Navy drafting new UFO reporting guidelines

Debi

Owner/Admin
Staff
Joined
Sep 16, 2013
Messages
241,487
Reaction score
233,992
Points
315
Location
South of Indy
U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting UFOs

U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting UFOs
The service says it has also 'provided a series of briefings by senior Naval Intelligence officials as well as aviators who reported hazards to aviation safety.'


By BRYAN BENDER

04/23/2019 06:06 PM EDT

Updated 04/23/2019 08:14 PM EDT

The U.S. Navy is drafting new guidelines for pilots and other personnel to report encounters with "unidentified aircraft," a significant new step in creating a formal process to collect and analyze the unexplained sightings — and destigmatize them.

The previously unreported move is in response to a series of sightings of unknown, highly advanced aircraft intruding on Navy strike groups and other sensitive military formations and facilities, the service says.

"There have been a number of reports of unauthorized and/or unidentified aircraft entering various military-controlled ranges and designated air space in recent years," the Navy said in a statement in response to questions from POLITICO. "For safety and security concerns, the Navy and the [U.S. Air Force] takes these reports very seriously and investigates each and every report.

"As part of this effort," it added, "the Navy is updating and formalizing the process by which reports of any such suspected incursions can be made to the cognizant authorities. A new message to the fleet that will detail the steps for reporting is in draft."

To be clear, the Navy isn’t endorsing the idea that its sailors have encountered alien spacecraft. But it is acknowledging there have been enough strange aerial sightings by credible and highly trained military personnel that they need to be recorded in the official record and studied — rather than dismissed as some kooky phenomena from the realm of science-fiction.

“Right now, we have situation in which UFOs and UAPs are treated as anomalies to be ignored rather than anomalies to be explored,” he said. “We have systems that exclude that information and dump it.”

For example, Mellon said “in a lot of cases [military personnel] don’t know what to do with that information — like satellite data or a radar that sees something going Mach 3. They will dump [the data] because that is not a traditional aircraft or missile.”

The development comes amid growing interest from members of Congress following revelations by POLITICO and the New York Times in late 2017 that the Pentagon established a dedicated office inside the Defense Intelligence Agency to study UAPs at the urging of several senators who secretly set aside appropriations for the effort.

That office spent some $25 million conducting a series of technical studies and evaluating numerous unexplained incursions, including one that lasted several days involving the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group in 2004. In that case, Navy fighter jets were outmaneuvered by unidentified aircraft that flew in ways that appeared to defy the laws of known physics.

Raytheon, a leading defense contractor, used the reports and official Defense Department video of the sightings off the coast of California to hail one of its radar systems for capturing the phenomena.

The Pentagon's UFO research office, known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, was officially wound down in 2012 when the congressional earmark ran out.

But more lawmakers are now asking questions, the Navy also reports.

"In response to requests for information from Congressional members and staff, Navy officials have provided a series of briefings by senior Naval Intelligence officials as well as aviators who reported hazards to aviation safety," the service said in its statement to POLITICO.

The Navy declined to identify who has been briefed, nor would it provide more details on the guidelines for reporting that are being drafted for the fleet. The Air Force did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advocates for treating such sightings as a potential national security threat have long criticized military leaders for giving the phenomenon relatively little attention and for encouraging a culture in which personnel feel that speaking up about it could hurt their career.

Luis Elizondo, the former Pentagon official who ran the so-called AATIP office, complained after he retired from government service that the Pentagon's approach to these unidentified aircraft has been far too blasé.

"If you are in a busy airport and see something you are supposed to say something," Elizondo said. "With our own military members it is kind of the opposite: 'If you do see something, don't say something.'"

He added that because these mysterious aircraft "don't have a tail number or a flag — in some cases not even a tail — it's crickets. What happens in five years if it turns out these are extremely advanced Russian aircraft?"

Elizondo will be featured in an upcoming documentary series about the Pentagon UFO research he oversaw. He said the six-part series will reveal more recent sightings of UAPs by dozens of military pilots.

Both Elizondo and Mellon are involved with the To The Stars Academy of Arts and Sciences, which supports research into explaining the technical advances these reported UAPs demonstrate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NobleHouse
It is simple the typical swamp gas, weather balloons, flare's ect, just are not working anymore. While ago they only went on what people say no proof just eye witnesses. Now this day and age we all got phones we can take pictures and videos, so now they can't use the typical government cover up.
 
