Unidentified Flying Objects Over U.S. Military Bases in Northeast UK, as of roughly 11 a.m. CST.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

Ah, perhaps I should have been more clear then.
I simply googled "cube in a sphere" and then linked the first thing I saw.

In other footage these spheres morphed and flexed as if they had a bendy interior cube structure.
I was merely trying to represent that with something, but I guess I could have just left the image out and just said that.


Astrocometus - I mean, that's a fair position to take. Could be Project Bluebeam FAIK.
I won't knock you for being cynical. Maybe we'll get more clues in the coming days or weeks.

ufoorbhunter - I could probably argue that they're often in the ocean bc it's the best place on the planet to hide, or because it's the least explored place and they go there for science, but your stance is possible. I do remember a guest on the old Art Bell Midnight in the Desert who was a past life regressionist, who said he had clients who remembered being aliens under trance, and described being less than solid, like an astral being. He said one client told him that's why they had the ships. Rather than needing them to travel, they needed them to stay solid enough to interact with our physical world. It was a good broadcast, but IDK, myself.

I am actually of the opinion that reality is basically a simulation anyway, so I guess I'd have to view them as being as real as anything else here.

a reply to: Schmoe3755

Although it's possible to use several images from a video to get a slightly better image, there are no magic "enhancements" that will show more than the original image, if they do then it means they were created by whatever process was used.

That's why I never trust an enhancement that I do not know how was made.

For example, this image

is an AI enhancement of this image

a reply to: TheValeyard

There has been huge amounts of activity over the US airbases in the UK for weeks if not months-the last few nights has seen an increase of activity.
Our UK media has given it very limited coverage,and they claim its Rus/Chinese drones scoping out the bases.
Whatever is doing it is making themselves highly visible with flashing lights and sometimes changes of light colour,orange/green.

These bases are where the US either keeps nuclear weapons,or is upgrading facilities in order to keep more.
Many locals have been filming the lights,and a couple of nights ago there was a huge amount of activity,includng F-15s,an Apache and even an Osprey being scrambled over the bases which where seen on flight tracker websites.
There was talk the US had brought in 60 "specialists" to attempt to deal with the issue,and our UK troops were involved in trying to locate the source of the flights of what they called drones.

There was a pretty big reddit thread about it,and lots of speculation about it being UAPs or even aliens coming to prevent a nuke war.

From the videos I have seen,they don't seem to be exhibiting non human tech-but many of the vids have already been scrubbed since they were uploaded a few days ago.

We have had cases of idiots paid by Russia/Wagner doing stuff like arson attacks on companies linked to weapons which are supplied to Ukraine,so its not a huge stretch to think someone has been paid to send a load of drones over the bases-they would have to be relatively sophisticated though,as they are supposedly evading jammers,fling in high winds at times,and as they can fly over restricted air space,they are not "off the shelf" drones.

Here is the reddit thread
old.reddit.com...

At this point I would rather it be aliens,but so far I think its likely to be Russia related.

a reply to: TheValeyard

According to some news outlets, F-15s were scrambled but were outpaced and outmaneuvered.

Let's talk about this for a moment. I guess I'd need to see a reliable citation (say from a military agency) for the "outpaced" part, but as for the "outmaneuvered" part, a $500 dollar quad drone can easily 'outmaneuver' a $90 million dollar F-15. Why? Because all the drone has to do is quickly change altitude and the F-15 will overshoot it. But the drone would never (ever) be able to outrun it in a straight line. Equally, a small drone could make extremely quick lateral movements which would far exceed the F-15's ability to turn, so a simple lateral or vertical movement by a drone could put a F-15 miles 'behind' the drone because it has to turn around, but that doesn't mean it outran it.

So, what are these 'news outlets' really saying when they say "outpaced and outmaneuvered"?

Bottom line, this event could also have been a drone swarm.

The other thing is military radar would have a hard time 'seeing' a small drone. Sure, they might spot something with their FLIR cameras...maybe...but it would be doubtful they'd be able to see something so small and low powered on radar to shoot it down.

But the thing about drones is, they don't have enough mass to do any damage (other than to aircraft by being ingested). They can't carry large bombs or weapons (small drones anyway). They are essentially a 'birdstrike' to a jet aircraft. And birds existed long before drones ever did, so airspace denial via drones isn't really a worry. Plus, directed energy weapons can wipe out whole swaths of drones over sensitive areas like an airbase if necessary.

I just point these things out to temper a bit of the... "E.T. defeats Air Force"... theme which seems to be bantered about.

a reply to: onestonemonkey

Even my (old) DJI Phantom drones can fly in winds which exceed most cross-wind maximums for takeoff and landing, and still remain stable. Only point here is, some off-the-shelf type drones are more capable than many people think.

edit - BTW, I agree with your final assessment; it's not ET, but rather a foreign government action most likely.

Here is some footage of the more recent activity ober the UK based US airbases including F-15s chasing them,starts at 1:24


And this one talks about the UK tech systems which have been deployed to try to counter and identify the objects-


There was recent talk about the UK having a new laser system which I would have thought could be used to disable/destroy these objects,as there are concerns about live ammo causing collateral damage in areas outside the bases.
This could be a good opportunity to test that system in a real world situation,but as far as I am aware they have not been used as yet.
Of course if the military believe these are not an earth based adversary-shooting lasers at them may be a really bad idea!

a reply to: onestonemonkey

There are many anti-drone defense systems available today, and they are absolutely in use as we speak. Even some civilian airports have these systems in place (I've even installed one).

