UFO's: Flying Saucers, Black Triangles, and Tic Tacs

[BluesDriver66]

U.S. shoots down unidentified cylindrical object over Canada​

WASHINGTON/OTTAWA, Feb 11 (Reuters) - A U.S. F-22 fighter jet shot down an unidentified cylindrical object over Canada on Saturday, the second such instance in as many days, as North America appeared on edge following a week-long Chinese spying balloon saga that drew the global spotlight.

U.S. fighter jets from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, monitored the object as it crossed over into Canadian airspace, where Canadian CF-18 and CP-140 aircraft joined the formation.

"A U.S. F-22 shot down the object in Canadian territory, using an AIM 9X missile following close co-ordination between U.S. and Canadian authorities," Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder said in a statement.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...a-ufo-new-object-seen-over-canada-2023-02-11/

3 suspicious objects have been downed across North America this week. Officials have no idea where 2 of the UAP came from and the pilots who shot them down can't agree on what they even look like.​

"Some of the F-22 Pilots who Tracked the Aircraft that was downed over Alaska yesterday said that it 'Interfered with their Sensors' and that 'They could see No Propulsion Systems on the Aircraft not knowing how it could possibly be staying in the Air,'" according to the public military and intelligence scanner, Open Source Intelligence Monitor.

https://www.businessinsider.com/obj...aska-canada-ufo-interfered-f22-sensors-2023-2

 

[butters]

'no propulsion systems' would suggest a balloon

 

[jaF0]

Nannoo, nannoo....

 

[BluesDriver66]

'no propulsion systems' would suggest a balloon

I'm pretty sure Air Force and Navy pilots knows what a balloon looks like. If it was a balloon they would have identified it as such.



"A U.S. F-22 fighter jet shot down an unidentified cylindrical object"


"Some of the F-22 Pilots who Tracked the Aircraft that was downed over Alaska yesterday said that it 'Interfered with their Sensors' and that 'They could see No Propulsion Systems on the Aircraft not knowing how it could possibly be staying in the Air,'" according to the public military and intelligence scanner, Open Source Intelligence Monitor.

 

[Rightguide]

U.S. shoots down unidentified cylindrical object over Canada​

WASHINGTON/OTTAWA, Feb 11 (Reuters) - A U.S. F-22 fighter jet shot down an unidentified cylindrical object over Canada on Saturday, the second such instance in as many days, as North America appeared on edge following a week-long Chinese spying balloon saga that drew the global spotlight.

U.S. fighter jets from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, monitored the object as it crossed over into Canadian airspace, where Canadian CF-18 and CP-140 aircraft joined the formation.

"A U.S. F-22 shot down the object in Canadian territory, using an AIM 9X missile following close co-ordination between U.S. and Canadian authorities," Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder said in a statement.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...a-ufo-new-object-seen-over-canada-2023-02-11/

3 suspicious objects have been downed across North America this week. Officials have no idea where 2 of the UAP came from and the pilots who shot them down can't agree on what they even look like.​

"Some of the F-22 Pilots who Tracked the Aircraft that was downed over Alaska yesterday said that it 'Interfered with their Sensors' and that 'They could see No Propulsion Systems on the Aircraft not knowing how it could possibly be staying in the Air,'" according to the public military and intelligence scanner, Open Source Intelligence Monitor.

https://www.businessinsider.com/obj...aska-canada-ufo-interfered-f22-sensors-2023-2

Here we go again a 150 million dollar aircraft and a $400,000.00 missile to shoot down a friggin' balloon. Why aren't they using their cannons against these "balloons" over these uninhabited places?

 

[KeithD]

Yeah, why aren't they bringing Rightguard's "expertise" into play?

 

[BluesDriver66]

Better than

Here we go again a 150 million dollar aircraft and a $400,000.00 missile to shoot down a friggin' balloon. Why aren't they using their cannons against these "balloons" over these uninhabited places?

Better than having them collect dust and rust out in the middle of the desert. If they didn't shoot it down I'm sure you'd be complaining about that.

U.S. military aircraft boneyard.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Here we go again a 150 million dollar aircraft and a $400,000.00 missile to shoot down a friggin' balloon. Why aren't they using their cannons against these "balloons" over these uninhabited places?

Biden is doing it, to expressly piss you off.......*chuckles*

 

[butters]

I'm pretty sure Air Force and Navy pilots knows what a balloon looks like. If it was a balloon they would have identified it as such.



