Thursday, 10 October 2019

UFO TV News Report:
“THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE? -
SOMETHING OUT THERE? -
PENTAGON SET UP PROGRAM
TO INVESTIGATE UFO SIGHTINGS”


20 September 2019
(Fox News, New York City, New York)

Source: eventimus (YouTube channel)

Theoretical physicist and futurist Dr. Michio Kaku comments about U.S. Navy UFO incidents on Tucker Carlson Tonight.

“The evidence is overwhelming,” Kaku says.


Related posts:

realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=Michio+Kaku















(Fox News/youtube.com image)

USO Article:
“Alarming Encounter with Unidentified
Submerged Object (USO) Revealed By
Navy Pilot Who Engaged UFO”


By Frank Warren, 10 October 2019
(The UFO Chronicles, U.S.A.)

Warren writes about David Fravor’s recounting of two USO incidents (involving a U.S. Navy helicopter pilot flying a CH-53) that occurred months apart off the coast of Puerto Rico.

Fravor, who was involved in the 14 November 2004 USS Nimitz UFO incident, talked about the incidents on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast.

“This wasn’t an isolated event, a similar incident happened a few months later,” Warren reports.


Wikipedia article: “Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion”:


Related posts:


realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=David+Fravor










CH-53D releasing flares near Naval Air Station Patuxent River, 1982. (text by Wikipedia) (wikimedia.org) (wikimedia.org photo)

UFO News Article (Blog):
“Pilot Who Chased UFO Reveals
A Lot More Of The Story”


6 October 2019
(Hot Air (conservative political blog) (owned by the Salem Media Group, Inc., Camarillo, California))

The article reports on Joe Rogan’s podcast interview (The Joe Rogan Experience) of David Fravor, who was involved in the 14 November 2004 USS Nimitz UFO incident, and Jeremy Corbell.

The November 2004 USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group 11 UFO incidents occurred about a hundred miles south west of San Diego, California. The main UFO incident occurred on 14 November 2004 (Fravor and Slaight).

David Fravor, who chased the UFO (resembled a white Tic Tac) was flying his F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter.

It was not Fravor who filmed the Tic Tac UFO. The UFO was filmed a while after Fravor’s incident.

At the time of the UFO incident, Fravor was the commanding officer of the VFA-41 Black Aces, a U.S. Navy strike fighter squadron.

To my knowledge, eight U.S. Navy personnel, Sean Cahill, Kevin M. Day, David Fravor, Patrick J. Hughes, Omar Lara, Jim Slaight, Jason Turner and Gary Voorhis, have talked about the UFO incidents on the Internet.









realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=New+2019+U.S.+Navy+UFO+Guidelines













Commander David Fravor, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
(theufochronicles.com photo)

Tuesday, 8 October 2019

UFO Podcast Interview:
“Joe Rogan Experience #1361 -
Cmdr. David Fravor & Jeremy Corbell”


5 October 2019
(The Joe Rogan Experience, Los Angeles, California)

Source: PowerfulJRE (YouTube channel)

David Fravor talks about the 14 November 2004 USS Nimitz UFO incident.

The November 2004 USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group 11 UFO incidents occurred about a hundred miles south west of San Diego, California. The main UFO incident occurred on 14 November 2004 (Fravor and Slaight).

To my knowledge, eight U.S. Navy personnel, Sean Cahill, Kevin M. Day, David Fravor, Patrick J. Hughes, Omar Lara, Jim Slaight, Jason Turner and Gary Voorhis, have talked about the UFO incidents on the Internet.

Sean Cahill was the Chief Master-at-Arms aboard the USS Princeton.

Kevin M. Day was a radar operator aboard the USS Princeton.

David Fravor, who chased the UFO (resembled a white Tic Tac), was flying his F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter.

It was not Fravor who filmed the Tic Tac UFO. The UFO was filmed a while after Fravor’s incident.

At the time of the UFO incident, Fravor was the commanding officer of the VFA-41 Black Aces, a U.S. Navy strike fighter squadron.

