Hold On To Your Gyroscope ~ The Nellis Range Ufo Revisited

There are relatively few “UFO” vids that I find particularly compelling but the Nellis UFO footage happens to be one of my very favorites.

The footage is generally accepted as “real” by researchers—-that is to say real footage from Nellis of an actual airborne object that seems to have caused some actual confusion among the operators in the camera/control center.

All in all a remarkable piece of footage I think.

However, being that the footage is apparently from Nellis, Occam’s Razor would seem to suggest, maybe, something more down to earth. But what? What can move like that?

The flight maneuvers of this object are pretty extreme and the chatter between the camera-system operators is interesting and adds another layer of interest and "onsite" commentary to this UFO “vid.”

The speeds seem impressive, enough, but maybe not so “otherworldly”---the main characteristic that lends it its “anomalous” feel seems to be the stunning bee-like maneuvers.

It’s those bee-like maneuvers that I believe might possibly provide us a clue.

That along with what the infamous Lt. Col. Michael Aquino inferred (elsewhere in a ATS thread) was a hint about drone technology in general.

Part of his hint as regards drones consisted of the following fascinating vintage video. It immediately made me think of the Nellis film.

“Give the devil his due” might truly apply on this one as regards Aquino heh.

Dr. Laithwaite was a pretty hip cat! Would've loved to have him as a Prof.

Imagine a drone with a gyro inside. Not one for navigation but, rather, for extreme maneuverability and spatial attitude. As far as I can figure—I’ve played with a gyroscope or two but I ain’t no expert—a drone such-fitted could achieve g-forces unsustainable by a human pilot.


Then there’s this to consider:


"WHERE'S IT COME FROM?"
A STUDY OF THE 1994 NELLIS UFO VIDEO FOOTAGE by Martin J. Powell

Area 51 publicist Glenn Campbell cites the case of a former female radar operator at the Nellis range who operated from a closed threat-radar trailer, which is evidently able to maneuver around the range and present threats to aircraft from unpredictable locations.18 Her description of the equipment and operations at the range seem appropriate to those that we see in the Nellis footage.

Drop it on the unsuspecting crew and see if they can A.) Follow it with the cam system and, B.) Monitor the crew's reactions and guesses as to what it is.

A gyroscope is a spinning wheel or disc in which the axis of rotation is free to assume any orientation by itself. When rotating, the orientation of this axis is unaffected by tilting or rotation of the mounting, according to the conservation of angular momentum.

Because of this, gyroscopes are useful for measuring or maintaining orientation.

Gyroscopes based on other operating principles also exist, such as the electronic, microchip-packaged MEMS gyroscopes found in consumer electronics devices, solid-state ring lasers, fibre optic gyroscopes, and the extremely sensitive quantum gyroscope.

The main—and most baffling—gyroscopic effect is precession.

My greatest understanding of precession--probably my only understanding of it--comes not from trying to read and comprehend the concept, ahem, but from hands on experience!

My First Experience

Followed By The Classic Gyro Top


Not Just Any String Would Do

Then Came The Power Assist Gyro-Tops


Gyroscopic effects are also integral to the physical mechanics of other toys like yo-yos, Frisbees, and…Fidget Spinners!



The concept is also especially useful in space.

Gyrostat

A gyrostat consists of a massive flywheel concealed in a solid casing.Its behaviour on a table, or with various modes of suspension or support, serves to illustrate the curious reversal of the ordinary laws of static equilibrium due to the gyrostatic behaviour of the interior invisible flywheel when rotated rapidly. The first gyrostat was designed by Lord Kelvin to illustrate the more complicated state of motion of a spinning body when free to wander about on a horizontal plane, like a top spun on the pavement, or a bicycle on the road.

Kelvin also made use of gyrostats to develop mechanical theories of the elasticity of matter and of the ether. In modern continuum mechanics there is a variety of these models, based on ideas of Lord Kelvin…

…In modern times, the gyrostat concept is used in the design of attitude control systems for orbiting spacecraft and satellites.[35] For instance, the Mir space station had three pairs of internally mounted flywheels known as gyrodynes or control moment gyros.