"A U.S. F-22 fighter jet shot down an unidentified cylindrical object"


"Some of the F-22 Pilots who Tracked the Aircraft that was downed over Alaska yesterday said that it 'Interfered with their Sensors' and that 'They could see No Propulsion Systems on the Aircraft not knowing how it could possibly be staying in the Air,'" according to the public military and intelligence scanner, Open Source Intelligence Monitor.

possibly, but the language is open to interpretation: "unidentified" could actually be referring to the nature of the object, as in its purpose or its country of origin. Since they state 'cylindrical', that doesn't rule out a balloon-type, helium-filled shape. The fact it was floating with no visible propulsion systems would also point that way.

edit: just watched the vid: when asked if it was 'balloonish', they stated there was no sign of propulsion and they didn't have enough information to give a definitive answer yet, stay posted. So they're not saying it wasn't some kind of balloon-type object, were they?

Having said that, though, i'm quite open to possibilities that it is new tech unknown to the pilots (if not to any gov't's or wealthy individuals behind it). I've personally seen multiple anomalies extremely high in the night sky that behaved nothing like balloons, with the kind of speed, maneuverability and flight patterns unattributable to anything i'd imagined our planet could produce... yet. But that might be simply down to my own lack of knowledge.

 

[BluesDriver66]

possibly, but the language is open to interpretation: "unidentified" could actually be referring to the nature of the object, as in its purpose or its country of origin. Since they state 'cylindrical', that doesn't rule out a balloon-type, helium-filled shape. The fact it was floating with no visible propulsion systems would also point that way.

edit: just watched the vid: when asked if it was 'balloonish', they stated there was no sign of propulsion and they didn't have enough information to give a definitive answer yet, stay posted. So they're not saying it wasn't some kind of balloon-type object, were they?

Having said that, though, i'm quite open to possibilities that it is new tech unknown to the pilots (if not to any gov't's or wealthy individuals behind it). I've personally seen multiple anomalies extremely high in the night sky that behaved nothing like balloons, with the kind of speed, maneuverability and flight patterns unattributable to anything i'd imagined our planet could produce... yet. But that might be simply down to my own lack of knowledge.

I would find it hard to believe that multiple military pilots could not identify a balloon. It's their primary duty to recognize flying objects in their work environment. It would be like a Navy sailor not being able to recognize a boat.

 

[butters]

I would find it hard to believe that multiple military pilots could not identify a balloon. It's their primary duty to recognize flying objects in their work environment. It would be like a Navy sailor not being able to recognize a boat.

you'd think, but if it's not a typical balloon shape (cylindrical isn't) it could be any weird kind of thing and something they've simply never seen before. You know how many inflatables around the world must escape their tethers during windy conditions. The real point is they didn't confirm it was NOT an inflatable.

It'll be interesting to hear where the story goes, but i honestly don't expect to be too surprised by the findings... if we ever get "the truth", lol. The stuff of conspiracy theories and area 51s will go on and on.

 

[BluesDriver66]

Nannoo, nannoo....

Somes jokes are so old and lame you wonder why anyone would embarrass themselves by telling it again. This is almost as funny as when right wingers say, "Can I identify as a helicopter?" or "Can I marry my dog?" whenever the the subject of transgender comes up.

 

[BluesDriver66]

you'd think, but if it's not a typical balloon shape (cylindrical isn't) it could be any weird kind of thing and something they've simply never seen before. You know how many inflatables around the world must escape their tethers during windy conditions. The real point is they didn't confirm it was NOT an inflatable.

It'll be interesting to hear where the story goes, but i honestly don't expect to be too surprised by the findings... if we ever get "the truth", lol. The stuff of conspiracy theories and area 51s will go on and on.

Blimps and zeppelins are cylindrical. But if it was one that belonged to the U.S. or Canada they would known it wandered off before becoming a "UFO". I'd like to see pics of the crash retrieval and what their conclusions are.

 

[butters]

i think we're going to be seeing a whole rash of these type of sightings and taking downs... i think it was Keith mentioned it in another thread, lots of governments are sending spy balloons over other countries, but the information to the public was limited or non-existent. They probably can't collect data any better than satellites nowadays, but since this has hit public awareness don't be surprised to see a whole lot of tit for tat 'look at us protecting our respective country from aerial threats' sightings/shootings

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...pc=U531&cvid=12820d225d4b4d5c9486b14f4ae46414

 

[butters]

Blimps and zeppelins are cylindrical. But if it was one that belonged to the U.S. or Canada they would known it wandered off before becoming a "UFO". I'd like to see pics of the crash retrieval and what their conclusions are.

i was being too literal, i guess, assuming 'cylindrical' implied a hollow, open-ended outer surface, like a pipe

yeah, i'd like to see the pics too but who knows....