P. J. Hughes was an aviation technician aboard the USS Nimitz.

Omar Lara was a Flight Decker in Air Ops aboard the USS Nimitz.

Lieutenant Commander (later Commander) Jim Slaight was flying the second F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter during the UFO encounter.

Jason Turner was a Petty Officer Third Class (in Supply) aboard the USS Princeton.

Gary Voorhis was a Fire Controlman Petty Officer Third Class aboard the USS Princeton.

A large number of UFOs were recorded on radar on and off for several days during the November 2004 U.S. Navy exercise, according to USS Princeton radar operator Kevin M. Day.

Gary Voorhis experienced that the unknown objects “zoomed around at ridiculous speeds and angles and trajectories,” and that “it (the UFOs) was moving faster than our radar could register.”


Related posts:







realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=New+2019+U.S.+Navy+UFO+Guidelines













Commander David Fravor, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
(theufochronicles.com photo)

Freeze-frame of the Tic Tac UFO (filmed from a U.S. Navy
F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter on 14 November 2004)
(U.S. Department of Defense/disclose.tv/gstatic.com image)








F/A-18F Super Hornet (wikimedia.org)
(wikimedia.org photo)

UFO News Article:
“Navy tracks UFO at 3,000mph”


1 May 1982
(News World, New York City, New York)

Sources: U.F.O. Newsclipping Service, Plumerville, Arkansas and AFU.se

The whole article:
“Are UFO’s real? Certainly, most of those people who see them believe they are real. Even more convincing, UFOs are sometimes picked up on radar. Following is a case that occurred at a time when no nation on earth had any rocket or aircraft capable of doing what this object did. In fact, we still don’t have such capabilities. 

The USS Dyess steamed slowly through the night off the Atlantic Coast, keeping track of all air traffic within hundreds of miles to prevent any sneak attack by the Soviet Union.

‘We were afraid the Russians were going to bomb Washington at that time because we had gone into Korea,’ said Dr. Robert Wood, who was then a Navy lieutenant commander.

The Dyess, a radar picket destroyer, was about 125 miles southeast of Cape May, N.J., and Lt. Cmdr. Wood, the ship’s operations officer and an air controller, was manning one of the radars at the time.

‘We were plotting all the aircraft going north and south along the coast and inland as far as the Appalachians and any objects that were comng [sicin from the northeast, the east and the southeast.

‘Every aircraft had to have a certain set of parameters — distances, heights and whatnot — on their point of arrival over us.

‘On this particular night — it was about 11:30 one night in March 1951, I forget the exact date — this object came in from the east and got within about 30 miles of us when it just stopped dead.

‘It had been moving rather slowly, about 85 to 90 knots. We didn’t have the altitude-determining radar on at the time and we had to get one of the operators to come up. When he did, we found the object was somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,000 to 4,000 feet altitude.

‘This object gave us a blip on the radar screen about the size of a large aircraft, like a DC8 or a DC9. I phoned the bridge and they informed the captain, who ordered the ship to head out in the direction of the object.

We’d been loafing along steaming in circles, and didn’t have all our boiler power on. We did about as much as we could, about 22 knots, out in that direction.

‘We got to within about 15 miles of that object when it suddenly took off at a very high rate of speed. It was going so rapidly that as the radar turned we could see the blip just jumping across the screen.

‘We estimated it was going 5,000 kilometers an hour or roughly 3,000 miles an hour.

‘Then, when it got up within 35 or 40 miles south of Nantuckett, it suddenly just took off and went straight up!

‘I called the bridge and said, ‘We’re losing contact, the object is fading.’ And the operator on the altitude-determining radar in the other end of the room said, ‘NO! I’ve still got it! It’s 100 miles high and it’s still going straight up!’

The object then faded from the second radar.

Altogether, they had tracked the object about 35 to 40 minutes, said Dr. Wood, who is now a professor of astronomy and director of the observatory at Brevard Community College in Cocoa, Fla.

‘We reported it to the Pentagon but we never heard anything more about it.’

