The fact that we’re talking about stigma still, in a time when people are having near misses, is disturbing.”
~Ryan Graves
~~~
If you like what you see on my blog and my Twitter and appreciate the time and effort, here are my Patreon and Pay Pal.
https://www.patreon.com/ufojoe
PayPal – ufojoe11@aol.com
~~~
In case this is new to you, here’s former fighter pilot, Ryan Graves, and other former fighter pilots, on “60 Minutes.”
~~~
~~~
For more background on Ryan Graves, check out this excellent, in-depth interview I transcribed from 2019.
Excerpt:
Ryan Graves: “I joined the Navy, the very beginning of 2009. From there I went on through OCS, through Officer Candidate School. Basically, boot camp for officers. And within a couple of years, I was flying F-18s off the east coast of Virginia Beach. And I did that until about 2018, when I got out after about 10 years.
“I’m not like a ufologist. This is all brand new to me. But I imagine people that have been following this for a while are pretty excited. 2018, 2019 was kind of their year.”
~~~
~~~
“Ryan Graves presents a list of recommendations to further UAP research inside the aviation science community. The list was created by the six presenters at the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics AV21 Conference”
~~~
Ed: And we’re going to go on to, quote unquote, “unscheduled” element to our panel, and give everybody a little bit of a background beforehand. And that is, as we’ve heard from all the excellent presenters, if you will, for a bit of a tawdry explanation on my part, is a simile is each one is looking at this environment of UAP through their specific wavelength in the spectrum. And when we had planning meetings relative to this special session, I proposed a challenge to the group to think about, well, each one of you are going to make great presentations which you have. But at the end of the day, where do we go forward from here? And I threw this question to the group, and to their immense credit, they decided to get together and come up with what they would think would be a few conclusion charts going forward. In other words, where do we go from here. to present to this audience. So as a bit of a bonus, if you will, we’re going to review those charts. And it’s my understanding that Ryan Graves has been selected as the spokesperson for the group to give you their combined assessment of where do we go from here? So let me go ahead and get those up. And, Ryan, if you would, I’ll turn it over to you, please.
~~~
~~~
Ryan Graves: Yeah, hey, thank you. So, as I said, these recommendations were compiled by the entire group. And the idea here is that we’re trying to get some core messages across that I think are probably not going to be a surprise. But what needs to happen here isn’t something where we can look to you and tell you what needs to be done. This is going to require a lot of different specialties, from tactical aviation, to physics, so we need everyone’s help on this, and we need to do it in a way that is transparent, because, at the end of the day, like I said, very pragmatically, we’re flying around objects out there that, hundreds of miles an hour with people’s family’s on board. And it’s just a matter of time, frankly, I’m surprised it hasn’t happened already. But anyways, with no further ado, next slide, please.
~~~
~~~
Alright, so one of the, I think, the biggest takeaways here, and I’m going to just reading right off: The DNI report indicates that some UAP or real objects. Scientifically studying them should not be stigmatized, Recommend additional sessions introduced with key science/aerospace meetings. So, I’m even hesitant to ask people, or to state that this shouldn’t be stigmatized. For me, it’s a silly conversation because I know for a fact that this is still happening. that there’s still aviators that are briefing this as a safety consideration, every single flight they go on. NOTAMs have been filed and this is all a very pragmatic. everyday, air-to-air or excuse me, air safety considerations that we consider potential tactical considerations. That’s another whole conversation. But this needs to be resolved and we need all hands on deck.
We also believe that formation of a panel of experts from different disciplines are going to be required to identify needed data collection methodologies and instruments. So we understand that there might not be inherent expertise in this anywhere, whether that’s on a UAP Task Force or elsewhere, so we recommend that a scientific and engineering panel is established and is coordinated in the various subjects with some leadership, in order to talk to lawmakers and provide their opinion on things such as potential R&D opportunities, or paths forward.
Additionally, we believe that historical data availability is crucial. We recommend an established routine availability of unclassified sensor data on UAP for peer-reviewed, scientific analysis. So, I think we all would like to see a reality where this is a problem that everyone is working on and that when a conclusion is drawn is done so in a peer-reviewed manner for scientific analysis. Not just the United States, but worldwide. So, we would want that data out and we would want that as the gold standard of evidence. Next slide, please.
~~~
~~~
Just kind of getting to a couple of other points that we thought were important. The panel of experts, the civilian scientist panel, we believe that their responsibilities would lay with curating unclassified data for public consumption and understanding. So the expectation is this group would be cleared – just like any other group from a defense contractor – into programs at the appropriate level or collections at the appropriate level, in order to consume data. And if there is unclassified data that can be shared, then they will be responsible for ensuring that was communicated to the public effectively. Additionally, they would be representing the public’s interest to ensure any potential, scientific discoveries were available for peer-review, including the data. They’d be responsible for advising the government of UAP R&D based on the data that is available, and the direction that is agreed upon by both the the government and civilian groups.
Again, this will consist of scientists, engineers, subject matter experts in the relevant fields. I don’t think there’s a couple specialties that would sum everything up here, so I think there’s going to be a pretty wide group of specialties that are going to be required in order to answer the questions that need to be answered in a timely manner. And I imagine that list, those specialties are going to change over time as we as we learn more about what’s going on here. Next slide, please.
~~~
~~~
Civilian safety focus. The fact that we’re talking about stigma still, in a time when people are having near misses, is disturbing. So, we need to make sure that the military is already underway in this process, but we need to ensure civilian air crew feel comfortable submitting aviation safety reports related to UAP, without fear of retribution, by creating a standardized FAA, UAP reporting protocol, that is pushed out and that air crew are trained to, in order to ensure that we are receiving accurate data from the civilian aviation community. The civilian scientist panel would be available for data analysis, as well as further coordination with the FAA, for radar analysis, for debriefs from air crew and any other data that can be gathered.
And I’ll pause here, Ed. That is it for our recommendations and I’m sure they’ll be more conversation to follow. Thank you.
~~~
© Joe Murgia and www.ufojoe.net, 2018-2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Joe Murgia and www.ufojoe.net with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
aatip, alien, graves, notam, ryan graves, uap, uap task force, ufo
Related posts
Comments RSS Feed