Tag: technology

The Case for Correlation: Langley Air Force Base and New Jersey Drone Sightings

In December 2023 and late 2024, mysterious drone sightings over Langley Air Force Base and New Jersey exhibited notable similarities, including evening appearances, silent operation, advanced maneuverability, and resistance to countermeasures. These factors suggest a possible coordinated testing of advanced technology, raising questions about their origin and potential surveillance purposes related to sensitive sites.

The widespread sightings of mysterious drones over Langley Air Force Base (AFB) in December 2023 and New Jersey in late 2024 exhibit strikingly similar characteristics that suggest a common origin or operational purpose. While definitive proof remains elusive, the patterns observed in these incidents warrant serious consideration from both scientific and intelligence communities. Below, we outline the evidence for this potential connection.

Key Commonalities

1. Time of Day

Both the Langley and New Jersey incidents predominantly occurred during evening hours, with drones often appearing around or shortly after 6 p.m. This consistency suggests an operational preference, possibly leveraging low-light conditions for surveillance or testing purposes. The timing aligns with the transitional period between daylight and darkness, ideal for exploiting visual ambiguities.

2. Anomalous Flight Characteristics

The drones observed over Langley and New Jersey displayed capabilities that exceed current commercially available technology:

  • Silent Operation: Witnesses in both cases described the drones as silent, despite their apparent size and proximity. This points to advanced propulsion systems or effective noise-dampening technology.
  • Erratic Maneuvers: Both incidents involved erratic, high-speed maneuvers that challenge conventional drone flight dynamics. Langley drones evaded countermeasures like Dronebusters, while New Jersey sightings involved rapid directional changes inconsistent with known UAV capabilities.
  • Hovering Ability: Drones in both locations demonstrated sustained hovering, sometimes for hours, indicating highly efficient energy systems and precise control.
FeatureLangley AFBNew Jersey
Time of DayEvening (around/after 6 PM)Evening (around/after 6 PM)
Silent OperationYesYes
Erratic ManeuversRapid speeds, flashing lights, evaded countermeasuresRapid directional changes, inconsistent with known UAVs
Hovering AbilityYesYes
Resistance to CountermeasuresYes (electronic countermeasures ineffective)Yes (radar and conventional methods ineffective)

3. Persistence Over Time

The Langley incident spanned 17 consecutive days of continuous activity, while New Jersey saw repeated nightly sightings across multiple counties over weeks. This persistence suggests a coordinated effort, not random hobbyist or one-off commercial activity. It also indicates a strategic intent, possibly involving long-term data collection or testing under varying conditions.

4. Resistance to Countermeasures

Langley AFB deployed anti-drone technologies, including electronic countermeasures, without success. Similarly, in New Jersey, federal authorities, including the FAA and FBI, were unable to detect or intercept the drones using radar or conventional identification methods. This resistance points to highly sophisticated designs, possibly employing stealth or electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM).

5. Proximity to Sensitive Sites

Both locations are strategically significant:

  • Langley AFB: Houses critical U.S. Air Force operations, including the Air Combat Command, and is a hub for advanced aerospace and defense technologies.
  • New Jersey: Sightings occurred near military installations such as Picatinny Arsenal and Naval Weapons Station Earle, as well as critical infrastructure like power grids and highways. This focus on sensitive locations suggests surveillance or reconnaissance objectives.
Mystery Drone Over New Jersey (BBC, 2024)

Possible Connections

1. Coordinated Testing of Advanced Technology

If these drones are domestically operated, the Langley and New Jersey incidents may represent testing phases of a highly classified program. The focus on military installations and extended operational periods aligns with scenarios involving advanced reconnaissance systems. The timing gap between the two events could reflect iterative development or deployment phases.

2. Non-Terrestrial or Non-Conventional Origin

The lack of identifiable operators and the advanced capabilities exhibited by the drones in both incidents raise questions about their origin. If these systems are not domestic, their global presence and technological superiority suggest an origin beyond conventional state or private actors.

3. Controlled Study of Public and Military Responses

Both incidents involved high-profile areas and elicited significant public and government reactions:

  • Langley AFB: Drones repeatedly breached restricted airspace, testing U.S. military response protocols.
  • New Jersey: Sightings near populated areas fueled public speculation and media coverage.

These patterns could indicate a deliberate study of societal and operational responses to unidentified aerial systems.