U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting UFOs

U.S. Navy drafting new guidelines for reporting UFOs
The service says it has also 'provided a series of briefings by senior Naval Intelligence officials as well as aviators who reported hazards to aviation safety.'


By BRYAN BENDER

04/23/2019 06:06 PM EDT

Updated 04/23/2019 08:14 PM EDT

The U.S. Navy is drafting new guidelines for pilots and other personnel to report encounters with "unidentified aircraft," a significant new step in creating a formal process to collect and analyze the unexplained sightings — and destigmatize them.

The previously unreported move is in response to a series of sightings of unknown, highly advanced aircraft intruding on Navy strike groups and other sensitive military formations and facilities, the service says.

"There have been a number of reports of unauthorized and/or unidentified aircraft entering various military-controlled ranges and designated air space in recent years," the Navy said in a statement in response to questions from POLITICO. "For safety and security concerns, the Navy and the [U.S. Air Force] takes these reports very seriously and investigates each and every report.

"As part of this effort," it added, "the Navy is updating and formalizing the process by which reports of any such suspected incursions can be made to the cognizant authorities. A new message to the fleet that will detail the steps for reporting is in draft."

To be clear, the Navy isn’t endorsing the idea that its sailors have encountered alien spacecraft. But it is acknowledging there have been enough strange aerial sightings by credible and highly trained military personnel that they need to be recorded in the official record and studied — rather than dismissed as some kooky phenomena from the realm of science-fiction.

“Right now, we have situation in which UFOs and UAPs are treated as anomalies to be ignored rather than anomalies to be explored,” he said. “We have systems that exclude that information and dump it.”

For example, Mellon said “in a lot of cases [military personnel] don’t know what to do with that information — like satellite data or a radar that sees something going Mach 3. They will dump [the data] because that is not a traditional aircraft or missile.”

The development comes amid growing interest from members of Congress following revelations by POLITICO and the New York Times in late 2017 that the Pentagon established a dedicated office inside the Defense Intelligence Agency to study UAPs at the urging of several senators who secretly set aside appropriations for the effort.

That office spent some $25 million conducting a series of technical studies and evaluating numerous unexplained incursions, including one that lasted several days involving the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group in 2004. In that case, Navy fighter jets were outmaneuvered by unidentified aircraft that flew in ways that appeared to defy the laws of known physics.

Raytheon, a leading defense contractor, used the reports and official Defense Department video of the sightings off the coast of California to hail one of its radar systems for capturing the phenomena.

The Pentagon's UFO research office, known as the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, was officially wound down in 2012 when the congressional earmark ran out.

But more lawmakers are now asking questions, the Navy also reports.

"In response to requests for information from Congressional members and staff, Navy officials have provided a series of briefings by senior Naval Intelligence officials as well as aviators who reported hazards to aviation safety," the service said in its statement to POLITICO.

The Navy declined to identify who has been briefed, nor would it provide more details on the guidelines for reporting that are being drafted for the fleet. The Air Force did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advocates for treating such sightings as a potential national security threat have long criticized military leaders for giving the phenomenon relatively little attention and for encouraging a culture in which personnel feel that speaking up about it could hurt their career.

Luis Elizondo, the former Pentagon official who ran the so-called AATIP office, complained after he retired from government service that the Pentagon's approach to these unidentified aircraft has been far too blasé.

"If you are in a busy airport and see something you are supposed to say something," Elizondo said. "With our own military members it is kind of the opposite: 'If you do see something, don't say something.'"

He added that because these mysterious aircraft "don't have a tail number or a flag — in some cases not even a tail — it's crickets. What happens in five years if it turns out these are extremely advanced Russian aircraft?"

Elizondo will be featured in an upcoming documentary series about the Pentagon UFO research he oversaw. He said the six-part series will reveal more recent sightings of UAPs by dozens of military pilots.

Both Elizondo and Mellon are involved with the To The Stars Academy of Arts and Sciences, which supports research into explaining the technical advances these reported UAPs demonstrate.

The article is misleading and/or its writer uniformed. The USN does have a reporting system for aviation safety issues/hazards, it's administered by the USN Safety Center in Norfolk. Same with the USAF through the the USAF Safety Center in Albuquerque. These agencies have a great deal of cross talk relative to such issues, I worked with both of them many times.

