F-16s Pursue Unknown Craft Over Region

Washington Post ^ | Saturday, July 27, 2002 | Steve Vogel

[Ben Bolt]

Its not a matter of belief but rather a matter of fact , and the fact is that they are out there . Who is running the show is a whole different matter .

Myself and 3 of my fireteam saw the exact same thing on 2 consecutive nights and the aerocraft performed the exact same things in the sky .

I do not believe that they were US craft , but who knows . It was also interesting because it was nearly to the second on the hour on the same hill . Hill 722 on Oahu , 1980 . It was interesting .

[berkeleybeej]

What I find really odd is that NORAD and the Air National Guard actually acknowledged the incident.

[FReepaholic]

An interesting site:

www.bibleufo.com

[Gunrunner2]

Okay, let me again try and explain a few things.

First off, we do not fly our special toys over civilian airspace, especially airspace like the Wash DC area. Not going to happen.

Now, as far as the event. The radar returns can be explained in many ways, as the USAF spokesman stated. I offer what I consider a reasonable explanation why there were returns---slow speed returns, i.e., weather anomaly and/or a large group of bats/birds flying along. I’ve locked up a flock or two in my day and I assure you, it does happen, and scares the bee-jesus outta you when it happens at close range.

The alleged blue light is very likely the afterburner of the lead aircraft. The altitude of the aircraft, along with the location of the aircraft sighting, and the active runway at the time, tells me the F-16’s were likely on initial take-off, zipping along in after burner.

As far as “witnesses” and their testimony. No problem. I am a certified and experienced mishap investigator. I investigated several aircraft mishaps, two involved fatalities. I am also a former Texas policeman from many years ago. So, speaking from direct experience, let me tell you eyewitness accounts are highly unreliable, and when it comes to aerial events, unless its another pilot I don’t put too much weight in what the average citizen says. I have head too many times directly opposing “eyewitness” testimony. Anyway, the speed of the aircraft along with the parallax error involved, the lateness of the hour (1 am), along with the fact I do not know the sobriety/wakefullness of the witnesses. . .well, you get the picture.

Now, the news report is instructive, as I can tell the reporter put a few words in the people’s mouths---they wouldn’t do that , misreport the news for sensational reasons, would they? Consider: “"(The jets) were right on its tail. As the thing would move, a jet was right behind it," Rogers recalls.” Now, see the use of “Jets” at the beginning of the statement, and the actual witness statement of “a jet right behind it” (singlular).

The news reports talks about people being shaken from their beds. I tell ya, if an F-16 with full AB is zipping by at low altitude, you would not have time to rise up off the couch and walk outside and see the jet. No way. The blue light was likely the AB, as by the time you went outside and looked up, the jet would have been passed your location--whicj brings up parallax errors. The statement that people saw “jets” (plural) chasing the light is suspect and probably not what was actually seen.

What happened was an anomalous radar return, the strip alert jets were launched in 10-sec (maybe 15 sec) trail formation, full AB on take-off to get to speed and get quickly on a vector to the return, and the people, NOT USED TO FULL AB TAKEOFFS at night, these poor people were stunned, confused and didn’t know what they saw. (Late night AB take-offs are prohibited at Andrews and have not been done for years and years, and as such, the locals would be sensitive to any AB takeoff and not know what they saw after being "shaken from their bed.")

That is it. Make up your own mind, but I caution you not to take too much from uninformed unreliable reporters, reporting on a subject they know nothing about (aviation and fighters and jets). I am surprised many accept at face value this reporting but dismiss those same reporters when it comes to any other subject—like politics. Reporters have been known to sensationalize the news, don’t ya know.

[Momaw Nadon]

Anybody else find it just a bit odd that the last "flap" over Washington DC was EXACTLY FIFTY YEARS AGO?

Maybe this is just someone's way of commemorating the UFO flap of 1952?

[Prince Caspian]

I've always thought the F-4 had one of the most interesting and instantly recognizable profiles of any fighter aircraft.

[tomkat]

The continuously blended fuselage on that would imply a low radar cross section... ;-)

in the day, i wouldn't have minded trying my stealth on her technology

[jwh_Denver]

Hello Art Bell

We have totally corrupt aliens running our government. We want new ones.

[tomkat]

FOFLOL !

preemptive strike
good move

[Prince Caspian]

I'd always heard that the F-4 had the fastest dash speed.

For a while, the F-4 held the time-to-climb record (something like maximum altitude achievable in 2 minutes from a standing start - sitting on the runway with full afterburner and brakes locked). The aircraft that held the record before the F-4 was the T-38 Talon (trainer).

[maquiladora]

I remember this media report doing the rounds back in the 1990's.

UK PRESS TOLD NOT TO REPORT BLACK TRIANGLE UFOs

UFO Magazine Says Media Got "D-Noticed" On Mystery Aircraft

A top BBC executive let slip recently that there is a D-Notice on media reporting of the so-called "Black Triangle."

The executive, who cannot be named, is the former producer of a very popular BBC science program. He told one of our team that the black triangle "craft," first witnessed by hundreds in the Hudson Valley region of the United States [mid 1980s], then by thousands in Belgium (1989-90) and more in Britain, has been "heavily D-Noticed" by the government. For this reason the BBC will not be reporting on the enigmatic craft, no matter how many witness reports they receive.

According to the former science program producer, the reason the government has seen fit to slap a restrictive notice on reporting of the Triangle is because -- so far as the government has secretly informed the BBC -- the craft is part of a new secret military project, and as such must be protected under the secrecy laws. If this is the case, however, it surely begs the question: If the so called Black Triangle is a secret military aircraft, then what is it doing hovering over residential areas and frightening people half to death? Something somewhere simply does not add up.

Here's the offical D-Notice website

[Momaw Nadon]

Okay, let me again try and explain a few things.

First off, we do not fly our special toys over civilian airspace, especially airspace like the Wash DC area. Not going to happen.

Now, as far as the event. The radar returns can be explained in many ways, as the USAF spokesman stated.

Is this a first draft of the "official" government explanation of what happened in the Washington DC area?

[jwh_Denver]

Has that pciture been goofed with or did it turn on it's afterburners or what? Never have seen jet cause that.

[tomkat]

it's sure one i wouldn't wanna see bearin' down on my hole with the wrong markings on it ..

[Reactionary]

I agree, although I'm somewhat shocked to see that this story has been picked up by major newspapers.

Call me a tinfoiler, but I have no doubt that UFOs (whatever they happen to be) are real.

Tinfoil off!

[Kevin Curry]

Is this a first draft of the "official" government explanation of what happened in the Washington DC area?

No. It's a sensible explanation offered by a former F15E fighter pilot.

Granted, it's not nearly as much fun as a Michael Rivero or Art Bell explanation, but it's far more reasonable and likely.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Just breaking the soundbarrier. Shockwave is moving down along the lines of the aircraft. Starts at the nose.

[Defender2]

Reply answer to you're question in post #1. Standard production F-16's have a fixed geometry inlet. thus limiting
the F-16's speed to little more than MACH 2. Jet engines cannot run on supersonic air entering the engine inlet. so the intake is shaped in such a way as to slow the air down inside the intake prior to entering the engine inlet guide vanes. An alternative to this principal is variable geometry
inlets or Variable Intake Ramps(more efficient in effecting
Supersonic Flight).

[berned]

I am in total agreement with you. People who glibly explain away each and every UFO sighting don't realize how silly they sound after the 42,497th glib shrug-off.

They remind me of clinton supporters who think it's perfectly reasonable that he fired the FBI director one day BEFORE Vince Foster "dies" then refuses to let the FBI investigate the crime scene. They see nothing fishy. They placidly accept the glib explanation that it's all just a buncha wacky ha-ha coincidences.

Now... care to venture who/what you think the UFO's really are, and what their agenda might be?

[Davea]

Anybody else find it just a bit odd that the last "flap" over Washington DC was EXACTLY FIFTY YEARS AGO?

Yes, I found it odd right after I read your post. July 26, 1952 - July 26, 2002. A 50th anniversary flyby? Interesting.