Are UFO's advanced military vehicle

Why Pentagon & Navy Care About UFOs

We recently reported on the new guidelines for the Navy and already pointed out that this has nothing to do with the US military getting the idea that extraterrestrial spaceships visit us, as the TTSA in particular is tirelessly promoting . Things have always been seen that we cannot explain (straight away) and are largely based on misinterpretations of natural phenomena or conventional objects. This not only applies to things in the sky, but also, for example, observations of alleged unknown beings on land or in the water, which sometimes have a very banal origin. A recent example is "UFO reports" due to the Space X Starlink satellite launch, which confused many people. False interpretations of what people see in the sky and cannot explain themselves are essentially based on incomplete information and a lack of experience about how conventional phenomena and objects can appear, which ultimately leads to confusion.

This can happen to everyone, including pilots, if they observe things that they cannot immediately identify. Against this background, Professor Iain Boyd, former scientific advisor to the U.S. Luftwaffe, in a post on, assumed that the Pentagon would like to avoid precisely this kind of confusion and better understand the background to the observations of unidentified objects in flight, which are made despite advanced technologies for identifying strange things in the sky. Because with all military missions you have the problem with such observations that you don't know what's behind it, is it friendly or hostile? Does it pose a threat or is it more neutral?

Boyd refers to the military term "situational awareness", that is, the "situation awareness", which includes the complete understanding of the environment in which military operations take place and what is in it. An unidentified object is a gap in this understanding, which the pilots then try to close through inquiries to air traffic control. Boyd cites the highest number of UFO sightings (over 8,000 in 2014) and that documented incidents remained unsolved despite numerous witnesses and other records. He refers to the FLIR-Nimitz video, which, however, raises a few questions and, like the other FLIR videos, has been criticized (more on this elsewhere). In addition, the number of sightings has fallen sharply since 2015.

Reporting on observations of UFOs gives the military the opportunity to improve identification processes, says Boyd: "At least some of this work could be done by automated systems in the future, and possibly in real time if an incident occurs. Military vehicles - humvees, battleships, airplanes, and satellites - are detected by sensors. It is not only passive devices such as radio receivers, video cameras and infrared images, but also active systems such as radar, sonar and lidar. (...) Sensors can provide a wealth of information about UFOs, including range, speed, course, shape, size and temperature. With so much sensors and data, however, it is a challenge to bring the information together into something useful. However, the military is working harder on autonomy and artificial intelligence. One possible application of these new technologies could be to combine them to analyze all the many signals coming in from sensors, separating any observations that cannot be identified. In these cases, the system can even assign sensors to nearby vehicles or satellites in orbit to gather additional information in real time. Then it could put together an even more complete picture."

The aim is to draw as complete a picture of the observed objects as possible in order to remove the 'U' for unidentified from 'UFO' and replace it with an 'I' for identified. Successful use of intelligent systems for identification, however, requires appropriate programming and weighing of available data, which in turn requires an appropriate understanding of UFO observations.

According to Boyd, "... The Navy's new approach to reporting UFO encounters is a good first step. This can eventually lead to a comprehensive, fully integrated approach to object identification, where the data from many sensors is merged through the application of artificial intelligence and autonomy. Only then will there be fewer and fewer UFOs in the sky - because they are no longer unknown."

Boyd's core statement is a purely military-based view of UFO observations and the resulting need to better identify underlying natural phenomena and objects in order to minimize misinterpretations as far as possible. But not only image recognition algorithms are still flawed in object recognition, as Boyd mentions, but new systems in particular can be prone to errors at the beginning, as is suspected to be a cause in connection with the most recently discussed pilot sightings using radar.
Another problem with the automated identification of conventional objects and phenomena is the various ways in which they appear and the different conditions under which they can be perceived. This makes it difficult to clearly delimit and delimit the automated identification, especially in the case of purely subjective observations. This shows the long efforts of UFO research to develop test schemes or expert systems to identify misinterpreted conventional objects that have reached their respective limits. In addition, new objects or phenomena appear again and again as stimuli, which even experienced case investigators initially confuse, until their true nature is recognized.

Why is the Pentagon interested in UFOs?