‘He couldn’t explain what it was he tracked that night. He has long accepted the idea that it was an unidentified flying object, whatever that may be.’

‘That was in 1951,’ he said. ‘I knew radar and I knew what it could do. We didn’t have any aircraft that could go that fast, especially after it came and hovered. And then when it got up near Nantuckett it just went straight up and disappeared. 

‘There must be something there. There’s more than just smoke. There must be fire.’ ”

The article is written by the late journalist Bob Pratt, who for years investigated the UFO phenomenon.


Wikipedia article: “USS Dyess (DD-880)”:


Quote from the Wikipedia article:
USS Dyess (DD/DDR-880), a Gearing-class destroyer, was a ship of the United States Navy named for Aquilla James Dyess (1909–1944).”







The U.S. Navy destroyer USS Dyess (DDR-880) underway on 
15 January 1962, while serving with the U.S. Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean Sea. (text by Wikipedia) (wikimedia.org) (wikimedia.org photo)


















Satellite photo of Cape May, New Jersey (tageo.com)
(tageo.com photo)

UFO Video Interview:
“Tic Tac Witness Jason Turner Interview”


Published: 26 September 2019
(The Nimitz Encounters (YouTube channel))

Video text:
“Nov 2004, in the Pacific Ocean west of Baja CA. The USS Nimitz aircraft carrier and the guided missile cruiser USS Princeton were completing TTSA and COMPTUEX training. These are combined unit training ops designed to bring the ships up to deployment readiness. US Navy vet Jason Turner was on USS Princeton. In this very unusual UFO case, Jason has some important insight as a second hand witness from the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group. This is the full interview from my research and film I wanted to share with you. I used a small portion in the film, it is an important historical record of this event.”

The YouTube channel is run by U.S. filmmaker David C. Beaty.

The November 2004 USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group 11 UFO incidents occurred about a hundred miles south west of San Diego, California. The main UFO incident occurred on 14 November 2004 (Fravor and Slaight).

To my knowledge, eight U.S. Navy personnel, Sean Cahill, Kevin M. Day, David Fravor, Patrick J. Hughes, Omar Lara, Jim Slaight, Jason Turner and Gary Voorhis, have talked about the UFO incidents on the Internet.

Sean Cahill was the Chief Master-at-Arms aboard the USS Princeton.

Kevin M. Day was a radar operator aboard the USS Princeton.

David Fravor, who chased the UFO (resembled a white Tic Tac), was flying his F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter.

At the time of the UFO incident, Fravor was the commanding officer of the VFA-41 Black Aces, a U.S. Navy strike fighter squadron.

P. J. Hughes was an aviation technician aboard the USS Nimitz.

Omar Lara was a Flight Decker in Air Ops aboard the USS Nimitz.

Lieutenant Commander (later Commander) Jim Slaight was flying the second F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter during the UFO encounter.

Jason Turner was a Petty Officer Third Class (in Supply) aboard the USS Princeton.

Gary Voorhis was a Fire Controlman Petty Officer Third Class aboard the USS Princeton.

A large number of UFOs were recorded on radar on and off for several days during the November 2004 U.S. Navy exercise, according to USS Princeton radar operator Kevin M. Day.

Gary Voorhis experienced that the unknown objects “zoomed around at ridiculous speeds and angles and trajectories,” and that “it (the UFOs) was moving faster than our radar could register.”


Related posts:







realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=New+2019+U.S.+Navy+UFO+Guidelines















(The Nimitz Encounters/youtube.com image)

Sunday, 6 October 2019

UFO Video Interview:
“Tic Tac Witness Patrick Hughes”


Published: 21 September 2019
(The Nimitz Encounters (YouTube channel))

Video text:
“In Nov 2004, one of the biggest UFO mysteries in history unfolded over the Pacific Ocean west of Baja CA. The Nimitz Strike Group, which consisted of the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and numerous other warships was conducting training 100 nm west of San Diego, CA. US Navy vet Patrick Hughes was there on USS Nimitz. In this very unusual UFO case, Patrick has some important insight as a participant from more than 4,000 men and woman from the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group. His E2 Hawkeye from the Wallbangers had landed and soon thereafter US Gov officials, both navy and USAF came to his remote shop to confiscate all recordings from the Tic Tac Flight of his E2 Airplane. This is the full interview from my research and film I wanted to share with you. I only used a small portion in the film, it is an important historical record of this event in the SOCAL OPAREA.”

