UFO Sighting From ISS
Discussion
I don’t pursue UFO videos or sightings, but this one caught my attention!
https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/1245959/NASA-...
A quick Google search suggests that there are various UFO sightings from the ISS, most of which include VHS-quality footage, or have been confirmed as debris/lights on Earth.
The footage in the link above is good in terms of quality - and apparently the sighting lasts 22 minutes. The video begins with a freeze frame, so be sure to watch to the end in order to view the craft moving ...
Is it aliens, or is it some sort of classified craft ... or something else?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/1245959/NASA-...
A quick Google search suggests that there are various UFO sightings from the ISS, most of which include VHS-quality footage, or have been confirmed as debris/lights on Earth.
The footage in the link above is good in terms of quality - and apparently the sighting lasts 22 minutes. The video begins with a freeze frame, so be sure to watch to the end in order to view the craft moving ...
Is it aliens, or is it some sort of classified craft ... or something else?
I’d be more impressed by a video that had commentary from the people on the ISS. The video goes all stop motion towards the end, which is odd - and suggests a lot of editing.
Almost certainly a US or Russian secret thing - all sorts of s
t is flying around up there.
‘
And if I don my tinfoil hat for a moment .... how would what looks like a reaction propelled craft that size make it to Earth from a solar system a long distance away? It looks reaction propelled (rocket or ion drive out the back), so its subject to the same sort of limitations that we are. Our nearest stellar neighbour is 4 light years away, about 70,000 years by our best technology. It would more convincing if it just “appeared”. Either that or the mother ship is stashed on the other side of Mars. I’ll take the hat off now....
Almost certainly a US or Russian secret thing - all sorts of s
t is flying around up there. ‘
And if I don my tinfoil hat for a moment .... how would what looks like a reaction propelled craft that size make it to Earth from a solar system a long distance away? It looks reaction propelled (rocket or ion drive out the back), so its subject to the same sort of limitations that we are. Our nearest stellar neighbour is 4 light years away, about 70,000 years by our best technology. It would more convincing if it just “appeared”. Either that or the mother ship is stashed on the other side of Mars. I’ll take the hat off now....
There is always something going on up there. Most of the government "experiments" often have dual use.
The 70s and 80s were the peak times but even today a lot of stuff goes on up there.
Project Almaz and MOL both spring to mind which were very cloak and dagger stuff and we only know very limited info on either and they were 40 years ago.
The 70s and 80s were the peak times but even today a lot of stuff goes on up there.
Project Almaz and MOL both spring to mind which were very cloak and dagger stuff and we only know very limited info on either and they were 40 years ago.
MOL is a bit older than 40 years ago. It was cancelled in 1969 and the astronaut team slated to fly the missions transferred to NASA - not that NASA wanted them as they already had more astronauts than available missions. Bob Crippen, who was the co-pilot on the very first Shuttle mission in 1981 was one of the pilots transferred from MOL.
MOL itself was a replacement for the USAF X-20 Dyna - Soar project, which was cancelled in 1963. By coincidence, I have just finished building a 1/72 model of a Dyna-Soar -
This is what a sub-orbital Dyna Soar launch would have looked like -
Orbital missions would have used an augmented version of the Titan, known as the Titan IIIA -
When MOL replaced Dyna-Soar, the Titan IIIC was retained as the launch vehicle. One unmanned test mission of MOL was carried out, in 1966 -
MOL itself was a replacement for the USAF X-20 Dyna - Soar project, which was cancelled in 1963. By coincidence, I have just finished building a 1/72 model of a Dyna-Soar -
This is what a sub-orbital Dyna Soar launch would have looked like -
Orbital missions would have used an augmented version of the Titan, known as the Titan IIIA -
When MOL replaced Dyna-Soar, the Titan IIIC was retained as the launch vehicle. One unmanned test mission of MOL was carried out, in 1966 -
Honestly I doubt we know the full story of MOL. It was cancelled very quickly, often the cancellation is explained that other technology was developed which meant MOL was not of use. I think you and I have had this same discussion before 
As for the Russians Almaz was advanced enough for them to retain the unlaunched platforms until today... with at least 3-4 of them making it into some kind of operation and the development of Almaz continued into Almaz4 which was unmanned - so we are told.
Its on a level of the Glomar Explorer, IMHO.
As for the Russians Almaz was advanced enough for them to retain the unlaunched platforms until today... with at least 3-4 of them making it into some kind of operation and the development of Almaz continued into Almaz4 which was unmanned - so we are told.
Its on a level of the Glomar Explorer, IMHO.
Bet it is a simple explanation, man made. ISS seems to have a lot of top secret alien films out in the open. The man in black are doing their jobs very well. People then pull them apart on the tube of U to show they do not understand perspectives, parallax, near and far (famous documentary done by Father Ted etc.) and so on.
Edited by Zirconia on Sunday 23 February 15:13
red_slr said:
Honestly I doubt we know the full story of MOL. It was cancelled very quickly, often the cancellation is explained that other technology was developed which meant MOL was not of use. I think you and I have had this same discussion before
As for the Russians Almaz was advanced enough for them to retain the unlaunched platforms until today... with at least 3-4 of them making it into some kind of operation and the development of Almaz continued into Almaz4 which was unmanned - so we are told.
Its on a level of the Glomar Explorer, IMHO.
We know a lot more about MOL than we did , say, ten years ago. It is excellently covered in Rowland White's book "Into the Black". Although the book is ostensibly about the first Space Shuttle flight (STS-1), it covers in detail the politics behind the Shuttle and it's inter-relationship with the US Department of Defense programmes. Consequently, he goes into quite a bit of detail on MOL. As for the Russians Almaz was advanced enough for them to retain the unlaunched platforms until today... with at least 3-4 of them making it into some kind of operation and the development of Almaz continued into Almaz4 which was unmanned - so we are told.
Its on a level of the Glomar Explorer, IMHO.
The reason it was cancelled was precisely because by the end of the 1960s it was really obvious to the intelligence community that imaging technology was rapidly approaching a point where there was absolutely no need to have humans in attendance on board the reconnaissance satellite - which is what MOL really was.
The Russians didn't have such advanced imaging systems at that time so they pressed ahead with their military space station programme which was officially called Almaz. However, for public consumption, the Almaz space stations were included in the Salyut naming system.
nikaiyo2 said:
Didn’t Kelly Johnson (the man who started Lockheed Skunk Works] see UFOs on more than one occasion?
He does not seem the type to be mistaken by things flying about.
It is interesting when they hold up certain professions as "must be cos they saw it.". Pilots have made mistakes (Documented), generals have, airforces have chased stuff that is not there (ghosts in the radar machine) and people have really got confused over insects and Chinese lanterns. I would rather each occurrence is dealt with on its merits not who saw it.He does not seem the type to be mistaken by things flying about.
As someone just pointed out. UFO means ant got a clue at the moment.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: At the risk of being a pedant doesn't UFO just mean you don't know what it is?
That's not the same thing as aliens or whatever else.
Exactly this!That's not the same thing as aliens or whatever else.
It really annoys me that as soon as anyone say UFO, it is always instantly assumed that UFO = aliens or a flying saucer.
People seem to forget that UFO by definition simply means a flying object that has not been identified yet
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff