Beyond Bigelow & BAASS, After AATIP and on To the Stars...

a reply to: deanbaker

As I recall, it was a guy who worked for the company and not the owners who allegedly uploaded the video to their servers. It would be interesting if the PowerPoint was ever added there too....

Ohh and the guy who owns Vision Unlimited is called Phil Schneider. That always amused me..

originally posted by: pigsy2400
As I recall, it was a guy who worked for the company and not the owners who allegedly uploaded the video to their servers. It would be interesting if the PowerPoint was ever added there too....

Ohh and the guy who owns Vision Unlimited is called Phil Schneider. That always amused me..

Phil's memory seems to have faded over the years.



When I contacted Phil in 2007, he confirmed that _he_ uploaded the video ["i stored it on my server for a friend of mine"] and very briefly provided some other details.

When I tried again in 2008 to get more details from Phil, he couldn't remember how the video got on his Vision Unlimited website. Basically, it didn't seem to be a big deal to Phil.

By 2018, Phil remembered even less.

The relevant friend (ATS user "Cometa", who also did some work for Vision Unlimited) obtained a copy of the Powerpoint presentation and other material from TheFinalTheory (including the longer video). I don't know if Cometa still has that material. I'm still waiting for Cometa to return my phone message (via a German colleague), but it's been a pretty long wait so I assume he doesn't want to talk to me.

I may try again (but I generally don't like to bother people more than once) or ask the person that leaked the video to Cometa, TheFinalTheory, to call him instead.

Or I could perhaps give relevant details to another researcher in Germany, whether another local researcher or perhaps to Tim McMillan (who has shown an interest) - but I haven't been keen on spreading personal details around very much. I think people are entitled to choose whether they remain anonymous or not.

By the way, there was there is no sign of the Powerpoint presentation on the Vision Unlimited website archive (unlike the FLIR1 video) and no-one involved has mentioned uploading the Powerpoint presentation on that website.

An attempt was made to transfer some of the material to another member of ATS back in 2007, but that user had a problem opening the files and did not retain them.

(During the last couple of years, I've generally been sticking with less contentious projects like sharing searchable versions of UFO periodicals and other material, rather than pursuing the material I found on higher profile topics like the Nimitz incident(s) and Bigelow. I'm not looking for any drama).

a reply to: IsaacKoi

The fact that his name is spooky and hilarious

His memory lapses are troubling, why is nothing in this game simple?

We should get Lt. Timmy to follow up on this....

The relevant friend (ATS user "Cometa", who also did some work for Vision Unlimited) obtained a copy of the Powerpoint presentation and other material from TheFinalTheory (including the longer video). I don't know if Cometa still has that material. I'm still waiting for Cometa to return my phone message (via a German colleague), but it's been a pretty long wait so I assume he doesn't want to talk to me.

a reply to: celltypespecific

You will have to go and ring his bell Cellty.

"I have it on very good authority, without going into too much detail, that NIDS and Bigelow Aerospace was funded as a black budget CIA project to prevent scrutiny and accountability from Congress. ... In case you haven’t noticed, most of the members of the aviary are also members of the NIDS science advisory board. The aviary group was part of an organized government operation that intentionally tried to convince Americans of an alien presence. "

When all the static is ignored--tuned out--the above signal, time and again, is the irreducible leftover. It that's true, the "why" might be debatable, but even without the "why" it's valuable information: There's a narrative being sold by shady operatives---buyer beware.

Probably a few of them actually. Embedded deep within ufology and maybe even deployed globally.

I read ahead and I must say...Damn, your dogwhistle is good!

originally posted by: The GUT
I read ahead and I must say...Damn, your dogwhistle is good!

Just as "Blucher" is the German word that always startled the horses, you are ably providing the Glue that congeals this whole farce together - once, as you say, all the noise and irrelevant static has been eliminated.

I'll see your Frau Blucher and throw in a Trashmen (at 1.25, the Bird dance move is a perfect encapsulation of how ufology has progressed during the past thirty to forty years).




Meanwhile...

originally posted by: pigsy2400

Ohh and the guy who owns Vision Unlimited is called Phil Schneider.

