Gimbal, Uncategorized

The Gimbal UFO: It’s All About Rotation, Rotation, Rotation…Have We Been Sold A Bill Of Goods?

8 May , 2020  

By Joe Murgia – @ufojoe11 on Twitter.
.
There’s been heavy debate lately over the Gimbal UFO video that was released by the Pentagon on December 16th, 2017. The crux of the disagreement is over the apparent rotation of the stationary craft. Skeptics say it’s the product of the ATLIR targeting pod while others believe it’s because the craft itself is rotating. If it’s an ATFLIR artifact, a lot of people are going to look foolish because the rotation has been used over and over to justify it being an anomalous craft. However, if it’s really rotating, we may be seeing something or someone who has figured out how to overcome gravity.

Gimbal In Process of Rotating?~~~

.

.

These quotes from Season 1, Episode 4 of “Unidentified,” clearly show why this is an important issue that needs to be cleared up. Lt. Ryan Graves and Lt. Danny Aucoin are U.S. Navy fighter pilots and have flown and deployed together. In this episode, they share their thoughts on the Gimbal video.

“Unidentified” follows around Luis Elizondo, Tom DeLonge, Christopher Mellon and the rest of the folks at “To The Stars Academy of Arts and Science.”

.

Lt. Ryan Graves: “[The Gimbal] almost looks like a gyroscope, right? The way it moves. The points coming out of the top and the bottom of what appears to be a disc or at least a central mass on the object…It’s just this guy (Gimbal) that’s stationary.”
.
Narrator: “Lt. Graves says the way the larger craft suddenly rotates at 90 degrees is unlike anything he had ever seen.”
.
Lt. Graves: “It’s just basic, airplane physics. When your wings are underneath you, and you’re flying along, you have 100% of your lift. And if you turn yourself, all the way like this, kind of knife-blading, you have none of the lift that your wings would provide you.”
.