Conclusion

The drones sighted over Langley Air Force Base and New Jersey share a compelling set of characteristics: silent operation, advanced flight capabilities, persistence, resistance to countermeasures, and proximity to sensitive sites. These parallels, combined with the absence of attribution and the advanced nature of the technology, suggest a coordinated effort or shared origin.

Whether this represents classified domestic testing, a foreign actor, or something more unconventional, the evidence points to a unified narrative. Further investigation is essential to unravel the mystery, assess potential threats, and determine the broader implications of these incidents.

UAP over Ukraine

Scientists in the Ukraine recorded some interesting UAP observations that may say a lot about the phenomenon.

We’ve discussed these papers numerous times on our Fortean Winds UFO podcast.  So, we thought it best to give you a quick summary and links to where you can find the full papers. 

They are well worth reading. The astronomists in Kyiv did a fantastic job of capturing and sharing this data.  We  would especially like to draw your attention to the classification of the two objects (Phantoms and Cosmics) they observed.  

The observations were carried out by the Main Astronomical Observatory of NAS of Ukraine, and this was a rare independent scientific UAP study.  The Cosmics are very bright and much easier to detect than Phantoms which are dark and contrast with the sky. 

Both objects are moving at extremely high speeds (30k mph plus).  These challenges required the fine tuning of equipment and observations carried out at two different recording stations to verify the sightings.

 The Phantoms have no albedo*, which means they appear to not emit radiation, and rather absorb all of the radiation around it.  This could have several implications (absorbing energy, camouflage…both).  It’s also  good to note that speeds of 30k mph would tear apart any conventional aircraft.

Over 150 miles per a second and they have varying luminosity.  Our sensors aren’t calibrated to pick these up.  No one’s sensors are looking for these.  These objects could be doing what they want, when they want…just sayin.  Read the papers and decide for yourself.

*the proportion of the incident light or radiation that is reflected by a surface, typically that of a planet or moon.

A phantom UAP as recorded in the paper by Ukrainian scientists

SUMMARY

The paper titled “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena I: Observations of Events” by B.E. Zhilyaev, V.N. Petukhov, and V.M. Reshetnyk from the Main Astronomical Observatory NAS of Ukraine, discusses the study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). It details observations and analyses of these phenomena, categorizing them into two types, ‘Cosmics’ and ‘Phantoms’, and provides insights into their characteristics using specialized observational techniques.

AUTHORS

  • B.E. Zhilyaev
  • V.N. Petukhov
  • V.M. Reshetnyk

Date

Submitted on 23 Aug 2022 (v1)

AUTHOR ORGANIZATIONS

Main Astronomical Observatory, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine.

FINDINGS

  • Identified two types of UAP: ‘Cosmics’ (luminous objects) and ‘Phantoms’ (dark objects with variable contrast).
  • Observed high-speed movements of UAPs, ranging from 3 to 15 degrees per second, with some exhibiting brightness variability of 10 – 20 Hz.
  • Utilized colorimetry methods to estimate distances and characteristics of UAPs. For instance, Phantoms were estimated to be in the troposphere at distances up to 10 – 12 km, with sizes ranging from 3 to 12 meters and speeds up to 15 km/s.
  • Detected a variable object at an altitude of 1170 km, flashing at an average of 20 Hz.
  • Highlighted the challenge in detecting UAPs due to their high speeds and the need for specialized equipment and observation techniques.

STUDY DETAILS

  • The study was conducted using two meteor stations in Kyiv and Vinarivka village, Ukraine.
  • Observations were performed with color video cameras in the daytime sky.
  • Special observation techniques were developed to account for the high speeds and characteristics of UAPs.
  • The study included colorimetric analysis and two-site observations for comprehensive data collection.

STUDY QUALITY

  • Study Design: Observational study using specialized techniques for UAP detection.
  • Consistency of Results: Consistent observations of two types of UAPs, though further studies are needed for confirmation.
  • Data Analysis Methods: Employed colorimetry and high-speed video capture, appropriate for the study’s objectives.
  • Researcher’s Interpretation: Findings are presented with caution, acknowledging the limitations in UAP identification and the need for further research.

OVERALL SUMMARY

This paper presents a detailed analysis of UAP observations, categorizing them into two types with distinct characteristics. The study’s methods are well-suited for its objectives, though the lack of statistical testing and details on sample size limit the conclusiveness of its findings. Further research and corroborative studies would enhance the understanding and validity of these observations in the scientific community.

CONTROVERSY
Following questions and comments from the scientific community.  The scientists in Kyiv released a follow-up to their original paper to clarify some outstanding questions.