 

[schism666]

Yeah, why aren't they bringing Rightguard's "expertise" into play?

vetteman's vietnam-era military "intelligence" is on display for our amusement.

of course, this is the imbecile who thinks the founding fathers wrote AKs and glocks into 2a.

 

[Bray123]

Last week, 'Why isn't Biden strong enough to shoot down something that may be spying on us?'
This week, 'Why is Biden wasting the tax cash from blue states on shooting down something that may be spying on us?'

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Last week, 'Why isn't Biden strong enough to shoot down something that may be spying on us?'
This week, 'Why is Biden wasting the tax cash from blue states on shooting down something that may be spying on us?'

Rightguide posts in a nutshell....well done!

 

[schism666]

Last week, 'Why isn't Biden strong enough to shoot down something that may be spying on us?'
This week, 'Why is Biden wasting the tax cash from blue states on shooting down something that may be spying on us?'

don't forget about his inability to acknowledge trump's failure to do anything about the 3 chinese balloons he let spy in the u.s.

 

[Rightguide]

Better than

Better than having them collect dust and rust out in the middle of the desert. If they didn't shoot it down I'm sure you'd be complaining about that.

U.S. military aircraft boneyard.

I'm not questioning whether they should have been shot down but "how" they were shot down. The F-22 could have used its cannon instead of a $400,000 missile against an alleged balloon.

 

[butters]

i'd be very interested to see genuine statistics regarding just how many objects, 'floating' or otherwise, are considered a normal event but don't trigger any military response because they're not posing a problem to regular flight paths.

The one radar anomaly reported over Michigan, which wasn't sighted on investigation, and the others were at around 40,000 feet... half the height of the large chinese "weather balloon" and at a height to cause potential problems for aircraft.

in your initial post below, the reuters link actually states this:

Canadian Defence Minister Anita Anand declined to speculate about the origin of the object, which she said was cylindrical in shape. She stopped short of calling it a balloon but said it was smaller than the Chinese balloon shot down off South Carolina's coast a week ago, though similar in appearance.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...a-ufo-new-object-seen-over-canada-2023-02-11/

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I'm not questioning whether they should have been shot down but "how" they were shot down. The F-22 could have used its cannon instead of a $400,000 missile against an alleged balloon.

You didn't bitch about the missile when they shot down the other balloon over the Atlantic....you don't fool anyone here wrongway...*chuckles*

 

[BluesDriver66]

i'd be very interested to see genuine statistics regarding just how many objects, 'floating' or otherwise, are considered a normal event but don't trigger any military response because they're not posing a problem to regular flight paths.

The one radar anomaly reported over Michigan, which wasn't sighted on investigation, and the others were at around 40,000 feet... half the height of the large chinese "weather balloon" and at a height to cause potential problems for aircraft.

in your initial post below, the reuters link actually states this:


https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...a-ufo-new-object-seen-over-canada-2023-02-11/

I would assume any unknown object/vehicle violating U.S airspace would be investigated.

 

[schism666]

I'm not questioning whether they should have been shot down but "how" they were shot down. The F-22 could have used its cannon instead of a $400,000 missile against an alleged balloon.

i agree with you, vette. imagine all the money trump saved us by letting those 3 chinese balloons spy on us.

 

[butters]

defense intelligence officials say "the U.S. mitigated the amount of information that could have been picked up by the Chinese balloon".
michael mccaul, the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, however, says 'it did a lot of damage' and that "Going over those sites, in my judgment, would cause great damage.”

what are mccaul's credentials to support his judgement in this?

from his BIO: https://mccaul.house.gov/about/full-biography

A fourth generation Texan, Congressman McCaul earned a B.A. in Business and History from Trinity University and holds a J.D. from St. Mary's University School of Law. In 2009 Congressman McCaul was honored with St. Mary's Distinguished Graduate award. He is also a graduate of the Senior Executive Fellows Program of the School of Government, Harvard University

co-founder and co-chair of the Congressional High Tech Caucus and the Cybersecurity Caucus <<<(can't reach this page)

Chairman of the House committee for Homeland Security (113th, 115th &116th)

In the 112th Congress, McCaul's legislation, the Creating Hope Act, was signed by the president and became law in October 2012, creating incentives for pharmaceutical companies to create new treatments for pediatric cancer patients.


so he's done some real good, but how qualified is his thinking on this? (genuine question). Just being cited as heading up or being on certain committees isn't ANY guarantee... after all, just look at where the likes of mtg, boebert and gaetz are now