2 "satellites" or what?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: network dude

It doesn't necessarily have to be an unknown platform. I saw two yellow lights in formation over Omaha recently. Most likely F-16s out of Des Moines heading home. Or out of Sioux Falls, as they were heading more that way.

In this case, the speed, along with the zig-zags, makes me believe it had to be something amazing. Either UAV (since we can't handle those types of G forces) or something even more amazing that had it's own gravity.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: network dude

It doesn't necessarily have to be an unknown platform. I saw two yellow lights in formation over Omaha recently. Most likely F-16s out of Des Moines heading home. Or out of Sioux Falls, as they were heading more that way.

In this case, the speed, along with the zig-zags, makes me believe it had to be something amazing. Either UAV (since we can't handle those types of G forces) or something even more amazing that had it's own gravity.

What do you mean by "has it's own gravity" dude?

a reply to: 3danimator2014

I know it's star trek type stuff and I seriously doubt it exists. But to have something be able to go from dead stop to faster than you can see, would have G forces that exceed measurement. Humans can only endure minor g forces before they have issues such as your guts smashing against your rib cage and rupturing. So in order for the occupants of something that moves like that to not die and become steaming piles of goo, there would need to be gravity that is separate from the Earth's gravity. (at least that's how I understand it, which may be wrong)

And I am not claiming anything like that exists outside of fantasy, I lean more towards UAV's where you don't' have to worry about any occupants.

To get an idea, go to Cedar Point amusement park in Ohio and ride the Top Thrill Dragster ride. Feel the G forces from that instant takeoff, then think about the speed of that ride as opposed to the speed of something like what some UFO descriptions are. IF there is anything to them, and they contain occupants, then somewhere, somehow, there is gravity outside of our understanding. (at least my understanding)

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: menneni

My one and only sighting involved two lights that I thought were shooting stars until one of them zigzagged at high speed.

Knowing that fighters usually travel in at least pairs, if not groups, I think it may have been military and just something we don't know about yet. (since the movements would have turned a human into a pile of goo)

My vote is military.

The OP said this later about about the zigzagging:

originally posted by: menneni
It was clear for the while that they did travel the same speed, and seemingly kept the same distance (finger apart), going on a same vector.

I thought i saw some zig zagging with the latter one, but i shrugged it off as a atmospheric turbulance.

This leads me to think that the zigzagging could have been due to the autokinetic effect, which makes me think these could have possibly been satellites (such as the NOSS formation of satellites that I mentioned earlier).

I know if I star at stars long enough, the autokinetic effect makes the stars appear like they are wiggling, and I noticed the same thing sometimes happens if I track a satellite with me eyes without looking away. After a minute or two of staring at the satellite, the autokinetic effect can make them appear as if they are wobbling along their path, but they aren't.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

My sighting was kind of an accident. My friend and I were on the beach talking, waiting for our wives...as usual. I am the one who's into all the conspiracy stuff, and he is not at all. but he noticed the "stars" and pointed at them, we watched them zip across the sky with just enough time to say looks like two shooting stars, when one of them did fast zig-zags and they both zipped out of sight. Either moved real fast, or turned off the visible light.

I may well be a nut job, the two of us may have had a "mass delusion", but what we saw, and what I understand of flight, doesn't fit in the same box. I fully expect to one day have an answer for it, and I suspect it will be less exciting than visitors from another world, but as of now, it was an amazing thing to see, and I am really certain of what I saw.

You should be used to the old, "I know what I saw" rhetoric.

a reply to: network dude

I gotcha. Like an inertial dampener of sorts...Fantasy almost certainly, but that would be awesome.

On a vague side note...ive been playing Elite Dangerous (space sim/trading/fighting game) and when you turn flight assist OFF and therefore are flying with realistic space physics...its almost impossible to control. Very interesting though

Oh sh*t...i just remembered! My one and only "what the hell is that" moment in 35 years of amateur astronomy was about 20 years ago when i also saw a satellite flying with another one next to it zigzagging over and over again. Away from the "regular" sat and then back again...a fair distance and speed too.

To this day i have never been able to explain it.

I remember it like it was yesterday.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Yeah, earlier i wrote about zigzagging being because of atmospheric turbulence, but now i understand more properly. The correct word is what you said, autokinetic effect. I have noticed that kind effect numerous times, and it fits the bill perfectly. Atmospheric turbulence is just what i'm more familiar with because of some telescope-photo-op's.

