plume from the object. An exhaust plume is clearly visible on conventional aircraft in the mid-wave infrared frequency used by the ATFLIR. Shown below is a mid-wave infrared image of a F-16 in flight. The sensor is in “white-hot” mode. Note that the length of the exhaust plume is nearly the length of the aircraft. The video from which this still was extracted makes it clear that the F-16 is subsonic, which means the throttle is at a low setting which creates relatively low exhaust temperatures and volume of exhaust gases. In a higher power setting, the exhaust plume would be much larger and brighter.
f16-inflightmidwaveIRimage-updated1.jpg

Figure 2 - Infrared imagery of known aircraft shows features and characteristics clearly different than the object in the GO FAST video
 

nivek

As Above So Below
I think if it had wings then they would certainly show in the video, it's seemed to me it may have been remotely controlled though...
 

1963

Noble
Hi guys, I've seen this thread on a number of sites over the last week or so, and have to say that my initial thoughts on the video was that 'the UFO' was in fact no more than a large seabird [albatross perhaps?] gliding over the ocean, but like a lot of observers I soon began to doubt that supposition on the grounds that "surely the excited-sounding pilot crew members would have been well familiar with such a mundane occurrence?"... and also the headline claim that the FLIR reading indicated that the 'object' was in fact travelling at the rate of about 300mph made me switch my reasoning to wonder if it might be some kind of pacey electrically powered military drone being tested?
And then when looking to find the provenance of the video's claim to being legit... I found that it was actually a segment of the previously discussed [and explained] 'Navy F-18 'Gimbal UFO' Video' that was presented by the group spearheaded by Tom Delonge ... Navy F-18 'Gimbal UFO' Video Explained?

.... And then , to cut a long story short... I found that technomoth Mick West et al over on 'Metabunk' had been doing their stuff [you know .. the type of in-depth analysis that gives us normal folk a headache.] ... and after fudging my way through all of that thread, it turns out that my initial feelings that the 'UFO' was an albatross [or something similar] ...might just be correct after all. :Tongue:
"GO FAST" Footage from Tom DeLonge's To The Stars Academy. Bird? Balloon?

... Of course though the situation as it stands does not 'yet' prove conclusively that this video should be binned [as far as ufological studies are concerned] ... but it's enough for me to move on anyway, and reminds me of the old maxim that "if it looks too good" [ie the source and apparent infallibility of the equipment and personnel] then the likelihood is that it "just bloody is too good to be..." lol .... reminds of getting a rather excited when I first came across the 'Mexican Air-force FLIR UFO Case' a few years ago... "This is it! ... the smoking gun! ... bang to rights!" .... and then it turned out to be 'Oil field flares' . :Sneaky: ... and i'm still waiting for that legit video to once and for all convert the filthy non-believers into more intelligent ETH proponents just like me! :laugh8:

Cheers.
 

Sheltie

Fratty and out of touch.
Clearly it has no tail or wings and is much too fast to be a gliding bird or balloon, except perhaps in the event of a cat 5 hurricane. :eek: I concur that the only earthly explanation left for serious consideration would be that it is a highly advanced drone craft, maybe one as yet unfamiliar to technological dawdlers such as myself. o_O
 

ImmortalLegend527

The Messenger Of All Gods old and new
2015 GO FAST FOOTAGE

GO FAST is an authentic DoD video that captures the high-speed flight of an unidentified aircraft at low altitude by a F/A-18 Super Hornet ATFLIR forward-looking infrared system. While TTSA was the first to obtain a copy, it should be available to any member of the press or public via the Freedom of Information Act.

BACKGROUND
This video, GO FAST, was captured by a U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet using the Raytheon AN/ASQ- 228 Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pod. This sensor has two imaging modes – mid-wave infrared and visual. It has high resolution and can locate and designate targets at distances exceeding 40 nm. The video imagery represents the image displayed in the cockpit to the pilot and Weapon Systems Operators (WSO). Major features of the display are shown in Figure 1.

The date, location, and other information has been removed by the originating authority as part of the release approval process.

GO FAST was selected for release, like GIMBAL and FLIR1, after review by multiple government organizations. The object in this video remains unidentified.