Oh, FFS... ***head crashes into desk*** ...

originally posted by: The GUT

"I have it on very good authority, without going into too much detail, that NIDS and Bigelow Aerospace was funded as a black budget CIA project to prevent scrutiny and accountability from Congress. ... In case you haven’t noticed, most of the members of the aviary are also members of the NIDS science advisory board. The aviary group was part of an organized government operation that intentionally tried to convince Americans of an alien presence. "

When all the static is ignored--tuned out--the above signal, time and again, is the irreducible leftover. It that's true, the "why" might be debatable, but even without the "why" it's valuable information: There's a narrative being sold by shady operatives---buyer beware.

Probably a few of them actually. Embedded deep within ufology and maybe even deployed globally.

So basically the disclosure narrative.

originally posted by: celltypespecific

originally posted by: Cravens
a reply to: celltypespecific

Thanks for the embed.

At the 1:46 mark there’s a graphic* illustrating the number of the something(s) in various regions of the world, what do the numbers represent? Any insights into the number represented by Africa? Much appreciated.

*I’m assuming your two-year, TTSA prayer sojourn would have covered this leg of the trail.

I think its the number of skyhubs they plan to install...?

Who is “they”? Who are the people installing these skyhubs in Africa?? 21??? Second only to the US??? Huh?

Praying for no minutes* you can answer...

*I assumed your two-year prayer, being answered, would have had requisite answers for these queries

ETA: Africa has had a lot of DFI from a certain...well, if those implications aren’t clear...

Sea Trial Experiment “Silent Hammer”

(Source: US Naval Sea Systems Command; issued Sept. 24, 2004)

WASHINGTON --- The Undersea Technology Directorate (SEA 073) of Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) plans to conduct a Sea Trial Limited Objective Experiment, “Silent Hammer”, Oct. 4-14 off the coast of San Diego.

Using a network of participants, which includes SEA 073, Naval Submarine Forces, Naval Warfare Development Command, and Submarine Group Nine, as well as other fleet units and teams of industry and academic naval researchers, “Silent Hammer” will test and evaluate the latest joint warfighting capabilities.

The principal objective of “Silent Hammer” is to show how a network of forces consisting of special operational forces (SOF), sea-based on an SSGN, can work together to fill Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) and Time Sensitive Strike requirements. This will be accomplished by conducting large-scale clandestine operations, aided by advanced unmanned systems, to reduce risk, and increase capabilities.

The USS Georgia (SSGN 729), additional attack submarines (SSNs), a SEAL Delivery Vehicle, two Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) surrogates, and various U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force air assets are scheduled to participate in “Silent Hammer”, which is to be coordinated with another Sea Trial Experiment, “Trident Warrior”, being conducted during the same time frame in the Southern California Operating Areas adjacent to San Clemente Island, Calif.

Silent Hammer

a reply to: pigsy2400

Are you implying submarines might have more capabilities than just hunting ships, launching missiles and allowing combat divers to swim out escape trunks for clandestined missions?

Like maybe they might even have the capability to support aircraft? Like aren't there usually submarines dedicated to each carrier task force? Maybe they can fo other things besides protect the carrier from enemy submarines. Or what if you put a submarine off an enemies coast near where you might want to establish a safe place for air refueling to take place? Didn't fravor say he saw something very large quickly submerge during his "tic tac" "incident"

In the ufo community they have a saying "i know what i saw!". I'm willing to bet so did fravor.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: pigsy2400

Are you implying submarines might have more capabilities than just hunting ships, launching missiles and allowing combat divers to swim out escape trunks for clandestined missions?

Like maybe they might even have the capability to support aircraft? Like aren't there usually submarines dedicated to each carrier task force? Maybe they can fo other things besides protect the carrier from enemy submarines. Or what if you put a submarine off an enemies coast near where you might want to establish a safe place for air refueling to take place? Didn't fravor say he saw something very large quickly submerge during his "tic tac" "incident"

In the ufo community they have a saying "i know what i saw!". I'm willing to bet so did fravor.

I know something about the submarine fleet. What Fravor saw, the "Tic-Tac", has nothing to do what the fleet was capable of in 2004. What Silent hammer is experimenting now, 16 years later, is at least decades away from the Tic-Tac level of technology. The bleeding edge of the fleet in 2004 was the Jimmy Carter. In many ways still is. Want to work with secret squirrel, cloak and dagger stuff? Try to get assigned on the USS Jimmy Carter.