A cosmic UAP over Ukraine as recorded in the papers linked.

SUMMARY

“Unidentified Aerial Phenomena II: Evaluation of UAP Properties” by B.E. Zhilyaev, V.N. Petukhov, and V.M. Reshetnyk from the Main Astronomical Observatory NAS of Ukraine extends their previous work on UAPs. This paper delves deeper into the properties of UAPs, categorizing them into ‘Cosmics’ and ‘Phantoms’, and evaluates their characteristics based on advanced observational techniques and detailed analysis.

AUTHORS

  • B.E. Zhilyaev
  • V.N. Petukhov
  • V.M. Reshetnyk

Date

Submitted on 13 Nov 2022

AUTHOR ORGANIZATIONS

Main Astronomical Observatory, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine.

FINDINGS

  • Detailed analysis of two luminous objects at altitudes of 620 km and 1130 km, moving at speeds of 256 km/s and 78 km/s, respectively.
  • Colorimetric analysis indicates these objects are dark, supporting the hypothesis that they are ‘Phantoms’.
  • Phantoms are observed in the troposphere, with sizes estimated between 20 to 100 meters and speeds up to 30 km/s.
  • The study further investigates the color properties of these objects, suggesting extremely low albedo values, making them nearly black bodies.
  • Challenges in detecting these UAPs due to their rapid movement and the necessity for specialized observation methods.

STUDY DETAILS

  • Observations conducted at two meteor stations in Kyiv and Vinarivka village, Ukraine.
  • Utilized color video cameras for daytime sky observation.
  • Advanced techniques developed for detecting and evaluating UAP characteristics.

STUDY QUALITY

  • Sample Size: Continuation of extensive observations from the first study.
  • Study Design: Advanced observational, focusing on detailed analysis of UAP properties.
  • Consistency of Results: Consistent with the findings of the previous study, providing more depth.
  • Data Analysis Methods: In-depth colorimetric and velocity analysis.
  • Researcher’s Interpretation: Cautious interpretation of data, highlighting the need for specialized equipment and techniques in UAP study.

OVERALL SUMMARY

This follow-up paper provides a more detailed evaluation of UAP properties, focusing on their physical characteristics and movement patterns. The authors use sophisticated observational methods to analyze the UAPs, categorizing them as ‘Cosmics’ and ‘Phantoms’. While the study offers insightful data, it maintains a cautious approach to interpreting these phenomena, acknowledging the challenges in observing and understanding UAPs. Further research and collaboration in this field could provide more clarity and potentially corroborate these findings.

Fortean Observations:
The “Phantoms” may be less visible because they are employing cloaking technology.  If we assume the ‘Phantoms’ described in the paper are cloaking, and this accounts for their less visible, dark appearance, we can infer several potential aspects of their cloaking technology:

  • Advanced Light Absorption or Manipulation: The extremely low albedo values (which means they reflect very little light) suggest that these objects might be using a mechanism to absorb or otherwise manipulate light to render themselves nearly invisible. This could be akin to an advanced form of stealth technology that goes beyond merely avoiding detection by radar.
  • Material Properties: The objects may be composed of materials that inherently have low visibility, either by absorbing most of the electromagnetic spectrum visible to the human eye or by bending light around them. These materials could be engineered to have these properties or could be naturally occurring substances unknown to current human science.
  • Active Camouflage: The Phantoms might be using some form of active camouflage, which dynamically changes to match their background. This would require highly sophisticated sensors and processing capabilities to analyze the environment and adjust the object’s appearance in real-time.
  • Non-Reflective Coatings or Surfaces: The objects might be coated with a material that minimizes reflectivity. This type of technology is somewhat understood in current human science (e.g., Vantablack), but the Phantoms’ apparent effectiveness at cloaking suggests a much more advanced implementation.
  • Multi-Spectral Cloaking: If the objects are cloaked, they might be employing technology that works across multiple spectra, not just in the visible range. This could include infrared, ultraviolet, and possibly even radar cloaking.
  • Energy Considerations: The effectiveness of such a cloaking mechanism would likely require significant energy resources, indicating that these Phantoms might have access to advanced energy technologies.  The absorption of radiation (which aids in camouflage) might also provide additional power.
  • Dynamic Response to Observational Techniques: The cloaking mechanism might be responsive to the types of observational techniques used. For instance, if standard visual or infrared observations are employed, the technology might adapt to remain undetected under these specific conditions.