2004 USS Nimitz UAP Encounter

“So, we got within a half mile of the Tic Tac, which people say that is pretty far, but in airplanes that is actually relatively close. No, it was perfectly white, smooth, no windows, although when we did take the original FLIR video that is out there when you put it on a big screen it actually had two little objects that came out of the bottom of it. But other than that, no windows, no seams, no nothing.”

“No. You know, it has been said it is probably the most credible UFO sighting in history, based on all the sensors that were tracking it and then for us to get visual. And to go against the naysayers that it is something on the screen or whatever, I mean, there is four sets of human eyeballs. We are all very credible. Of the six of us that were involved in the thing, including the video, every one of us is going to do 20-plus years in the military in very responsible positions. I would say the world needs to know that. It is not a joke.”

“No, there is none. There is no IR plume coming out and Chad, who took the video, went through all the EO, which is black and white TV and the I&R modes and there is no visual signs of propulsion. It is just sitting in space at 20,000 feet.”

“Yes, I concur with that. We have nothing that can stop in midair and go the other direction nor do we have anything that can, like in our situation, come down from space, hang out for 3 hours and go back up.”

“The Princeton tracked it. The Nimitz tracked it. The E2 tracked it. We never saw it on our radars. Our fire control radars never picked it up. The other airplane that took the video did get it on a radar. As soon as it tried to lock it, it jammed the radar, spit the lock and he rapidly switched over to the targeting pod, which you can do in the F–18.”

“Yes. I was an enlisted Marine, Naval Academy graduate, Navy, flew for 18 years. Got a Master's from University of Houston and I have worked in the private sector for the last what now, 19—16 years, 17 years. I do a lot of defense work.”

“My crew that launched after we landed experienced significant jamming to the APG–73 radar, which was what we had on board, which is a mechanically scan very high-end system prior to the APG–79 and, yes, it did pretty much everything you could do—range, velocity, aspect—and then it split the lock, then the targeting pod is passive. That is what we were able to get the video on.”

“No wings.”

“Yes, it was.”

“No.”

“No, and never felt threatened at all.”

“None. We had a standard debrief where the backseaters went down to our carrier intel center and briefed would have happened and that was it. No one else talked to us and I was in the top 20 in the battle group. No one came. That captain was aware. The admiral was aware. Nothing was done.”

“Abruptly, very determinant. It knew exactly what it was doing. It was aware of our presence and it had acceleration rates—I mean, it went from zero to matching our speed in no time at all.”

“Yes, I would agree with the previous two, being a user of those training ranges, that the data has to be out there. You have to acknowledge that you are seeing them and then you have to collect the data. Right now, you get the report. Someone says, I saw something, but no one collects the radar data to back it up and do research.”

“Yes. We were at a work up with all the battle groups. So, we integrate the ships with the carrier, the airwing with the carrier, and we start working. So, we were doing an air to air defense to hone not only our skills but those of the USS Princeton when they had been tracking them for 2 weeks. The problem was that there was never manned aircraft airborne when they were tracking them and this was the first day and, unfortunately, we were the ones airborne and went and saw it.”

“That is correct. For some people that cannot—know what a Tic Tac is it is a giant flying propane tank.”

“I would say no, just on the performance. It would have just left in a split second.”

“I was pestered by a friend, and I asked why and he said, you are the one person that they cannot discredit, and you will add credibility to the New York Times article. And so after about six times I said OK.”

“No, not for the acceleration rates that we observed.”

“Yes. I think what we experienced was, like I said, well beyond the material science and the capabilities that we had at the time, that we have currently, or that we are going to have in the next 10 to 20 years.”