Are Some of the UFOs Pilots Are Encountering Airborne Radar Reflectors? | Hacker News Reader

Are Some of the UFOs Pilots Are Encountering Airborne Radar Reflectors?

thedrive.com

37 pointssvd4anything22 comments

This series of articles from the Drive has been very interesting.

So far my personal conclusion is that we are better of searching for the explanation by interviewing a board of world leading magicians and radar specialists and asking them how they would pull off such a stunt, given a couple of billions to develop it.

Here are some ideas that cross my mind:

- towed active anti radar / electronic warfare transponders as known from recent planes, but adapted to balloons.

- simpler devices consisting of ballons with a variable radar cross section (might be as simple as a radar reflector that can be folded/unfolded remotely inside a balloon).

- careful timed releases

- careful timed activation/deactivation og reflectors and disposing of (i.e. rapid deflating of the ballons that will then "disappear" as everybody is moving their attention.)

Edit:

Also the quote from some magician (Penn or Teller?) that people vastly underestimate the effort a skilled magician will put into perfectly misleading their audiences.

Finally: doing some good old fashioned magic - only this time mid air and with modern props - might make perfect sense to distract from something you really want to hide.

tldr version of this theory:

foreign adversary built a system to probe US advanced radar using submarine launched transparent balloons with radar reflectors mounted inside, probably with some small UAV like drone providing recon and some guidance/propulsion capabilities. These device are launched from submarines and perhaps collected by them. Then can be strategically arranged in lines and different altitudes and dynamically have their radar reflection turned on/off.

This theory accounts for quite a bit of the observations. Of course I’m still hoping for ET but ... Occam's razor

Well summarized. I'll add one twist plot:

It could have been launched by a different branch of the US military to test this system or their own ability deal with such as system.

Flight characteristics of some of the observed craft seem to suggest otherwise. Trained observers as well.

Agreed... a bunch of highly trained fighter pilots mistaking unidentified craft that move in highly erratic manners at high speeds with balloons seem pretty far fetched.

The article clearly says that not all events can be described this way, especially the "tic tac" encounter.

I don't know, if moderate wind turbulence can cause a multi-ton airliner to bounce the altimeter by 10s of feet, than I can imagine it also moving a ten pound balloon enough to be characterized as performing erratic flight maneuvers

Especially a ballon filled with reflective spinning cube, aka Radar reflector.

This theory makes a lot of sense and would imply perhaps an adversary has been spoofing advanced radar systems.

edit: Also reports of underwater disturbances would be consistent with the concept of these being launched by submarines and ... maybe retrieved by them.

During these incidents, there were US subs nearby, it's unlikely they wouldn't have picked up foreign subs.

While I agree, it's impossible for us to tell who might be responsible, I wouldn't dismiss foreign subs as easily detected. AIP diesel-electrics are the quietest things out there, and Sweden has one of the best.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21662/swedens-notoriou...

> U.S. Patent #7341224B1, which was filed in 2004 and awarded in 2008, describes a Miniature Robot Surveillance Balloon that has thrusters to control its flightpath and can carry an electrical-powered payload aloft.

Cool in its own right. Cool that someone is taking the time to research possibilities.

But I wish we had more access to information from first-hand measuring systems of the type that were operational during these incidents. Currently most of that data seems to be well in the dark.

Just recently I was discussing with a friend how the late 80s and early 90s seemed to be the “highlight” of the UFO era. Mediocre camcorders and a lack of cell phones / instant conversation seemed to propel the type of curious conversation around aliens and other unexplained (in the moment) phenomenon. It seems like that conversation is totally gone. But I wonder if anything else has taken its place. Instead of UFOs are there other objects or phenomenon or experiences we seem to not be able to capture to prove false or true?

I think some of it is surveillance related. I don't know how many times I've heard someone say, "I said something out loud, and an hour later I got an ad for it! My phone must be listening to me."

I had the reverse of that happen to me today. My iPhone gave me an ETA and suggested route for a place I hadn’t heard of. Three hours later I found myself there for an event after getting free tickets from a friend.

Turned out my girlfriend had put the event on our shared calendar because she was interested in it which I suppose is where the suggestion came from.

Yes but the real question is what got her interested in it.

Not much of a mystery for me. It involved dogs.

That has always happened. People have thought their prayers were answered, for example.

I think it says something about human understanding of causality and our place in the world. Not technology.

So, i've talked with my dad about how i would need a credit to start-up some business if i would do it. We talked in a small garden, no wifi/pc there just my phone. Never searched online for a credit or whatever, nothing concrete it was just something that came up once in a conversation with my dad.

Three days later i received a letter from my local banking center offering a personal talk about getting a credit to start-up businesses, handsigned.

Never got such a letter before. Sure could be coincidence but im not quite sure there.

That’s more a variant of the Baader-Meinhoff phenomenon (frequency illusion) than “surveillance”

I thought the 1950s were by far the most intense UFO era.

No, just the best/scariest sound-effects ;-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfCzxbxztj8

Funny how all the commenters from previous posts on this topic insisted it was a misidentified birds, even though none of the data points truly fit that dismissal and you have to resort to witness bashing these pilots to make it work. “It cannot be therefore it must not be” is not valid reasoning and never will be.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com