Theres plenty of people who also know something about the submarine fleet that would disagree.
Interesting thing about the submariners is that they'll go to just about any measure to protect their secrets. So I'm not surprised you say theres no way submarines back then could support the fleet in some rather unorthodox ways.


The tic tac technology is decades old.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Interesting thing about the submariners is that they'll go to just about any measure to protect their secrets.

Yes. They can be real dicks about it. I've known a couple.

"So about how fast can a submerged nuke actually go?"
"More than 20 knots."

No #. Real funny, dude. "Here, have another margarita."

a reply to: pigsy2400

Interesting find. There is an article on drive providing some more information and speculation.
www.thedrive.com...

Georgia didn’t actually launch any unmanned aircraft during Silent Hammer, according to the Navy, but did release two Stealthy Affordable Capsule System (SACS) canisters, each containing an “inert test shape simulating a UAV,” from a Flexible Payload Module (FPM) installed in one of the submarine’s missile tubes.

We also know that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) supplied unspecified payloads, as well as sensor systems for the exercise.

Of all the submarine-launched unmanned aircraft in development around the time of Silent Hammer, by far, the most interesting was Lockheed Martin’s shadowy Cormorant... DARPA managed this program

Although I feel the Cormorant thing is a bit of a stretch. But who knows.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Theres plenty of people who also know something about the submarine fleet that would disagree.
Interesting thing about the submariners is that they'll go to just about any measure to protect their secrets. So I'm not surprised you say theres no way submarines back then could support the fleet in some rather unorthodox ways.


The tic tac technology is decades old.

Not true, imho of course. But please share, who are those submariners?

Our boats can and do carry out operations no one will hear anything about for decades. Many of the ISR
operations and techniques from the cold war are still highly classified. That being said, they had more to do with guile, courage, willingness to spend a lot of money and ability to use and enhance existing technology in surprising ways, than magical powers decades ahead of the actual, pushing the envelope, absolute bleeding edge of techology.

If the Tic-Tac is ours, the submarine fleet has nothing to do with it. The boats (and swccs and some others) have aces up their sleeves no one is prepared for or knows anything about, but Tic-Tac or anything close to it ain't one of them. A lot of very smart people have dedicated their lives developing underwater capabilites unmatched by any other power on this planet. Through their work, a lot of tax payer dollars and even some lives lost the USN has an edge on everyone else.

a reply to: Sublant

Oh i agree that subs are at the forefront of bleeding edge technology. The tic tacs aren't as complex as speculators believe although they are very dynamic and always developing nee tricks. They've been around for a while...

a reply to: Phage

They dont talk about much thats for sure. They're alright people if youre not fishing for info though.

originally posted by: Sublant
If the Tic-Tac is ours, the submarine fleet has nothing to do with it.

You know this how?

I don't know if there was a relationship between whatever was under the water under the tic tac and the tic tac, but Fravor said he thinks it was related. He can't confirm whether or not it was a submarine that caused the disturbance because he only saw the disturbance, but isn't a submarine a possibility for causing a disturbance as Fravor described? He said it was about the size of a 737 and he was guessing a bit so I don't see how that rules out a submarine. I also don't conclude it was a submarine, I keep an open mind.

TIC TAC UFO : AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH THE PILOT WHO CHASED IT : PART 1

At time 28:00:

"Knapp: If not for the thing in the water, you may not have seen [the tic tac], so, what was in the water? It wasn't a rock, because when you went back, it was gone.

Fravor: I have no idea. It was a disturbance, something below the surface that was causing the waves to break on top. When we went back, we could not find it. At all.

Knapp: This thing, a rendezvou? A docking? You're speculating obviously but there's a relationship between the tic tac and what was under the water.

Fravor: I think so."

Maybe it wasn't a submarine causing the disturbance Fravor saw which he thinks was caused by an underwater object, but I don't see how you can rule out a submarine being the cause of the disturbance.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Could have been a humpback. They leave a pretty good sized disturbance after a breech.

Don't think they employ ECM though. So, if it was a whale it didn't have anything to do with what he saw in the sky.