The YouTube channel is run by U.S. filmmaker David C. Beaty.

The November 2004 USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group 11 UFO incidents occurred about a hundred miles south west of San Diego, California. The main UFO incident occurred on 14 November 2004 (Fravor and Slaight).

To my knowledge, eight U.S. Navy personnel, Sean Cahill, Kevin M. Day, David Fravor, Patrick J. Hughes, Omar Lara, Jim Slaight, Jason Turner and Gary Voorhis, have talked about the UFO incidents on the Internet.

Sean Cahill was the Chief Master-at-Arms aboard the USS Princeton.

Kevin M. Day was a radar operator aboard the USS Princeton.

David Fravor, who chased the UFO (resembled a white Tic Tac), was flying his F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter.

At the time of the UFO incident, Fravor was the commanding officer of the VFA-41 Black Aces, a U.S. Navy strike fighter squadron.

Patrick J. Hughes was an aviation technician aboard the USS Nimitz.

Omar Lara was a Flight Decker in Air Ops aboard the USS Nimitz.

Lieutenant Commander (later Commander) Jim Slaight was flying the second F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter during the UFO encounter.

Jason Turner was a Petty Officer Third Class (in Supply) aboard the USS Princeton.

Gary Voorhis was a Fire Controlman Petty Officer Third Class aboard the USS Princeton.

A large number of UFOs were recorded on radar on and off for several days during the November 2004 U.S. Navy exercise, according to USS Princeton radar operator Kevin M. Day.

Gary Voorhis experienced that the unknown objects “zoomed around at ridiculous speeds and angles and trajectories,” and that “it (the UFOs) was moving faster than our radar could register.”


Related posts:







realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=New+2019+U.S.+Navy+UFO+Guidelines















Patrick J. Hughes
(The Nimitz Encounters/youtube.com image)

UFO Video Interview:
“Tic Tac Witness Gary Voorhis”


Published: 20 September 2019
(The Nimitz Encounters (YouTube channel))

Video text:
“In Nov 2004, one of the biggest UFO mysteries in history unfolded over the Pacific Ocean west of Baja CA. The Nimitz Strike Group which consisted of the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Nimitz as well as a compliment of warships, including the guided missile cruiser USS Princeton. US Navy vet Gary Voorhis was there. In this very unusual UFO case, Gary has some important insight as a participant from more than 4,000 men and woman from the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group. This is the full interview from my research and film I wanted to share with you. I used a small portion, it is an important historical record of this event in the SOCAL OPAREA.”

The YouTube channel is run by U.S. filmmaker David C. Beaty.

The November 2004 USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group 11 UFO incidents occurred about a hundred miles south west of San DiegoCalifornia. The main UFO incident occurred on 14 November 2004 (Fravor and Slaight).

To my knowledge, eight U.S. Navy personnel, Sean Cahill, Kevin M. Day, David Fravor, Patrick J. Hughes, Omar Lara, Jim Slaight, Jason Turner and Gary Voorhis, have talked about the UFO incidents on the Internet.

Sean Cahill was the Chief Master-at-Arms aboard the USS Princeton.

Kevin M. Day was a radar operator aboard the USS Princeton.

David Fravor, who chased the UFO (resembled a white Tic Tac), was flying his F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter.

At the time of the UFO incident, Fravor was the commanding officer of the VFA-41 Black Aces, a U.S. Navy strike fighter squadron.

Patrick J. Hughes was an aviation technician aboard the USS Nimitz.

Omar Lara was a Flight Decker in Air Ops aboard the USS Nimitz.

Lieutenant Commander (later Commander) Jim Slaight was flying the second F/A-18F Super Hornet jet fighter during the UFO encounter.