But in network dude's case, im getting a feeling that wasn't just a wobbly-wobble.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

Hey, thanks for posting that memory. It makes me feel some points more saner now.

Also that Elite Dangerous looked interesting.

originally posted by: menneni
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Hey, thanks for posting that memory. It makes me feel some points more saner now.

Also that Elite Dangerous looked interesting.

Yeah, i cant believe that i didnt think of that the minute i read your description. Thing is, i dont believe at all in aliens visiting us (but definitely in life elsewhere in the universe)...so, i dont think it was anything like that...but who knows eh?

Not suggesting you were suggesting it was aliens by the way...just sayin'

originally posted by: emsed1
NASA and SpaceX launched the DSCOVR satellite yesterday. It would have passed right overhead. There were three parts falling back to earth simultaneously, the two fairing pieces and the First Stage rocket. The launch was at 6pm Eastern Time in the US.

The second stage and satellite separated about 40 minutes later. The second stage would appear to be following the satellite at nearly the same speed. This would have probably been after several orbits if it was 1800GMT.

Well, 6 PM EST is 2300GMT, 4 to 5 hours after his sighting. Can anyone fill me in on what I'm missing here?

Some of my weirdest sightings were of points of lights at night that I thought were satellites ...until they did something crazy.

Once two were traveling towards each other from East - West, met with a finger width between right overhead, stopped for a moment, and then did a tight, fast semi-circle around each other as if they were tethered... then they broke apart and whizzed on their original paths... if THAT was military, then I really should've enlisted, as it looked like a blast.

Who knows what's up there and what they're doing... likely they are plasma critters... or fairies... I could go on all night.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
Well, 6 PM EST is 2300GMT, 4 to 5 hours after his sighting. Can anyone fill me in on what I'm missing here?

The quote you referenced says "after several orbits", so how long do you suppose that is?

I couldn't find the launch trajectory for the DSCOVR payload, so I can't say what the orbital period was exactly at that time, but we know that a typical orbit for the ISS takes maybe 90 minutes so 3 orbits is 4.5 hours.

If I had to guess I'd think the orbit was probably spiraling outward so each orbit would take longer, but if anybody finds details on the launch trajectory, please post a link. I tried NASA, the NOAA, and SpaceX. The only relevant hit I got when I searched DSCOVR launch trajectory was a post to NASA's blog by someone else saying they couldn't find it, and they requested it to be posted there, which nobody did.

I would also check the www.heavens-above.com... website at Finland's coordinates, at that time, to find any other possibilities for the sighting. It wouldn't show the DSCOVR, since that's would have a temporary launch orbit, and not a permanent orbit, and that site reports it has no orbit information on DSCOVR:

www.heavens-above.com...

a reply to: Arbitrageur

The launch was after the sighting. 4-5 hours after the sighting. No?

How did he see what had not yet been launched?

a reply to: DenyObfuscation
He obviously didn't, but I did say to check heavens-above to look for other possible sources for the sighting.

I misread your post thinking you were asking how he could see launch debris 4-5 hours after the launch, which would be possible, but yeah he obviously didn't see launch debris before the launch. Anyway I obviously wasn't convinced that was it, which is why I suggested checking heavens-above.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I misread your post thinking you were asking how he could see launch debris 4-5 hours after the launch, which would be possible, but yeah he obviously didn't see launch debris before the launch.

But that is the accepted explanation, which fooled me the first time I read it.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
But that is the accepted explanation, which fooled me the first time I read it.

I wouldn't say that; it was one of several possibilities he listed so I don't think he accepted it:

originally posted by: menneni
I'm convinced that todays sighting was either a ISS, murican MIL-secret or related to DSCOVR satellite. Dunno what to pick.

But your point is he can scratch the DSCOVR possibility off his list because the timing is wrong, and I agree. It also seems like he should visit heavens-above to see if non-secret satellites explain it before concluding secret satellites are a possibility. If it was the ISS and something else it seems like there would be a huge brightness difference which he didn't mention in the statement" 2 dim lights", so that doesn't seem to fit, unless there was a big difference in brightness which he didn't mention.