A control moment gyroscope (CMG) is an attitude control device generally used in spacecraft attitude control systems. A CMG consists of a spinning rotor and one or more motorized gimbals that tilt the rotor’s angular momentum. As the rotor tilts, the changing angular momentum causes a gyroscopic torque that rotates the spacecraft.

Link

Skylab is officially the first spacecraft fitted with CMGs for attitude control followed by the Salyut and Mir space stations.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m still open to the Nellis UFO being something anomalous and while it can most likely be explained by limitations of the optical system being used to film, the object does give the distinct appearance at times of shapeshifting—-so, ultimately, who knows. And if we are using gyroscopic systems in space who's to say extraterrestrials aren't using it is also a fair question.

So what do you think? Do gyroscopic systems make sense in drones? Could all of the above be the explanation for the puzzling and amazing Nellis Range UFO?

Do gyroscopic systems make sense in drones?

Gyros are employed in just about all drones. Even consumer grade ones.

The main function of gyroscope technology is to improve the drones flight capabilities. The drone’s hardware, software and algorithms work together to improve all aspects of the flight including hovering perfectly still or taking steep angled turns. A drone with six axis gimbal feeds information to the IMU and flight controller to vastly improve the flight capabilities.

www.dronezon.com...


I was never very impressed with the Nellis video.

a reply to: Phage

I actually figured I'd learn quick just how common it is to drones. It does make perfect sense. I'm guessing that's part of your reason for not being very impressed with the Nellis vid? Pretty old vid, too, so the extreme version of the concept has probably been around for awhile.

And that old Dr. Laithwaite thought no one was paying attention.

a reply to: The GUT

There's no way for me to tell if the object is making those jerky movements or if the camera is moving that way.

originally posted by: Phage
I was never very impressed with the Nellis video.

Certainly, like most (all) UFO videos, nothing ever became of it. Nobody ever came forward to claim they took it, or anybody else to even say that it was a real thing. I like it because it's not a dumb saucer or triangle. Something different for a change. But admittedly there's ultimately nothing to it.

originally posted by: Box of Rain
a reply to: The GUT
There's no way for me to tell if the object is making those jerky movements or if the camera is moving that way.

The story goes that the apparent jumps are a result of the theodolite filming the thing trying to track it and not keeping up. The slow rotations and shape changes are done by the object, which traveled on a fairly smooth path.

Great thread.
For sure it could have been a drone dropped
in on unsuspecting Nellis ATC. For reactions to Radar.
I’ll take this drone at an upcoming airshow but
I sure hope we get to see a USAF Big Black Triangle
on display someday..

Any idea When was that video was supposedly taken?

a reply to: Macenroe82

1994 seemingly.

This is the longer vid the above was excerpted from:

An eccentric for sure, here's more Laithwaite for anyone interested:

a reply to: The GUT

Ahh right on.
I was assuming late 80’s early 90’s based on the video quality.
Thanks.
I’m gonna look into this further.

a reply to: The GUT
That video provides a lot more information.
The ATC conversation speaks volumes in itself.

Their job is to identify craft.
Yet they can’t with one.

I can even hear one guy saying “that is not a flare, not a flare”
Very interesting

a reply to: Macenroe82

I've seen a better youtube copy I do believe but my simple search when writing this didn't turn 'em up.

Can anyone explain what that horizontal trace is at the bottom of the video screen? Is it freq/vs amplitude, or perhaps a linear bearing indicator? At first, it looked like it followed the audio, but then it does not.

a reply to: charlyv

Try this:

Nellis S-30 UFO discussion: Part 2
Methods, Analysis, Graphs, and Characteristics

NIce thread, GUT.