Jason Turner was a Petty Officer Third Class (in Supply) aboard the USS Princeton.

Gary Voorhis was a Fire Controlman Petty Officer Third Class aboard the USS Princeton.

A large number of UFOs were recorded on radar on and off for several days during the November 2004 U.S. Navy exercise, according to USS Princeton radar operator Kevin M. Day.

Gary Voorhis experienced that the unknown objects “zoomed around at ridiculous speeds and angles and trajectories,” and that “it (the UFOs) was moving faster than our radar could register.”


Related posts:







realtvufos.blogspot.com/search?q=New+2019+U.S.+Navy+UFO+Guidelines















(The Nimitz Encounters/youtube.com image)

U.S. Government UFO Document:
“Subj: Interpretation of Movies of
Unidentified Objects; progress report on”


4 May 1953
(U.S. Naval Photographic Interpretation Center,
U.S. Naval Receiving Station, Washington, D.C.)

Source: NICAP.org

The document pertains to the 2 July 1952 Tremonton, Utah,
and 15 August 1950 Great FallsMontana, UFO films (filmed by
Warrant Officer and Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse,
U.S. Navy, and Nicholas Mariana, a civilian, respectively).

Quote from the document (not written in U.S. Department of Defense document format) (Page 15):
    “1. … It is the majority opinion of the group conducting this analysis that these images are light sources. This will explain the non-blinking and variations in luminosity – but not the velocity or acceleration factors. In either case, light source or reflective surface, it appears as if the objects are of a nature which we are not able to identify in terms of natural phenomena or commonly known man-made objects.

     2. There is no indication of what kind of objects could have caused the images except that they must be of a construction, design, and material not commonly known. This is indicated by the computed acceleration rate and elocity [velocity] (answer 5). For the same reasons, birds, aircraft and balloons are ruled out.

     3. An analysis of the charts relative to movement indicate that there were group and individual movement. Within a group it appears as if the individual objects were moving counter-clock-wise along an elliptical or similar track. Thus when two objects crossed the camera line of sight they will appear to fuse into one. As they continued along their paths it will appear as if one object became two. This occurred at regular intervals at approximately every 25th frame as plotted in charts 5a and 5b.

     4. All objects appear to have the same characteristics in regards to shape, color, size and relative motion.

     5. The shape of the objects appears to be oblate or disk shaped, color; blue-white, and maximum and minimum size; 98 and 16 feet. The size is based on the assumption that the objects are five miles from the observer.

     6. Fade in and fade out of the objects were analyzed as in 3 above. In this case the group movement was such that the distance between the objects and camera was increased so that the objects could not be recorded on the film thereby causing the apparent fade-out. Fade-in as attributed to a shortening of the distance from the fade-out area to the camera station.

     7. Plots of the groups indicate that the objects move counter-clock-wise relative to the axis of flight path. However, nothing has been detected which indicates motion of the individual objects about their own axis although this motion appears to be likely.

     8. In determining the velocity of the objects three assumptions were made:

           a. The camera was held steady during Part III of the film.

           b. The objects were moving perpendicular to the optical axis, and

           c. The objects were five miles from the camera.

It is obvious that (b) is a fallacy; however, this assumption will give the minimum velocity and the actual velocity is greater than computed. The assumption that the objects are five miles from the camera is an arbitrary one. However, based on the emulsion speed and focal length, and object 50 feet in diameter and five miles from camera will be recorded on the film with sufficient resolution to identify major details of the object. It is felt that if these objects were closer than five miles at the time of recording, details would appear on the film.