The problem with these systems is, kind of as you state, you have to be careful how you deploy them to prevent "collateral damage". But the 'collateral damage' being referred to isn't the general public; it's actually other aircraft operating out of the same facility.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
Yeah we have similar at our main airports since we had an incursion over Gatwick a couple of years back which shut the whole airport down for a few days over the busy Christmas/new year period.

Some of the Tech they are now using ober the UK/US airbases are supposedly able to "hack" drones,and make them fly a reverse flight path,in theory back to where they were launched from allowing people on the ground to apprehend the perps.
Sounds good if it works.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3
I think the vital statement there is "They are not doing any investigation". Now use your intelligence here and this smacks of "We know what this is". The Manchester "sighting" has been blown out of all proportion Because believe me IF, I said if, this was any sort of craft in the flight area they would have completely shut the whole airfield down for safety reasons and because they didn't they must have known what the object was and of no danger to the aircraft.
No need of sophisticated anti-drone equipment, all that is need is a 12 gauge shotgun, pop, job done.
As for the mysterious drones, it suits them to claim "OH it's Russians spying before their nuclear attack" BS. Push the fear, Russians, Russians.

a reply to: crayzeed

If they can use the perceived threat to their advantage, they absolutely will. Russia, China, etc..

There must be a threat to justify the spending. An unknown threat means even more spending to 'inveatigate' it.

a reply to: TheValeyard

US military installations near Manchester in the UK?

WMUR radio in Manchester in the UK?

Nah

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: onestonemonkey

Even my (old) DJI Phantom drones can fly in winds which exceed most cross-wind maximums for takeoff and landing, and still remain stable. Only point here is, some off-the-shelf type drones are more capable than many people think.

edit - BTW, I agree with your final assessment; it's not ET, but rather a foreign government action most likely.

Absolutely wrong. If the USA or UK suspected another foreign power these things would be downed immediately. We have the ability to bring down human made drones with electronic counter measures, more explosive force and even some quite strange, physical methods. Same for hobbyist drones.

These things are not being shot at, and that is your answer. They are beyond our tech. They aren’t human made or necessarily alien either.

If legit, the video shown at the start of this clip shows how these things are running rings around the military jets.

a reply to: Kangawoo2

I know there is a new generation of drones being developed/already built by the UK, one of which will be demonstrated at next year's Fairford Air Tattoo. Looking forward to seeing it in action.
However, I'm of the mind that if they are going to display this next year, then what else are they developing, or already have, that they are keeping as the 'ace up their sleeve' as it were?
Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: BasicResearchMethods
a reply to: TheValeyard

US military installations near Manchester in the UK?

WMUR radio in Manchester in the UK?

Nah

Yeah did find that part pretty confusing - the US bases officially named as having a lot of unexplained activity are Lakenheath, Mildenhall and Feltwell - www.bbc.co.uk...

Stumbled upon a video of Lakenheath activity the other day where the person who filmed it claimed to be visited a couple of times by military patrols and police making sure he wasn't controlling it.

My guess is the drones are used to gather intel on what techniques are used to take them down as they wouldn't have lights on if it was to gather intel.

EDIT: Longer BBC article including interviews with witnesses here: Why are drones flying near US airbases in England?

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3 that is need is a 12 gauge shotgun, pop, job done.

I got tired of this pole making comments like this. Most drones of any real substance and threat can fly above 400 feet.

Why not an eight gauge?

According to Greener, the magnum 8-bore weighed 15 pounds and had a 36-inch barrel. It was chambered for a 3 3/4-inch brass cartridge containing 2 3/4 to 3 ounces of shot. There were “medium” and “light” 8-bores as well, lighter guns firing 2 1/2 to 2 3/4 ounces of shot and 2 1/4 to 2 1/2 ounces of shot, respectively. An 8-bore, he said, could kill out to 80 and even 100 yards.

freerangeamerican.us...

a reply to: Kangawoo2

As pointed out above? Like a fly can run rings around me? I bet the jets can still cross a country a lot faster with more weapons with more counter measures than the drones.

The video of supposedly a F-15 chasing the ufo screams of manipulation of perspective.

I looks like they waited for a commercial airline to make its normal flight path, had a small off the shelf drone with winky lights up at legal altitude (very far below the airline), then made it zip away as the airline was coming in. The video makes it look like the drone is at the same altitude as the jet, also military tactical aircraft in pursuit don’t have the anti col lights on, nor any lights except for formation lights that can only be seen with nvg’s.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

That was my own conclusion admittedly, yes. I assumed that they must be faster because they lost the jets because I'd read that they abrubtly ascended to over 11,000 feet, and I thought that implied they were faster than the jets.
If I'm wrong and you can explain how else they'd do that though, then I'll hear you out.

I'm open to these being from Russia or China too, it's just not what my gut tells me, so I tend to lean toward aliens.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: Schmoe3755

Although it's possible to use several images from a video to get a slightly better image, there are no magic "enhancements" that will show more than the original image, if they do then it means they were created by whatever process was used.

That's why I never trust an enhancement that I do not know how was made.

For example, this image

is an AI enhancement of this image

Are you sure? Where do you read that? The object is in 2 different spots in those 2 pictures..