I remember getting excited about this case in 1995, and I then completely forgot about it.

originally posted by: charlyv
Can anyone explain what that horizontal trace is at the bottom of the video screen? Is it freq/vs amplitude, or perhaps a linear bearing indicator? At first, it looked like it followed the audio, but then it does not.

It's a radar return signature to help identify the nature of the object. The station is manned rather than remotely controlled, switching between automatic tracking (designated by the letter "A" in the display at 23:21:08) and manual ("M") when the camera fails to lock on. In a second video (from camera "S-13" rather than "S-30", and from a much greater distance) it is all automatic.

I recommend this splendidly clear and concise article.

And here is the audio transcript [Note: FLIR = Forward-Looking Infrared Radar]. It's lengthy, but arguably just as important and intriguing as the actual footage (and in places even sounds like they're acting out ATS posters' replies to a thread about it - no swamp gas or birds, though!):



23:20:41 - External Controller: "[unintelligible] ... point zero at this time."

23:20:43 - Male Controller: "Its a helicopter!"

23:20:45 - Female Controller: "Aaah!"

23:20:48 - Male: "That's why its so slow."

23:20:49 - Female: "Might be some kind of debris."

23:20:52 - Female: "It's not much more than a round dot, but it looks different to most dots."

23:21:11 - External Controller: "[unintelligible] ..two zero...one one zero level, okay...ing North at this time."

23:21:23 - Female: "Got any ideas what it is?"

23:21:24 - Male: "I got a helo!"

23:21:26 - Female: "You've got a helicopter?"

23:21:27 - Male: "Yeah - can't get a result on these things!"

23:21:29 - External Controller: "[unintelligible]... two five two ...[unintelligible]"

23:21:34 - Male: "I don't know what the hell that is - that's a helo, isn't it?"

23:21:39 - Male: "[chuckle] ... What is that? I don't know! ... I've no idea!"

23:21:42 - External Controller: "[unintelligible] ... flight level ... [unintelligible simultaneous talking]"

23:21:47 - Female: "Looks like one. Right up high now, goin' like .. straight up!"

23:21:53 - Male: "Its a balloon, ain't it? I don't know what the hell that is, man!"

23:21:58 - Female: "I think it's a helicopter."

23:22:00 - Male: "[unintelligible] ... forget it! ... data on him."

23:22:04 - Female: "Straight up, boy!"

23:22:05 - Male: "I'm outta here!"

23:22:06 - Female: "Oh, okay."

23:22:07 - Male: "What the hell is it? ... I'm gonna lose it in the sun, [unintelligible]"

23:22:21 - Female: "Call sign?"

23:22:23 - Male: "Err ... I don't even know what it is!"

23:22:28 - Male: "Must be at eleven thousand feet a minute." (?)

23:22:33 - Female: "It's weird-lookin'!"

23:22:41 - External Controller: "[unintelligible] .. non-FLIR!" (?)

23:22:47 - External Controller: "Non-FLIR!" (?)

23:22:54 - Female: "See him?" (?)

23:22:57 - External Controller: "[unintelligible] ... non-FLIR, non-FLIR!"

23:23:05 - Female: "See him?" (?)



Erm... aren't these folks supposedly TRAINED to identify this stuff themselves?

a reply to: Phage

honestly it looked like drone movements to me, I'll look but how long ago has this been tested?

originally posted by: The GUT
a reply to: charlyv

Try this:

Nellis S-30 UFO discussion: Part 2
Methods, Analysis, Graphs, and Characteristics

Thanks, that explains it fully. A radar lock on presentation.

a reply to: The GUT

Drones use gyroscopes as sensors not as attitude actuators.

There is a reason why control moment gyroscopes or reaction wheels are used in space and not on earth. They operate on the principle of conservation of angular momentum. This works great in space as there is pretty much no friction. Changing the angular momentum of the gyro imparts the opposite angular momentum on the craft. It is a completely reversible process.

As soon as external friction comes in, damping the angular momentum changes or imparting additional angular momentum to the craft. The whole process becomes irreversible. The gyro would quickly saturate and become useless.