ANALYZING THE VIDEO
As the video starts, the sensor is in infrared “black-hot” mode – black elements in the display are warmer than the dark, or lighter color, areas. It is at zoom factor 1.0. The F/A-18 Super Hornet is at 25,000 feet altitude, 259 knots (~300 mph, Mach 0.61), and in level flight. The sensor is aimed 22 degrees below the horizon and 36 degrees to the left of the F/A-18’s direction. The ATFLIR tracking trap box is a square in the center of the screen. The ocean surface is clearly visible in the background.
Raytheon-web.jpg

Figure 1 - The ATFLIR display reveals significant information regarding flight conditions and characteristics of the imagery



The unidentified vehicle appears as a white oval shape moving at high speed from top right to lower left of the screen flying very low over the water. Initially, the sensor is unable to capture the object. The Weapon Systems Operator (WSO) steers the sensor ahead of the object to attempt another capture. On the third attempt, the sensor tracking capture is successful. The sensor is now in “autotrack” mode, where the sensor uses contrast and other parameters to lock-on to a target, automatically keeping it centered in the sensors viewing frame. This mode can track objects that possess speeds and accelerations within defined limits, which are set by expected target maneuver limits. Autotrack was developed because manual target track with an optical sensor is very difficult. The automatic modes in the ATFLIR system, specifically “autotrack”, reduces operator workload to facilitate target assessment and engagement. The operator expresses excitement at having successfully captured the object and the sensor is tracking it.

At the right of the screen, the rangefinder denotes that the object is at 4.4 nautical miles (5.1 statute miles) slant range. The F/A-18 begins a left turn to keep the object within the field of view of the ATFLIR sensor.

At 0:22, the WSO is asked, “Did you box a moving target?” and responds, “No, it’s in autotrack.” The question reveals surprise at the possibility of manually capturing the object. This is indicative of the difficulty in manually tracking the object with the ATFLIR sensor.

OBSERVATIONS
It is important to note:

There are no obvious wings or tails on the object. Even IR imagery of a cruise missile, would have visible wings at this range.
There is no exhaust plume from the object. An exhaust plume is clearly visible on conventional aircraft in the mid-wave infrared frequency used by the ATFLIR. Shown below is a mid-wave infrared image of a F-16 in flight. The sensor is in “white-hot” mode. Note that the length of the exhaust plume is nearly the length of the aircraft. The video from which this still was extracted makes it clear that the F-16 is subsonic, which means the throttle is at a low setting which creates relatively low exhaust temperatures and volume of exhaust gases. In a higher power setting, the exhaust plume would be much larger and brighter.
f16-inflightmidwaveIRimage-updated1.jpg

Figure 2 - Infrared imagery of known aircraft shows features and characteristics clearly different than the object in the GO FAST video
I didn't bother really reading this whole thread but if they didn't describe what they saw as a white light or white orb then this thread is really irrelavnt.Theres only one thing that moves that fast and thats one of the ultra dementional aliens..they have another word for it,some word august used i forgot but its one of them.I hope they didnt put this in the flying saucer category or something dumb like that.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
I didn't bother really reading this whole thread but if they didn't describe what they saw as a white light or white orb then this thread is really irrelavnt.Theres only one thing that moves that fast and thats one of the ultra dementional aliens..they have another word for it,some word august used i forgot but its one of them.I hope they didnt put this in the flying saucer category or something dumb like that.


It's a bird...
 

notdej

Honorable
if there were something unknown to the normal Joe Blow flying around in our sky, we would know it as fact by now
 

Area201

cold fusion
Hi guys, I've seen this thread on a number of sites over the last week or so, and have to say that my initial thoughts on the video was that 'the UFO' was in fact no more than a large seabird [albatross perhaps?] gliding over the ocean, but like a lot of observers I soon began to doubt that supposition on the grounds that "surely the excited-sounding pilot crew members would have been well familiar with such a mundane occurrence?"... and also the headline claim that the FLIR reading indicated that the 'object' was in fact travelling at the rate of about 300mph made me switch my reasoning to wonder if it might be some kind of pacey electrically powered military drone being tested?
And then when looking to find the provenance of the video's claim to being legit... I found that it was actually a segment of the previously discussed [and explained] 'Navy F-18 'Gimbal UFO' Video' that was presented by the group spearheaded by Tom Delonge ... Navy F-18 'Gimbal UFO' Video Explained?

.... And then , to cut a long story short... I found that technomoth Mick West et al over on 'Metabunk' had been doing their stuff [you know .. the type of in-depth analysis that gives us normal folk a headache.] ... and after fudging my way through all of that thread, it turns out that my initial feelings that the 'UFO' was an albatross [or something similar] ...might just be correct after all. :Tongue:
"GO FAST" Footage from Tom DeLonge's To The Stars Academy. Bird? Balloon? :laugh8:

Cheers.

Has anyone determined the size of this object and it's speed from the video footage? If this was a large seabird, we can determine that explanation as false by those metrics. I'm reading an article on TTS site and don't see these estimates. That's unfortunate as we would be able to joke..