Lt. Ryan Graves Demonstrating Knife-Blading – from Unidentified: S1 E4

.
Lt. Ryan Graves: “So, the fact that he would just get himself on his wing tip, with no turn, by staying at the exact same point, isn’t how aircraft work.”
.
Luis Elizondo: “Ryan Graves is an aerospace engineer when he’s not a pilot. So, when Ryan is telling you that there is something up there that he doesn’t know how it works and it is not one of out aircraft, you need to listen.”
.
Commander David Fravor: “This is important. Now we’re looking at something that can stay stationary over a geographic point, at 120 knots of wind, can rotate around and then can accelerate above supersonic.”
.
(Nowhere on the video do we see the Gimbal accelerate at all. And definitely not above supersonic. Do Graves, Aucoin, Fravor and Elizondo all have clearances to see the full Gimbal video? And in that version, does the craft accelerate away at a high speed? Or are they referring to the fleet of unknown objects located off camera, next to the Gimbal and seen on the AESA radar? ~Joe)
.
Elizondo: “As a Top Gun guy, have you seen something like that before?”
.
Fravor: “(Laughs) No. No, I’m pretty baffled right now.”
.
~~~
.
Later on in the episode, we’re introduced to two experts who view and analyze the Gimbal and Go Fast videos. Once again, the focus is on the apparent rotation.
.
Narrator: “Retired Marine Colonel Chris Cookie spent a career flying fighter jets. Ross Aimer flew commercial aircraft for decades and consults for the National Transportation Safety Board. The Gimbal video is even more baffling to the experts. It shows a craft in mid-air, that rotates, into a near perpendicular position to the ground.”
~~~
Narrator: “The strange way the object turns in mid-air, confuses both experts.”
.
Chris Cook: “It is definitely rotating. It appears to be, or, you know, changing angle of bank. And it appears to have stopped moving quickly across the horizon.”
.
Elizondo: “And yet it doesn’t lose any altitude. It doesn’t seem to be dropping.”
.
Ross Aimer: “Sadly, with all the experience that you think we have, I can’t figure it out. Well I certainly can’t, Chris.”
.
Chris Cox: “No. I have no idea.”
~~~
.
Later in the episode, we’re introduced to F-18 pilot, Lt. Danny Aucoin. Graves and Accoin are sitting in a restaurant and watching the Gimbal video on Graves’ phone.

Lt. Ryan Graves and Lt. Danny Aucoin

.
Lt. Danny Aucoin: His flight path doesn’t look like it moves at all.
.
Lt. Ryan Graves: Yeah, his flight path doesn’t change. His altitude’s not changing. So, it’s basically just rotating in some fashion. At least from my perspective.
.
Aucoin: Yeah, I’d say the same thing. That’s definitely not a maneuver I’ve pulled before.
.
.
At one point, you hear the voice of a female (producer?) asking Aucoin if there’s anything he knows of that can make turns like that. We’re not told what turns she’s talking about but I reached out to a source who would know and they confirmed he was referring to Gimbal.
.
Noted skeptic/debunker, Mick West, has been the loudest voice online when discussing the alleged rotation. He’s analyzed the video and has come a conclusion. I saw his original video but never saw this updated one until today. Put your emotions aside, watch it and you be the judge. Spoiler: I think Mick might be right.
.

.

I reached out to West via Twitter DM and asked for a summary of what he believes caused the rotation and why it’s important.

.
“I think the apparent rotation is just an internal artifact of the camera system. The infrared glare of the engines at that distance is larger than the plane, and limitations of the gimbal system cause internal rotations, which make both the glare, and the light pattern over the entire image, rotate together. Since the apparent rotation passes 90° with no change in altitude, there would have to be a highly unconventional form of lift involved if the craft was actually rotating that much.”
.
Mick thinks the Gimbal was a distant plane but I’m not going to go into that now. If we can prove the Gimbal was rotating, it appears he would admit it was an unconventional craft. That would be a coup! However, IF it can be proven the craft was not rotating, I think a lot of questions need to be asked about what we consider to be a true UAP and UFO. And a lot of people, including the folks at TTSA, will have some explaining to do. Why did Mick figure this out and they didn’t? I don’t believe anybody at TTSA purposely mislead us.
.
To really have a more informed opinion on whether or not this is an anomalous craft, we need to see more data. The entire FLIR video would be a start and hopefully, one day, whatever radar exists. For now, we have to accept that it’s inconclusive. I currently lean toward Mick and his not rotating theory but I’m willing to change my mind. We’re all operating at a disadvantage until more data is released and we get to hear from the folks who actually shot the FLIR and encountered the Gimbal. So far, that has not happened. And if it’s not rotating, it still could be an anomalous craft. But a big piece of the argument will have been debunked.
I have no doubt craft of unknown origin have been engaging with us for a very long time and I support the effort of TTSA. But with the Gimbal and Go Fast video, I’m unsure of what we’re seeing. And we need to keep asking questions.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

By



2 Responses

  1. Keith says:

    Hi Joe – great site and honesty on your part.
    About Gimbal and it’s officially designated “unidentified” status by the Pentagon and surely what this means in terms of science. You’d assume they’d have researched this particular sighting to death to finally come up with this term.

    It would mean unidentified in relation to known science. Aerospace engineering and more basic, physics (I’m not saying *some* physics we know cannot be used to help in an explanation). So an object in the air is unidentified in this respect. The meaning of this term hasn’t been emphasized enough. This is a massive statement – from a scientific perspective – the Pentagon has provided the world with and actually now gives researchers something to work on. It’s not a public relations remark. I remember a lecture Luis Elizondo gave where he said how important words were in military programs and documents. And it is a statement that would stand the test of time from an aerospace perspective up to what we presently know about such (I’m an astrophysics grad. and particle physics postgrad. from a while back).

    It is essentially saying that a new aerospace phenomenon has been discovered, something huge in science. And, it behaves purposefully (of course the Pentagon didn’t say that).
    (remember the “five observables” spoken of by Luis Elizondo that contradict present Newtonian physics at least, e.g. in respect of inertia)

    https://www.history.com/news/ufo-sightings-speed-appearance-movement

    FLIR expert Dave Falch, who you’ve been chatting to has rubbished Mick West’s explanation for the Gimbal rotation. He has the expertise on these observing systems. Mick West has none, so why does he continually debate this? It’s not an either/or situation on who’s right of course. Physics doesn’t work that way!
    Then there is the larger context in respect of Gimbal, especially Lt. Ryan Graves interview with Luis Elizondo and Cdr. David Fravor and the presence the Gimbal object has with the rotating V-formation Graves talks about. An analysis of Gimbal needs to include these too and we’ve all seen they were near each other, from Ryan Graves’ sketch. Not a mention of this by West.

    One thing also about the confidence West shows in engaging as if he is an equivalent expert to a FLIR expert, is that it cannot be in relation to any expertise in this field on his part. So what is the source of such confidence? Why persist? Delusion? Doesn’t seem to be. Arrogance? Again, that seems ruled out.
    So while it *seems* one might be engaging on an equivalent basis with someone, this isn’t the case.

    So what really are his motives? Once you’ve ruled out delusion and arrogance, what is left? To confuse an audience? Surely many in the scientific community aren’t fooled by this. Other folks may be heartened by such apparent debunking, I mean, we’ve been saved by Mick West thank God – aliens haven’t arrived, been with the Earth over time etc. Nothing to see here, let’s just get on with normal life.

    Science, being impassionate and not subject to opinion, would give all weight to FLIR expert Dave Falch. Again it’s not an either/or situation.

    Saying all this (!), it’s really important to engage West as you have done and Tim McMillan has in his just recent chit-chat. To see, in reality, that the emperor has no clothes. But overall, what a fascinating ride these 2.5 years have been since the NY Times article and the formation of TTSA. Cheers and regards! Keith

  2. Sri Bubba says:

    Has Mick ever reviewed something and come to a conclusion other than that with which he started?
    What for me is most glaring is that in focusing on one small aspect of a complex phenomenon and inferring that it carries weight in judging the validity of the entire issue, he completely ignores radar data, eyewitness accounts of hundreds of professional pilots dating back to WWII, statements of intelligence and govt. officials and a plethora of additional data points.
    However, this is not surprising, it is just what typically happens when one begins with a conclusion and selectively chooses data to fit that conclusion at the expense all other non-supporting facts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *