Mufon Released Video Yesterday From Pilot Who Filmed UFO At 40,000 Ft.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

His claim of a weather balloon with "radar jamming" under cable tow is about as much rubbish as it was for Roswell in 1947. First, he is basing his assessment on what little footage your Government will allow that will not endanger national security. Second, his math is off.

Third, this quote is nonsense:
"As that explains, if the UFO is halfway between the aircraft and the ground, even if the UFO was a relatively motionless balloon, it will appear to have the same speed as the aircraft due to parallax."

Relatively motionless, it is not.

originally posted by: play4keeps
First, he is basing his assessment on what little footage your Government will allow that will not endanger national security. Second, his math is off.

OK, show the corrected math.

Third, this quote is nonsense:
"As that explains, if the UFO is halfway between the aircraft and the ground, even if the UFO was a relatively motionless balloon, it will appear to have the same speed as the aircraft due to parallax."

Relatively motionless, it is not.

Let's see the corrected math, and what it shows for the estimated speed.

In any case it's still true that a motionless object halfway to the ground will appear to have the same speed as the aircraft due to parallax. For the UFO that's the topic of this thread, as I said all we know is that it's below the aircraft taking the video, we don't know how far.

Based on what we know so far, I think I have narrowed down the planes on FR24.
The pilot reported that he was flying West at around 40k ft.

The FedX plane here is at 32k
The Blocked plane is at 34k.

The sighting took place in the vicinity of Zion National Forest while over Kane County around 4 pm Mountain time. (11 pm UTC)

Ignore the above post.

Its wrong.
The information from the witness was wrong as well.

I was just provided the actual coordinates from a very reliable source.

a reply to: Macenroe82

Based on sun angles, I'm betting the video was filmed by that Gulfstream G550 headed southwest right at the ATC border between FX3162 and the blocked flight. And he was looking at either FX3162 or the blocked flight. Hard to know which one without knowing what model aircraft the blocked flight is. The FedEx livery, with the dark tail, seems like a good fit.

Just to make sure. The observer is going somewhat to the right. no?
So the parallax effect would make a stationary object visually move to the left.


And another thing:
Sun reflection of the planes body is a strange guess. The ground is outdoors, its not comparible with a mirror reflection into a room. So any experiment outdoors i think would quickly eradicate that argument. Not even if the plane was made of a mirror would be enough imo.

Unless you mean window reflection, which of course is possible i guess.

originally posted by: Histeria
Just to make sure. The observer is going somewhat to the right. no?

It's not 100% clear to me either way, maybe, maybe not.
I was hoping the final report would have some details like the aircraft involved, speed, heading, etc, then we would have some facts, but the camera is jiggling around a lot and if it's just following the UFO as the UFO moves it may not be a reliable indicator of the direction of the aircraft where the filming is happening.

But now it's looking like we may not get those details, if the report is closed and they are lacking.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Hmm.
If you check the mountain peak at
0:08 and compare it with the same at 0:40.
So if the observer is not turning his plane, this indicates to me that the observer is taking the video out of his left window, or of the frontleft window.

a reply to: Histeria

Yes, the pilot chair is on the left.
The plane is heading west.
The object is approaching from the south to the north.

Ive been talking with a well-known friend all morning.
He pointed out to me that the video that's currently available on the MUFON website, is the original video.
The investigator must have got the original last night and uploaded it to the CMS.

Here is the XYZ for Google Earth:

+37.2174-113.0588

Can someone download the video and tell me what they get for a timestamp ?

Does it match the time we think this sighting took place?

a reply to: Macenroe82

I get 00:57 UTC on September 20th.

There is a Bombardier Challenger 350 that passes right over the coordinates you gave at that time at 40,000 feet. Off to his left, about 8.3 miles away, is UA541 at 24,000 feet. United livery is white body with dark tail.

a reply to: nataylor

Exactly!

Then convert it to Mountain time and you get 7 pm.

But the witness is saying around 4 pm mountain.

a reply to: Macenroe82

Can't be 4pm local time by looking at the sun angles. The sun was about at about 40° elevation at 4pm. The shadows are clearly quite long. At 6:57pm, the sun would have been at 6.7° elevation, which matches up with the what we see in the video much better.

a reply to: nataylor

We have a winner!
Thats what I was thinking.

Now... to find out why he was saying it was 4 pm.

Are you guys ready?

I have to give some of the credit to Mick West.
He and I have been talking since this morning about this.

Here is the challenger 350, business aircraft at 40,000 ft.



Here is the challenger 350 in the precise location where this video was taken - marked by the red pin.



If you reference the video, they match up pretty perfectly.

I sent this to not only the investigator but also MUFON HQ.

Case closed, beers on me boys!

a reply to: Macenroe82
Thanks, it's nice to get some more details.
Strange about the 4PM versus 7PM time though.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Ya, that's what still has me thinking.

a reply to: Macenroe82

This is more like it. Why can't more MUFON investigators just take the extra time to do a full investigation?

Glad you didn't just let it lay, and run this case to conclusion. I don't know if they still issue out the training manual with you first join up, but if they do this case should be in it. Not because it's important but because it shows new investigators (and old ones too) that group think can be used to solve so-called "Unknown" cases. Good job Macenroe, good job both for putting all of this together, and for not letting it sit unsolved.

Really good job to everyone in the thread.

a reply to: Guyfriday

Amen to that.
And yes, thank you to everyone who stuck around chiming in with their thoughts and assistance on this one.

ATS has some very bright minds.
it’s amazing when we put politics aside, when it comes Down to figuring out something like this.

I should start posting some other questionable cases marked as unknown from the CMS.