Mike West discovery!

pteranodon-bird-flying-above-ocean--594380947-599759f3054ad90011f67d40.jpg


Can't take this guy seriously as an "honest researcher" sorry, clearly agenda to debunk is his niche, not "truth". Not fooled by the sophisticated technical charts either, but gets away with swaying some people.
 
Last edited:

notdej

Honorable
Has anyone determined the size of this object and it's speed from the video footage? If this was a large seabird, we can determine that explanation as false by those metrics. I'm reading an article on TTS site and don't see these estimates. That's unfortunate as we would be able to joke..

Mike West discovery!

pteranodon-bird-flying-above-ocean--594380947-599759f3054ad90011f67d40.jpg


Can't take this guy seriously as an "honest researcher" sorry, clearly agenda to debunk is his niche, not "truth". Not fooled by the sophisticated technical charts either, but gets away with swaying some people.
off track a bit =these large airborne reptiles are always depicted as flying, but they couldn't fly
 

CasualBystander

Celestial
Has anyone determined the size of this object and it's speed from the video footage? If this was a large seabird, we can determine that explanation as false by those metrics. I'm reading an article on TTS site and don't see these estimates. That's unfortunate as we would be able to joke..

Mike West discovery!

pteranodon-bird-flying-above-ocean--594380947-599759f3054ad90011f67d40.jpg


Can't take this guy seriously as an "honest researcher" sorry, clearly agenda to debunk is his niche, not "truth". Not fooled by the sophisticated technical charts either, but gets away with swaying some people.
From the links posted by 1963 metabunk thinks the object is 6.6 feet or less in its longest dimension and moving much slower than the aircraft.

IE pelican or seagull.

The pilots seemed to be excited that they were locked on an object, not that the object was exciting.
 

Area201

cold fusion
off track a bit =these large airborne reptiles are always depicted as flying, but they couldn't fly

I'm not familiar with these creatures, but according to this article "Early research suggested pterosaurs were cold-blooded animals that were more suited to gliding than active flying." Supports your claim.

Graphics of wing structure suggest they would have flown like modern day albatross. Generally everything points to them gliding not flying so good point. Unless you mean they didn't get off the ground at all?
 

notdej

Honorable
Pterosaurs did fly.
I studied dinosaurs/ Pterosaurs etc many years ago & the general consensus was they could not fly like a bird.
It's still in debate to this day whether or not the bone/ muscle structure etc was actually capable of powered flight= many still believe they could not.
 

CasualBystander

Celestial
I studied dinosaurs/ Pterosaurs etc many years ago & the general consensus was they could not fly like a bird.
It's still in debate to this day whether or not the bone/ muscle structure etc was actually capable of powered flight= many still believe they could not.

Of course they didn't fly like a bird.

Bats don't fly like birds either.

Pterosaurs flew like reptiles. They had high mass wings like bats (and arms in their wings like bats) so they flew more like bats.

Since there aren't any around we can only guess what that looked like.


Seems pretty clear they took off from a 4 point stance.

The claim the larger pterodactyls couldn't fly is pretty dubious. The 30% oxygen means these reptiles would perform like a bird (or bat) that someone dropped a supercharger on, with much greater strength and endurance.

Their flying style would be an odd cross between a swan (because of the long neck) and a bat.

Bats vs Birds.
 
Last edited:

notdej

Honorable
Of course they didn't fly like a bird.
yep.... i'm saying it's still not conclusive they actually 'flew' at all..you know what i mean:

they didn't propel themselves by flapping there wing and 'moving' via their own power.

who knows? it seems no one does for sure....
 

CasualBystander

Celestial
yep.... i'm saying it's still not conclusive they actually 'flew' at all..you know what i mean:

they didn't propel themselves by flapping there wing and 'moving' via their own power.

who knows? it seems no one does for sure....

Well...

Current thinking seems to be that they flew from birth until they got so big nothing could attack them.

All the "can't fly" people seem to ignore the oxygen levels which were 50% higher.

The modeling of the physiology will gradually improve and we will get better answers, but the estimates of mass go from 70 kg to north of 250 kg up to more than half a ton. That is an almost useless range of estimates.

A giraffe weighs almost 2000 kg for the same size.

The bones of Quetzalcoatlus alone weighed 40 kg.

Don't know for sure - but all that wing doesn't make sense if it didn't fly.

Flightless animals (like the ostrich) rapidly lose their wings.

So at some point in its life it did a lot of flying.
 
Top