Replies

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.

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?

On occasion, "toys" have over-flown civilian areas around D.C., to make a point.

You are correct, the F-15 is the "top gun;" details remain classified.

What was seen, was probably an "ion wave" or "ion hole;" details remain classified.

Some things are "virtually" possible.

A bureaucracy is a fixed thing, generally, like the Maginot Line.

I do not doubt your bonafides , But your reply#124 reads like I have read that somewhere before . It also almost matched perfectly to the report my BC made .