As for reporting a UFO sighting being detrimental to a military aviator's career, I think that more myth than fact. I'm not saying the aviators themselves don't believe it, just that I saw no evidence of it in over thirty years of dealing with military aircrew. I've heard a good number of UFO stories from USAF pilots, some who reported their experiences, others who didn't. Those who didn't feared doing so would hurt their career, but I never found a single aircrew who did make a report who felt doing so hurt their career.
 
The article is misleading and/or its writer uniformed. The USN does have a reporting system for aviation safety issues/hazards, it's administered by the USN Safety Center in Norfolk. Same with the USAF through the the USAF Safety Center in Albuquerque. These agencies have a great deal of cross talk relative to such issues, I worked with both of them many times.

As for reporting a UFO sighting being detrimental to a military aviator's career, I think that more myth than fact. I'm not saying the aviators themselves don't believe it, just that I saw no evidence of it in over thirty years of dealing with military aircrew. I've heard a good number of UFO stories from USAF pilots, some who reported their experiences, others who didn't. Those who didn't feared doing so would hurt their career, but I never found a single aircrew who did make a report who felt doing so hurt their career.

I grew up around the military uncle was a USMC grandpa Navy my mom second hubby Army.
My grandpa knew ppl who admitted to seeing UFO and it did ruin there military service. I use to go to Fort Sheridan and I heard ppl talking alot were afraid to speak to be made fun of ect.....
Not gonna say it always happens but going by what I have witnessed
 
The article is misleading and/or its writer uniformed. The USN does have a reporting system for aviation safety issues/hazards, it's administered by the USN Safety Center in Norfolk. Same with the USAF through the the USAF Safety Center in Albuquerque. These agencies have a great deal of cross talk relative to such issues, I worked with both of them many times.

As for reporting a UFO sighting being detrimental to a military aviator's career, I think that more myth than fact. I'm not saying the aviators themselves don't believe it, just that I saw no evidence of it in over thirty years of dealing with military aircrew. I've heard a good number of UFO stories from USAF pilots, some who reported their experiences, others who didn't. Those who didn't feared doing so would hurt their career, but I never found a single aircrew who did make a report who felt doing so hurt their career.
I think he was referring to the "dedicated office" the gov. spent 25 million on......now is that just smoke and mirrors to sound more official? or is there something to it?.
 
I grew up around the military uncle was a USMC grandpa Navy my mom second hubby Army.
My grandpa knew ppl who admitted to seeing UFO and it did ruin there military service. I use to go to Fort Sheridan and I heard ppl talking alot were afraid to speak to be made fun of ect.....
Not gonna say it always happens but going by what I have witnessed

Interesting. How did reporting UFOs ruin their careers based on what you witnessed?
 
He added that because these mysterious aircraft "don't have a tail number or a flag — in some cases not even a tail — it's crickets. What happens in five years if it turns out these are extremely advanced Russian aircraft?"
.

I think this statement, if true in any way, tells more if you read between the lines....if we think it could at all possibly be Russian or anyone elses technology, then just where are we at with our own tech. at this point.... we wouldn't even think that unless we are either already there or at least very close to being....
 
My guessing is because when you get a order to not speak of it and they did, that is the way for them to remove them. Look at area 51 all the people who witnessed what they did alot said , they couldn't talk about it afraid for there jobs and there life, now that was back in the 50's 60's look at Roswell something.
 
I think he was referring to the "dedicated office" the gov. spent 25 million on......now is that just smoke and mirrors to sound more official? or is there something to it?.

As I've said before AATIP was a pork barrel, plus up funded program for which there was no DoD requirement organically generated or money requested through the POM process. $22M over five years is round up error in DoD financial management circles. There was no "dedicated office," Elizondo himself admitted (on C2C to George Knapp) that AATIP was a part time job (as in one of multiple small projects he managed) for him and he had no dedicated staff/team. He was more a contract monitor than anything else acting as a pass through for the funds to Bigelow. The project was nothing more than Harry Reid getting money to a business/contributor in his state. Reid, along with the late John Murtha of Pennsylvania, was known for earmarks for their constituents.

Harry Reid Does Love His Earmarks (Video)
 
Last edited: