bad_hair_day wrote:Yoss, humans are probably more fallible at identifying 40 foot objects 20 miles away which is why there are tactical systems that tell if objects are friendly or not.
bad_hair_day wrote:Back to Fravor’s Wingman, administrative phase - what mistakes were made again?
That’s not what the pilot said happened.
Yossarian wrote:bad_hair_day wrote:Back to Fravor’s Wingman, administrative phase - what mistakes were made again?
Potentially this:
That’s not what the pilot said happened.
bad_hair_day wrote:Yossarian wrote:bad_hair_day wrote:Back to Fravor’s Wingman, administrative phase - what mistakes were made again?
Potentially this:
That’s not what the pilot said happened.
Dietrich and Fravor were the actual pilots, not forgetting the backseat WSO’s (also pilots) and all four saw it.
Yossarian wrote:bad_hair_day wrote:Yossarian wrote:bad_hair_day wrote:Back to Fravor’s Wingman, administrative phase - what mistakes were made again?
Potentially this:
That’s not what the pilot said happened.
Dietrich and Fravor were the actual pilots, not forgetting the backseat WSO’s (also pilots) and all four saw it.
Who all saw what? The object that they couldn’t get a radar lock on? How can they all be sure it was the same object?
superflyninja wrote:Ok so as far as I recall, in the Nimitz incident, multiple planes, ships and an AWACS plane all had congruent readings that seemed to agree with the pilots' stories. Some objects had been recorded over the course of days IIRC. Im at work and unable to fully keep up to speed but what is the general debunk to the incident? That the pilots were wrong, instruments were wrong/ misinterpreted?
Regarding the Tony Hawk guy taking readings from the video and calculating the height and velocity of the craft. Why is he to be believed over the Navy? Surely they wouldn't release such a potentially embarrassing video? One that some random, nonmilitary keyboard warrior was able to figure out just based on readings in the video? Im sorry, Id have to presume the Navy knows how to work and interpret their equipment with far greater accuracy than a games dev.
I expect the complete summary on my desk by 15:00 hours.
bad_hair_day wrote:Perhaps you’re right, could’ve been more than one.
Who is only looking at the videos? Tony Hawks guy?Yossarian wrote:He’s only looking at the videos, not the entire incident.superflyninja wrote:Ok so as far as I recall, in the Nimitz incident, multiple planes, ships and an AWACS plane all had congruent readings that seemed to agree with the pilots' stories. Some objects had been recorded over the course of days IIRC. Im at work and unable to fully keep up to speed but what is the general debunk to the incident? That the pilots were wrong, instruments were wrong/ misinterpreted?Did the Navy state anything official about speed or height or anything like that or did they just release the video and say we don’t know what this is?Regarding the Tony Hawk guy taking readings from the video and calculating the height and velocity of the craft. Why is he to be believed over the Navy? Surely they wouldn't release such a potentially embarrassing video? One that some random, nonmilitary keyboard warrior was able to figure out just based on readings in the video? Im sorry, Id have to presume the Navy knows how to work and interpret their equipment with far greater accuracy than a games dev. I expect the complete summary on my desk by 15:00 hours.
GooberTheHat wrote:Which experts?
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!