Velocity is computed to be 3780 mph for a shift of 1 mm per frame if the object is five miles from the observer. From 55 measurements taken from Part III of the Utah film, the maximum and minimum velocities were 2457 and 378 mph respectively. These figures differ from those given in reference (c) and were computed from measurements obtained under more controlled conditions. Acceleration was determined from the formula: 

Since ‘g’ is equal to 32.17 ft/sec2 it was computed that:

Maximum acceleration = 21,168 mph/sec = 965 g
Minimum acceleration = 1,104 mph/sec = 50 g
Maximum deceleration = 32,448 mph/sec = 1479 g
Minimum deceleration = 272 mph/sec = 12 g

Velocity and acceleration determinations were also made from the Montana film. In this case, terrestrial objects appeared in the film and were held to as control. Subsequently, the velocity and acceleration determinations are considered to be more reliable. On the assumption of (b) and (c) above the maximum and minimum velocities of the left object are 1374 and 361 mph respectfully. For the right object they are 1117 and 189 mph. Accelerations were computed as:
                                                                      Left Object             Right Object
Maximum acceleration mph/sec   14,016 = 639 g     12640 = 576g
Minimum acceleration mph/sec                0 =     0 g                0 =      0g
Maximum deceleration mph/sec   13,184 = 601 g      14288 = 651g
Minimum deceleration mph/sec               0 =      0 g                0 =      0g

The above determinations were made from a total of 322 measurements. It was noted that the acceleration and determinations were in multiples of 12.5 approximately. This may be of significance although no study has been conducted to determine this.

     9. Velocity and acceleration were treated in sub-paragraph 8 above. Paragraph 2a indicates the controls used during this investigation.

     10. a. There is no recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects in formation. It appears however, as if the shift in relative positions were regular and that the original formation would be recovered if the continuing action has been recorded.

          b. No. However, the same formation is maintained with objects changing positions.

          c. No detection of relative positions being maintained coincidental with movement about their axis.

          d. No detection of undulating motion of objects in phase either in formation or tumbling motion.

          e. There is evidence of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles.

          f. Certain objects do appear to remain motionless while other move about.

          g. Certain objects disappear while still well within the field of view. This is discussed in sub-paragraph 6 above.

4. Discussion.

During the study and investigation of the unidentified objects, the preliminary data uncovered were revealed to experts (with proper security clearance) in the fields of astronomy and physics. Although they presented certain natural phenomena theories to explain the cause of the objects under certain conditions they were not able to do so under the conditions during which the photography was taken, nor were they able to recognize these objects as man-made.

As to the results of the investigations being reported, no attempt was made to corroborate the opinions presented. Because of the lack of proper equipment, money and personnel, the investigation was limited. There are obvious tests which can be conducted to prove or disprove some of the findings presented. It is suggested that these be undertaken.

5. Reference (d) requests spectrophotometric analysis of the Utah film be made. Preliminary plan of test id underway.

L. W. KEITH [Officer in Charge]”

The document was sent to Director of Naval Intelligence.

NOTE: The document starts on Page 12. Numbers 1 to 10 in 
this text are sub-paragraphs. Numbers 4 (Discussion.) and 
5 (Reference …) are paragraphs.


Wikipedia article: “Office of Naval Intelligence”:


Quote from the Wikipedia article:
“The Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) is the military intelligence agency of the United States Navy. Established in 1882 primarily to advance the Navy’s modernization efforts,[4][5] ONI is the oldest member of the United States Intelligence Community and serves as the nation’s premier source of maritime intelligence. Since the First World War, its mission has broadened to include real-time reporting on the developments and activities of foreign navies; protecting maritime resources and interests; monitoring and countering transnational maritime threats; providing technical, operational, and tactical support to the U.S. Navy and its partners; and surveying the global maritime environment. ONI employs over 3,000 military and civilian personnel worldwide and is headquartered at the National Maritime Intelligence Center in Suitland, Maryland.”












(wikimedia.org image)












Freeze-frame of the 2 July 1952 Tremonton, Utah, UFOs
(filmed by Delbert C. Newhouse, Warrant Officer and
Chief Photographer, U.S. Navy) (gststic.com image)














Satellite photo of Tremonton, Utah (tageo.com)
(tageo.com photo)







Film freeze-frame of the 15 August 1950 Great FallsMontana, UFOs (filmed by Nicholas Mariana) (ufocasebook.com image)












Satellite photo of Great Falls, Montana (tageo.com)
(tageo.com photo)